Viewing Single Post From: If it was a controlled demolition then . . .

Viewing Single Post From: If it was a controlled demolition then . . .
Trajan Octavian Titus	Feb 20 2008, 05:21 PM
Posts: 67 Group: Members Member #335 Joined: 02/19/08	Aldo Marquis CIT Feb 20 2008, 04:53 PM Trajan, If a demotilition expert wanted to bring down the towers or a replica of them and he decided to do it using a scenario similar to that of 9/11, what would happen if he planted explosives all throughout the 94th-98th floors out of 110 floors and blew out 4 floors (trusses/perimeter columns), do you think they could make the whole thing collapse or implode downward without stopping??? We are simply talking about swapping the gradual elimination of support (jet fuel fire) for the immediate elimination of support (explosives). If someone asked you to place your bet on whether it would implode downward without stopping or not, which would you choose? Is it likely that it will implode downward without stopping? Or is it likely that it will not? If not, why wouldn't a demolition expert do it this way? If you believe that the official version is possible IE that the planes and fires caused the collapse then why do you need anymore than that? Regardless you don't understand the NIST report, it wasn't just the localized structural damage from the fire which caused the collapse, the heat would have gone down through more than just the structural columns between those 6 floors, thus compromising more of the structure thus paving the way for total collapse following collapse initiation IE due to the outward bowing of the perimeter columns and the failure of the south face of WTC1 and east face of WTC2 it caused a simultaneous total failure. The NIST does not support the progressive "pancake" collapse scenario. And again I say you wouldn't know what the threshold for collapse initiation was until it had already happened, the conspirators would not have taken the risk that the building would not collapse. Edited by Trajan Octavian Titus, Feb 20 2008, 05:26 PM.
Posts: 67 Group: Members Member #335 Joined: 02/19/08

If it was a controlled demolition then . . . · Skeptics