I haven't seen any evidence that supports the theory of intentional demolition. There were signs of structural degradation throughout the day (bulges, creaks and groans, partial internal collapses) before the building finally collapsed completely. Fire can't melt steel but impacting debris can cause damage and fire can weaken structural integrity especially when burning out of control on almost every floor for many hours. One critical column finally collapses and the rest can't make up for that and fail. I mean if they were going to intentionally demolish the building, wouldn't they go out of the way to NOT make it look intentional? Wouldn't it be rather difficult to keep such a conspiracy a secret given the number of people that would have to know about an intentional demolition? I went to download the report you linked and they want a name and e-mail address. Give me a break.
Edit:
If anyone once to see this report without having to provide a name and e-mail address, it can be downloaded here: http://ine.uaf.edu/wtc7
This study was funded by Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth and completed by a 3 man team at University of Alaska Fairbanks. This study doesn't prove much except that the way they modeled is different than the way other organizations have modeled. And it comes down to a matter of inches. E.g. NIST says one particular girder would have been displaced 6 inches while this study says it would have only been displaced 1 inch. This study is currently only a draft and it has just been opened up to public comment. It will be interesting to see what results from that and peer review (assuming there is some). To be taken seriously it's going to need it. Otherwise it's just three guys and their model.
What none of the studies say or seem to take into account (certainly not this one) is what damage was done to girders and/or columns as a result of impacting debris. Maybe it was none but then again maybe it wasn't.
3 buildings collapsed in a perfect vertical trajectory on the exact same day. It's obvious they were rigged for demolition.
If they had fell due to damage, they would not fall in such a perfect vertical way.
Open your eyes. The Israelis and the Saudis are the main terrorists of 9/11 and you know it. You just need to get your cognitive dissonance out of the way and admit what you already know.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Certainly Saudis were involved. That's not even in dispute and never really was.
How do you expect massive buildings such as these to collapse once structural failure occurs? As soon as one major structural component fails then another will fail as more stress is put on it, especially with such widespread damage. The failure isn't simultaneous but it's close enough not to matter that much. It's not as if the rest of the structure is going to hold together while the rest of the building simply tips over (which is what some of the simulated videos from this study shows). To me that seems far more absurd.
There's no cognitive dissonance on my end, I'm just waiting for some hard evidence. To suggest that demolition charges were placed in 3 massive buildings without anybody knowing about it and without anybody finding evidence (other than the gut feel and "common sense" of a lot of armchair quarterbacks as far as how they think buildings should collapse) is far more absurd than the buildings collapsing the way they did.
They say 3 people can keep a secret if 2 of them are dead. Here there must be hundreds or thousands of people who would have to know about this. Yet none are talking.
The difference between you and I is that I could be convinced with evidence. Witnesses who have first hand knowledge of demolition charges, evidence that shows explosive charges were used, etc. You could never be convinced that demolition didn't happen no matter what evidence is provided (not that it is easy to prove a negative anyway). I'm not saying it's impossible that the buildings were intentionally demolished, just that I have no reason to believe that at this time. I'll be interested in the results of a peer review of this study and if it holds up what if any other explanations are theorized about possible causes of near simultaneous failure of supports.
I would also point out that in controlled demolitions, collapse starts at the bottom. In at least WTC 1 and WTC 2, collapse started near the top. You also typically see visible explosions before the collapse. If you wanted to fake a building collapse, having terrorists plant bombs seems a whole lot more straightforward than hijacking airliners and flying them into the buildings.
Besides, why would terrorists, whoever they are, be concerned with a "controlled" demolition? Why not make the buildings fall over and do more damage?
I don't think I'm the one with cognitive dissonance.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Well, the theory you believe in defies the main laws of physics. That scenario is impossible, you don't have any evidence to prove it and you still believe in it.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
What theory did I put forth that defies the laws of physics? That the failure of major structural components puts stress on other structural components? Is there evidence of planted explosive charges that I was not aware of? Where is it? I'll gladly consider hard evidence. I just don't accept non-expert opinions about how buildings should fall when subjected to these conditions as proof, that's all.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
For 50 years these people believed that a magic bullet killed JFK. They will believe whatever the government tells them.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Your obsession with @berniesanders is pathetic. Get a life.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
you're watching, but you're not seeing.
it's almost like you want to believe the government isn't lying and at perpetual war which makes trillions for the pentagon and defence contractors whose boards the politicians will join when they leave government.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Why don't you re-examine your assumptions about how buildings should collapse under the conditions these were subject to? It's seems like an awfully small minority of architects and engineers are agreeing with you.
The Pentagon never had problems with perpetual war before this happened so that doesn't really seem like a realistic motive here. You don't need an excuse to do what you are already making excuses successfully to do. A conspiracy on this level is far more elaborate than what is necessary so why go to all the risk and trouble?
Sure, there are evil people in the world but enough of them on the boards of defense contractors to conspire to murder this many men, women and children? Anything is possible but this hardly seems like the most likely scenario.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
nobody died, the buildings were empty. your naivete seems to hold no bounds.
'why would the government..?'
there weren't even any planes:
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Now you're just trolling.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
no. deadly serious. what do you see in the image? is that possible? that is from broadcast pictures from the day in question. what is it you need explaining?
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
I've seen the impact from multiple camera angles. The wing was there. Just because poor video quality and a possible modified image makes it look otherwise in this one frame doesn't change that. Nevermind all the eyewitnesses. Why do you take one very questionable piece of evidence and exclude all the other available evidence? What's your explanation? The special effects artist forgot the wing? No, this can only be trolling. I'll stop feeding the troll now.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
again, deadly serious. you have no idea of the depths of illusion you are under - and the smarter you are the deeper you are likely to have bought it and not be able to see it.
obviously, it's not just one frame, and this is one of hundreds of problems with the official story.
of course one should also consider the consequences of that day, both for human beings in other countries (who did nothing) and on american citizens themselves (who also did nothing.)
if you still trust your government at this stage there may be no hope for you.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
It's pointless to say anything to these people. They're too gone down the rabbit hole. Their cognitive dissonance is off the roof. They believe in the government lies, and no amount of evidence proving them wrong will change their minds.
It's obvious that both airplanes were holographic projections. There was supposed to be a third airplane hitting WTC7 but they've messed it up somehow.
Not that it matters. As we can see, these brainwashed idiots still believe the building caught fire and collapsed on its own, despite the fact that nothing touched it.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit