If you have read the 9/11 Commission report about all events that took place on 9/11 prior impacts as I assume you have, do you believe everything in it? I do not (and millions others). It is too much fiction and fantasy in the report.
Many members have already addressed your points, repeatly, but I would like to pass comment on this little gem. Along with a few other gems your have posted. I take it that is ok? Since we are having an open discussion and all that stuff. Yes I have read the 911 commission report, thats the one that say Al Qaeda carried out the attack right? The same report that says 19 guys who subscribe to this ideology carried out the attack right ?
Yes I do beleive this is generally correct and I beleive that billions of other people on the planet also beleive it to be correct. So were exactly do you get the figure of millions of Americans from ? maybe you pulled it from somewhere? You didn't make it up did you, you wouldn't just say that to try and impress people would you? After all you are after the truth are you not ? You couldn't just start telling stories would you? the only fiction and fantasy comes from you sunbeam, prentending that millions of people support you. Is it a comfort thing you seek, thinking millions all think like you? Does it make you feel you not so isolated,?
But my main interest is the analysis of structural damages after impacts, i.e. the results of forensic examinations ... or the lack of them.
WTC2 was the first tower that collapsed. I assume the people trapped in the section above thought they were safe and that the tower would not collapse as the fire slowly went out. But then WCT2 suddenly collapsed ... and NIST is coming up with some suggestions why that we are discussing. Controlled demolition is evidently not investigated by NIST.
Now this gem is the lock , stock and barrel of the truther, you assume? You assume what pal? How dare you assume you have any idea how terrifying it must have been for anybody trapped inside those towers? How dare you use your assumption to fuel you fantasies? You assume the fires had gone out and you assume that everybody felt save, .It may have slipped your mind but two very large planes had just been slammed into each tower, they had fires inside them and you drag another inane comment out, assuming that everybody inside one of the towers felt safe?
Your assumption aside, the firefighters inside WTC 1 did not even know that a second plane hit the second tower and they did not know it had collapsed, they did not see it ,they heard it. many people inside WTC 1 would not have even seen WTC 2 collapse simply because of the side of the building they were on, but you in your infinate wisdom make assumptions of jaw dropping insensitivity.
Controlled demolition was not investigated any more than little green men with lazer beams was investigated, becasue the most plausible senario which fits all the facts is that the damage from the planes and the fires brought down the towers. Maybe they didn't assume like you, anything, maybe , just maybe they used science and physics, but hey you would know all about that wouldn't you ?
The people trapped in the WCT1 must have been horrified when WTC2 collapsed. I assume they concluded their tower would also collapse ... and some desperate persons decided to jump before that, etc. Terrible.
More assumptions, see above. You are not in a postion to assume anything. Do not assume that you will be shown anything other than the same distaste, I have for any other conspirator who mocks this event. If you assume this, you will be wrong.
I see no harm in discussing WTC2 and what happened to its structure after impact and prior to the global collapse that ensued.
Neither do I , give it you best shot, opps sorry you already did and got torn apart, try harder next time.
NIST alleges that the east wall suddenly buckled and that there was load redistribution which caused the collapse. But it is not certain. Very little is certain.
Yes there is very little that is certain when you make wild assumptions, but hey lets assume I am actually bothered what you say anymore. Lets assume that I actually am wondering why you have not offered up any answers to the questions I have asked you. lets assume that you are not ignoring these questions but actually giving them some serious thought. So based on these assumptions, are you actually going to try and answer them?
NIST says that the intact section above tilted 7-8° to east prior collapse, but then the west part of the tower could not really be damaged as it was. And where did the intact section land?
With all respect to NIST they should have spent less ink/paper on the design, construction, maintenance and fire protection of the tower and descriptions of fires after impact and prior collapse. Much more efforts should have been spent on the structural conditions of the tower after impact and prior collapse and forensic examinations of the rubble that could explain the collapse.
The collapse as been explained and countless billions accept it. Maybe you should write to NIST and tell them all about it, maybe you should tell them they got it all wrong and that fires don't effect steel framed structures and fires have never caused any to collapse and the fires went out inside WTC 2 and everybody inside WTC 1 saw WTC 2 collapse and decided to jump. I assume they will tell you exactly what to do.
