I'm not saying for a second that's what happened, I'm just saying the likelihood and ease of using explosives on 9-11 is very high, and anyone arguing otherwise ought to remove their head from the sand.
Brasil: Part of being a careful researcher regarding 9/11 involves comparing various aspects of the event to make sure they agree with and don't contradict each other. Mackey here has discussed the thesis of jet fuel being a more probable cause of any damage in the basements than non-jet-fuel explosives (I won't add to that because I haven't the expertise, and he's handling it well enough on his own). Another angle to investigate would involve the injuries the victims sustained. If you are correct, then there should be evidence of overpressure injuries. I'm still working on that, but my point is that mere assertion regarding the "likelihood and ease of using explosives on 9-11" is not strong argument. It is unsupported. If you could elaborate on your opinions by including more observations, reported and acknowledged facts, and present supporting evidence that can be independently researched rather than simply presenting assertions, the debate here can proceed more smoothly.
---
TAM, Gravy, and others:
On the note above (his quote I've excerpted), I've been trying to research the concept of a high explosives blast occuring under the WTCs from the point of view of injuries reported. Specifically, I've been trying to locate sources that discussed seeing any cases of tympanic (eardrum) or alveolar (lung) overpressure injuries. I've only found a few reports here and there of ear injuries - although a couple only specified one eardrum, and no accompanying respiratory distress (which doesn't rule out explosives, but does argue against it), and I'm completely striking out on lung overpressure injuries; I'm simply finding no reported cases.
But, absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence, as the saying goes, so I'm wondering if you two (or anybody else) has any info regarding the specific issue of overpressure injuries. If, as Brasil purports, explosives were used, we should be seeing a plethora of reports of such tympanic or alveolar injuries, like we do in the reportage of the Madrid bombings (here's one example of many, from "Emergency Radiology":
http://www.springerlink.com/content/k323178048673w12/fulltext.pdf), the bus bombings in Israel during the Intifada, or the Oklahoma City event. Here's my question: Do you know of any sources that deal specifically with listing the injuries treated during 9/11?
And
TAM (bolding and coloring to catch your attention
), since you're a doctor, I was hoping to get your help on this specific find: This report from "Morbidity and Mortality Weekly" Titled "Rapid Assessment of Injuries Among Survivors of the Terrorist Attack on the World Trade Center — New York City, September 2001" (Link:
http://www.terrorisminfo.mipt.org/pdf/mmwrvol51no1_01112002.pdf). It's a short article, unfortunately, but I was interested in eliciting comment from you on it. From what I as a layman can read from it, there's a conspicuous absence of any overpressure injuries recorded in that study, but I may have missed something due to my lack of expertise. Would you mind taking a peek at it when you have the time and seeing if you can find anything regarding that?
BTW, only the first few pages are relevant; the rest of that link includes completely off topic articles (Childrens' nutrition in Mongolia, an Arizona Salmonella outbreak, etc.) that should just be ignored.
