Then provide some evidence supporting your claims of a "controlled demolition." Not knowing what you're looking at on a YouTube video is not "evidence."
Keeping in mind that the video you just linked as evidence of a controlled demolition shows no such thing and is DEBUNKED.
Aluminium at 800°C is not yellow glowing like seen on 9/11.
Here you go, big guy. START READING:
http://www.debunking911.com/moltensteel.htm
the best point so far is the high voltages that could be a source for the very high temperatures to bring aluminium glowing yellow.
And where, pray tell, did the "high voltages" come from?
and no explanation about the squibs convinced me so far.
This is irrelevant. There is no evidence - NONE - that supports the presence of "squibs" or any other explosive at WTC. Period. End of discussion.
Unless, of course, you can produce some evidnece of this - chemical fingerprints, audiotape of the NWO orders to detonate, etc.
We're not holding our breath.
i think they are far to local to be from "compressed" air.
Oh? And what do you know of squibs? What is the proper distance ejecta from a squib is supposed to achieve? On average? And how about for air compression? Cite some sources supporting your beliefs.
It doesn't matter what "you think." What "you think" is not "evidence."
You need to show evidence of explosives, which leave distinctive chemical and other fingerprints, or you need to give up this pointless exercise in childish futility.
You have no evidence supporting your position None. Not one speck. I showed you what the canards you floated actually were, I provided you with links that you did not read, sources you did not internalize, and physical evidence, expert testimony and debunking that you ignored entirely.
Now you're just putting your fingers in your ears singing LALALAICANTHEARYOULALAL.
You're going to have to face facts some day, champ.
Best to start now, because you're obviously in the "Loose Change" phase of Trooferism and are potentially savable.