How can I disagree with no theory?
Except for WTC1 and WTC2, the remainder were pulled because they were highly damaged or, in the case or WTC7, pulled for other reasons. Either that or a relatively tiny fire in the corner of WTC 7 caused the central supports to fail in exactly the same way as a building falls when it's central beams have been cut by explosives.
Even government reports don't know the reason WTC 7 failed or they know and are not saying. That's what the cover-up is. The destruction of WTC 7 is the cover-up. The glibness of the reason for the failure of WTC 7 is the cover-up.
This is entirely incorrect, and betrays a near complete lack of knowledge of what you are talking about. NIST has a report on the 7 collapse, and it says, basically, "Unfought fires caused by impact damage from WTC 1's collapse".
And, of course, the theories for 1 and 2 are "plane impact and fire".
I like how, in your very next post, you reference the report that purported to explain 7's collapse. Oh, and the 9/11 Comission Report was out by 2004. NIST was A report, not The report.
The official report took about seven years to complete. A quote from Wikipedia follows:
This report is at least as plausible as the belief that someone pulled the building with explosives.
Based on your informed and experienced consideration of the subject matter, of course. I'm not sure how "The fires, fueled by office contents, along with the lack of water, were the key reasons for the collapse." is as plausible as ninjas secretly planting silent non-explosive explosives in three occupied and heavily trafficed buildings in the middle of Manhattan? I disagree.
However, buildings are supposed to be engineered to be five times as strong as needed to simply hold their own weight from collapsing. That's why this report seems a push.
Even if that's true - and I doubt you've ever seen a primary source saying so and are quoting other Truthers - that depends on the building being intact. Incidentally, the falling blocks hit the lower blocks with force equivalent to several times the weight of both towers combined.
Push or pull, what was it?
You are trying really hard to look witty here. And failing utterly, especially since you refuse to acknowledge all the things you've been corrected on.
I've seen video of towers where entire floors were engulfed in flames. They didn't fall.
Some people are shot and don't die. Some people are shot in the exact same body location and do. Clearly, the ones who died are all faking it.
I've seen video of many buildings brought down by explosives. They fell in exactly the same way that WTC 7 did.
You mean asymmetrically, with enough force to kill everyone nearby, with dozens of conspicuous flashes of light and miles of distinctive wiring that had to be cleared out of the rubble, with walls knocked down inside the structure, with an audio signature audible across New York?
I shouldn't get any disagreement that government and government officials lie.
So I remain skeptical.
Interesting fact; NIST also standaridzes weights and measures. So if you don't trust their report because the govt. lies, you can't trust your wristwatch.
