Could a demolition team bring down WTC 7?

lisabob2 said:
funny how come people here know all the answers and anybody who doesn't think like then are wrong? either they must be all under 25 and /or neocons, both who are always right no matter what evidence is there to disprove them.
Click to expand...
What evidence? Considering that a quarter of a million civil engineers find no reason to doubt the real truthTM you are tilting at windmills.
 
peteweaver said:
Magz, the time needed just to clad charges alone makes your proposition ridiculous.

Then there's pre weakening of steel, stripping out interior walls so as to get at the load bearing structure, there's time needed to survey the building, calculate the amount of explosives to bring a building down cleanly.

Ridiculous.

Magz, just answer this simple question: why isn't structural damage and fire an acceptable explaination for you ?
Click to expand...

Structural damage and fire is not an acceptable answer even to those who are preparing the final report on WTC 7. That is why it is taking them five or six years to come up with an answer.
 
MaGZ said:
Structural damage and fire is not an acceptable answer even to those who are preparing the final report on WTC 7. That is why it is taking them five or six years to come up with an answer.
Click to expand...

Huh?

You mean the report is not coming out until 2010/2011?

How do you know it's being delayed that long?
 
MaGZ said:
Structural damage and fire is not an acceptable answer even to those who are preparing the final report on WTC 7. That is why it is taking them five or six years to come up with an answer.
Click to expand...
neoNAZI missile guy fails to see damage and fire are acceptable for explaining why buildings fail. You are the missile guy right? You are a guy who can not understand damage and fire to a building are enough to destroy the building. This is great stuff, you can not even stay on the topic, your own topic, you continue to show your expertise at not being logical or rational on 9/11.

WTC7 was unique; anyone disagree on a structural engineering standpoint?

WTC7 was allowed to burn all day; anyone disagree?

WTC7 was on fire all day! Big fires, we have first hand witnesses and more; anyone disagree?

Buildings that suffer damage and are on fire for hours are called destroyed. Learn to understand. The study going on now is trying to figure out the details of failure, and since your missile idea is made up, and you now have presented no real on topic ideas worth much. What do you think?
Zlaya said:
What if, and this is just a big IF - a plane was supposed to crash into it, like into towers 1 and 2, but somehow flight 93 crashed somewhere else? Since there was no plane coming, they had to destroy the building, since it would have been difficult to explain the explosive destruction in the lobby, and lower levels of the building. This also explains the BBC, CNN and Channel 24 confusion.

Obviously this is just a theory. Some may even call it a 'conspiracy theory'.

Ooooooooo....
Click to expand...
At least you are getting top notch expert posts like this one which has highlights of delusional ideas making it pure stupid CT.
 
Last edited:
MaGZ said:
Structural damage and fire is not an acceptable answer even to those who are preparing the final report on WTC 7. That is why it is taking them five or six years to come up with an answer.
Click to expand...

You might want to mention that to the vast majority of experts in relevant fields from across the globe.

You do know that building codes around the world are being changed because of 911, right?
 
Last edited:
After the cameraman films the second plane hitting WTC 2 there is an explosion on his right (WTC 7) and the cameraman falls to the ground trying to get out of the way from the flying debris. His camera catches the event as he falls to the ground. The Naudet video 9/11 has footage of the white cloud of smoke that was the result of the missile explosion.
Click to expand...

LOL yea. Post 101. Brilliant.
 
Hey MaGZ, why is the combination of damage and accepted by the vast majority of professional architects and structural engineers on the planet, but not for you? What, specifically, are they getting wrong?
 
MaGZ said:
The cameraman’s name is Jack Taliercio with the local New York City FOX affiliate.
Click to expand...

Uh huh. And where is this footage of which you speak? Hint: it isn't in post #101.
 
I've heard this line before about how the government shot down 93, and the errant missile hit WTC 7...The question I have is: Why would the government hide the fact that they shot down the planes? It seems like they would brag about it, if anything...considering how much heat they took for not being able to organize a shoot down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom