Bah.
Obviouslt, WTC 7 fell because of a horrendous miscalculation while testing a new government anti-gravity device. THe wires were connected in opposing phase, thus making a pro-gravity device instead. This actually pulled the planes into the WTC 1 & 2. WTC 7, although at the center of the device, was built strongly enough (secret CIA labs and the Illuminati swimming pool, you know) that it hung around a bit before the building finally gave way.
This also explains why all the rescue workers got so tired, and had so much trouble in WTC7, as well as explaining why it fell so much faster than freefall (I mean, really, if I watch it at 4x in WMP, it falls in, like, 1 second!!).
It also only requires a very small conspiracy. Most of the explanation was cover up after the fact.
Of course, like every other CT that's been put forward here, my little fantasy offers no explanation for much of the events, such as reports from the planes via cell phone and/or plane phone of terrorists, Flight 93, the plane targetting the Pentagon (why not wire that to blow, too?), why use planes instead of just blowing the things up, why would this even be required to start a war in Iraq (seems it'd be much easier to manufacture chemical weapon attacks from Iraq to Isreal, for example, would be enough to incite a large percentage of the population without damaging the U.S., and would more than justify a war). There are too many things that don't make sense. The only way any of this fits together is if you start with an axiom like "THe gubmint always lies" and work from there.
Of course, that boils down to an "AD Hominem" argument, rather than anything based on actual evidence.
Not to mention that the entirety of the arguments rely on extreme misundertsandings of explosives and demolitions. Here's a hint...what you see on TV and in the movies is
NOT what real explosions look like. Real building demolitions do
NOT cause things to fall "faster than freefall". If the buildings had been wired to blow, they would have had to sneak in
TRUCKLOADS of explosives over a period of
DAYS just to get the amount of material there that was needed, as well as more days and weeks to get it properly wired and make sure it would go. Not to mention that damage from the airline crashes and subsequent fires would have ruined any sort of detonation system that would have been in place.
Does the official story account 100% for everything? No, it doesn't, and there are some things we may never know the exact nature of. Does this mean it's a conspiracy? No, it doesn't. They're using the same reasoning used by creationists..."evolution doesn't explain everythign so that means God did it!". We can add the Either/Or fallacy to their list of invalid argument techniques, as well.
Not to mention "Poisoning the Well" (if you don't believe it you're just snother dupe of Big Gubmint), a sort of historical Slippery Slope (the Gubmint lied before, so they would pull off a conspiracy to kill thousands of their own people and we're headed to a NWO), Ad Hominem attacks (you're just naysaying and refusing to see anything, you're stupid, you're a dupe, etc, etc), Appeal to Authority (this English Professor says that the buildings were demolished, so forget your Structural Engineer!), and probably more.
ETA: Oh, and Argument from Ignorance (no structural engineer can convince me, I
know what it is, even if I have no expertise in the subject), thanks for reminding me David
These peopel are as deeply in love with thier CT as deep-south fundies are with thier religion, and I'd think for much the same reason. They're part of a "select club" of people who are "smart enough to have figured it out" and have "secret knowledge" about how things "really work". If you can't understand reality, make your own.
