"Would you agree that a 47-story modern steel tower covering a city block is extremely unlikely to have a final collapse, totally and at high speed, simply because of the prevailing heat created by migrating office cubicle fires?"
"I would not agree that the WTC 7 collapse was unlikely. I think it was very likely, no matter how many qualifiers you try to add. Also, one person's opinion of something's likelihood does not determine whether something actually happened. You've dressed up incredulity in new clothes.
"Scientists have calculated that the chance of anything so patently absurd actually existing are millions to one. But magicians have calculated that million-to-one chances crop up nine times out of ten." - Discworld: Mort"
So are you saying that even with odds against it of a million-to-one, you would accept the credibility of the NIST 'prevailing heat from migrating office cubicle fires' hypothesis?
"Particularly, with a visual outline previously identifiable only with steel towers felled by controlled demolition?"
"
No matter how many words you're using, you're saying "it looked like a CD to me". I doubt you'll be able to provide examples of these "towers", since no building over 30 stories has been CDed. And I'll bet none of them will be on fire."
Well I didn't think you had to be a detective to see that?
You state that no buildings over 30 stories have ever been felled by controlled demolition [commercially].
Since these buildings tend to exist in high density commercial areas, there are obvious reasons for using other demolition methods.
Probably the biggest single reason, other than the debris cloud, is that it is hard to get buildings to drop straight down.
The NIST hypothesis requires very smart fires and a secret fuel stash.
Fires that amazingly performed a complete high speed building demolition.
And did so, accidentally no less, on a building 56% taller than those in the published engineering record.
AND, produced a total collapse with a visual outline previously identifiable
only with those steel towers felled by controlled demolition.
"Do you honestly believe that in light of the NIST's final 9/11 Report on WTC7, that a demolition company could, using the NIST WTC7 Report specifications, have induced a similar full, high speed building collapse?"
"Not with a building on fire on multiple floors, not having to plant explosives and wiring in secret in a heavily trafficked building in the middle of Manhattan, not using an experimental method of demolition. In other words, it might be possible, but not in the context of what we know about 9/11."
You appear to be confused so I'll re-phrase that question.
Do you believe that demolition engineers could do what the NIST argues was possible with the prevailing heat from migrating office cubicle fires?
Induce a column failure comparable to what the NIST claims to have happened to the undamaged column 79.
"And they could make those office cubicle fires dance so well that the core failure would be so well timed and balanced as to prevent significant toppling?"
"No.
Are you arguing that the bad guys somehow directed the fire? Since when was this something controlled demo companies do in high rises, ever?
How did they make sure WTC 1 hit 7 and gave them an excuse, without damaging any of the explosives or wiring?"
No.
What I am saying is that building demolition companies would have to be magicians in order to get the necessary abeyance of reality to create high speed total steel building collapses by fire.
MM
