9/11 debate on C2C I consulted on for Richard Gage

[SydneyPSIder]

This is a 2 YEAR conversation in slow mo?

The buildings collapsed rapidly at near free fall speeds indicating a lack of structural support from top to bottom. The only conceivable way this could happen given modern construction methods and the properties of steel frame buildings is if the buildings connecting joints were weakened from top to bottom beforehand.

I think there is very little evidence of a 'DEW' weapon, there is little evidence that such a weapon even exists, and the same result can be obtained with good ol' explosives and the placement of shearing thermite devices. Thermite was used for silence to cut through bolts holding the frames together every 10m, or 3 storeys, which is why the building collapsed into neat 10m sections of steel, the length they were manufactured in. This process took place for about an hour after 'impact' (or initial explosions in the basements to weaken the foundational structures timed on the impacts) and evacuation of the buildings. Then a second set of small C-4 charges were detonated to actually cause the weakened beams to fly out and collapse the building.

As posted on the other active thread:



I think the DEW arguments are not supported well by the facts or realism and are a crank argument, used possibly to introduce FUD, or else the proponents really are harmless cranks.

[ProfWag]

[SydneyPSIder]

[ProfWag]