posted on Sep, 7 2006 @ 05:11 PM
According to the timeline of events here:
WTC 1 was hit at 8:45 and then WTC 2 at 9:03. By the time Tower 2 was hit, the jet fuel fires had been burning in Tower 1 for 18 minutes.
At 10:05, Tower 2 collapses. Its fires had been burning for one hour and 2 minutes. Tower 1 takes another 24 minutes to collapse (at 10:29), by
which time its fires had been burning for 1 hour and 44 minutes.
Assuming that jet fuel fires did indeed burn hot enough to melt steel, and caused the collapse of the towers, then why didn't Tower 1 fall first,
since its steel had been subjected to the heat for the longer time? Surely Tower 1 would have at least shown some sign of its weakening supports,
well before Tower 2 collapsed. If this is the case then I apologize, but in all the videos I have seen, Tower 1 looks solid as a rock, even as Tower
2 collapses right beside it.
As 2 comes down, does the shock wave cause 1 to sway or bend in some way, indicating weakened support structures? In my observation it does not. How
can this be?
If anyone has an explanation of this anomaly that I may have missed I'd appreciate a link.