posted on May, 11 2007 @ 05:29 PM
I think you guys are approaching the timeline the wrong way.
Note, both images show fire damage coming from windows, correct? Damage that is roughly the same in both images, though in the 'faked' one it
appears to be slightly greater.
So, I think we can all agree, both the pictures show buildings which had fires, correct?
One building shows damage, the other one does not.
But regardless of when the pictures were taken, ALL damage, including the fires in WTC7 were started by the collapse of the towers, correct?..
At any point before the collapse of the towers, the building should show no fire damage, one would assume - please, if I'm missing something here let
Fire takes time to spread and cause smoke damage like that seen surrounding the windows on the upper floors, and the collapse of the towers being very
close together, you can assume that even if you had debris from tower 1, and tower 2 hitting separately, at best you have a 20 minute window in which
it is possible for you to take two pictures of WTC7, and show one with the 'scoop' damage, and one without, but both with fire damage.
Does that make sense?.. That's the BEST scenario for these two pictures to be real in my opinion.. that one was taken in some magical time before the
structural damage happened, but after fire damage..
If there is evidence of fire in WTC7 before 1&2 collapsed, obviously my theory is just bunk, but I've never heard of any..