Originally posted by The All Seeing I
I
In sum, the OS regarding the collapses violates the laws of physics. Where as the CT does not violate the laws of physics. So which theory does science dictate we reject? For those who regard NIST an authority on science, then you have to ask yourself; why did they ignore the Laws of Conservation of Momentum and Energy in their "studies"?

Originally posted by The All Seeing I

a disinfo agent.

Originally posted by The All Seeing I

Only a certain type of person is capable of running/hiding/deflecting/distorting in the face of what can't be denied.

Originally posted by The All Seeing I

1-You are in the matrix son,

2-it takes no rocket scientist to figure out what happened,

3-i even proved this with simple science and math.

Originally posted by The All Seeing I

1-The commonality of these three collapses with regard to the lack in conservation of momentum, shows with or without the calcs,

2-hmmm you must be right... i must be the delusional one.

Originally posted by The All Seeing I

2- Yes in your Brain Operators Manual, only a SE who sells out to the OS can know what really happened.

One of our primary responsibilities as architects and engineers is to ensure public safety in and around our structures, and we take this seriously. It is also our responsibility as concerned American citizens to ask questions and seek honest answers. I encourage everyone to read the numerous books, technical reports and papers about the WTC; look closely at the photographs and videos; listen to the speakers with an open mind. Decide for yourself, and take a stand for what you believe. As a structural engineer I believe in the laws of physics and rely on them every day.

After much reading and studying it is obvious that NIST, FEMA and the 9/11 Commission have all fallen short of a detailed accounting of the catastrophic collapses of the three World Trade Center buildings in Manhattan on 9/11/01. A few examples of unexplained details include the "severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel" as described in Appendix C of the FEMA Building Performance Study, the complete symmetrical collapses following asymmetric structural damage and short-term fires, and the chemical signature of incendiary compounds found in the toxic WTC dust.

I would really like to know why complete collapse of the twin towers "became inevitable" as expressed by NIST without any scientific analysis to substantiate it. Why would all 110 stories drop straight down to the ground in about 10 seconds, pulverizing most of the contents into dust and ash - twice? Why would WTC 7 fall straight down to the ground in about seven seconds the same day? It was not struck by any aircraft or engulfed in any fire. An independent investigation is justified - and necessary - for all three collapses.

Originally posted by The All Seeing I

Boy this guy really hates America, what a delusional terrorist-lovin crack-pot he is.

Originally posted by The All Seeing I

Why didn't these towers fall like trees?