Originally posted by Jezus
So you are capable of all this analysis and critical thinking and speculation. and you STILL believe in the official story?
I just don't really understand you.
You make a lot of speculation and assumptions in order to dismiss this evidence, but I'm just wondering if you only question evidence that goes
against the official story?
If you are actually interested in science it should take even less time that this thread to figure out the official story is a physical impossibility.
The official story is the only one that offers a comprehensive analysis and explanation of the events that occurred. It is backed up by forensic
evidence, testimony, video and photography.
Looking at some points of the alternative explanation presented:
One ton of therm*te would have been required for every 8 tons of steel to reach a sufficient weakening temperature of 1300 degrees Fahrenheit. So we
are talking enormous quantities installed. As many or more of the columns damaged by the airplane impact or weakened by the fire would have had to be
As the steel structural skeletons were not exposed, planting incendiaries in advance would have required major invasive work on the buildings, far
beyond the removing of wall panels. Concrete would have had to be drilled or blasted through for incendiaries to be positioned and then damage
repaired and expose surfaces repainted. The building would virtually have had to be taken apart in numerous places, most in full business operation.
This would mean working around electrical wiring, heating and cooling systems, water lines, insulation, fireproofing, etc. All to be done
inconspicuously by skilled crews without raising undue suspicion.
Fully successful remote ignition with precision timing would be needed. Given the relatively slow burning rate of therm*te it would somehow have had
to be kept in direct contact with steel surfaces for minutes to work effectively.
All happening in the turmoil of buildings with burning airplanes on top and fires raging throughout.
Is all this possible?
[edit on 9-5-2009 by mmiichael]