A Scientific Theory of the WTC 7 Collapse, page 2

Originally posted by Six Sigma

Originally posted by PonyoSon
I'm no scientist but that just doesn't make any sense what so ever.

I have never personally met someone who after seeing the clip of WTC7 that didn't find something wrong with it. only on ATS have i seen people try to defend the official WTC7 story.

Hi PonyoSon,

If you are indeed looking for answers to your questions. (above you state that you are not a Scientist) If you search within conspiracy sites, you will get conspiracy answers. Do yourself a favor. Take a walk to a university near your home. If not, write to some of them. Find a university with a Structural Engineering department. They like to help. (typically)

Asking Richard Gage, Jim Fetzer, Judy Woods, or other ilk like them will not get you the real answers.

I wish you luck on your search for the truth.

- SS

sorry Six Sigma i missed your post somehow, thanks for the advice

I feel that if their are 1200 architects and engineers already willing to contradict the OS what else could be done to convince me/others that the OS is not accurate(aren't these are the people we should be asking)? I could be wrong but i don't think you could find 1200 architects and engineers willing to support the OS. why do you think this is?

I truly feel that the most seasoned/experienced architects or engineers could come out and say the OS is false, and people would still find a way not to believe it.

I'm more than convinced the OS isn't accurate and WTC7 is the single most obvious reason for that. Steel building just don't collapse in 15 seconds from fire. Nobody has ever even come close to logically explaining how that happen.

also FDNY343, what happen i was enjoying our debate, you were challenging me quite well,.you gave up on me, how come?

edit on 25-2-2011 by PonyoSon because: (no reason given)