posted on Oct, 4 2011 @ 07:31 PM
Originally posted by ipsedixit
reply to post by Varemia
You might be right but those beams at the base of the building were massive. They may have required the extra punch that depleted uranium charges
Only scientific analysis will really answer the question. It might even come out in biopsies done on cancer or respiratory or renal disease
I dunno. I feel like once the top part is collapsed, there's no real point in blowing out the base. What effect was trying to be achieved? To me, it
would have been more devastating of a picture to see a shredded building with the bottom 20 floors mostly intact, buried by debris.
I'm just trying to figure out the why in all this. So much of it just seems pointless, when the initial plane impact was enough to send the country
into emergency mode. The collapse just tipped it over the edge. I doubt that the manner of collapse would influence the situation much.
I mean, imagine if you were in charge of the secret commission to blow the towers or collapse them in some way following a "staged" attack.
Wouldn't you go for the simplest and least noticeable manner? Demolitions are extremely loud and obnoxious. In my opinion, that's the last choice a
person would make in demolishing a building secretly. No, something better would be along the lines of spreading some kind of odorless material that
burns extremely hot to weaken the steel faster (though I don't know any off the top of my head).
I don't know, it just seems like too many uncontrollable factors to assume that there was a way to plan an effective demolition after a plane impact.
You can tell by my thoughts in this post being jumbled worse than a box of confetti.