This one seems more plausible cause it's backed up with evidence, see the video here http://www.ae911truth.net/omnitv_interview.htm

Just watch the three buildings collapse, it is plain to see that you are viewing three "Controlled demolitions"


Robert.

WTC7 is a smoking gun. No plane hit it. What building falls STRAIGHT DOWN after being hit by debris?

Eeeeewwww.....Truthers.


One that has had its co-dependent underpinnings pulled out from it by its neighbors.

By the way Rosie, fire WILL melt/weaken steel. Especially when prompted by jet fuel, and
the gases from distilling plastic office fixtures and carpet.

Strangely, professionals expert in engineered demolition agree,
"Truthers, STFU."


Here's a trick.
Carefully step on top of an empty soda can. Holy smokes! It holds you up!
While atop the can, quickly poke the sides of the can with a mere finger of each hand.
(Don't forget to retract your hands just as quickly!!!!)

Now,what have we learned about engineering, well ...since Lincoln Logs and the Ziggurats?
I blame Otis, and his elevator safety brake.

Jet fuel isn't hot enough to weaken/melt steel like that.

But let's pretend it is. Did WTC7 have jet fuel all over it?

Oh, and BTW...not all "truthers" are liberals. Some of us are Christians who are not asleep!

Neighbors? Bldg 7 was not next to buildings 1 and 2. Buildings 4, 5, and 6 were between 7 and 1 & 2. Why, then, did 4, 5, & 6 not collapse?

WTC 7 was across the street from the rest of the WTC complex, I might add....

Hmmm..never implied that "truthers" were all liberals. Those willing to enjoin conspiracy
theory from the opinion of ONE "experts" opinion, as cited from an interview, tend to be equal opportunity groups. One need only hold up a placard to be deemed a fellow member of "Yay for our side".

Citing ones chosen religion CERTAINLY doesn't add to the veracity of ones position on
matters of hard, or political, science.

Ironically, non sequitur IS a traditional Liberal/Socialist/Feminist/Democrat/Humanities
response to deflect direct rebuttal.
Really?
I have personally seen photographs of a factory fire where steel I beams were festooned
across (heavy)wooden beams that survived whatever was hot enough to "plasticize" the steel.
Of COURSE I can't call up copies of the photos, or technical details of that fire.

Try THIS:
Remove the coolant hoses from a (your) car engine. Run it 'til it stops.
Get back to us on a revised opinion of burning kerosene, or gasoline, melting metal.
Remember that the wind blows pretty good around the Southern end of Manhattan
on the ocean shores of Battery Park.
No, as a matter of fact, if that's ALL there is to consider, jet fuel ON it would do minimal damage as it simply burned off, perhaps exploding some window glass out from the inside
pressure, and starting the chain reaction of a compromised stress skin curtain.

Are there ANY other opinions, by..you know...folks that actually inspected the damage,
and are familiar with the stress skin engineering that is involved, that are contrary to
those presented by Mr. Gage in the satellite interview from Canada? Perhaps from observers
IN the buildings in question as the conflagration transpired?

In fairness:
I can only base MY humble opinion on years as a metal shop fabricator/welder and over- head rigger, as well as personal conversations with a Frenchman named Mr. Petite,(see: "Man On A Wire") through my years in preforming arts/exhibition technology. None of the independent studies in architectural engineering (especially the style known as "High Tech") I pursued was officially accredited by any institution of higher learning, and none of my actual formal academic architectural drafting/design went further that an addition to my private high school's theater. I may have missed some of the important stuff concerning vaulted ceilings, and flying buttresses, in my History of European Art/Architecture class because the instructor favored quiet, darkened-room, slide shows for an early morning class. Yes, I MAY very well have been asleep!

Otherwise, I can only rely on several others personal observations, and of stress skin "curtain" failure analyses from The John Hancock Building (the plywood palace) in Boston, and MOST of the Petro-industry corporate buildings in downtown Houston from a hurricane.(Andrew?)

"Forensic Engineering Investigation" (Randall K. Noon), or any of several (freakin' expensive) books published by CRC press, aka. Francis and Taylor Press, may be of interest to those interested in formulating their own non-political/agenda driven conclusion. So VERY much of what
we endure from "truthers" can be directly attributed to Bush Derangement Syndrome scripts, which are by NO MEANS relegated to "liberals", or non-Christians.

Um, does anybody have an inkling how intertwined the infrastructure of buildings in Manhattan are, ESPECIALLY where subway passages, structural pilings, and electrical/steam/water conduits are involved?

"Across the street" is joined at the hip in terms of co-dependent "old big city" underpinnings.

As for the other small buildings, who knows?
Their smaller stature may very well have afforded them the "independence" of life boats, and from going down with the rest of the ship.

How about those buildings in Madrid that burned for TWO WHOLE DAYS and didn't collapse?

Not familiar with that.
I must ask, what do buildings in Madrid that burned for two days have to do with buildings in New York?

Same height?
Same construction?
Same weight/flex/stress/catastrophic failure parameters?
Same anthropological density?
Same "abrupt" initiation?
Same prevailing atmosphere?
Same fuel supporting the fire?
Same underlying infrastructure?
Same emergency response measures?
Same alleged "expert" offering unsolicited analysis of the phenomena from a comfy academic chair in Canada?

Here's a thought.
Two identical reinforced steel walk in "saftey" locker boxes, about half the size of a sea-tainer.
Both contain "high power" explosives, munitions, (C-4, plastique, det cord, Claymores, etc.)
One has the the door closed and sealed, the other is open.

Fire breaks out. Which would you feel safer hiding behind?*

Point is, two buildings in Madrid are NOT two buildings in New York- subject to wild claims
of conspiracy other than by a group citing their "religion" as an excuse to destroy "anyone not willing to bend to our misguided will", and to generate mayhem for ALL who actually exhibit "tolerance" of the enemies they have been instructed to hate.

It's far easier to speculate imagined evil in others than to address the fallibility of ones own "sphere".

Sound familiar?

*Extreme case, to be sure, simply to illistrate the point.
The "sealed can" is gonna explode-all at once. The open "high explosives" will simply burn. Any folks familiar with military ordnance care to opine here?