an observation about the destruction of WTC 1, 2 & 7

Gravity.

 

We've been over this before and you refuse to listen.

 

How did "explosives/thermite" cause the tilt?

Please explain your thought process of how "explosives/thermite" could have caused the tilt and why that is more believable than impact damage/fire causing the weakening of the structure to cause the same thing.

 

in other words, you don't have an answer as to why
GRAVITY could cause the event of the South Tower
tipping of the upper section, without having said upper
part of the building simply fall over, and then the North
Tower came straight down.

 

We have been over this before. The impact damage and fire weakened the structural components to cause the tilt. The "hinge" or "pivot point" that caused the tilt then failed and that;s where gravity took over.

Now explain how your "explosives/thermite" caused this to happen.

 

NO,their story is NOT 'suspicious',and the collapse is NOT suspicious..their survival in the stairwell is nothing short of miraculous

 

yet another miracle, one among many.
there are so many things that happened on 9/11/2001
that require a huge stretch of "it could happen like that"
or something, or possibly divine intervention explains it
all, maybe Allah blessed the effort by those angry Arabs
and therefore things happened as they did?

 

Your incredulity is NOT proof of wrongdoing...

 

When outcomes like the total destruction of WTC1,2 & 7
are the least likely to have happened given the circumstances,
why do people continually throw around bits like "incredulity"
when in fact its a matter of probabilities. Think about this
( if you will ) toss a tin-can up in the air and watch it land,
how often does it land on its side vs landing on an end straight up?
now look at the famous Murray st. Jet Engine. .........
takes just a bit of thought, the fact is that a multitude of things
that may have happened just that way, but have a low probability
of happening exactly as it did, but this is the story of 9/11/2001
the cosmic improbability machine working overtime.

 

It was the most likely scenario.

 

and so the complete & total destruction of WTC1, 2 & 7
was the most likely outcome? exactly how did you arrive
at that conclusion?

 

It wasn't complete and total. Repeating that lie won't make it come true.

My conclusion was arrived at via the evidence.

 

And when I ask for documentation of what remained,
I get pix of one staircase at one of the towers and that
is all, really, if there is something that = < 1% of the total
of the tower(s) and you have to then state that destruction
was incomplete therefore I'm wrong about the destruction
of the tower sharing an attribute with Controlled Demolition
because the towers were destroyed. what?
You argue in support of the whole OFFICIAL story
for what reason?

 

The pictures of the collapsed buildings prove that the destruction was not what you describe as total.
Take for example the mall beneath the complex and the sub-basements of 1 and 2.

 

So you include the mall and the bits in the basement,
so be it, the basement was not completely destroyed.
so now that begs the question as to exactly what happened
to the mass of the building, if the skyscraper was indeed
110 stories tall and 90% air, then by that standard, the rubble
pile could very well be expected to be 11 stories tall, however
it was not, so what happened to the remainder of the material?
pulverized & scattered all over Manhattan(?)

The totality of destruction is a given, unless somebody
just happens to have some photographic evidence of
the bits above street level that miraculously survived
the "collapse" event.

 

How deep do you think the basements and foundation was, and exactly how high and wide was the rubble pile?

Be sure to source your answers.

 

You have to talk about sub-basements to prove your point about less than total destruction of buildings that were 110 stories tall?

ROFLMAO

psik

 

Of course if you are a truther, you can't consider the whole picture.

 

So what you have to insist upon, is that destruction
was not complete because the basement was not
completely destroyed and so it negates the claim
of controlled demolition because the WTC tower(s)
were not totally destroyed by that standard.
so be it, you have your excuse, run with it.
however, the fact is that the 110 stories above ground
were totally destroyed and that destruction is a factor
in concluding that the destruction of WTC1, 2 & 7
had to have been of such a nature that it was a planned
event, a controlled demolition, now it then comes down
to speculation as to exactly how it was done, but what
was done is quite obvious.

 

What was done is quite obvious and that is why you have nothing to show for your fantasies.

 

so, if its so completely obvious
can you explain exactly how it is that the
top 15% of a skyscraper can collapse
down upon the remaining 85% ( as yet totally undamaged 85% )
and cause the complete destruction of said building down
to ground level? Just exactly like a controlled demolition. or?

 

No controlled demolition looks like that. No demolition experts bring down buildings from the top down. When the support buckled from the heat, they were no longer being supported by the columns and the floor could not support any kind of weight like that so collapsed pretty easily. You can even see this in this video that leaves a core column standing for a little bit.

[video=youtube_share;MAYXdafNl6E]http://youtu.be/MAYXdafNl6E[/video]

 

You mean like knowing the weight of the horizontal beams on each level in the core?

psik

 

Here you go, some reading for the truthers. Careful, it has math.

http://www.911myths.com/WTCREPORT.pdf

 

and this report you cite, makes the assumption that
from the very first floor that is destroyed the floor trusses
and the core columns and the box columns in the outer wall
ALL fail at exactly the same time, because if they did not,
the whole thing would take up a bias to one side or another
and would have the top section of the building tipping over
or at least dumping mass quantities of rubble out one side
of the building to the exclusion of the others.
The uniformity of the event gives it away, it was the product
of intelligent design.