9-11/anomalies/collapse/debate

From Issuepedia
< 9-11‎ | anomalies‎ | collapse
Revision as of 22:38, 19 July 2009 by Woozle (talk | contribs) (finished with "first round" responses)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Editing is currently in progress on this article, and the author or editor has saved their work to prevent loss. Please check back later by reloading the page, and do not edit while this message is still showing. Thank you.

right-arrow debaticon WTC1 and WTC2 were destroyed by controlled demolition.
down-arrow debaticon Controlled demolition goes from the bottom up, while the twin towers clearly collapsed from the top.
up-arrow debaticon Standard protocols were probably not followed.
up-arrow debaticon The demolition was not for legitimate purposes, so the demolition engineers were not necessarily constrained by convention, law, or ethics.
up-arrow debaticon Top-down demolition is more in line with the goal of being frightening ("shock and awe"), since it is more dramatic.
up-arrow debaticon Top-down demolition aids the goal of supporting the appearance of structural failure due to the impact, thus hiding the sabotage.
up-arrow debaticon The pattern of attributes matches controlled demolition much better than any other previously-known cause of collapse.
up-arrow debaticon WTC7 did collapse from the bottom.
down-arrow debaticon It is extremely improbable that those planning such a complicated demolition would be able to predict the exact location the planes would impact the towers, and prepare the towers to begin falling precisely there.
up-arrow debaticon They didn't have to know in advance; CD is usually radio-controlled. The demolition controllers presumably started the demolition near the impact points in order to support the appearance of structural failure due to the impact.
down-arrow debaticon WTC2 did not fall straight down, as the North Tower and buildings leveled by controlled demolitions typically fall, but rather began tilting from the point of impact.
up-arrow debaticon There are a number of reasons why an otherwise-controlled demolition of WTC2 might have resulted in the observed tilt.
up-arrow debaticon If structural elements were being severed by thermite shortly before collapse, this might have been enough to start the top of the building tipping over before the main demolition began.
up-arrow debaticon There is strong evidence that structural elements were severed by thermite.
up-arrow debaticon Diagonally-severed beams were found in the rubble.
up-arrow debaticon Thermite was found in dust collected after the collapse but before rescue operations had begun.
up-arrow debaticon There is significant evidence that steel was being melted by something other than the impact fire minutes before WTC2 collapsed.
up-arrow debaticon Streams of molten metal were seen pouring from one corner.
up-arrow debaticon The impact fire never reached temperatures sufficient to melt steel.
up-arrow debaticon The tilt might have been an extra bit of drama to add to the "shock and awe" effect.
up-arrow debaticon Some elements of the controlled demolition rig might have been set off prematurely, either due to events within the building (metal beams falling and shorting something out, heat from the fire melting something and crossing wires or initiating some chemical process) or due to human error on the part of the remote control operator(s).