Dagget,

I can see why you might go for a conspiracy theory like this, when you seem to believe that capitalism is a huge conspiracy perpetrated upon an unsuspecting public by the US gov’t.

You say >> “The 9/11 conspiracy theory debunkers maintain that the collapse of the twin towers can be explained because: 1. a 767 had never been flown into such a building before, and 2. the construction was radically different from anything else before.Yet WTC7's construction was far more conventional and no 767 had been flown into that (as I believe someone pointed out earlier).”

The twin towers fell only after fires weakened enough of the remaining columns to lead to total collapse. Those fires took only 56 and 102 minutes. WTC7 burned unattended for something like 9 hours. It also got sideswiped by 110 stories of the North Tower. There was a massive hole in WTC7 20 stories long caused by that collapse.

You say >> “Given the enormous deceit that U.S. has engaged in before, including its fraudulent case for the invasion of Iraq,”

Iraq had WMD even if they did not have them at the time of the invasion. The fact that Saddam continually thwarted the inspectors attempts to properly survey the country led to this mistake. The suggestion that this was a conspiracy is nonsense. In any case, even if it was it pales into absolute insignificance when compared with the groundwork and the number of people needed to pull off 911.

Can you tell me why Dagget, the Gov’t would choose to demolish WTC7 with explosives when no plane had flown into it? Or why they chose not to pull down 3,4,5 and 6 which were all much closer. Can you tell me how they managed to get the north tower to fall such that it caused fire and damage to WTC7.

TBC,

Cont,

You say >> “It strikes me as too great a coincidence that WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 all happened to collapse on the same day in ways that looked exactly like controlled demolitions,”

Sorry what? The planes crashed into WTC1 and 2 on the same day. Those towers fell within 1.5hours and the north tower caused damage to WTC7 which in turn suffered a catastrophic failure 9 hours later.

Tell me why the US gov’t would demolish the buildings in a manner which looked like controlled demolition? They obviously didn’t care at all about casualties, why not put all the explosives on one side and make it look nothing like a controlled demolition? And Please don’t pretend for a second that they didn’t hav the capability. You conspiracy nuts whole case is built upon this idea that the US gov’t had UNLIMITED capability.

Finally, please tell me why these “conspirators” didn’t just detonate a dirty bomb, or even a small nuke? There are one hundred far easier ways to arouse the anger of the American public, that would have been far easier to carry out, far less costly in human lives, and far easier to cover up.

All this was carried out in full view of thousands of witnesses and hundreds of cameras. You suggest that not a single camera captured unequivocal evidence of demolition. How can that be. Its so unrealistic as to beggar the immagination

Here is an explanation for the collapse of WTC 1&2 by a British scientist:
http://www.abc.net.au/rn/scienceshow/stories/2008/2369411.htm

What I find problematic with his theory is that even if the loss of insulation made the steel deformable at less than 1500 degrees, that still does not explain the rapid collapse of the lower floors that were not affected by the flames.

Paul.L wrote, "The entire proof that Popular Mechanics and 911 Debunked have been themselves debunked, consists of a nitwit on a website who says so. That’s your proof?"

No it is not. Try reading what I wrote before shooting your mouth off. A pointer is just that, it points to something, in this case to David Ray Griffin's book "Debunking 9/11 Debunked". I recommend that you read it.

"Claims – This is the first time a steel framed building collapsed ever.
The response - In all the history of high-rise fires, not one has ever been hit with a plane traveling 500 miles an hour and had its fire proofing removed from its trusses."

Here you go again, misquoting in order to demolish a straw man.
The claim was that it is the first time ever that a steel framed building has collapsed in seconds as a result of office fires. It referred to WTC7 which was not hit by a plane and did not have its fire-proofing removed.

"For Building 7, in all the history of high-rise fires, not one has ever been left for 6-7 hours with its bottom floors on fire with structural damage from another building collapse. Note the Madrid/Windsor tower did not have almost 40 stories of load on its supports after being hit by another building which left a 20 story gash."

The floors on fire were middle storeys, which were partly burnt out before the collapse. The Madrid/Windsor building had 29 floors above ground and burnt for 26 hours during which time the parts of the building which were not part of the concrete core sagged and fell at different times, not all at once in all parts simultaneously like WTC7.

Continued:

"Claims - Towers fell at free fall speed.
Response - The towers did NOT fall at freefall speeds. You can see from the pictures that debris is falling faster than the building itself."

Again that is not the claim, he said "near freefall", read the article again. He says that Building 7 fell in 6.5 seconds which is 0.5 seconds longer than free fall in a vacuum. Quote: "The height of the South Tower is 1362 feet. I calculated that from that height, freefall in a vacuum (read, absolutely no resistance on earth) is 9.2 seconds. According to testimony provided to the 9-11 Commission, the tower fell in 10 seconds. Other data shows it took closer to 14 seconds. So the towers fell within 0.8-4.8 seconds of freefall in a vacuum."

"Claims - WTC7 mysteriously imploded and fell to the ground in an astounding 6.5 seconds.
Response - According to NIST analysis of WTC 7 video, the building collapsed 18 stories in 5.3 seconds. If the building exhibited free fall, this process would have taken just 3.9 seconds. The actual collapse time exceeded the free fall time by 40 percent."

Heller was calculating the speed of fall of all 47 storeys, not just 18 of them. Even so, for 18 floors of a steel framed buildig with only two of them on fire to collapse in 5.3 seconds is still pretty incredible. Heller has degrees in physics and architecture and is entirely independent of the US administration.

What a shame, we'll miss you.