by Kaharz » Mon Dec 17, 2012 1:04 pm
Lethal Interjection wrote:You know what I don't understand? Why the hell does WT7 even matter? I mean, if you think this is all a conspiracy, whatever. But what would be the motivation for them blowing up another building? Do you think the planners of such an elaborate conspiracy were stupid enough to say, "Well, shit, we gotta knock building 7 down too, or else no one will care!"
What's the motivation?
Why bother with such an elaborate plot at all? A car bomb in times square would have probably been enough to get the public behind military action.
Thatcrazytrollguy wrote:Interesting fact I had not kept in mind: WT7 came down more than seven hours after the twin towers. So much for those who tell you that its collapse was caused by the fall of the two other buildings, or whatever vague notion of something of the like. Now you're saying that "around 2 pm" it "started to budge", what is the source of this piece of information ?
Bulge, not budge. I put degrees instead of debris, but I got bulge right. The source was people on site, primarily firefighters, who witnessed it. A bulge in the wall of a building is usually a sign of imminent collapse. I've had experience of witnessing this phenomenon myself on much smaller buildings. Of course those are just eyewitnesses, the least credible form of evidence next to geocities websites with black backgrounds and yellow text in a nearly unreadable font.
WTC 7's collapse was only caused in part by the falling debris. The collapse was directly caused by fires burning out of control for hours. Those fires are believed to have been started when the building was struck by the debris. The fire suppression system of WTC 7 was also severely compromised by damage to the building and low water pressure.
[quote="Lethal Interjection"]You know what I don't understand? Why the hell does WT7 even matter? I mean, if you think this is all a conspiracy, whatever. But what would be the motivation for them blowing up another building? Do you think the planners of such an elaborate conspiracy were stupid enough to say, "Well, shit, we gotta knock building 7 down too, or else no one will care!"
What's the motivation?[/quote]
Why bother with such an elaborate plot at all? A car bomb in times square would have probably been enough to get the public behind military action.
[quote="Thatcrazytrollguy"]Interesting fact I had not kept in mind: WT7 came down more than seven hours after the twin towers. So much for those who tell you that its collapse was caused by the fall of the two other buildings, or whatever vague notion of something of the like. Now you're saying that "around 2 pm" it "started to budge", what is the source of this piece of information ?[/quote]
Bulge, not budge. I put degrees instead of debris, but I got bulge right. The source was people on site, primarily firefighters, who witnessed it. A bulge in the wall of a building is usually a sign of imminent collapse. I've had experience of witnessing this phenomenon myself on much smaller buildings. Of course those are just eyewitnesses, the least credible form of evidence next to geocities websites with black backgrounds and yellow text in a nearly unreadable font.
WTC 7's collapse was only caused in part by the falling debris. The collapse was directly caused by fires burning out of control for hours. Those fires are believed to have been started when the building was struck by the debris. The fire suppression system of WTC 7 was also severely compromised by damage to the building and low water pressure.