Controlled Demolition?
One of the nuttier claims in the 9-11 "Truth" movement is that the World Trade Center Towers were brought down by a controlled demolition. Charlie Sheen, that noted expert on building engineering, commented:
Later on that day I was with my brothers at my parent's house. We were out on the deck and I said, "Call me insane, but did it sort of look like those buildings came down in a controlled demolition?" And he said, "Well, kind of, but gosh that’s impossible if you think what it would take for them to orchestrate that." And so as the days and the weeks went on, I was sort of told what to believe, and I was told through mainstream media and all of the talking heads about what really happened. …
Now, as I have commented before, the reason it "sort of looked like those buildings came down in a controlled demolition" is because that is the only way we had seen large buildings collapse before.
But does it really look like a controlled demolition? Let's look at some controlled demolitions of the past.
Here's a look at the Schuykill Towers demolition:
Notice anything different between these pictures and the pictures of the collapse of the two towers?
Yep, the WTC came down from the top, while the Schuykill Towers, which was demolitioned, came down from the bottom.
posted by Pat @ 10:59 AM
5 comments
5 Comments:
Both this post, and the 1 comment reply is so lightweight, so not even comming close to discussig the evidence, the details, and the surrounding logic that I must conclude that this is the best that you've got. You attempt here to discredit the obvious controlled dems at the WTC 1,2, 7 shows you must think you can do some good be appealing to the those who are too lazy or unexposed to the truth.
This blog is a complete joke. For anyone interested in the truth, please consult www.st911.org
bg,
There *is* no logic behind the claims the towers were brought down through controlled demolition. The logistics involved to plant the munitions alone would be prohibitive. It's an insane, literally, proposition. There's no there there. Give it up. You're peeing in the wind and have nothing but a yellow shirt to show for it.
I am not sure the order of the collapse is that big of a deal. The big problem for the conspiracy theorists is the difficulty in placing these thousands of charges, and the fact, especially in the case of WTC7, that these charges are somehow fireproof.
How does the building burn for 50 minutes, to 7 hours, without setting off the explosives in the first place? The detonators could have been set off by the electromagnetic inteference from the radio towers and office equipment, much less 10,000 gallons of burning jet fuel.
I"m troubled by the top of the WTC looking "bent"
Why not compare your controlled demolition pics to the WTC 7 collapse? It looks almost identical. In fact, WTC 7's collapse is even cleaner, but that might ruin your fun here!
Post a Comment
<< Home