Howdy folks,

When I first saw the collapse WTC 7, it rattled my nerves because is DOES look like a controlled demolition and I can't believe I never saw this collapse of a tall ass skyscraper being replayed on TV a hundred times like they normally would.

However, I was watching some other demolitions of similar shaped buildings and I'm finding it hard to believe bombs were used as seen in traditional demolitions. It's hard for me to accept that they were able to wire the building without being noticed and in traditional demolitions, you can see and here the pops of the bombs going up and down the building before it implodes.

BUT, I still can't accept this giant building can come down the way it down without some man-made assistance. I just don't buy that building was flimsy and held up by one steel girder as the officials want us to believe.

I'm at a loss to explain what made the 7 building implode on itself even though I think its collapse was man-made. Does anybody feel the same way?

Bro, I understand you're new so I'll ask politely you post threads in the correct forum.

WTC7 is our smoking gun so it's only natural that we have a forum dedicated solely to analyzing it.

Please post topics in their correct forum.

Welcome!

:toast:

Moved to WTC7

Oh sorry bro. I guess I should read the rules first and learn the etiquette!

It's all good.

something being hard to accept doesn't make it untrue... sorry to say. I still have a hard time coming to grips with all this stuff... but that doesn't make it untrue, even though I really wish it could. :(

Welcome to the forum

Here are some 'must read' URL's if you want to know the details of the 'official story'.
They are kinda hard to read because they were written by a 12 year old [or so it seems]

The half baked farce [Fire Engineering Magazine]
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_ch5.pdf

The insipid piece of misleading dribble [me]
http://wtc.nist.gov/progress_report_june04/appendixl.pdf


WTC 1, 2 and 7 were core and perimeter frame design.
This leaves the floor space open with no columns in the way.

It also means the core columns are accessible in the elevator shafts where no one would see the demo charges.

In WTC 7 the 5th and 6th floors were mechanical and utility space, thus allowing access to the core columns not accessible from the elevator shafts.

Wires are not necessary.


Teleblaster

Please read the summaries i have posted here, based on the data in the the 2 reports listed. [and others as noted]

Chris

Are there any witnessess to the massive work that would have to be done to wire WT7 for demolition, even if some floor to two was unoccupied? No security there at all?

The perps.

Perps in with the security.

Not all CDs are the same. Some don't show flashes. And the sound you can edit out.

Slamin, the question you should be asking is why did it fall the way it did. The only plausible explanation I can think of is explosives.

I'm sorry, I was seeking evidence, not suspicions. Your inability to grasp reality is not an argument from evidence, rather from ignorance.

Evidence has it's ultimate value in the courtroom as the result of trustworthy investigation.

With regard to investigations, it's extremely difficult to get honesty over coverup any more.

Suspicions and current evidence have meaning in forum discussion groups such as this.

Accusing another member of being unable to grasp reality is the imposition of your point of view over reality.

You present no evidence either. You claim to be seeking evidence but feel no need to provide it yourself.

I see no evidence or basis for suspicion that would argue Avenger is according to you Slamin "unable to grasp reality"

We are all to some extent ignorant until the full story behind the collapse of WTC7 gets told.

MM

There is an accusation a controlled demolition was used to bring down World Trade Center 7 - to the point that wiring was not needed, certain floors were available, etc.

I've asked for evidence to support this accusation. Certainly you can fathom the need for evidence to support such an outrageous claim - in the absence of evidence, you have nothing left but unsupported accusations.

When the evidence proffered is, "only plausible explanation I can think of is explosives" - it shows a disconnect with reality - there are many other plausible explanations.

Why was wiring needed?

Does your cellphone need a wire?

A digitally encrypted radio controlled demolition could be planned and installed much more easily and rapidly.



The much more overt industry-preferred, cheaper method, uses an extensive wiring harness that takes quite a while to install and would be difficult to hide from public view.

Using digital radio signal control, the whole operation could be operated and monitored from a single portable computer.

Instant feedback on the status of every demolition setup would be easily available via a 'digital handshake' with each setup's radio controlled unit. Demolitions could be safely, instantly armed, disarmed, and detonated by computerized remote control.

Slamin on WTC7 explosives.."it shows a disconnect with reality - there are many other plausible explanations."

Well I would love to hear about just some of those "many" plausible explanations for that total, high speed, level-roofline, footprint collapse?

You are quite welcome to explain in narrative detail, what you believe happened inside WTC7 that meshes well with the video evidence.

I can't wait to hear why WTC7, supposedly collapsing from office furniture fires managed to perform such a tidy collapse?

Even including the controversy surrounding the early east penthouse collapse, there was no real evidence of the expected natural unpatterned collapse.

MM

Six years later and NIST has not offered even one plausible explanation. The date keeps getting pushed back and pushed back. That's because there IS no plausible explanation other than explosives.