> WTC Towers: The case for controlled demolition
> By Herman Schoenfeld
>

> "Henry" treason.gov> wrote in a message

>> Small random fires can't possibly make a steel framed building
>> do that. Not even a raging inferno can cause a steel building to
>> do anything even remotely close to that. Only a very well executed
>> controlled demolition can cause the total, instant, and symmetric
>> failure of all steel support columns that took place in WTC7.
>> That was very solidly braced and virtually undamaged steel frame.
>> It was dramatically over engineered to withstand hurricane force
>> winds and mild earth quakes. Look at the still photos at 1 second
>> intervals. The building stays perfectly straight and level all the
>> way down. Every one of the 58 steel perimeter columns failed at
>> exactly the same time, and they all failed totally, putting up

> Poor Chuckles... still hasn't bothered to look into any of the actual facts
> of the building design.

> On Jul 4, 1:59 pm, Henry treason.gov> wrote:

>> Twin Towers:
>> The massive reserve strength designed into the steel frames of
>> the towers could not possibly have been overcome by the force
>> of gravity alone. The fact that it was exceeded to such an
>> extreme degree that the undamaged steel frame offered no
>> measurable resistance, proves conclusively that the lower
>> structures were destroyed before being impacted by the upper
>> structures.

> How much resistance would they provide if they weren't artificially
> destroyed?

> This is the question I never see answered. How would they behave if
> they collapsed as they are supposed to have?

>> This is the question I never see answered. How would they behave if
>> they collapsed as they are supposed to have?

>
> They couldn't have collapsed under the weight of the top
> twenty stories at all. That theoyr is as absurd as it is
> impossible. Read Gordon Ross' papers on this page:

> On Jul 8, 9:47 am, Henry treason.gov> wrote:
>

>>> This is the question I never see answered. How would they behave if
>>> they collapsed as they are supposed to have?

>

>> They couldn't have collapsed under the weight of the top
>> twenty stories at all. That theoyr is as absurd as it is
>> impossible. Read Gordon Ross' papers on this page:

>
> I just read one of them. He says the energy from the first impact
> would be distributed over several floors.
>
> It seems to me that this is quite different from a car crash, in that
> once a floor absorbs any energy at all, it will fail completely - in
> other words you wouldn't find a floor reduced to half its original
> height, and still being held up by buckled supports. Do you suppose
> that as soon as the second floor began to fail (whether that was below
> or above the initially failing floor), it stopped the deceleration and
> therefore stopped any more energy being transmitted to other floors ...

> Have you ever seen any non-WTC building completely collapse, for any
> reason besides controlled demolition? Do you have any idea how it
> might fall?

> On Jul 4, 7:08 am, nottooo...@hotmail.com wrote:

>> Have you ever seen any non-WTC building completely collapse, for any
>> reason besides controlled demolition? Do you have any idea how it
>> might fall?

> How about

> http://tinyurl.com/ywg6pa

> 6/14/2007

> On Jul 8, 9:47 am, Henry treason.gov> wrote:

>>> This is the question I never see answered. How would they behave if
>>> they collapsed as they are supposed to have?

>> They couldn't have collapsed under the weight of the top
>> twenty stories at all. That theory is as absurd as it is
>> impossible. Read Gordon Ross' papers on this page:

> I just read one of them. He says the energy from the first impact
> would be distributed over several floors.

> Rob Kleinschmidt wrote:

>> On Jul 4, 7:08 am, nottooo...@hotmail.com wrote:

>>> Have you ever seen any non-WTC building completely collapse, for any
>>> reason besides controlled demolition? Do you have any idea how it
>>> might fall?

>> How about
>>http://tinyurl.com/ywg6pa
>> 6/14/2007

>
> So, in RobWorld, the building in the photo below has
> completely collapsed, eh?

> http://davesweb.cnchost.com/windsor14.jpeg
>
> You sure do get silly when you attempt to defend the Bush regime's
> impossible cartoon conspiracy theory.

> Here's what happens to steel framed buildings exposed
> to raging infernos for hours on end.
>
> http://davesweb.cnchost.com/nwsltr69c.html
>
> On 9-11-01, WTC7, a 47 story steel framed building, which
> had only small, random fires, dropped in perfect symmetry
> at near free fall speed as in a perfectly executed controlled
> demolition.