1. Destruction proceeds through the path of greatest resistance at nearly free-fall acceleration
1. Wrong. More energy would have been needed to topple the top sections over, or to move them horizontally away from the bottom sections to then fall freely, therefore they actually traveled through the path of least resistance, as they always will.
2. nearly, only if you consider 70%-75% "nearly". If that is the case...SO WHAT.
2. Improbable symmetry of debris distribution
Improbably according to who? Seems to me, things fall down, they land pretty close to where they stood, things go "Kaboom" they can land anywhere...this is yet again another "argument from what I think should have happened".
3. Extremely rapid onset of destruction
??? well how long should it have taken to fall, by "non CD means" once the collapse started? 5 minutes? 30 minutes? this is ridiculous.
4. Over 100 first responders reported explosions and flashes
really? flashes of light and "explosions" were heard around the time of, and during the collapse of 2 110 storey skyscrapers that were just hit by jet airliners...well i'll be damned that is ****ing amazing.
5. Multi-ton steel sections ejected laterally 600 ft at 60 mph
When you pound a big mac with your fist, where do the ingredients go, down, or out sideways?
6. Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete & metal decking
Wrong. lots of photos with tonnes of concrete that was far from pulverized. most of the dust cloud is pulverized WALLBOARD. Please play again.
7. Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic-like clouds
For the love of god, you have no idea what you are talking about. When a building falls down, WHAT EVER THE CAUSE, you will get a big billowing cloud of smoke.
8. 1200-foot-dia. debris field: no "pancaked" floors found
Debris field was in keeping with the collapse of a 110 storey building, regardless of cause. Thre were pancaked floors found, and I think someone here has pictures of them to prove it.
9. Isolated explosive ejections 20 – 40 stories below demolition front
Dylan Avery, is that you? Really, you are still trying to push the "Squibs" angle after it has been clearly debunked. air pressure from collapsing building blows out windows below...EOS.
10. Total building destruction: dismemberment of steel frame
Ya, so?
11. Several tons of molten metal found under all 3 high-rises
This is the best one yet. You are even brazen enough to try and quantify the lie into "several tons", proof please or shut up.
12. Evidence of thermite incendiaries found by FEMA in steel samples
Wrong. No proof, just one poorly written, poorly carried out paper and analysis by a bunch of "wish we were" scientists way out of their fields.
13. Evidence of explosives found in dust samples
Wrong again. Many many analysis of the dust by REAL LABS with LEGITIMATE SCIENTISTS, without an AGENDA, found NO such proof.
14. No precedent for steel-framed high-rise collapse due to fire
No precedent for the "Big Bang" either, yet it happened.
NEXT!!!!
TAM
