|
I do not consider myself qualified to assess the various theories put forward as to why WTC 1 & 2 would have collapsed so utterly, completely and quickly based on localized damage and fires. When I watch the video, my layperson's eyes have difficulty understanding what "innocent" theory explains the towers falling so suddenly and symmetrically and why almost none of the superstructure appears to have survived. I also must say that when I see the apparent force with which so much material was ejected horizontally and vertically upward from the falling towers, my non-engineer's horse sense tells me that there is something inside there that is stronger than the force of gravity that is causing that "explosion" of building material into the sky over Manhattan. I saw the Nova special advocating the "zipper/pancake" theory, but I find it hard to believe the pancaking floors would have behaved as they did and completely demolished all the exterior and interior superstructure so extremely quickly.
I am not an extremely regular reader of this forum, and perhaps you've all discussed this ad nauseum. However, what I see most often relating to this is a poster suggesting that the towers were professionally "demolished" followed by several skeptics of that theory offering a lot of math problems supposedly disproving that theory.
I would sleep a lot better if someone could provide a plain-English, affirmative case explaining why the towers fell in the manner they did solely as a result of the plane crashes. I really want to believe this is what happened, and I don't have a MIHOP explanation for what happened on September 11, but I when I watch the video, I see what looks to me like two skyscrapers being utterly demolished by explosives.
And, um, can we please keep the conversation civil, friends? We all have different gifts, so there's no need to insult anyone's intelligence. We're all on the same side, right?
|