Here are photos of Hamburg, Dresden and Yokohama after Allied planes

[funflower]

dropped thousands of tons of high explosives
and incendiary bombs on them during WWII,
causing firestorms that reached temperatures
exceeding 1500F. Despite the horrific destruction,
many buildings are still standing. Does this shed
any light on the likely cause of the destruction of
the World Trade Towers?

Firestorm in Hamburg:



Hamburg after the firebombing:



Dresden after the firebombing:



Yokohama after the firebombing:

[LARED]

1. A possible difference is that

most of those buildings were of concrete construction.

[funflower]

2. Yes, and, of course, they are not as tall . Still, I'm struck by how

essentially intact the basic structure of those buildings remains, particularly considering that the damaging force inflicted was far greater.

[LARED]

3. far greater.?

By what measurement. Dropping incendiary bombs over a wide areas is quite a bit different than what happen to the WTC's.

I'm not comfortable comparing to two events in order to draw anything useful out of it.

[funflower]

4. So what is your theory about the 3 WTC collapses?

Let's put those excellent cross-examination skills to work on the government's theory. Do you see any problems with the theory that WTC 1 and WTC 2 collapsed in the manner that they did solely as a result of damage from the plane crashes and subsequent fires and WTC 7 fell as a result of fires and apparent "shock" damage from the falls of WTC 1 & 2?

[LARED]

5. re

you see any problems with the theory that WTC 1 and WTC 2 collapsed in the manner that they did solely as a result of damage from the plane crashes and subsequent fires

I would have liked to see a better effort to collect steel, but I think the investigation to date is pretty well done.

WTC 7 fell as a result of fires and apparent "shock" damage from the falls of WTC 1 & 2?

Yes, except for the shock part. I don't think the investigation has made that claim. I think a major factor in WTC's failure was the unique design.

[petgoat]

6. Did NIST ever follow up on the FEMA Metallurgical Report

Appendix C that found highly mysterious sulfidation in the steel and
recommended that this issue be followed up upon?

[LARED]

7. I don't know, but I don't

view every anomaly as evidence of controlled demolition either, so I have not checked to see if there is an update.

You seem highly concerned about this. I suggest you search the NIST WTC web page.

This is an interesting link http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/NISTNCSTAR1-3CchapsDraft.pdf

and this http://wtc.nist.gov/

good luck

[petgoat]

8. I've been through the NIST report and didn't see a followup to the

FEMA Appendix C; that's why I'm asking.

I think the NIST report is a joke--they have these pretty multicolor
graphs of temperature gradients as if they had fireproof sensors on the
floor, and they've completely fabricated their data! They have
absolutely NO STEEL SAMPLES to validate their thesis. My only question
is... is MIT going to defend their work, or cave in to the NIST
authority.

[funflower]

10. I don't view every anomaly as evidence of anything. I do have trouble

reconciling what I saw on 9/11 with the government's explanation.

[funflower]

9. It was my understanding that WTC7 was designed very differently than

WTC 1 & 2.

[LARED]

11. Yes, it was (n/t)