Don > Your non pyroclastic flow of cement will mix with air on the way down, making a cloud of dust
Yes, indeed, I have no argument with your analogy. What concerns me, and why I appear obstinate, is that there was no powdered cement per se in the WTC. The dust arose from the transformation of virtually all the solid material in the building -- concrete, glass, asbestos, office contents, cabinets, shelves, humans, etc etc.
If, what was done in the demolition was just to "surgically" cut the steel columns, in my opinion, most of the solid material would not have turned to dust but would have fallen to the ground, certainly in bits, but still in its original identifiable form. This was not the case.
>The problem isn't what it takes to crush and disperse non structural, low compression strength concrete. The problem is what it takes to crush and disperse 47 massive chrome molly steel columns.
I fully accept that and agree. My argument is that the force which was used to cut the steel columns, and thereby bring about the demolition, was so great that, as a side-effect if you will, it transformed everything else in the buildings into a very fine dust.
We are really dancing around in circles because we both accept that explosives were used. It's just that I believe much more were used than you do. |
