Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bush-The Mastermind behind 9/11? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (242)	4/25/2003 8:49:43 AM
From: Don Earl	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20039

Ray, I wasn't trying to be condescending. Building implosions is a field so specialized it still looks a bit like magic to me. IMO, logic says if a kerosene fire was the cause, there would have been no need to break laws with the fancy footwork cover up. All the evidence would have been preserved long enough for enough experts to form a consensus as to what happened. FWIW, the nuke theory also strikes me as far fetched. Enough countries have the ability to detect radiation events that I have a hard time seeing that as being the right tool for the job, plus I'd tend to think it would be rather hard to control, at least if any of our other nuclear tests are an indication. I've downloaded some of the clips and I have some software that allows me to do a frame by frame view of what happened. There are places where there appear to be charges going off at the beginning of the collapse. Also, the steel supports tend to fly out sideways rather than fall straight down, and they are still flying out sideways after the top of the building has gone by. The path of the steel is fairly easy to spot when you move through the frames slowly. It was a sunny day and they sort of sparkle as well as cast shadows. From what I can find poking around the Internet, most demolitions experts like to set cutting charges at the foot of the building first, to get it to settle in its foot print, before setting off the rest of the sequence of cutting charges. I'll speculate that a building that size would make one honey of a thump in the process, which might account for the seismic event. What I was getting at in my previous post is I can hypothesize till the cows come home, but lacking the necessary engineering expertise, any guess work I could do on the topic lacks credibility. It's just another one of the many areas where a real investigation should have taken place instead of a cover up, and a real investigation still needs to be done.