you people keep saying b7 matters, but no one has said why yet... care to explain?

they also need to explain the reason of mixing Explosives and Fires!
Last time I checked,Heat causes Explosives to cook off and mess up the sequence that is necessary to bring down a Building!

and an 80,000 pound steel frame fall from 1200 feet didn't help much either...

windsor hotel burns for 23 hours, on many floors and remains standing, steel structure stays intact. south tower burned for 56 minutes, north tower burned for 102 minutes, and fell freefall style. that doesnt sound a little odd to you?

What I find odd is that you think the planes crashing into the buildings had nothing to do with the collapse.

It is clear from the videos taken that day the collapse sequences started immediately above the points of plane impact. There is no way that explosives would not have been wiped out in those areas or set off by the fires.

The collapse would have happened immediately.

Actually # 7 came down in 6 seconds

Did you miss that part in your extensive research of 9/11?


http://911research.wtc7.net/materials/wtc/b7.html

You just wiped out all the conspiracy theories in one post

What I find odd is that you think the planes crashing into the buildings had nothing to do with the collapse.

It is clear from the videos taken that day the collapse sequences started immediately above the points of plane impact. There is no way that explosives would not have been wiped out in those areas or set off by the fires.

The collapse would have happened immediately.

Take a 6 ft piece of rebar. Hammer 2ft into the ground and torch it 1 ft from the top. Use oxyacetylene, a plasma cutter whatever you want and let me know when you get it to collapse and take out the bottom. Put 200 lbs of weight on it and get any result besides a steel candy cane. Impossible.

The planes were the explosives at the top and the diversion to draw attention away or make an excuse for the explosives. Buildings that just fall don't make the concussive sound that many first responders reported hearing.
Back to Jenga since you don't seem to understand the principle of Structural load bearing construction. You can pull blocks from the top down for much longer than you can from the bottom. Plus the FACT that there has to be more horizontal bracing at the top of a skyscraper to defend against higher wind speeds. You dont control a demo from the top down, the debris field is to much collateral damage. You blow from the inside lower floors weight bearing walls struts beams etc. That's how pros do it when they have thr option and that's what happened here. Vs what happened in the allied march toward Paris. Tanks shot artillery at upper floor sniper nests and sprayed bricks stone and everything else AND THE BUILDINGS STILL STOOD.

Initial, secondary. How come nothing of the towers remained? Those pristine lower floors the survivors evacuated before reporting the sound of explosives when there was NO FIRE in the lower floors? And what part of straight down don't you understand when there was commercial airline sized DIRECTIONAL IMPACT THAT DIDN'T PENETRATE THROUGH THE INNER SUPPORT OF THE BUILDINGS? How come it didn't fragment out in the direction the 'exoskeleton' was weakened and where the most additional weight came to rest in and around it plus the burning jet fuel? Your other view clearly shows the thick black jet fueled fire smoke considerably higher than the point of collapse which is the lower grayish mushroom below. Maybe you haven't witnessed the purposeful decimation of a structure with explosives before. I have. Maybe you've never witnessed a fueled vehicle explode and burn out. I have. Maybe you have never seen an oil field burn, I have. In the oil fields of the east they burn the impurities instead of reusing or refining another fuel or oil. That smoke is black. It stands to reason that the hhottest point of the fire caused by the impact of the planes would be the floors where it hit and those directly above. Why then would the building shown in the photo you provided have a second, cold mushroom of pure concrete dust well below the point of impact?

You have no proof whatsoever to claim there was no damage to the interior columns. NONE.

I don't care what you say you witnessed because you have no proof of that either.

You claimed that the collapse started in the bottom of the towers 'cause that is the way pros do it'..

I show you indisputable photographic evidence that you are wrong.. And you come back with 'directional impact that didn't penetrate through the inner support'..

LMAO

Uh Hello!?

Yes, of course, Building 7 ( and Benghazi) matter!! Precisely my point. All the seemingly endless corrupt events that are happening, all of it matters and it is foolish to think otherwise.