(October 13, 2013 at 12:02 pm)FallentoReason Wrote: I also don't know how they would've set the charges. The only thing that definitely gets to me (after a day of thinking about it..) is that WTC 7 collapsed... and in such a "clean" manner as well. The somewhat straightfoward collapse of the tower next to it hardly touched WTC 7, yet it cleanly collapsed in 7 seconds. It doesn't make any rational sense.From Wikipedia:
Quote:On September 11, 2001, 7 WTC was damaged by debris when the nearby North Tower of the World Trade Center collapsed. The debris also ignited fires, which continued to burn throughout the afternoon on lower floors of the building. The building's internal fire suppression system lacked water pressure to fight the fires, and the building collapsed completely at 5:21:10 pm. The collapse began when a critical internal column buckled and triggered structural failure throughout, which was first visible from the exterior with the crumbling of a rooftop penthouse structure at 5:20:33 pm.
WTC 7 wasn't "hardly touched" by the North Tower. Go to YouTube and search for "debris hitting WTC7", and you'll find plenty of videos of large projectiles falling off the North Tower and hitting WTC7.
I'm not so sure I understand the meaning of the word "clean" you use to describe the collapse. Buildings generally collapse downwards in the manner WTC7 did, just as the North and South towers did. This is due to the fact that the structure holding parts of the building up fails, and once the top of the building starts falling, the rest of it collapses underneath.
If you were expecting the towers to fall over to one side, or for WTC7 to fall over to one side, then you don't quite understand the mechanics of what went on that day.
