Give me your 9/11 conspiracy theories! And/or their debunking

[Mr.Miskatonic]

@EasyPhil

Building 7 wasn’t hit by a 40,000L molotov cocktail

No, it just had a much larger burning building fall on top of it, then burned for many hours without any firefighting due to lack of water.

moreover a molotov cocktail’s destructive power lies in it’s ability to create fire not crash into stuff.

Hence my qualification of it being multi-ton and high speed. Did you not read what I wrote?

[GIGObuster]

And just to remind any lurkers:

@ivan_astikov

If you are trying to categorise me as a “CT’er”, perhaps you’d better clarify what you mean by the label first. Then we’ll see if my behaviour -at least on this site - fits that description.

@GIGObuster

Well, here is a simple test, do you agree now that Griffin does not have a “laser sharp mind” and that he lied left and right in his book?

ivan refused to answer; so, as even ivan proposed, I have to say that he himself fits the description. Refusing to acknowledge the evidence that showed how misleading Griffin was in the controller’s radar case shows that evidence will continue to be ignored by him, like what a run off the mill 9/11 CT’s does.

[Valgard]

@EasyPhil

3 skyscrapers, 2 hit by a plane apiece, all collapse in one day due to fire, first time in history, for total collapse due to fire for skyscrapers in a single day. Either the buildings weren’t built correctly or something else is going on.

Back in post #434 I asked you the following:

[QUOTE=Me]
ivan astikov and EasyPhil, you have presented various theories, question or claims regarding structural analysis, material science and demolitions. What educational background or actual work experience do you have in those areas or any related fields to base your ideas on?
[/QUOTE]

So again, what background or work experience do you have to base your judgements the buildings weren’t built correctly or that “something else is going on”?

I can tell you quite confidently that “Suicide attack by jet airliner into structure” and “One of world’s largest buildings collapses nearby flinging massive amounts of flaming debris onto structure” are not design considerations for office buildings. Maybe for the containment shell of a nuclear reactor.

[ivan_astikov]

@Valgard

Back in post #434 I asked you the following:

So again, what background or work experience do you have to base your judgements the buildings weren’t built correctly or that “something else is going on”?

I can tell you quite confidently that “Suicide attack by jet airliner into structure” and “One of world’s largest buildings collapses nearby flinging massive amounts of flaming debris onto structure” are not design considerations for office buildings. Maybe for the containment shell of a nuclear reactor.

Regardless, they both stayed up for over a hour, and ‘weakened by heat’ steel is meant to have lost it’s integrity simultaneously, but it couldn’t possibly have been assisted by an extra heat source? Where’s the best place to hide arson(ie. thermite or similar sabotage)? In a fire!

Btw, has there been an explanation for that molten metal pouring from one of the tower’s corners, yet?

[GIGObuster]

@ivan_astikov

Regardless, they both stayed up for over a hour, and ‘weakened by heat’ steel is meant to have lost it’s integrity simultaneously, but it couldn’t possibly have been assisted by an extra heat source? Where’s the best place to hide arson(ie. thermite or similar sabotage)? In a fire!

Again, when did the terrorists had the chance to install the thermite? And there has not been **any **atrong evidence that there was any thermite at all.

@ivan_astikov

Btw, has there been an explanation for that molten metal pouring from one of the tower’s corners, yet?

Aluminum

http://www.debunking911.com/moltensteel.htm

One of the arguments for thermite that conspiracy theorists use is the temperature of the fire. They say the fires at the towers weren’t hot enough to melt aluminum, which suggests they need an unnatural source for the melted aluminum. (Hint, hint) Yet, the aluminum outer skin of other airliners have melted without even hitting anything. Sparked only by friction…

…

Air France flight 358 didn’t hit a steel building at 500 miles an hour. It didn’t even burn the fuel in the wings, yet its aluminum skin melted to the ground. It simply went off the runway and caught fire. What melted the airliner was its contents, like seats, clothing and other combustibles including chemical oxygen generators. It’s not unreasonable to conclude the airliner and contents didn’t even need the contents of the building to melt. Yet the NIST replicated the fires by burning office furniture in a controlled experiment and found the ceiling temperature to reach 1,100 degrees C. (They say “Yeah but that’s the ceiling” to which I say “Now imagine what the actual flame is.. Do you think it’s cooler?”) More than enough to melt aircraft aluminum as well. Unfortunately, they weren’t charged with putting conspiracy theorists fears to rest so they didn’t include a piece of aircraft aluminum in the test.

More evidence that normal fires without jet fuel added can reach over 1000 degrees C is an experiment conducted by One Stop Shop in Structural Fire Engineering, Professor Colin Bailey, University of Manchester.

Figure 1 shows the various nominal fire curves for comparison. It can be seen that, over a period of 2 hours, the hydrocarbon fire is the most severe followed by the standard fire, with the external fire being the least severe fire although the slow heating fire represents the lowest temperature up to 30 minutes. It is noteworthy that for standard and smouldering fires, the temperature continuously increases with increasing time. For the external fire, the temperature remains constant at 680°C after approximately 22 minutes. whereas for the hydrocarbon fires, the temperatures remain constant at 1100°C and 1120°C after approximate 40 minutes.

http://www.mace.manchester.ac.uk/project/research/structures/strucfire/Design/
performance/fireModelling/nominalFireCurves/default.htm

The next piece of evidence they point to is the color, which is a bright yellow at the center. They say aluminum is silver when melted. While this is true, at higher temperatures it can be yellow

One of the pieces of evidence Jones points to is a snapshot of the flow falling down the side the building. This pyrotechnic show seems ominous, that is until you look at it closely…

Note the color of the substance as it cools and solidifies toward the end of its journey. Molten steel would turn almost black. One thing it’s not, and that’s black.

Jones writes: “This is a point worth emphasizing: aluminum has low emissivity and high reflectivity, so that in daylight conditions molten aluminum will appear silvery-gray”

I think at a cooler temperature, he’s right.

What’s telling about this photo isn’t that it’s proof of the substance being aluminum, It’s that it’s a zoom and crop of the photo from Jones own paper. (Time for him to change yet another one of his photos.) Below is a screenshot from National Geographic’s “Inside 911”.

The droplets on the outside of the center of the fall seem to be the color of aluminum siding to me.. As I said, the evidence points to it being aluminum.

[Mr.Miskatonic]

@ivan_astikov

Regardless, they both stayed up for over a hour, and ‘weakened by heat’ steel is meant to have lost it’s integrity simultaneously, but it couldn’t possibly have been assisted by an extra heat source? Where’s the best place to hide arson(ie. thermite or similar sabotage)? In a fire!

Once again, a complete lack of evidence doesn’t hinder ridiculous claims.

Btw, has there been an explanation for that molten metal pouring from one of the tower’s corners, yet?

Its been covered multiple times. Its aluminum, and aluminum glows when it gets hot despite what Jones and a nutballs claim.

[EasyPhil]

@GIGObuster

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/07272007/alqaeda.htmlJason Burke does not say that there is not an Al-Qaeda but shows that the way that “organization” is portrayed in the West is wrong. I do agree with him, but clearly the BBC show is an attempt to demonstrate how exaggerated their threat was painted by the USA after 9/11, The show does not demonstrate that Al-qaeda was a myth, but what their capabilities are. It was clear to me that the Keystone cops of terrorism got lucky on 9/11, but that does not make it an organization that we should ignore, a crime was committed in any case.

The “Myth” is how the organization is portrayed in the west. I agree a crime was comitted by a group of, for the most part Saudi Nationals, 15 of the hijackers which of course how more ties to Afghanistan than they did to Saudi Arabia.

[EasyPhil]

@Valgard

Back in post #434 I asked you the following:

So again, what background or work experience do you have to base your judgements the buildings weren’t built correctly or that “something else is going on”?

I can tell you quite confidently that “Suicide attack by jet airliner into structure” and “One of world’s largest buildings collapses nearby flinging massive amounts of flaming debris onto structure” are not design considerations for office buildings. Maybe for the containment shell of a nuclear reactor.

Let me answer your question this way…

I don’t need credentials to know that if my tire comes off of my car while driving that one of four things have happened.

1. I or someone forgot to tighten them the last time I took that wheel off.
2. Someone deliberately loosened them
3. The bolts worked they way free via normal driving
4. All of the bolts failed

If you know that buildings collapse essentially on their own footprint via demolition, but not during a fire even if the building burned for 24 hours or more then if you see 3 buildings collapse that day, two in one fashion and one in another, it’s not too far fetched to assume that either the buildings weren’t built properly or that something else happened besides the planes.

[Mr.Miskatonic]

@EasyPhil

Let me answer your question this way…

I don’t need credentials to know that if my tire comes off of my car while driving that one of four things have happened.

1. I or someone forgot to tighten them the last time I took that wheel off.
2. Someone deliberately loosened them
3. The bolts worked they way free via normal driving
4. All of the bolts failed

Or 5) Your car was abused in a manner that caused the bolts to loosen or fail.

If you know that buildings collapse essentially on their own footprint via demolition,

Irrelevant, none of the buildings collapsed ‘in their own footprint’. The damage to nearby buildings is proof of that.

but not during a fire even if the building burned for 24 hours or more

what are you talking about? None of these buildings burned for 24 hours.

then if you see 3 buildings collapse that day, two in one fashion and one in another, it’s not too far fetched to assume that either the buildings weren’t built properly or that something else happened besides the planes.

The main failure of all three building’s construction can be summed up in the following three words: Steel frame construction.

[Alessan]

@EasyPhil

Let me answer your question this way…

I don’t need credentials to know that if my tire comes off of my car while driving that one of four things have happened.

1. I or someone forgot to tighten them the last time I took that wheel off.
2. Someone deliberately loosened them
3. The bolts worked they way free via normal driving
4. All of the bolts failed

5. A semitrailer rammed into you at 80mph shearing off the entire right side of your car, including your wheel.

[42fish]

@Alessan

5. A semitrailer rammed into you at 80mph shearing off the entire right side of your car, including your wheel.

But can you prove it was a semi and not a missile?

[GIGObuster]

@42fish

But can you prove it was a semi and not a missile?

Sure! Just check the site Debunking4x4.com

[XT]

[QUOTE=EasyPhil]
Where’s your evidence that shows the existance of Al Qaeda prior to 2001?
[/QUOTE]

Previously cited (oh, 3 times in this thread at least):

Al-Qaeda, alternatively spelled al-Qaida and sometimes al-Qa’ida, (Arabic: القاعدة‎; al-qāʿidah; translation: The Base) is a well-known Islamist group founded sometime between August 1988[5] and late 1989/early 1990.[6] It operates as a network comprising both a multinational, stateless arm[7] and a fundamentalist Sunni movement calling for al-qaeda al-sulbah (a vanguard of the strong).

Al-Qaeda has attacked civilian and military targets in various countries, the most notable being the September 11 attacks in 2001. These actions were followed by the US government launching the War on Terrorism. As of 2009, the group is believed to have between 200 and 300 members.[8]

Characteristic techniques include suicide attacks and simultaneous bombings of different targets.[9] Activities ascribed to it may involve members of the movement, who have taken a pledge of loyalty to Osama bin Laden, or the much more numerous “al-Qaeda-linked” individuals who have undergone training in one of its camps in Afghanistan or Sudan but not taken any pledge.[10]

Al-Qaeda’s objectives include the end of foreign influence in Muslim countries and the creation of a new Islamic caliphate. Reported beliefs include that a Christian-Jewish alliance is conspiring to destroy Islam,[11] and that the killing of bystanders and civilians is religiously justified in jihad.

Its management philosophy has been described as “centralization of decision and decentralization of execution.”[12] Following 9/11 and the War on Terrorism, it is thought that al-Qaeda’s leadership has “become geographically isolated”, leading to the “emergence of decentralized leadership” of regional groups using the al-Qaeda “brand name.”[13][14]

Jihad in Afghanistan
Main articles: Soviet war in Afghanistan and Afghan Arabs

The origins of the group can be traced to the Soviet war in Afghanistan. The United States viewed the conflict in Afghanistan, with the Afghan Marxists and allied Soviet troops on one side and the native Afghan mujahedeen on the other, as a blatant case of Soviet expansionism and aggression. The U.S. channelled funds through Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence agency to the native Afghan mujahedeen fighting the Soviet occupation in a CIA program called Operation Cyclone.[41][42]

At the same time, a growing number of foreign Arab mujahedeen (also called Afghan Arabs) joined the jihad against the Afghan Marxist regime, facilitated by international Muslim organizations, particularly the Maktab al-Khidamat,[43] whose funds came from some of the $600 million a year donated to the jihad by the Saudi Arabia government and individual Muslims - particularly wealthy Saudis who were approached by Osama bin Laden.[44][page needed]

Maktab al-Khidamat was established by Abdullah Azzam and Bin Laden in Peshawar, Pakistan, in 1984. From 1986 it began to set up a network of recruiting offices in the United States, the hub of which was the Al Kifah Refugee Center at the Farouq Mosque in Brooklyn’s Atlantic Avenue. Among notable figures at the Brooklyn center were “double agent” Ali Mohamed, whom FBI special agent Jack Cloonan called “bin Laden’s first trainer,”[45] and “Blind Sheikh” Omar Abdel-Rahman, a leading recruiter of mujahideen for Afghanistan.

The Afghan Mujahedeen of the 1980s have been alleged to be the inspiration for terrorist groups in nations such as Indonesia, the Philippines, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Chechnya, and the former Yugoslavia.[46] According to Russian sources, the perpetrators of the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993 allegedly used a manual allegedly written by the CIA for the Mujihadeen fighters in Afghanistan on how to make explosives.[46]

Al-Qaeda evolved from the Maktab al-Khidamat (Services Office), a Muslim organization founded in 1980 to raise and channel funds and recruit foreign mujahadeen for the war against the Soviets in Afghanistan. It was founded by Abdullah Yusuf Azzam, a Palestinian Islamic scholar and member of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Maktab al-Khadamat organized guest houses in Peshawar, in Pakistan, near the Afghan border, and paramilitary training camps in Afghanistan to prepare international non-Afghan recruits for the Afghan war front. Azzam persuaded Bin Laden to join MAK, to use his own money and use his connections with “the Saudi royal family and the petro-billionaires of the Gulf” to raise more to help the mujahideen.[47]

The role played by MAK and foreign Muslim volunteers, or “Afghan Arabs”, in the war was not a major one. While 250,000 Afghan Mujahideen fought the Soviets and the communist Afghan government, it is estimated that were never more than 2000 foreign mujahideen in the field at any one time.[48] Nonetheless, foreign mujahedeen volunteers came from 43 countries and the number that participated in the Afghan movement between 1982 and 1992 is reported to have been 35,000.[49]

The Soviet Union finally withdrew from Afghanistan in 1989. To the surprise of many, Mohammed Najibullah’s communist Afghan government hung on for three more years before being overrun by elements of the mujahedeen. With mujahedeen leaders unable to agree on a structure for governance, chaos ensued, with constantly reorganizing alliances fighting for control of ill-defined territories, leaving the country devastated.

Sudan

From approximately 1992 to 1996, al-Qaeda and bin Laden were located in Sudan, coming at the invitation of Islamist theoretician Hassan al Turabi following an Islamist coup d’état, and leaving after being expelled by the Sudanese government. During this time bin Laden assisted the Sudanese government, bought or set up various business enterprises, and established training camps where insurgents trained.

But in Sudan bin Laden lost his Saudi passport and source of income in response to his verbal attacks on the Saudi king.[57] A key turning point for bin Laden occurred in 1993 when Saudi Arabia gave support for the Oslo Accords which set a path for peace between Israel and Palestine.[58]

Zawahiri and the EIJ, who served as the core of al-Qaeda but also engaged in separate operations against the Egyptian government, had even worse luck in Sudan. In 1993, a young schoolgirl was killed in an unsuccessful EIJ attempt on the life of the Egyptian Interior Minister, Hasan al-Alfi. Egyptian public opinion turned against Islamist bombings and [59] the police arrested 280 more of al-Jihad’s members and executed six.

In 1995 an even more ill-fated attempt to assassinate Egyptian president Mubarak led to the expulsion of EIJ and not long after of bin Laden by the Sudanese government.

1992

On December 29, 1992, al-Qaeda’s first terrorist attack took place as two bombs were detonated in Aden, Yemen. The first target was the Movenpick Hotel and the second was the parking lot of the Goldmohur Hotel.

The bombings were an attempt to eliminate American soldiers on their way to Somalia to take part in the international famine relief effort, Operation Restore Hope. Internally, al-Qaeda considered the bombing a victory that frightened the Americans away, but in the United States the attack was barely noticed.

No Americans were killed because the soldiers were staying in a different hotel altogether, and they went on to Somalia as scheduled. However little noticed, the attack was pivotal as it was the beginning of al-Qaeda’s change in direction, from fighting armies to killing civilians.[88] Two people were killed in the bombing, an Australian tourist and a Yemeni hotel worker. Seven others, mostly Yemenis, were severely injured.

Two fatwa are said to have been appointed by the most theologically knowledgeable of al-Qaeda’s members, Mamdouh Mahmud Salim, aka Abu Hajer al Iraqi, to justify the killings according to Islamic law. Mamdouh Mahmud Salim referred to the thirteenth-century scholar Ibn Taymiyyah, much admired by Wahhabis.

In a famous fatwa, Ibn Tamiyyah had ruled that Muslims should kill the invading Mongols, and so too Salim said al-Qaeda should kill American soldiers. The second fatwa followed another of Ibn Tamiyyah’s, that Muslims should not only kill Mongols but anyone who aided the Mongols, who bought goods from them or sold to them.

In addition the killing of someone merely standing near a Mongol was justified as well. He ruled these killings just because any innocent bystander, like the Yemenite hotel worker, would find their proper reward in death, going to Paradise if they were good Muslims and to hell if they were bad.[6] This became al-Qaeda’s justification for killing civilians.[88]

Now…what is your evidence that AQ didn’t exist before 2001?

Where’s your evidence that shows that Osama Bin Laden is a member or even a leader of such organization?

From Wiki:

Osama bin Laden (Arabic: أسامة بن محمد بن عوض بن لادن‎ Usāmah bin Muḥammad bin `Awaḍ bin Lādin; with numerous variations) (born 10 March 1957) is a member of the prominent Saudi bin Laden family and the founder of the terrorist organization al-Qaeda, best known for the September 11 attacks on the United States and its associations with numerous other mass-casualty attacks against civilian targets. Bin Laden is on the American Federal Bureau of Investigation’s list of FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives.[1]

Since 2001, Osama bin Laden and his organization have been major targets of the United States’ “War on Terrorism.” Bin Laden and fellow Al-Qaeda leaders are believed to be hiding in the border of Afghanistan and Pakistan’s Federally Administered Tribal Areas.

Mujahideen in Afghanistan

After leaving college in 1979 bin Laden joined Abdullah Azzam to fight the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan[46] and lived for a time in Peshawar.[47]

By 1984, with Azzam, bin Laden established Maktab al-Khadamat, which funneled money, arms and Muslim fighters from around the Arabic world into the Afghan war. Through al-Khadamat, bin Laden’s inherited family fortune[48] paid for air tickets and accommodation, dealt with paperwork with Pakistani authorities and provided other such services for the jihad fighters. He moved to Peshawar in 1994, and during this time met his future collaborator Ayman al-Zawahiri, who encouraged Osama to split away from Azzam.[citation needed] Osama established a camp in Afghanistan, and with other volunteers fought the Soviets.

It was during his time in Peshawar that he began to wear camouflage-print jackets and carrying a captured Soviet assault rifle, which urban legends claimed he had obtained by killing a Russian soldier with his bare hands.[49]

Formation and structuring of Al-Qaeda

By 1988, bin Laden had split from Maktab al-Khidamat; while Azzam acted as support for Afghan fighters, Laden wanted a more military role. One of the main leading points to the split and the creation of al-Qaeda was the insistence of Azzam that Arab fighters be integrated among the Afghan fighting groups instead of forming their separate fighting force.[50] Bin Laden returned to Saudi Arabia in 1990 as a hero of jihad, who along with his Arab legion, “had brought down the mighty superpower” of the Soviet Union.[51] However, during this time Iraq invaded Kuwait and Laden met with Sultan, Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia, and told him not to depend on non-Muslim troops and offered to help defend Saudi Arabia. Bin Laden’s offer was rebuffed and after the American offer to help was accepted he publicly denounced Saudi Arabia’s dependence on the US military. Bin Laden’s criticism of the Saudi monarchy led that government to attempt to silence him.

Etc. Again, what is your evidence that ObL is not the nominal head of the organization he founded called al-Qaida?

Don’t just say everyone knows that show that it’s not merely hearsay.

Well, the evidence is overwhelming. Unlike your own which is, well, underwhelming.

Here’s a video on the origin and “myth” of Al Qaeda.

Underwhelming. For evidence you present another YouTube video…and one it’s pretty clear you did not even understand? You should really watch it again because it’s not saying what you seem to think it’s saying.

And just a tip…even if it did, a YouTube video is not exactly compelling evidence, ehe?

-XT

[Bryan_Ekers]

I just happened to find my Popular Mechanics issue on the 9/11 myths. It helped reinforce my stance that conspiracy nuts are, well, nuts.

[Oukile]

@ivan_astikov

Third plane, manages to sneak by all the Pentagon’s security cameras, when one, which must have faced out onto the heliport in front of the crash site, must have picked something clearer up than what has been shown.

Security cameras pretty generally point downward. Most likely because few people install cameras to watch the sky.

[XT]

[QUOTE=Oukile]
Security cameras pretty generally point downward. Most likely because few people install cameras to watch the sky.
[/QUOTE]

Also, a lot of security cameras don’t record continuously…instead they are generally in stand by mode and switch on (after a 3-6 sec delay) on motion or other trigger. ETA: This is for record only, they are generally ‘on’ wrt real time video to the security outposts. When you set up a security camera that is external you almost always put in an exclusion zone above your expected target (as you say, they are designed to video capture PEOPLE…not birds, clouds or moving trees). The reason you don’t generate video continuously (for recording) is that video is very bandwidth and memory intensive stuff, especially if we are talking about higher level resolution (the Pentagon cameras were analogue cameras at that time btw on their own closed circuit). It would take a huge amount of hard drive space for even a single camera on continuous record…multiply that by many cameras and it would be unsupportable, especially in the early 2000’s. Even today with video compression and such you never have all of the cameras recording continuously…so you set exclusion zones so that your systems don’t trigger on the movement of things like birds, trees blowing, clouds, shadows, etc.

And on this topic I DO actually have some level of expertise…I worked for a security company as their principal IT engineer for about 2 years, and we designed and installed video security systems. I also was tangentially familiar with the Pentagon’s security system, at least WRT the Navy’s piece. Anyone attempting to say that the video cameras should have captured good video of the planes impacting the Pentagon basically doesn’t know what they are talking about. It would be pure luck to capture a good image, especially with the older, analogue camera systems and older DVR’s or AtD systems.

-XT

[Bryan_Ekers]

@xtisme

Anyone attempting to say that the video cameras should have captured good video of the planes impacting the Pentagon basically doesn’t know what they are talking about.

But what about the “enhance” function that can let you clearly see the plane in the reflection on a side mirror of a car in the parking lot?

It must be true - I saw it on TV!

[Valgard]

@EasyPhil

Let me answer your question this way…

I don’t need credentials to know that if my tire comes off of my car while driving that one of four things have happened.

So, specifically, you mean that you have no educational or work background in any field related to the topics I mentioned?

Look, we’re not talking about a flat tire, we’re talking about the collapse of some very large, very complicated (from a structural standpoint) buildings under extraordinary conditions. The average person’s day-to-day experience with things breaking or falling down or whatever simply does not scale up to 100-story office buildings. When you make statements about demolitions and collapse mechanisms you are just guessing because you really, really do not know how that stuff works. I don’t mean that perjoratively, it’s just that saying “Well as a layman that extraordinarily unusual event looks weird to me so I don’t care what the experts in that field say, they must be wrong” is not backed up by anything.

I’m not a biologist. If I saw thirty seconds of video of a thousand people writhing on the ground, one leg stiff, green foam pouring from their ears, all of them screaming “TIKITIKITIKI!”, the fact that I know what I feel like when I’ve got the sniffles is of very little use in diagnosing what the hell is happening.

@EasyPhil

If you know that buildings collapse essentially on their own footprint via demolition, but not during a fire even if the building burned for 24 hours or more then if you see 3 buildings collapse that day, two in one fashion and one in another, it’s not too far fetched to assume that either the buildings weren’t built properly or that something else happened besides the planes.

If that was an accurate description of the collapses of WTC1, 2 and 7, and if you had some expertise in demolitions or structural engineering or anything like that, then it might not be too far-fetched, but that is not an accurate description and you do not have expertise in any of those fields, so it’s just wrong.

[Skywatcher]

@EasyPhil

If you know that buildings collapse essentially on their own footprint via demolition

7 was in the same footprint as 1, a Greek Orthodox church was in the footprint of 2 (even though it was across the street), and 30 West Broadway was in the footprint of 7 (even though it was across the street)?

[Bryan_Ekers]

@Valgard

I’m not a biologist. If I saw thirty seconds of video of a thousand people writhing on the ground, one leg stiff, green foam pouring from their ears, all of them screaming “TIKITIKITIKI!”, the fact that I know what I feel like when I’ve got the sniffles is of very little use in diagnosing what the hell is happening.

However, frat-party experiences may prove on point.