Please answer these questions

The experts at PM have changed their story so often its ridicoulus. First they say the buildings pancaked and now they say thats not so. Now we are supposed to believe that the part above the impact zone crushed the part below with no resistence from a structure that was built to withstand multiple jet impacts according to one of the engineers who desigined it, Frank demartini, a former harvard professor. The idiots at NIST have given us no historical, experimental or graphical occurance of their newest Pile driver theory.

I would like answers to the following questions

If the fires were so hot why didnt the windows break?

Is it not suspicious that fire never has caused a high rise building to collpase, then three magically collapsed symetrically in the same day?

How come NIST can barely explanation to the bright orange reaction right before the collapse, it fits a thermite reaction like a glove, but NIst speculates its from the aluminum burning, but sorry DR jones conducted experiments and its not. Aluminum even when mixed with office materials is silvery. Please explain.

according to the new york times the steel was evaporated, you need temps far higer than a office fire to do that......5000 degrees, whats your hypothesis?

What about all the engineers that designed the building like demartini and skilling that said the building could easily withstand multiple jet impacts?

According to nist FAQ their newest pile driver theory which was supported by a couple sentences of speculation and not one historical example (of course fires have never caused buildings to collpase) the part above the impact zone crushed with no resistence or conservation of did the block above the impact zone turn into dust in midair.................HOW COULD IT CRUSH THE BUILDING IF IT WAS TURNED INTO DUST IN MIDAIR?

And why was molten metal found under the WTC when

temperatures from burning buildings (or exploding jet fuel) can not reach the levels needed to do that?

If the fires were so hot why

If the fires were so hot why didnt the windows break?

and if the fires were so hot how was edna cintron able to stand right where the alleged 767 disappeared without a trace?

PM = Hurst = CIA Review?

So they abandon the pancake theory. Why? Add these unanswered questions to your list and you'll have the reason:

How did the fires and damage cause a symmetric and identically timed failure across most if not all of the affected floors?

Why are there heavy pieces of debris shot out long horizontal distances or even with a pronounced upward arch if only gravitational energy was available?

How did the vertically stacked center columns fail so completely as to offer virtually no resistance to the process of collapse?

How do they incorporate (actually ignore) what FEMA? (or was it NIST?) determine to be the maximum temperatures applied to the painted steel members? Weren't these evaluated to have not exceed 350C and nearly all maxed out around 250C? At those temperatures, no softening of any significance would occur as demonstrated by the successive UL tests!

Why didn't the NIST evaluation actually address the collapse mechanisms? They stopped once they had force fit a black box simulation too achieved the 'conditions for initiation'. That's not science, it's anti-science.

What caused all of the reported and videotaped explosive damage at the base of the towers?

How much kerosene was even available to fuel the floor fires? The fireball ate much of it. The remainder would be consumed in a matter of minutes if not seconds.

There are of course even more issues, but these are more than enough to torpedo the PM half-assed big brother fanboi-ism for the far more ludicrous rubber-stamp caveman conspiracy theory.

BTW - What ever happened to the elephant/table theory? :P


elephant theory ? nah, its all about the 'no-elephant-theory' now, dont you get it?its obvious!