Why were they bowing? What was destroying the supports below to help cause the bowing? That clown Mark Roberts that debated with Avery & Bermus was using the bowing BS, and when the idea that the top portion of the S. tower should have continued to fall was brought up, he mentioned that a fulcrum would have been needed to allow for such a thing to occur. Well i'm sure he has no answer to why that portion was pulverized, ofcourse there was no fulcrum to help it continue falling, the supports were being melted by thermite, and blown up.

They talk about demolition experts who say it wasn't controlled demolition, have they ever stopped to think that maybe that was the first time two gigantic towers were brought down with controlled demolitions, and helped the shock and awe effect? Since there is no visual footage to compare of what such huge buildings look like when being brought down with explosions. Especially two that had jetliners hit them in positions that were obviously pre-determined points of impact, most likely the explosives and thermite had to be placed in certain areas where the planes were not going to hit, and to get maximum effect as to damage the structure so it would be brought down quickly. I believe that regardless of how well the government planned this false flag event, they still made huge mistakes.

I believe they most likely wanted the buildings to go down as soon as the planes hit, had that have happened the firefighters never would have been able to get inside the buildings to hear explosions, William Rodriguez would not have been here to tell us about the explosion he heard prior to the plane hitting. If that had happened they would obviously have blamed it on the planes, their impact, and the jetfuel, and called it a day, just like they did anyways, but they'd have less witnesses to worry about.

Look at how the second building to get hit, went down first. Look at how building 7 went down later that afternoon in a matter of controlled demolition without even being hit by a plane. Look at how the other buildings survived all the debris falling from the towers, being directly below them compared to 7, and were eventually brought down with demolition as part of the clean up. If you look at all that, you see the holes in their plan, but they are slick, they still continue to press forward, and call all dissention conspiracy theories.

Such a convienient term to use when there are so many questions to answer. I wish everything was so easy in life, when we have to face questions at work, or when taking an exam on things we studied, why can't we have the luxury of just calling all questions conspiracy theories, and have our word be law? Oh I forgot we aren't presidents, vice-presidents, and secretaries of defense. We aren't the world bankers, Rockerfellers, Rothchilds.

When we get pulled over for speeding, why can't we say that's just a conspiracy theory, I never speed, I wasn't speeding, you guys are liers, I don't believe in radar guns, you guys always lie so you can make money off of us, and fill your quotas.

I mean really do common criminals have such luxury? When they are being accused of a crime? They aren't allowed to bypass a trial by jury, by simply saying, bah- that's just a conspiracy theory, I had nothing to do with that, that was the other guy I mentioned when I was first questioned. You found my fingerprints? What? Bah- that's a conspiracy theory..

-Ryback

Look at some of the images... the video... you can see the columns along one wall.... every one of them just glowing orange.... but the fire is hardly visible.

that my friends is the thermite

most likely placed with-in those coulmns....

thermite was used on the area of impact as well as the building above..... the themite reaction melted the building... and when the building began to fall from the failure of the compromised structure.... then they pulled the trigger and blew it from the top down.

the thermite was used up top to create the exagerated smoke while destroying the structure so that they could destroy the upper part without the use of explosives... for the most part.

the video of the molten steel pouring out of the building was in an area where the column buckled the wrong way.... and it ruptured spilling it's hidden goodies down the side of the building.

Problems with bowing scenario...

1) It is only an initial event, and does not provide any explaination for the global collapse events.

2) It's cause is based purely on speculation. The bowing may have occured, but there is no
evidence that supports that fire alone could have caused this, let alone after only a few minutes of fire.

3) If the bowing occured so early on, how come the towers didn't collapse then?

4) If this was so obvious, why wan't it the FIRST theory of collapse and not the THIRD theory of collapse?

5) The testimony of the "we knew it was going to collapse" is taken years after the event. 20/20 hindsight. Besides, this testimony is irrevalent because it doesn't prove anything - just like people "hearing" explosions does not prove that it was CD.