In the part were the author shows several people commenting on hearing an explosion, he fails to show the entire conversation and for good reason. There were indeed many explosions, after all a skyscraper was beginning to fall. Almost all the people the author cites heard the explosions after the building began to fall. If you watch a controlled demolition of a building the explosions occur before the building begins t fall. Also they have to wrap the building to p[revevnt debris from being ejected during the explosions. If the towers were indeed brought down by a controlled explosion with no wrapping to prevent the explosion from coming out of the building it would seem that these unprotected detonations would have been easily seen as the force required to cause the failure would have required massive ammounts of explosives. Keep in mind that they detonated a 1500 pound amonium nitrate bomb in the basement of the world trade center in 1993 and the buildings didn't fall. The weight at the bottom is the greatest and yet this massive explosion didn't cause them to collapse. How many explosives would have been required to start the collapse? The people the author uses in his "I heard explosions section" are talking about noises that would becommon in a collapssing building with no explosives present. The forces that were being generated were massive. If explosives were used why weren't there huge ejections of material from the buildings before they started collapsing. I often question authors who use small segments of longer conversations to make their point. Having been there myself I heard no explosions before the building began to fall but heard many crazy sound once the buildings started to fall. Also keep in mind that few of the witnesses used in the documentary had any experience in identifying sounds especially explosives. One floor collapsing creates an enormous sound much like an explosion. Find the interviews in there completion and I believe you will take another look at the documentary.
love and smoochies.
The picture of the cut beam seen after the collapse was done through deconstruction during the cleanup and was done with a blowtorch not an explosive. The picture is several days if not weeks after the collapse. These beam cuts can be seen throughout the cleanup site in various different pictures including some with the welder actually doing it. Also the beam would imply that they detonated explosives very close to the ground which few people seem to be able to validate. We supposedly see explosions during the collapse, again which doesn't happen in controlled demolitions (find one)ever. The explosives are also haphazardly distributed in the building if we go by the authors account. In a controlled explaion there would be some symetry aof action not present in the video. The core did remain standing briefly during the collapse and can be seen in video analysis. Any building collapsing is going to take the path of least resistance, straight down. The madrid tower in spain did collapse partially and it is on video. The construction of lower floors and the fact that much of the materials had been burned prevented the Madrid tower from completely collapsing. Also the Boeing 707 is a much smaller plane then the 767 that struck the towers. The scenerion in the origial plans didn't factor in a fully fueled 707, as it was assumed that an aircraft might strike them accidently on approach. Two of the interviews if veiwed in there entirety, mainly the designers comments, validate the collapse scenerio that is the governments official position on the events. By using only a segment the author biases the account. Anything can be taken and used out of context. I always question those who show little but claim alot. Why did so many people not hear explosions. Where were all the explosives and how did they hide them? A building that has 50,000 running through it on any given dy and no one notices primacord or explosives. Maintenence men would have noticed or should we assume they are part of the bigger plot? Unlike a controlled demolition where the building is weakened as much as possible so as to minimize the amount of explosives used, there was n weakening of the towers in the portions where explosives are allegedly detonated. Remeber also that each floor was completely open except for the core portion and the air in collapsing floors would have generated random explosions as the air escaped through elevator shafts, stairwells etc. Food for thought.
Take a look at the following link. someone isn't running the video at the right speed. I tend to lean towards the Popular mechanics theory which backs their claim up with physics and mathamatics. Physics never lies.Why don't the authors of this documentary use this information. It would have to be because they can't get the answer they want. It contradicts their theory. See attached link. http://www.debunking911.com/freefall.htm
Thank you for sharing. I appreciate that you viewed this content and that it was worth enough thought for you to comment about it.