Re: University Study Finds Fire Did Not Cause Building 7's Collapse on 9/11
Sure, that defines one side of the problem. The fall time in a gravity field with air resistance disregarded, which is okay.
so what's wrong with the fall time of the twin towers?
so what's wrong with the fall time of the twin towers?
Is the fact that the resistance from the ENTIRE STRUCTURE of the building is disregarded? Apparently you think so. That is the ONLY way free fall speeds could be reached.
There is one other way free-fall speeds could have been attained. And it answers the point that no explosives could have been sneaked into the buildings.
The answer is that they were landed on the top of the buildings by helicopter, days before 9/11. It's these explosives that pushed the buildings into near free-fall speeds, and caused the "pancaking" that many seemed to have observed.
Of course, others have talked about missiles. So, maybe it was a missile or two, that had "shaped charge explosives" of the kind used in tank shells.
