#9228 by tolman » Oct 22, 2016 11:34 pm
But science doesn't involve pretending the towers fell in free fall when evidence suggests that they didn't, and when no feasible hypothetical demolition explanation would suggest they would do so if they had been demolished.
What you're trying to claim or (just as bad) imply, apparently without any relevant knowledge, is that any non-demolition collapse would have to have taken far longer than the collapses actually took.
Your constant harping on about '15 floors destroying the rest' demonstrates that either you haven't got a clue about the structures and their potential failure modes (or, indeed, the official explanation of how they collapsed), or you do have a clue, but that for some unpleasant reason, you're pretending that you don't.
I don't do sarcasm smileys, but someone as bright as you has probably figured that out already.