On 03/07/2006, at 8:06 PM, Gibson Jonathan wrote:
How the debris we see falling {I would point out it's much more akin to exploding outward and then down} exterior to the building can match an interior descent flies in the face of logic. I simply cannot accept that the core structure, a thick _lattice_ of crossing steel, would offer the same resistance as the air outside slowing the debris.
It doesn't. The building collapsed very rapidly, but not as fast as most of the debris.
Rio de Janeiro had a steel skyscraper burn for 24+ hours over multiple floors yet it had no such catastrophic collapse, was reconditioned and in use today {with upgraded fire suppression}.
Had it had a plane full of kerosene fly into it?
One final and glaring omission from the official NIST report is rarely commented on: once the collapse takes place they virtually ignore the entire structural analysis of the pancake theory and how the various materials acted {or didn't}... as thought the report ends once collapse is initiated.
Because progressive collapses are well-documented. Charlie _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
