posted on Jul, 13 2006 @ 06:50 PM
This question had better be directed to Steve than to me. Even the NIST admitted it had found sulfur residue it could not explain. I find it
unreasonable that NITS would have overlooked explanations such as you suggest were they available and appropriate. He (Steve) has now reported
discovering therimite residue on other samples of steel. My opinion is that, together with the massive evidence that the buildings were destroyed
from the top down (Professor Wood has compared them to enormous trees turning into sawdust from the top down!) The impact of the planes was
negligible, the fires burned too low and too briefly to have caused the steel to weaken much less melt, there was not enough kinetic energy for a
floor's collapse to bring about another floor's collapse or for that occurrence to bring about the pulverization of the concrete flooring, plus the
speed of fall--10 seconds for the South Tower, 11 for the North--even exceeded the rate of free-fall for a grand piano released in space and only
affected by air resistence, which would have come down in 12 seconds! Not to mention the enormous pools of molten metal that were found at the
subbasement level three, four, and five weeks later. For more, consult Steve. But there had to have been another source of immense energy to blow
steel beams outward and even upward and create that massive cloud of very fine dust.
[edit on 13-7-2006 by James Fetzer]
[edit on 13-7-2006 by James Fetzer]