Has any demolitions experts concurred with the explosives used in WTC theory?

I like to know if any real demolitions expert have actually backed up the claims that explosives were used. Because I have yet to find any.

how many demolition contractors are there? one contractor could bring down 20 buildings a year, no problem if they were full time. how many buildings that size go down every year in the US. I thought it was still a special event.

Controlled Demolitions Expert Danny Jowenko

Its a 3 part video. This guy agrees with the official story but when showed WTC 7 he swears its a demo.

I don't think that video says much either way.

They basically pulled a bait and switch on him. He even shows disbelief once he is told what he is seeing. If you want to prove anything with his opinion it would be better to have a discussion with him after he is presented all the facts. Tricking him into saying it's a demolition does not necesarily mean he really thinks that.

While WTC 7 certainly looks like a demolition, that does not in any way prove that it was.

Brent Blanchard in a paper, not in a bait and switch interview, clearly outlines his reasons to think otherwise.

www.jod911.com...

3. Any detonatino of explosives within WTC 7 would have been detected by multiple seismographs monitoring ground vibration in the general area. No such telltale "spike or vibratory anomaly was recorded by any monitoring instrument.

. . .

We have spoken with several who possess extensive experience in explosive demolition, and all reported hearing or seeing nothing to indicate an explosive detonation precipitating the collapse.

Jowenko is shown the video of WTC7. He doesn't even know it is WTC7. Shows how much he knew about the structural integrity of the building before it collapsed.

Once he is told fires were burning and the building had holes in it he wasn't so sure it was a demolition.

Implosion World WTC Report

These guys don't agree with the WTC demolition theory one bit.