Quote Originally Posted by lampost
Ok, you're obviously not going to be rational on this and that's ok because there aren't any rational 9/11 conspirators. I expected that.

WTC 7 experienced what's known as a progressive collapse. When 1 member (beam, column, etc) fails, higher strains and stresses are introduced in other members. This causes more members to fail until it cascades and the whole building comes down.

From what I've read, there was a 10-story gash in the building that extended to 25% the depth of the building. That's huge! There was tons of structural damage from falling debris, and there were fires burning all day inside. There was no firefighting inside Building 7. So, yeah, that's enough to bring it down.

Why is it so hard to believe that they just initially underestimated the damage in that building on the morning of the 11th? Then it slowly came down without anyone realizing that is was happening.

And how many other things could a firefighter be referring to when he says, "Let's pull it"? ... A shitload.

And yes, I bet there was a lot of legitimate talk of demoing the bldg. But, they were probably considering it as an option to prevent further casualties from unexpected collapse. So, I bet there was a lot of confusion on the ground as to whether the controlled demo was actually carried out or whether it fell.

I don't know. I'm gonna drop it now. If you had more compelling evidence I'd be more inclined to argue my point. I think the evidence speaks for itself. I have a formal education in this kind of shit and it makes complete sense to me.
nice wiki search