If the buildings did not fall one or two hours after the crashes, they should not have fallen due to the impact. What he is saying is that the government used explosives so the buildings collapsed with very little resistance other than air resistance.
And weakened steel caused the first two wtc's to collapse nearly at freefall rate?
The airplanes blew up really fast consuming most of the fuel. After 10 or 15 seconds at most the fireballs get much smaller.
Tell me, please, how fire disintegrates steel.
Picture evidence shows the fires were really weak, people were standing where the planes made holes.
So the Windsor hotel in Madrid burned entirely and at a much higher temperature than the WTC one and two yet didn't fall and that means nothing to you? It's tempting to make a comment on America's structural engineers if Spain's are so superior.
Fire still does not turn steel to dust.
Hey, all you have to do is prove fire makes buildings collapse at near freefall levels.
the buildings caved in. if it's not demolition then it's intelligent, steel pillar seeking and detonating fire.
I will drop some conrete and if it turns to dust... mwahaha you are so silly.
He did not say the buildings should have toppled horizontally. OK?