Quote Originally Posted by cheyenne1212
None of them hold any evidence of truth.
c'mon, both theories (which are anyways not "too" far from together) bring up dozens of interesting facts, which cannot be ignored.

Quote Originally Posted by nihil
The concept of "no steel framed structure being brought down by fire" is irrelevant nonsense. All that says is that "no building of this type in whatever condition it was in, had ever had an airliner run into it before" Nobody can model or calculate what should have happened...............it just did!

The building collapsing upon itself is exactly what I would expect, given its design and construction. It collapses from the centre inwards and pulls the ectoskeleton with it.
well steel is not the only material used in it, (which could be melted), what about the concrete that turned into dust, you know when the buildings started to collapse, there were masses of debris falling out, that covered the whole area for days. if the ony reason for falling is the airplanes hit, and they collapsed because of burning kerosine, i think concrete can withstand very high temperature.

I think that "at least" some people from bush's administration knew about the attack(which both theories agree on), and used it for their own goals, which is in my opinion something serious...
Hence the title