Originally posted by Bat Dude
I don't have huge knowledge on the subject (and most of this has been posted before), but:-How can fire destroy a steel skyscraper? It didn't before the attacks, and it hasn't since the attacks...
-How could the grass at the Pentagon have been in perfect condition when a commercial plane supposedly flew through the base of the Pentagon?
-How come they never found remains of the people on said commercial flight, and how come they never found any evidence to support that a plane of its size had flown into the Pentagon? They found a 3 foot engine, but the plane they are claiming did it needs a WAY bigger engine...
-How come the major news stations continuously played the same footage over and over again, while neglecting other footage, such as the collapse of Building 7? (which has been compared to a "demolition"😉
-Why did President Bush claim to have seen the plane go into the first tower while waiting to go into the classroom, when such footage was not even known to have existed until several hours after the towers collapsed?
point 1:...for a start...it wasn't just a fire...it had an impact of a 200+ ton airliner crashing into it at 400+ mph...the forces exerted by the impact are collosal
point 1 again: there have actually been many examples where building both similar in construction to the WTC have been destroyed solely by fire...i posted several of them earlier in this thread
point 2:
yep....definitely looks like the grass is unscathed there doesn't it?
point 3: i posted testimony of an aircraft engineer earlier in the thread which disputes your claim
point 4: i remember watching it many times and it was recorded from many angles and widely reported at the time...although it was less dramatic and was alot later than the twin towers as well
i notice nobody questions the collapse of the marriot hotel from damage from the WTC collapse though