Reply #82: When I look at the pictures and videos of the WTC

[DoYouEverWonder]

both buildings blew up with such violence that they looked like volcanoes going off. That is why I refuse to call the collapses a control demolition. This was not a CD, the buildings were blown up. Considering how these towers were built, these massive steel structures, I do not believe that the damage from the passenger jets and the resulting fire was enough to cause the total collapse of these buildings. Partial collapse, sure but not total failure of the entire building.

So IF the jets and the resulting fires were not enough to be the cause of the total failure of the towers, then what is the cause? It had to be something that could generate a lot of energy. Enough energy to pulverize everything except the steel. I've looked at 100's of pictures. I rarely see anything recognizable. No chairs, no desks, no people, no body parts, no computers, no filing cabinets, no nothing. Just dust and steel. That was about all that was left.

So far the only thing I can come up with other then a nuke is some sort of thermobaric weapon. The US is currently using shoulder mounted thermobaric weapons in Iraq with great 'success'.

A version of the standard USMC Shoulder Mounted Assault Weapon but with a new warhead. Described as NE - "Novel Explosive"- it is a thermobaric mixture which ignites the air, producing a shockwave of unparalleled destructive power, especially against buildings.

A post-action report from Iraq describes the effect of the new weapon: "One unit disintegrated a large one-storey masonry type building with one round from 100 meters. They were extremely impressed." Elsewhere it is described by one Marine as "an awesome piece of ordnance."

<snip>

"SMAW gunners became expert at determining which wall to shoot to cause the roof to collapse and crush the insurgents fortified inside interior rooms."

http://www.defensetech.org/archives/001944.html

Sounds like what happened to the WTC but on a much smaller scale?