Reply #111: How to explain

[petgoat]

Chopper pilots would have seen the same heat-induced distortions as all other witnesses.
I don't have to believe that all the cameras had the same distortions--which was after all,
not a function of the camera but of the behavior of light in hot air.

Your assuming a few hundred bolts and seams would stop a 30 story building from falling.

They held it up before the fires and nobody has proven they wouldn't hold it up after the fires.

There are NO professional civil engineers who question the total collapse.

See post 95. To shoot one's mouth off and challenge an official investigation (especially
when lacking the information) would be highly unprofessional. For those affiliated with an
institution, it would bring unwanted controversy and financial risk to the institution.
Those who work alone would be viewed as lunatic publicity seekers.

In fact most structural engineers were surprised when the towers collapsed.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/dyk.html

Re: heat test.

Yes, NIST used a 3.4 MW burner to heat trusses to 700 degrees. Any idiot can do it,
using the heat of 500 wood stoves in a space of a living room. There's no evidence that
the real trusses got that hot, that the columns were buckled, or that partial floor collapses
would have resulted in total building collapse.

anyone can recreate the computer model

I don't think so.

Finally, you misread my statement in order to label it a logical fallacy. And you clearly
don't understand what "zipper theory" means. My point was not an attempt to say that "since
the story has changed, therefore they lie." My point was that the complacent lack of controversy
about both the zipper theory and its overthrow by the NIST theory indicates that few people
are willing to express an opinion on this extremely important subject.