Harry said:There is now way buildings such as the twin towers can collapse like a deck of cards.
If they were hit near the bottom then maybe.
If anything it would fall apart piece by piece taking much longer, ie one floor collapse here, another there, one side here another there etc.
It seemed way too orchastrated and there seemed to definately be explosions happening floor by floor as it crumbled.
Too suspicious.
Firstly, if the burning fuel and excessive heat from the explosion didn't melt the beams, then surely the heat would have at least weakened them structurally enough, for them to start to fail mechanically.
Secondly, you have to realise mate, that here we have an aircraft, weighing close to 100-tonne, flying into the building at....what....200-300km/h?
How many buildings are built to survive such an impact, and how many would have survived upright, as long as they did, after such an impact?
Such an impact would have caused dramatic weaknesses on the steel and concrete, still left, trying to hold up the remaining floors (see photo below):
With so much steel/concrete warped, or totally destroyed, it would have been only a matter of time before whatever left of the structure at the point of impact, would collapse under the weight of the remaining floors above.
The resulting collapse, would have left the building like a concertina, as each floor gave way under the weight/force of the floors above, then the 'pancake' continued all the way to the bottom.
In fact, there's an excellent webpage here, showing the engineering behind why the building collapsed the way it did.
http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html
even one from the Sydney University:
http://www.public-action.com/911/jmcm/USYDENR/
The principal engineer of metallurgy quoted on this webpage states:
"Only the containment building at a nuclear powerplant is designed to withstand such an impact and explosion".
Again, like I've said previously, if you want to believe the Americans did it, then no evidence will sway you, no matter how factual, scientific, or logical, it is.