Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

[Phys-L] Re: Here we go again. WTC brought down by aircraft, not.



Yes, that's why I subjected it, "Here we go again."

bc, who does wonder about the third building's collapse; only two aircraft.

Shapiro, Mark wrote:

That's for sure!

Mark


-----Original Message-----
=46rom: Forum for Physics Educators on behalf of John Clement
Sent: Mon 11/14/2005 6:31 AM
To: PHYS-L@LISTS.NAU.EDU
Subject: Re: Here we go again. WTC brought down by aircraft, not.
=20
I haven't looked at the tapes recently, but it is my distinct impress=
ion
that they clearly show that the top parts of the building collapsed f=
irst,
and then you can see the progressive crushing of the floors below. I=
t looks
quite different from a demolition where the bottom floors collapse fi=
rst and
then the building just sinks into a pile of rubble.

This visual evidence along with the difficulty in setting charges pro=
perly,
and the structural design evidence should convince most people that t=
his
hypothesis is probably incorrect. But conspiracy theorists are never
satisfied by evidence.

John M. Clement
Houston, TX


Professor thinks bombs, not planes, toppled WTC:


cut
_______________________________________________
Phys-L mailing list
Phys-L@electron.physics.buffalo.edu
https://www.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l