I'm not normally one for conspiracy theories and many of the 9/11 ones seem a bit crazy (though the idea of the Pentagon not being hit by a plane is interesting), but here is one I'd not really heard of before.
Everyone knows about how the two main towers came down in a manner suspiciously like a controlled explosion. Each floor was designed to withstand the equivalent weight of 15 extra floors-full of stuff, and so a breach on the upper floors should not have caused the whole thing to come down and, if the buildings were fire-weakened, they probably would have buckled as a key support gave way, rather than go down vertically as if all supports gave way simultaneously. The fact that it happened twice makes it all the more unusual, but these were unusual times and they had both been hit by planes, so we'll cut them a bit of slack in the conspiracy stakes.
However, there was a third building in the complex, WTC 7, which also came down in exactly the same way even though it had not been hit by anything, supposedly because of numerous small fires. Even though no such building has ever collapsed in such circumstances before or since. In fact, if it wasn't for the other two buildings drawing all the attention, this complete collapse due to small fires would have been the most significant civil engineering failure of all time.
Now I'd never even heard of this building before, and it has been almost completely wiped from the record in most commentary on 9/11 (mostly because no-one died in it) but I thinks its fairly intersting none the less....
http://www.wtc7.net/articles/kimball/thirdskyscraper.html
Opinions ??
Everyone knows about how the two main towers came down in a manner suspiciously like a controlled explosion. Each floor was designed to withstand the equivalent weight of 15 extra floors-full of stuff, and so a breach on the upper floors should not have caused the whole thing to come down and, if the buildings were fire-weakened, they probably would have buckled as a key support gave way, rather than go down vertically as if all supports gave way simultaneously. The fact that it happened twice makes it all the more unusual, but these were unusual times and they had both been hit by planes, so we'll cut them a bit of slack in the conspiracy stakes.
However, there was a third building in the complex, WTC 7, which also came down in exactly the same way even though it had not been hit by anything, supposedly because of numerous small fires. Even though no such building has ever collapsed in such circumstances before or since. In fact, if it wasn't for the other two buildings drawing all the attention, this complete collapse due to small fires would have been the most significant civil engineering failure of all time.
Now I'd never even heard of this building before, and it has been almost completely wiped from the record in most commentary on 9/11 (mostly because no-one died in it) but I thinks its fairly intersting none the less....
http://www.wtc7.net/articles/kimball/thirdskyscraper.html
Opinions ??