AggiEE said:
So we hand waive away a massive gaping hole while it was likely drenched in the same molten lava steel foundry around ground zero (seen by the white smoke thermate residue), yet the structure remains standing
Fire does not bring down buildings. If all it takes to bring down buildings is "uncontrolled fires", there'd be no need for demolition companies
You obviously have no clue how demolition contractors bring down buildings. There is no evidence of demolition...no flashes, no sound, no credible evidence in the rubble.
Correction on my earlier statement....the Marriott hotel was WTC 3, not WTC 6.
As for why WTC 6 (as well as WTC 3, 4 and 5) didn't collapse like WTC 7...we are comparing different buildings with different damage and differing fire conditions. WTC 7 was a much taller building with much more loads involved. It had significant fires, unlike the other buildings We know that uncontrolled fires, given enough time, do weaken steel, and that 7's design contributed to the way it collapsed.
You continue to hand wave the reasoning and psychology of the conspiracy theories. There is no reasonable explanation to demo WTC 7. No sane American would even dream up this convoluted, indescribably complicated plan to kill thousands of citizens just to provide impetus to go to war in the Middle East. A plan that would take thousands of people to plan and execute, involving the government, contractors, the media, members of both political parties, the military, etc. Everyone they approached to be part of it said "sure, that an awesome idea! Count me in!". Not one person said no, not one person talked, there is no evidence of any plan. Explain that away.
plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose