Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
I don't get the "truther" movement. It's very easy to make accusations claiming something isn't what it appears to be without having any proof, and asking the other side to defend itself. In the end you have entire discussions and debates about things that have no relevance to what happened.
I love the discussions about how "nano thermites" were discovered at the WTC site. Well.... The main ingredients of thermite are rust and powdered aluminium. The buildings were steel structures with aluminium cladding. The majority of the buildings were turned to dust/powder. So, it would be expected to have large quantities of powdered aluminium and powdered iron-rust in the dust. Something would be more seriously wrong if these ingredients were not found in the dust.
I also enjoy the discussions about the temp of the fire and how it wasn't enough to melt steel. Let's just accept this is correct.... The fire didn't need to melt steel, only bend it.
|
Yep, all correct.
It is fun to debate, especially over beers. There is one thing that is interesting though: For me being liberal minded, it would be really easy for me to say that Bush / Cheeny planned the whole thing, but I can't. I also can't look at the buildings collapsing and see a controlled demolition like Truthers claim. When I see them fall, I seem the fall due to stresses on the buildings caused by damage, fire, and gravity. They do not even remotely look like controlled demolitions.