Disproven? By whom? If it was disproven by people who would mislead you into thinking steel remains perfectly strong and rigid unless exposed to blast furnace temperatures, then I am sorry but my actual experience has shown me that this assumption is incorrect. Steel softens with heat and loses its temper with heat. Steel can be bent, cut, reformed and pliable without reaching blast furnace temperature. If you watch the video of the WTC falling, the top floors (at least 15 stories of building), fell onto the rest of the structure. Although moving slowly at first, this is a massive force (force = mass X Velocity (squared)). I doubt that the building was engineered for the weight of 15 stories dropping on it.

WTC7 was a fuel and power depot building. It housed machinery and fuel for emergencies. In the video, the building can be seen rupturing in the middle. If is as if the center support gives way and falls (perhaps just one story). Try this with tinker toys or something similiar. Remove a small section in the middle and the sides will become stressed (like bending a stick) and fail at the weakest point (the joints). Once the supporting skeletal frame has been broken in several place to relieve stress, why would it go anywhere except straight down?

The morons are not the scholars. Scholars with agendas are simply dishonest. The morons are the individuals who rally behind the dishonest scholars and think I will follow what I know to be wrong.

Exploring possibilities is a good thing but if it becomes an all consuming mantra, I have to step aside.

For me, I find the hands-on experience with various grades of steel and heat to be a more convincing explaination than a massive conspiracy involving precise timing by hundreds of people masterminded by a guy who can't tie his shoes in the morning.

If your absurd and poorly thought-through idea were true, all modern steel framed buildings (i.e similar to WTC7) would need to be decomissioned or reassessed immediately. There would need to be massive reassessments of how designers build buildings and the whole industry would need to self review, costing $100 millions

this hasn't happened because your idea is bunk.

soo let me see, fuel in the WTC caused the centre column to be destroyed, you sayd.

if might have been due to machinery, you guess.

get a clue, you spastic.

the owner admitted on a PBS special called 'American Rebuilds' that they decided to PULL the building.

All that fancy talk of your experience of contruction, metal work and steel, and yet you CANNOT tell me what the construction term 'PULL IT' means?

Silverstein admitted it. It's on the record. Try again.

john geehad? ha ha haeh, very good.

This topics is now too long (and too boring) so I'm closing her down.