1. Why did WTC tower number 7 fall at all?
Because it got nailed with debris and was on fire for half of a day.
I find it hard that fires could weaken a steel building enough for it to fall as if it was a controlled implosion. At near free fall speeds.
2. Why was there Thermite in the rubble of the two towers?
There wasn't. There were things that people incorrectly interpreted as the residue of a thermite reaction. Claims to have found "nano-thermite" remain unsubstantiated.
I find this ridiculous. Of course they would say there wasn't thermite. They being whomever was responsible for putting it there.
3. When steel skyscrapers caught fire in the past why didn't they fall when 3 skyscrapers fell on September 11, 2001 that were on fire.
Previous steel skyscrapers didn't have airplanes ram into them and have jet fuel pour into their innards and burn. Jet fuel went into the core of the buildings and burned, weakening the superstructure.
Previous steel skyscrapers were hit with planes and caught fire.
4. Secondary explosions were heard by witnesses in New York on 9/11. What was the cause of these disturbances?
I don't know what you are referring to. Be specific in your claims.
Specifically you can google it.
What is the Logic behind not thoroughly investigating exactly what happened? I would like to think a logical person would want the right questions asked and not put up with answers that are not logical explanations of observable phenomenon.
All of the questions you asked have been thoroughly investigated and answered by reputable scientific organizations.
Bullshit they have. Thoroughly investigated by people with agendas and not with scientific method. This all played out in front of the public and wasn't investigated very well at all.
We really need to have Logic as a course in high schools.
20/09/2011 06:50:36 AM
- 1328 Views
Logic classes would be good in schools.
20/09/2011 10:23:56 AM
- 877 Views
Ugh.
20/09/2011 11:30:59 AM
- 902 Views
Re: Ugh.
21/09/2011 12:03:31 AM
- 829 Views
Something tells me that no matter who answered your questions you wouldn't believe anyway.
21/09/2011 02:16:52 AM
- 833 Views
this is a controlled demolition
21/09/2011 12:20:09 AM
- 948 Views
I've seen controlled demolitions in person. They happen in the opposite order of the WTC collapses.
21/09/2011 03:54:35 AM
- 903 Views
Agreed
20/09/2011 01:09:40 PM
- 836 Views
I've long advocated this for the reasons Tom states as well as others.
21/09/2011 06:49:28 AM
- 777 Views
I don't know if the Internet is degrading skills, or just giving stupid people a voice
20/09/2011 02:33:24 PM
- 908 Views
There is compelling evidence that 9/11 was not what it seemed
20/09/2011 03:06:58 PM
- 890 Views
No, there is not.
20/09/2011 03:19:43 PM
- 973 Views
Well, the circumstances were odd at least
20/09/2011 03:26:40 PM
- 858 Views
As far as conspiracies go ...
20/09/2011 03:36:35 PM
- 952 Views
what would be the motive for the US doing something that stupid?
20/09/2011 04:40:31 PM
- 770 Views
I'm not sure you got my gist.
20/09/2011 04:46:28 PM
- 812 Views
I don't think there is any evidience that Bush wanted to attack Iraq before 9-11
20/09/2011 05:21:09 PM
- 834 Views
Um. Well, sure, that would be true. If you ignored all the evidence.
20/09/2011 05:45:23 PM
- 892 Views
Well if you had argued that some Bush advisers wanted to attack Iraq I would have agreed
20/09/2011 06:35:07 PM
- 876 Views
But that's what I DID argue.
20/09/2011 06:47:17 PM
- 857 Views
sorry but you need to be more precise in your terms
21/09/2011 02:37:36 PM
- 883 Views
I've always seen them as separate.
21/09/2011 03:33:14 PM
- 722 Views
And the explicit statement of a Bush Cabinet member.
21/09/2011 06:59:47 AM
- 930 Views
I'm still annoyed.
21/09/2011 01:58:38 PM
- 764 Views
I stopped responfding when suddenly realized I didn't want to be in a Bush Iraq war debate
21/09/2011 02:53:29 PM
- 766 Views
and I pointed that it was was just continuin gthe Clinton policy
21/09/2011 02:30:13 PM
- 851 Views
Even if that were true, it would still be flip flopping on a central Bush platform plank.
21/09/2011 05:45:10 PM
- 876 Views
In addition:
20/09/2011 05:57:33 PM
- 956 Views
Contemplate this....
20/09/2011 04:27:52 PM
- 852 Views
You just did not go Star Trek on me
20/09/2011 04:44:28 PM
- 868 Views

You should watch the pilot episode of the X-Files spin-off series The Lone Gunmen.
20/09/2011 08:19:15 PM
- 902 Views
Make 'em all take debate.
20/09/2011 08:23:37 PM
- 829 Views
Re: We really need to have Logic as a course in high schools.
21/09/2011 12:10:08 AM
- 841 Views
Yeah, and the 100,000 pounds of sudden extra weight slammed into the towers at 400 mph...?
21/09/2011 01:05:18 AM
- 841 Views
Not actually the best example
21/09/2011 01:56:03 AM
- 818 Views
what about the hole it cut into the frame of the building?
21/09/2011 03:23:07 AM
- 855 Views
The fireproofing was scraped off the steel by the crash, so the beams melted.
21/09/2011 07:35:08 PM
- 1041 Views
Re: Yeah, and the 100,000 pounds of sudden extra weight slammed into the towers at 400 mph...?
21/09/2011 03:02:19 AM
- 875 Views
You would force Euler on to the masses?
21/09/2011 03:21:40 PM
- 900 Views
You could still argue.
21/09/2011 04:06:51 PM
- 762 Views
I didn't mean to imply that it is no fun to argue with a like-minded person
21/09/2011 04:15:47 PM
- 796 Views

Or they could just do more math. Cold, hard, beautiful math.
21/09/2011 04:01:05 PM
- 779 Views
Now we are talking... Everyone can benefit from some basic Euclid.
21/09/2011 08:32:17 PM
- 1040 Views
I really and truly appreciate your love of pure math for math's sake, but...
21/09/2011 11:10:03 PM
- 812 Views
Well, it requires a lot more science to really dispute things than HS can give someone
21/09/2011 11:28:29 PM
- 843 Views