🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1190000561.158836.43870@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com>,
LarryG@Yahuu.com <larryg_uu@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Sep 16, 9:37 am, God Bless Texas <no.one.no....@no.where.org>
>wrote:
>> On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 00:23:21 -0700, Lar...@Yahuu.com wrote:
>>
>> > Apparently you don't know the difference between opinion and facts.
>>
>> You want to compare training or profession, when it comes to discerning
>> opinion vs. fact?  I didn't think so . . .
>
>What is this?  You issue a challenge and conclude that I will
>not respond BEFORE you even post the thing?  Not very
>honest or ethical.
>
>
>
>> You'll take absurd rumor and pseudo-scientific paranoia over engineering
>> facts?
>
>You assume that the entire case implicating government involvement
>in 9/11 rests on the collapse of the Twin Towers.  Even without
>this issue, no realistic explaination has been given for the
>demomlition of WTC7, 




WTC7 fell because of some combination of falling debris, exposure to
fire from adjacent buildings, time, poor fireproofing, thousands of
gallons of stored diesel fuel, lack of water for sprinklers and
firefighters and the strange steel framework that was kludged over a
pre-existing electric utility substation.  There may be other
factors. If there are, they will be published in the next NIST report.


Experts differ on the exact mechanism but none of them propose
man-made explosives are needed to explain how the tower collapsed.


-- 
a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m 
Don't blame me. I voted for Gore. A Proud signature since 2001