Quote Originally Posted by memeticverb View Post
So far, if one wants to be honest, the only supported position by science has been the controlled demolition hypothesis. Why is this the only scientifically supported hypothesis? Because the government funded studies did not analyze the mechanism that caused the sudden, rapid and total collapses.

The NIST investigation was flawed in that it only aimed to try to explain the initiation of collapse, and not what happened after the first instant of support load failure. NIST did everything to stack the experiments against the models being able to survive. But none of their test models could cause a duplicate structure to fail under greatly exaggerated conditions.

Now, how many scientists have written academic literature in favor of the use of explosives at the WTC? How many have been challenged by defenders of the government? Answering these questions will go a long way to finding th truth.

WTC7: Collapses in Seconds and in a manner Indistinguishable from Controled Demolition.
How many scientists think the issue is even worth mentioning?