Reply #39: Sophistry? She is making a very clear argument. [View All]

[spooked911]

You already said crushing takes more energy than breaking.

Didn't you also calculate it took 16 seconds to "break" the buildings using gravity?

Ergo, it follows logically that to crush the buildings in 16 seconds it takes more energy than can be supplied by gravity.

What part of this doesn't make sense?

I know-- you say the buildings really were "broken", not "crushed".

But let's get real here.

The buildings were CRUSHED.

Are these word games? Yes.

But isn't that what this is all about? It seems you are devoting a significant portion of your life to refuting the notion that the twin towers were brought down by demolition. Why you choose to do this, only you can say. I'm curious though, how seriously do you ever take our arguments?