Originally Posted by
DGM
It certainly has no value in a study of a building collapse. Neither does his statement that the building was not hit by an aircraft. Why would he even bring up this irrelevant detail?
I hope his students keep him focused because it appears he needs it.
The not hit by an aircraft is supposed the undercut the CD explanation of the twin towers.... fire alone can't destroy the integrity of a structure... see it took a commercial airliner to start the twin tower collapses.
He doesn't sound like a critical thinker. Oh dear!