Sorry John but I'm calling you out on this one. You have already stated that you'd love to hear from an engineer or a demolition expert so that by definition tells me you are neither.
Claim whatever you want and you may have some engineering knowledge and guess what I studied engineering science as well but sorry, to make judgements like these you need to be an expert, come back when you done a 4-5 year engineering degree and 10 years in the field.
The link I gave you was written by structural engineers and they are satisfied it collapsed without the use of explosives. And guess what, call me crazy but I'm going to take the word of qualified structural engineers over "john risk" from Hot Copper spruiking his engineering ability on a finance forum. So I suppose we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.
And I note how you adopted the same "draw a blank" response to my other question, same thing happened when I challenged other CTers on this thread to explain the alternative account. How convenient that is, it reminds me that one of the typical traits of a conspiracy theorist, they never notice that the small inconsistencies in the accounts which they reject are dwarfed by the enormous, gaping holes in logic, likelihood and evidence in any alternative account.
