News channels never reported the thousands of architects, engineers and explosives/demolition experts confirming my wonderment at how the twin towers came down from planes crashing into them.
The good news being that this was all solved, although it did take awhile.
https://www.nist.gov/el/final-reports-nist-world-trade-center-disaster-investigation
And certainly it was in the news, mentioned more often than i thought it deserved. This one from CBS for example.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-9-11-truth-movements-dangers/
Popular Mechanics.
https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a6384/debunking-911-myths-world-trade-center/
I have always just assumed that folks are predisposed to not believe a word the government says, but the entire "run in the opposite direction and pretend that is the truth" is a bit jarring.
There is no mention in the CBS article of the thousands of engineers, architects and demolition experts who maintain the official narrative is impossible.
I will not take time to read the first link because the last one, popular mechanics relies entirely on quoting it, so gives a summary. Let's deal with CBS first, as it comes first and appeals to the popular mechanics (PM) first article, at least 15 years earlier than this one.
They reference a video called 'loose change' on YouTube as largely responsible for the allegedly incorrect conspiracy theories rather than our own eyes. I had never heard of it, though Michael Moore's film focussing on the Bush and Bin Laden families collusion is well known. The article is about an overall appeal that govt has been caught lying about a few things like WMD and secret prisons, but that does not mean they are lying about 9/11. They reference the 1930s Reichstag fire in Germany as the conspiracy theorists basis. I've never heard of the Reichstag fire mentioned in reference to the twin towers or any alleged govt conspiracy. They usually mentioned gulf of Tonkin, Moon Landing and JFK assassination as precedents. The Author would know this, but attempted a diversion.
He also says it is a huge concern that in the innocent days of 2006, 1/3 of people believed 9/11 was an inside job and are to blame for accepting a corrupt govt if the govt is corrupt. He doesn't say what options the people have to do about it. It seems obvious, all they can do is not trust MSM like him defending it, but he makes clear the msm should be more active in holding govt accountable, so he must be the only honest or wise enough to be sceptical of govt journalist. We can trust him to dispel any incorrect distrust of govt then.
The CBS article claims that conspiracy theorists are "obsessively focussed on physical minutiae" and mentions cell phone coverage at altitude and Pentagon light poles as examples. They say PM debunks these, but it does not mention them. It therefore stands as unexplained how there could have been cell phone calls about being hijacked at the time the plane was hijacked. Also that a jetliner hitting the Pentagon would have snapped off the closest light poles (as well as left aircraft wreckage which seemed absent).
The one thing that CBS mentions PM addressing is the burning jet fuel melting steel. They say it burns hot enough to weaken steel. I thought fair enough, I've never had a problem with some steel immediately surrounding the aircraft melting. However that would not appear to be able to cause the next hundred or so floors below to also melt. Unless the construction is like a house of cards and one pulled out causes it all to collapse, melting some steel at the top of the building is not an explanation for the total collapse.
PM quotes the FEMA experts explaining that jet fuel went down elevator shafts and the path is not known, however further experts from the report say if it reached an ignition source it would ignite.
This means that the fuel did not explode quickly on impact as it appeared , but the tanks were cut and the fuel poured down the elevator shafts and somehow went horizontally into all the floors, which all had the elevator shaft doors open, past the hallways, through the office doors and there were naked flames or sparks in them to start fires.
The story is that the curtains, carpets and paperwork then burned hot enough to crack off all the concrete surrounding all the steel beams and weaken the beams so the whole buildings came down.
They also adress another thing I had not heard of before, that witnesses heard explosions and saw damage on the ground floor lobbys. PM quotes the govt report and a witness from a French film saying that flames came out of an elevator and people ran out of an elevator on fire on the ground floor.
This means that as the jets sliced into the elevator shafts as they explain, the elevators carriages did not freefall and plummet at a speed that would kill or even injure the passengers on impact. Instead the closed boxes got filled with jet fuel and then the passengers maybe decided it was a good time to ignore the no smoking signs and set themselves and the carriage on fire. At the bottom the doors still worked and opened for the burning people pressing the buttons and they ran out, on fire. The impact of the elevators had not been enough to knock the burning passengers off their feet or prevent the doors working, but did do damage to the lobby, explaining the witnesses who saw the damage but not the burning people cited by the conspiracy theorists. Unless I'm missing something, this just does not make sense. If the elevators hitting the ground explain what sounded like explosions and damage in the lobby, then anyone inside would be dead or at least too hurt to run out on fire and doors would be unlikely to work.
They go on to give explanation for building 7 collapsing, without any diagrams to demonstrate what they are talking about. In any case they need to put fema's explanation to the test by using their own independent experts to test and verify, instead of simply being drafted to try and give some credibility to the govt. They also need to put the govts experts explanations to the thousands of dissenting experts, instead of citing only one who first said there were explosives used and then retracted his statement. They achieve nothing convincing in also quoting him saying the govt funding his income had nothing to do with his changed stance.
At the end of the day
, the biggest buildings in the world that withstood 30 years of seismic activity and billions of pounds of pressure from wind, could not cope with office fire belongs with
we could travel to the moon 50 years ago, but not now.