Could Vancouver 2010 be the next 9/11?

[Finnster]

Originally Posted by _paralyzed_

Demolition is taught at colleges. I haven't taken the classes. I can't give you technical data or demolition theory. I can't make an educated formal argument. I can tell you that it is simply not possible for the buildings to have fallen the way they did from plane impacts and the subsequent fire. Every scenario has been tried in controlled environments, and that's why there are demolition experts that are licensed and accredited and very strictly regulated. Ask a demolitions expert, see what they say.

If I don't know something, I say "IMO" or "IIRC". I make it a point to either know what I'm talking about or make it clear that I don't.

My conspiracy theory lies more toward the owner of the building, who not only made out huge in insurance money, but now owns the single most expensive piece of property in North America.

I don't know what happened, I know planes can't make skyscrapers fall into nice neat little piles. Skyscrapers specifically built to withstand an airplane hit, because the erection and demolition of buildings is a science.

Food for thought: Even controlled demolitions go wrong. Is it plausible to you that there were two very controlled falls on the same day right next to each other as a result of a chaotic catastrophe?

With all due respect man, I don't think you have the expertise to say that. Its your opinion that it doesn't seem like the buildings should have fallen like that, but that has little bearing on the actual truth of the matter.

I can't wrap my head around parts of Einstein's Theory of General Relativity, and how going faster slows the passage of time. That does not mean its not true.

Anyway, my post was more aimed at the OP. But as an example of my point as you were the (un)fortunate one to respond. If it was Silverstein's master plan, how did he get a hold of hundreds of thousands of pounds of explosives, get people to secretly rig them in his building (which 50000 people worked in, and hundreds of tourists visited every day) manage to hijack to 4 separate planes, all the while not getting caught and having enough money left over after the payoffs and materials to make the mass murder worth it? As far as insurance scams go, seems a bit complicated. Really, why bother bombing the pentagon then? One more chance to get caught, and get set on fire and shoved thru a woodchipper by an angry mob.

When looking at the implications and totality of these theories, it just doesn't make any sense.