9/11 Weekend - New hypothesis to Explain 9/11 - Part I

[Peter Lemkin]

Nothing I have proposed defies evidence of physics. To the contrary it is based ON physics, engineering (applied physics) and the mappings/observations of the movements seen... and the rubble found. Physics tells us that the columns could not be crushed. And they weren't... the frame broke at the weakest points - the joints and splices which were bolted together... when subjected to excessive lateral forces and the structure's materials and their loads were disengaged from their load paths... and were free to act (gravity and F=MA) on the frame's joints

Mr Orling,

What you propose specifally defies physics.

For the Towers to have fallen at free fall speeds the RESISTENCE of MATERIALS BELOW any falling debris has to be ZERO.. They too mst be falling, for in YOUR theory things just come apart, yet wind up landing within a very small area in a very short period of time...

You can't have extremely high frictional temperatures and NO RESISTENCE and the same time... Friction = resistence = time

and according to every analysis of the event, except NIST, the building fell as if the core columns and every other supporting structure was gone BEFORE they were encounter in the fall... even a fraction of a second per floor for resistence would have DOUBLED THE FALL TIME...

So I am interested in understanding how two buildings with 250,000 tones of material each, simply

Got out of it's own way... if nothing stuck these building below the 70th floor
and how Marble is exploded from walls 70 plus stories BELOW the action...

Thanks
DJ

JO seemingly has left us [hopefully forever] to either lick his wounds or get his new standing orders.....

NB - your analysis of JO's illogical and unscientific 'theory' is very good.....but he doesn't and never has cared about physics nor logic...its all about maintaining the 'current order', if you get my drift - the only question is if JO is aware of this or not...I think he is.....IMHO