Some Misunderstandings Related to WTC Collapse Analysis

[Albert Doyle]

The very first witnesses in the video (the two firefighters) show your attempted argument to be inconsequential. There were explosions heard by those inside the building and the interior of the building started falling apart causing them to flee for their lives.

That's false. You can't be seriously saying that overly-general reference to 3 explosions makes everything else "inconsequential"? That's ridiculous and you destroy your credibility by saying it. Furthermore those men probably ran and were outside fleeing for their lives when the alleged progressive demolition charges occurred, so they were probably outside anyway. In any case it doesn't preclude the need to answer for the audio forensics, as anyone can clearly see. So, yes, you are mixing things up and evading.

So we clearly have evidence of explosions causing damage to the building.

This doesn't answer the blast signature argument nor does it have anything to do with it. Also, as Orling points out, you have no proof of the source of those blasts. They could have been pneumatic air pressure blasts funneled down the chutes in the building. Some protest "oversimplified nonsense," yet I don't see them here for this easily-refuted stuff.

Then when the collapse up top starts, and the measurements and calculations show the columns could not have been involved, you want to say it was natural because we can't hear enough booms. Get real.

That's not at all what I said. I said you can't reconcile your claims that the progressive explosions Chandler claims were muffled by the roar while also showing videos of people who said they heard them clearly. And so far you haven't. Thank you.

Still waiting for you to explain that.