OK then. Just the facts. 9-11

[LARED]

50. Here is what I am seriously suggesting

1. You have in fact made conclusions. This has been amply shown in other posts

2. You admit you lack the proper background in math and science. This means you are capable at best of a superficial understanding of the VAST work performed on the SCIENCE behind the collapse by credible engineers and scientists. Evidence of this lack on your part is your reliance on the laughable work by Chandler.

3. My views, while in line with the rational scientific view, is meaningless. Fortunately as a Mechanical Engineer I have the background to understand the work, but I am not an expert in structural engineering or materials science, so I leave it up to those with expertise. There is abundant rational, sensible, scientific views published by credible, reviewed professionals that tell us the how's and whys of the collapse.

3/a It would be pretty foolish of me to question the analysis of a highly credible biologist when I have no background in biology.

4. The notion that anything other than planes impacting, fires, and hundreds of variables that influenced the failure as seen, as the only cause of the collapse is beyond doubt. No matter how many Google trained engineers think otherwise.

5 An open mind is a wonderful thing, just don't leave it so open your brains fall out. Not my words.

6. Honest debate is indeed a wonderful thing. I just don't see it in this thread on your part.