Creative Speculation
In reply to the discussion: The Official Video: ReThink911 September 2013 [View all]William Seger
(11,082 posts)... rip into buildings constructed like the towers, either, so that's an even sillier use of the "never happened before" fallacy.
It would appear that for both the towers and WTC7, there are gaps in your knowledge and understanding of the hypotheses you're arguing against. If you read the WTC7 report, you will see why explosives were considered but dismissed: There was nothing resembling the concussive damage to surrounding buildings that explosives would have caused. If explosives had been used to bring down either the towers or 7, there would have been a very distinctive sound that could have easily been heard in New Jersey (not to mention every camera in Manhattan), and there would have been easily identifiable seismic waves. There is simply not a shred of evidence to support the explosives hypothesis. As I said, we can disprove explosives, but we can't disprove Martians, so you are the one stuck with a ridiculously implausible theory.
When Richard Gage wants to explain the "simultaneous" column failures that led to the collapse of WTC7, he claims explosives. When he wants to explain the lack of explosive sounds and concussive damage, he claims thermite, which of course couldn't be coordinated to cause "simultaneous" column failures. It's hard to believe the he is too stupid to realize he's contradicting himself. It's easier to believe he thinks his target audience is pretty stupid.