Ron, this is actually the first time you are hearing about WTC7 from the tin foil hat club?

Here is everything you need to now about debunking 9/11 myths. http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/

yes, this is the first time i had heard about the WTC7. i'm not one to normally indulge in conspiracy theories...well, other than the road to the war in iraq.

bimmer, can you point me to more specific links within that site? i want to see a debunking of the science of the paper that i linked.

mb, fire resistance or not, the paper posited that there would not be enough heat generated from the jet fuel and office materials to melt the steel. and even if it was warped/expanded steel, it would've still had sufficient load-bearing capacity at the temp of the fires.

like it said, i don't necessarily agree with the conspiracy theory, but i'd like to see it rebutted scientifically because this theory is based on science.

because i know you all care to know, some engineer friends of mine have provided me with some good rebuttal materials for the Jones paper.

*whew!*

Ron, your posting in the wrong place bro. You posted the article here. So naturally, people will vocie their opinions on it. Whether they are "qualified" to or not. Since this is a banking website, I doubt that there are any enigneers posting in the cooler.

TBH, there are people, obviously not scientists BTW, handing out fliers about this and many other consipiracy claims all along Manhattan. They are just ignored.

dang it. i was so hoping my theory was true.

why is it that everyone assumes that because a person is on a bank website and may even work at a bank they may not know something, like engineering?

Im not saying you dont know anything about engineering Xodus. I am making a logical assumption that since this is a banking website, there are not many engineers trolling the cooler. Obviously, I could be wrong.

i know that. but i also know that there are lots of smart people here who could probably link me to the scientific rebuttals i was looking for.

Fair enough Ron. I'll take a look at the paper later tonight.

BTW, your whopping some major ass in the fantasy baseball league!!

that's ok. i still give you mad props for trying to explain a conspiracy theory with another conspiracy theory. ...gutsiest move i ever saw.

don't bother. it's full of holes and bad assumptions.

i've already stricken the conspiracy from my mind. i just need to see some "scientists" rebut the paper's "science".

edit: here's a link that was provided to me. http://www.debunking911.com/index.html

it's still really early.