Not a conspiracy.
Look, you lose two major skyscrapers and a couple of other buildings in a matter of minutes in one of the most important cities in the world, and there are bound to be some extremely bizarre coincidences.

But here's almost all you need to know about WTC7. www.debunk911myths.org/topics/7_World_Trade_Center

But it's not really that surprising that a small building, hit by large pieces of debris from multiple collapsing adjacent buildings, with sprinklers that had been destroyed when the water pipes were sliced by falling debris, with large quantities of diesel fuel inside on multiple floors, would ultimately collapse entirely.

When you mention "similar events in the past", do you mean that you've studied the records of OTHER buildings being struck by debris from multiple collapsing adjacent buildings that have been hit by major airliners, weakening the structure, destroying much of the sprinkler systems, and causing much diesel fuel to leak, then catching on fire?

Conspiracies are fun, but unlike science, they start with the conclusions, and then seek to prove them, and thus, can only generate more confusion.

I love the way people can say "the official explanation makes no sense when examined."

That's as dumb as saying "Sodium chloride is a deadly poison, as it is the combination of two deadly poisons, sodium and chlorine."

Sodium chloride is not a poison, it's table salt. WTC7 was not a conspiracy.
(not here, Tue 8 Jul 2008, 6:43, Reply)