That wasn't my argument... I was merely pointing out that I didn't understand exactly what the sentence "because the horizontal reaction to the rate of angular momentum of the upper part would have exceeded the elasto plastic shear resistance of the story at least 10.3x" meant.
The government couldn't even get their story right with the FEMA report. An amazing $600,000 was spent to investigate it at first. So the biggest attacks on USA soil and the government barely spends any money investigating. They pretty much destroyed all the evidence before any investigation could be completed.
See, this is the problem with this thread. Your disporven, move on to another debunked theory, and just keep moving on as things keep getting debunked until you recycle your way around to other debunked things.
All of your arguements have been heard before many times over... and been rejected several times over because they're all contigent on cherry picking and outright removing sentences from eyewitness accounts.
As for why you need to hire expert demolition crews? You know, so nobody freakin dies... and you could avoid things like electrical fires and shit and so you don't have random small chunks of derbies flying out and hitting people.
Also you know... measuring the right amount of explosives to use, so you don't over do it (Afterall the buildings are built up to what can reasonably be expected.) New York prepares for plane crashes and Earthquakes of NY level, not Japanese level (I believe) or under do it leaving an unsafe enviroment that still needs lots of demolition.
I mean heck, it fell inwards on itself, but actually, the twin towers falling was far from a controlled implosion. You know... cause tons of surrounding buildings still got damaged.
It's why they're fire protection standards were updated after the studies.
It's like your give way bumpers working but your airbag not deploying.