I am just wondering if we are watching the same videos. So after you look at all the videos you see nothing wrong with the collapses at all?
Can you admit that the investigation should have been more thorough? Should they have waited till the investigation was complete before they pretty much scrapped all the evidence? The government even switched their stories from the FEMA report to the NIST. They originally stated that the bolts failed then went to that the fires warped the steel. So not even the government had their official story right.
Yes. There was nothing wrong or suspisous about the collapse at all.... so long as you ignore the guy spouting nonsense and just look at the buildings collapse... which look nothing like controlled implosions.
Should the investigations have been more thorough? Well no. Hell investigations are still going on by structural engineers...
who all agree it was the plane and the fires.
The question isn't "WHAT DESTROYED THE TWIN TOWERS"
It's "EXACTLY HOW DID THE TWIN TOWERS GET DESTROYED BY THE PLANES."
The offical story didn't change. What no doubt your conspiracy theory friends likely ignored is that in fact the Fema report DID find that the steel was warped by the fire.
They just thought the bolts failing due to the fire was more important to the collapse.
The NIST report says the steel warped by the fire was more important then the bolts failing.
Same story, different thoughts on which situation caused the other and which was at fault.
The FEMA study was looking for an explination and the NIST the chain of events.