The OP is misleading you. You don't need to reach melting temperature to affect a steel structure - you can weaken the steel and produce strange unplanned loads at lower temperatures and cause failure cascades.
I'm talking purely from a perspective of emergency preparation. I would have the ability to rapidly bring down buildings in a controlled fashion in my toolkit.
It's not something people often like to think about. It's counter intuitive but for example captains of warships will have contingencies to scuttle their ships in certain scenarios. Sometimes a pet has to be put down.
When you balance all the risks there are situations where you might want to bring down the buildings or a building in a controlled fashion in a chaotic situation rather than an uncontrolled collapse.
This is compounded by that some system design will have the buildings collapse in a controlled fashion as well.
The issue here isn't if it happened or not but that it might not be as unusual as people might assume. Nor does it strictly mean the whole thing was a hoax.
There would be other reasons they might want to suppress certain information. If it was something that happened with inside help orchestrating the whole thing is unnecessary when all you need to do is let your guard down which has plausible deniability.
An insider may have also known about the building's tolerances and designs. It may be a matter of national security that many buildings are designed to not take as much damage as possible and to keep standing but have a system almost like fuses where if they are sufficiently damaged they are designed to "degrade elegantly".
You always have to go back to basics. If they might have brought some of them down then why?
The OP is misleading you. You don't need to reach melting temperature to affect a steel structure - you can weaken the steel and produce strange unplanned loads at lower temperatures and cause failure cascades.
Here is the NIST story about WTC7: https://youtu.be/PK_iBYSqEsc
Myles Power made a video about WTC7: https://youtu.be/7PpsCCTMP8w
I don't endorse him on other topics, but this particular video is good.
I'm talking purely from a perspective of emergency preparation. I would have the ability to rapidly bring down buildings in a controlled fashion in my toolkit.
It's not something people often like to think about. It's counter intuitive but for example captains of warships will have contingencies to scuttle their ships in certain scenarios. Sometimes a pet has to be put down.
When you balance all the risks there are situations where you might want to bring down the buildings or a building in a controlled fashion in a chaotic situation rather than an uncontrolled collapse.
This is compounded by that some system design will have the buildings collapse in a controlled fashion as well. The issue here isn't if it happened or not but that it might not be as unusual as people might assume. Nor does it strictly mean the whole thing was a hoax.
There would be other reasons they might want to suppress certain information. If it was something that happened with inside help orchestrating the whole thing is unnecessary when all you need to do is let your guard down which has plausible deniability.
An insider may have also known about the building's tolerances and designs. It may be a matter of national security that many buildings are designed to not take as much damage as possible and to keep standing but have a system almost like fuses where if they are sufficiently damaged they are designed to "degrade elegantly".
You always have to go back to basics. If they might have brought some of them down then why?