Did you even read the article? Did you even read my post? The fires couldn't possibly get hot enough to melt steel. And Popular Mechanics agrees. But what Popular Mechanics says is that it doesn't have to melt the steel to cause possible structural failure. My point is that melted steel was found. So something must have sped up the process, like incendiary, controlled demolitions. To back this theory, there were chemical tests done on the structural steel residue. Thermate was found. Which is the controlled demolition explosive thermite plus sulfur, which produces the molten yellow steel that was found. Do I need to spell it out for you? Molten steel means incendiary, incendiary means controlled demolition.

And yes, there is a problem. Just the small problem of that never happening before to a steel-framed building in the history of mankind; then for it to all of a sudden happen three times in a row is just a tad bit suspicious don't you think? Considering this completely and utter lack of historical precendent for the total progressive collapse theory, don't you think we should be giving questions about the WTC's just a little bit of credence?

And Lucidthots. Please, if you're going to join the debate then debate. We actually have a good one going, don't mess it up with your propaganda posts.