Reply #2: The original page is very dishonest. [View All]

[petgoat]

Two out of three of the WTC graphics are quite misleading. The animation eliminates the
transverse trusses that would have made the unzipping pictured impossible. The other
shows gratuitous non-structural core slabs floating in air--a magical house of cards.

Dr. Eagar's theory is silly, and obviously was concocted without reference to the blueprints.
It requires that the perimeter clips be so flimsy the floors unzip from the walls, but the
core clips are so strong that the collapsing floors tear down the core.

Dr. Eagar's assertion that the building is too big to fall anywhere but down is also silly.
I guess he'll tell us next that the Michelangelo was too big to turn around, so it would
have to steam forward from Italy to NY, and then backward from NY to Italy.



You seem not to appreciate the major differences between the NOVA/Eagar/FEMA zipper theory
and the NIST theory. The former assumes that the floors break free from the columns,
leaving them unsupported laterally so that they buckle outward. The latter assumes that
the floors hold so tenaciously to the columns that the columns buckle inward--despite the
bracing effect of the adjacent floors.