[Bring_Back_Shantz]

It always amazes me how consipracy theorists always go back to the mantra that us poor engineers hear all too often. Nothing like a good old fashoined "That won't work" to prove that all those guys with the fancy degrees don't know what they're talking about.

Sure the elevators are stagered, but they're all in a central core, and I'm pretty sure that there weren't airtight seals between all the shafts.

What about service conduits? In the empire state building I saw an open shaft that ran the full lenght of the building (I've even got a nice picuture looking down it) for things like power, telephone and other utilities, but I suppose it would be impossible for one of these to act as a conduit for fuel and fire to get to the bottome of the building because "That wouldn't work".

And as for the "The top of the building was tilting, but it fell straight down so it must have been an implosion" don't even get me stared on the flaws in that arguement. Basic grade 10 physics tells you that implosion or not, that building was gonna come straight down, and that if the top was tilting engough to topple over then there wasn't anything that could have stopped it from doing so, the "it should have toppled" arguement doesn't prove anything, because it's like trying to prove something by using the premise that the sky is red.