Comment: Now on to your argument.

(See in situ)


Now on to your argument.

Its better than the twin tower comparisons, but still doesn't cut the scientific mustard.

1. 40 stories compared to 47- I'll give you that. Not exact, but close.
2. Both steel and concrete- My backyard shed is steel and concrete. That they are both high rises built out of similar materials hardly constitutes similar design. Humans and elephants are made out of the same basic elements, are we "similarly designed" enough to assume an experiment on an elephant would yield the same results as one doen on a human?
3. Fire location-you admit they were differnet here, but then claim it somehow doesn't matter. It matters. If I punch you in the leg, would that have the same effect as me punching you in the face? Location matters.
4. Response- you just admitted they weren't fighting it. They intended to fight it, but they never started because they couldn't get the proper equipment in time. Thus, not the same.
5. Source-true, no plane hit WTC7, but the "source" is still different. WTC7's fire and damage was caused from the nearby towers, furthering the damage was the collapse of those towers nearby. That was not the case in either of these other two tower fires where the fire was started some other way, and no massive structures collapsed nearby, shaking the ground and sending debris at the towers.
6. Mass-I'll give you this. The masses must have been somewhat similar, about as similar as the 40 stories to 47 stories. Not perfect science, but good enough for this debate.

So you've almost narrowed it down to 4 variables. The other two are still a bit off, but close enough for me for this argument.
However, you skipped a few things. My variable 7, which you didn't address, includes any variables which we just aren't taking into consideration. Unless exact replicas of these buildings had been tested using the exact methods each tower was set on fire, then we don't have conclusive evidence of what other variables might have been in play when comparing the two.
On top of which, as I briefly mentioned, the fact that two massive structures had just collapsed near WTC7 is a huge variable which you just can't reproduce in the case of the Chechnia tower or the Windsor.
Take away those important factors and you have still left yourself with a science experiment which has 4 variables being tested at the same time. This just isn't good science, by any stretch.

Free market capitalism isn't right for America because it works better. It's right because it's free (and it works better).