Comment: Well there's lots to consider.

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: What one piece of evidence do (see in situ)

Well there's lots to consider.

I don't doubt for one second that Saudis could have hijacked a plane and flew it into these buildings. That's about the only part of the official story that is believable.

Probably the most compelling for me is the fact that the official narrative has 15-20% of a structure crushing the bottom 80%.
You can't even recreate this phenomenon with materials such as cardboard boxes or a stack of coke cans.

Second would be the collapse of building 7. NIST admits it was in free fall at some point and this just can't occur unless there is zero structural resistance, meaning all columns had to fail simultaneously. Fire just doesn't cause that kind of damage. It spreads and causes progressive failure, which means the building above the fire leans to one side or another as these failures occur and results in a leaning over or toppling of the section above the failure.