See here's the problem. You claim to understand the issues sufficiently to be able to state with 100% certainty that it was not a fire. And yet you are not at all certain how it might be brought down with explosives.
Are you suggesting the only people who may hold valid opinions on the issues are demolition experts?
Are you suggesting because I am not a demolition expert and can not say how many grams of thermite I need to place at each particular point and exactly where and when they will have to be ignited to recreate the the near perfect symmetrical collapse of 7 into virtually it's own footprint, my opinion and my theory, (which is shared by millions), is worthless?
Can you tell me exactly on which columns you would set the thermite and what amount and how you would time them to go off...? So how do you get entitled to have an opinion?
'Ah' you say... 'but I agree with the official scientists and NIST and the Government and the 9/11 Commission... and they have proved it'.
Well no you don't actually because they haven't proved anything and they have changed their stories time and time again.
Then tell me where my logic is flawed here.
We agreed the fire did not 'melt' the steel so there was no reason for it to collapse from fire.
No other fire has ever collapsed a steel framed building.
Do you suggest the beams expanded and unseated from the columns, one after another after another each 20 mins or so as the fire ran out of fuel and moved on to the next?
If so why has this never happened before?
You say 'Oh these were special, these were slender long span beams, that's why it happened to them'.
Well if that is the case why did it not happen in 1975 when the fire burned fiercer and much longer and not one slender long span steel beam or truss had to be replaced and went on to serve well until 2001, withstanding in between a massive bomb blast and 47 other fires between the three buildings.
Not only was the steel undamaged, they did not unseat themselves, the concrete and steel floors did not give way...
See
https://www.metabunk.org/posts/48463
So please explain why you feel this happened in 7 on 9/11?
Please explain how as the fire traveled round (allegedly for 7 hours), and unseated this beam and then that beam and then another beam, why did we not see partial collapses occuring, first this section, then that section and so forth.
No, even though 7 was evacuated by 10.00 am because it was expected to collapse, (even before fires are first seen), everyone is shocked when it finally collapses 7.5 hours later because it looks so undamaged apart from a few office fires
Trying to focus on the one point, what if the columns buckled between the 5th and 10th floors, starting to buckle within one second of each other? Wouldn't that produce the effect we saw?
Which columns all of them?
Why would they do such a thing?
Please explain your theory.
Now just to finish off:
If folks were to take their car in for roadworthyness test and it failed, say on some steering joint play, well the folks may be a bit upset if they had been renewed at that self same garage the year before and some folks may question why it needed changing again.
Well, the garage owner, he ups and tells these folks, 'I am an expert in these here matters, I been done changing these here steering joints for years and if en I tells ya'll they needs to be changed then they needs to be changed'.
Well most of these folks they say 'well he's the danged expert and well we don't know how to dooes it so guessing we best just keep our tongues and let the fella get on with it'.
But one of these folks, has a cousin and that cousin knows about fixing cars so he says, 'Well I'm taking my car over to see Billy Bob and see what he says
Well Billy Bob has a look and says 'well there is no wrong with that, it sure's hell doesn't need changing'.
So the guy goes back to the gas station and says, 'There is nothing wrong with the car, a different expert tells me so and showed me why there is nothing wrong with it. Look there is no play on the steering wheel.'
But the owner says, 'and and how would you go about replacing the parts'... and the guy says, ' I would take it to Billy Bob and let him do it ... if it needed doing ... which it doesn't.'
Did they say that releasing it would jeopardize public safety?