The thread is 'Does NIST not testing for explosives or testing the steel, invalidate everything, so the questions you pose, and which have been discussed on other threads on this site, are off topic on this thread.Why was it necessary for conspirator's plan that the buildings had to collapse?
Had they survived without collapsing, do you think it remotely likely that they would have been restored?
Is it not reasonable to suggest that the buildings would have been condemned like the Deutchebank building and then demolished later?
Don't you think the spectacle of the planes crashing into the buildings was enough to persuade the masses into revenge, or do you think it just would have been insufficiently cinematic without a total collapse?
If I were a conspirator, why would I choose to add an extra several layers of complexity to an already complex-beyond-reason-plan, and the layers are the ones most likely to be discovered? Why would I choose to increase the risk of discovery or failure by doing that?
Take me through the conspiracy, step by step...
As to if these facts invalidate everything, I would suggest that is a bit strong but certainly it leaves many questions concerning the validity of the investigation and it's conclusions.
Ok, you are happy with the way it was handled but many are not.