9/11 was an inside job.

By arguing that 9/11 was an inside job I assume that my opponent who did not explain himself much is talking about the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and Pennsylvania. In order to save space I will focus my argument on the World Trade Center first and then if time allows discuss the pentagon attacks. < > My opponent feels that there isn't "one" shred of evidence to prove that 9/11 was in fact an inside job. This makes my case very easy, because all I have to do is prove that there is at least one shred of evidence that there is proof of an inside job and leave enough doubt in the audience's mind that there are at the very least some unanswered questions that point to an inside job. The official story is that the towers got so hot that it melted the steel causing a structural failure hence the pancake collapse and utter destruction of the pulverized concrete that followed. Now I can use the argument that Beemor used on me to try and prove an inside job, but it's so much more fun to actually show the physical unanswered questions that point to some serious questions about this administration and their actions on 9/11. 1.Steel doesn't melt at 800 degrees. It is a scientific fact that steel does not begin to melt and loose strength until it burns at temperatures above 2000 degrees. Video clips and footage from the burning towers show a red and orange flame burning in the buildings and black smoke (Evidence points to the fact that the towers never got hotter than 800 degrees). This is evidence of a starving fire, or a fire with little fuel to keep it burning. In fact most of the fuel burned up on impact. According to official reports, Popular Mechanics and government agencies the fire never burned hotter than 800 degrees. For Example: If you put a pan on the stove and light the burner. You will see that the pan becomes hot. However, you can keep the flame on the pan all day and the pan will not loose shape or integrity, no matter how long you burn the pan for. The reason, is because the pan must get hotter than 2000 degrees to compromise the steel. 2.This is important because if the fire never burned hotter than 800 degrees and the steel's integrity was not able to be compromised, than how did the towers collapse? Unanswered Question / Shred of Evidence #1 3.The Pancake theory: The pancake theory states that the top floors of the towers became too hot and mutilated. The floors below (which were not on fire: radio calls form firemen inside the towers said the fires were isolated) were not able to support the upper floors causing a pancake collapse. Explaining that the complete destruction that left nothing in wake was the result of the pancake collapse a.Problem: Lab tests and computer simulations of the collapse prove that in order for this theory to be true, the towers would have taken at least 1:30 to completely collapse. That's ONE MINUTE THIRTY SECONDS FOR THE BUILDINGS TO COLLAPSE.Official reports show and video footage show the buildings collapsed in 9seconds and 10 seconds respectively. Unanswered Question / Shred of Evidence #2 4.In addition if you were to take a billiard ball and drop it from the 110th floor of the WTC it would take exactly 10 seconds for it to reach the bottom and hit the ground, with nothing inhibiting its path, with nothing in the way. That's total freefall. Yet, the towers had a tremendous amount of steel, concrete, carpet, rivets, bolts, elevators, computers, people, windows, chairs, phones, drywall, tables cubicles, desks, doors, metal, toilets, sinks restaurants, cables, wiring air conditioners, heater, aluminum…………etc………….. in the way. It was able to accomplish this same task in about 10 seconds??? Right, you really got a case for this one. 5.Pulverized Concrete: Even if you are able to explain the questions above, how do you explain pulverized concrete? What is strong enough to pulverize concrete and everything else in the towers? The largest item they found in the tower was half of a keypad from a telephone. How is this possible? Even if the towers collapsed due to the impact and fires from the planes (which I have already proved they didn't, they would not be able to pulverize concrete to point of unrecognizability). The only thing that can pulverize steel and concrete are implosion devices, explosive devices, dynamite, and THERMITE etc. Unanswered Question / Shred of Evidence #3 6.Assuming you can explain all that, how do you explain the force at which steel columns were thrown outward in the midst of the collapse? Based on the official story this is not plausible or possible. Steel columns were thrown outward and lodged into the surrounding buildings with such an extreme force that it cannot be explained based on the government supported theory. Unanswered Question / Shred of Evidence #4 7.Squibs: When viewing the footage of the collapse, it is noted and has been documented by professional demolition expert's evidence of squibs. Squibs are puffs of smoke or explosions that can be seen on the sides of buildings prior to collapsing when demolition experts demolish buildings. Unanswered / Shred #5 http://video.google.com...=# I think it's pretty clear that the government is at the very least not supporting the investigation of the truth and what really happened on 9/11. This evidence points to at many unanswered questions that lead us to reasonable doubt that the government is hiding something. Add that together with the propensity of this administration to lie, pervert the truth, twist the truth, start unconstitutional wars, violate our longstanding moral authority in the world to not torture and you can pretty much see that it's more likely than not that we have some inside jobs going on, 9/11 is just the most visible one, not the only one. I can't wait for your response