Pete: My response is going to have to wait until the weekend. The OKC bombing myth was once one of my 'debunking' hobbies, but that was a long time ago and most of my resources are gone. I'll have to go reassemble what I can off the net, and that will take time. I can do a little bit now, but I'll bookmark your post and spend some time on this Sunday. I view consiracy theory debunking as public service.

"I trust you have seen Partin's analysis?

Oh, dear, why yes I have seen Partins analysis. Partin is a fruit. Partin has sent 'analysies' to 'congress' (anybody can send anything they want to congress) and to the media saying that TWA 800 was caused by a missile and pushing for half a dozen other conspiracy theories.

(Google Partin, see what you come up with)

Please don't confuse apples with oranges. In building demolition they use high explosive cutting charges to punch through both concrete and steel in the support columns, causing a clean controlled implosion

but to fail a majoy support column, all you have to do is pulverise enough of the concrete- the steel alone can't at all support weight. Down goes the building in a spawled unclean fdashion where the collapse is asymetrical as the still connected bits of the building pull against eachother.

And an ANFO blast wave is perfectly suited to pulverizing brittle substances such as concrete.

Furthermore, McVeigh used Nitromethane racing/jet fuel for a much more productive ordinance, in at least most of the bomb barrels. The evidence brought to court was diesel because the prosecution had reciepts for the diesel fuel and did not have to rely on eyewitnesses (and it brought Nichols into the case decisively). Nitromethane for most of the bomb was always suspected. Several witnesses say McVeigh bought some http://archive.salon.com/news/feature/2001/06/09/john_doe/index4.html, but the diesel recipts were much better trial evidence. AFTER the prosecution, McVeigh admitted that he used Nitromethane, confiming the eyewitnesses.

There is a published study somewhere saying that the blast effects were inconsistent with a low-octane ANFO explosion from an assumed amount of ordinance. But what is not pointed out is that if you either increase the amount of ordinance or use a higher-octane fuel, the blast effects are entirely consistent.

Also, look at the crater size. If the blast was incapable of demolishing concrete support beams just a few feet away, how did it demolish a roadway. Look into how those roadways are constructed.

Also, how could it have thrown the Ryder truck axel as far as it did with as much force? Do you really think the blast wave was innefectual if it could have that effect on the truck? Do you realize they never found an intact engine block? That was a circe 1960 designed solid engine block...

The distance from the truck to the support columns of the building could be measured in feet. Do you propose that those few feet magically dispersed a blast wave capable of rending steel into shrapnal?

You don't need a hypersonic blast wave to have enough inertia to demolish something. you can make up for speed with mass. and they detonated a HUGE amount of ANFO.

Davin L.