I'm not a demolitions expert, but I think it only depends on how they hook up the explosives. It should be easy to detonate from the top-down instead. It may cause issues in controlling the direction of taller buildings if you don't detonate the bottom first, but a short structure probably wouldn't matter.
I'm not saying you're wrong about the "correct" way to demolish a building. I'm just pointing out it is possible to do it the "wrong" way and still achieve acceptable results.
As for the theory of a controlled demolition, I'm not going to make a guess either way. There are a lot of unanswered questions and I prefer to have those answered before drawing a conclusion. We may never know the truth, and I have accepted that.
I wrote "acceptable results". If the goal is to create destruction with no care about collateral damage, that is different from a goal to have a controlled and safe removal of a building.
I'm not a demolitions expert, but I think it only depends on how they hook up the explosives. It should be easy to detonate from the top-down instead. It may cause issues in controlling the direction of taller buildings if you don't detonate the bottom first, but a short structure probably wouldn't matter.
I'm not saying you're wrong about the "correct" way to demolish a building. I'm just pointing out it is possible to do it the "wrong" way and still achieve acceptable results.
As for the theory of a controlled demolition, I'm not going to make a guess either way. There are a lot of unanswered questions and I prefer to have those answered before drawing a conclusion. We may never know the truth, and I have accepted that.
I wrote "acceptable results". If the goal is to create destruction with no care about collateral damage, that is different from a goal to have a controlled and safe removal of a building.
Dude, he's not disagreeing with you. You're just failing to address his point, which is its technically possible to wire it up to blow top down.