This is a great video debunking the popular “Truther” claims about Building 7. https://youtu.be/7PpsCCTMP8w
The points brought up in the video are:
• “Why wasn’t building 7 ever mentioned in the 911 Commission Reports?”**
This is because the Commission Reports were specifically about the actual targets of the attacks, not collateral damage like WTC 7. It was however investigated in a NIST report which is here https://www.nist.gov/publications/final-report-collapse-world-trade-center-building-7-federal-building-and-fire-safety-0
• “How could it collapse if it never was hit by a plane?”**
Pretty simple, huge chunks of burning debris crashed in through the top of WTC 7 from the towers. This not only caused massive structural damage, but also caused a massive fire to spread throughout WTC 7.
Truthers deceitfully only ever show pictures of it from the south, where it was not struck by debris, making it seem like it was a perfectly fine building that collapsed out of nowhere, but images of it from the north side clearly show the massive damage WTC 7 sustained from the falling debris
• “Building 7 collapsed in free fall out of nowhere! This is only possible through controlled demolition!”**
This is just an outright lie. Footage of the attack clearly shows building 7 folding in on itself over the course of hours before finally collapsing. All footage of the “free fall” conveniently only ever starts right as the building falls, it never shows the footage before of the penthouse caving in.
Remember, the truth doesn’t fear investigation.
How much engineering school have you gone to? As some one who has a mechanical engineering degree I can clearly state you are retarded on the subject
Heres some responses from actual engineers to the NIST report as well to rub your nose in it even more.
from Engineering professor Zdeněk Bažant http://www.civil.northwestern.edu/people/bazant/PDFs/Papers/466.pdf
From structural engineer Ramon Gilsanz https://web.archive.org/web/20090419050714/http://www.structuremag.org/Archives/2007-11/SF-WTC7-Gilsanz-Nov07.pdf
Here is a peer reviewed paper that shows the NIST simulation omitted key structural elements in their simulation.
https://ine.uaf.edu/wtc7
Why would they do this? Because it was the only way to get the tower to collapsenin the same manner as is seen on video. If the elements were included it would have been impossible for the tower to collapse in the manner it did. This is what makes claims of controlled demolition plausible.
This is a report from 3 dudes who are affiliated with a conspiracy theory "truther" movement. No actual engineer disagrees with the NIST report or found serious issues with their findings. Again, trying to appeal to authority on this is a losing play for "truthers"
Then why did the NIST simulation require that the anti walk pins were omitted from the simulation?
By the way, your entire response was an appeal to authority....
The report produced by NIST is much more qualified in mechanical engineering than anything you or anyone else here can lie about on the internet. This is a collection of engineers saying this, not me.
""Our study found that the fires in WTC 7 could not have caused the observed collapse," said Professor Leroy Hulsey, the study's principal investigator. "The only way it could have fallen in the observed manner is by the near-simultaneous failure of every column."" retard 3000 engineers concluded that their was no way it feel without failure of every column.... Did a piece of the building fall before a plane hit or after? Or did it fall from stuff coming up and hitting the building? Something bounced and then took out every column? Go to school faggot. "The four-year study was funded by Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth), a nonprofit organization representing more than 3,000 architects and engineers who have signed the organization's petition calling for new investigation into the destruction of the three World Trade Center towers on 9/11."
"Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth" lol conspiracy tard garbage organization. Stop trying to make an appeal to authority when you clearly will lose on that point.
Got a problem that 3000 PE engineers say you're a faggot loser who would fail you out of their dynamics or math classes?
You believe a massive building with asymmetrical damage collapsed completely symmetrically into its own footprint with multiple seconds of freefall LOL I've got a bridge in Arizona to sell you too
Here's an actual eyewitness who was INSIDE building 7 testifying there were explosions BEFORE either of the twin towers came down:
https://www.corbettreport.com/9-11-whistleblowers-barry-jennings/
You realize every time you post this, you're drawing attention to the most irrefutable evidence of controlled demolition? Carry on with your undercover truther activity LOL
You guys are popping up all over lately. Do you work in the same office as Ep0ch?
The terrorists passports they found intact caused the building to collapse.
Only retards believe the official narrative.
The official narrative is pretty straight forward, you have to use reverse Occom's razor in order to believe in the incoherent, convoluted, and outright mystical shit you "truthers" believe. Its pure emotional outrage for you guys and not at all based on reality.
It's common sense. Support beams and steel reinforced columns must be removed for the pancake effect.
Show me another example of a building with minimal damage drop to dust in its own footprint....?
Another building? When has this ever happened before? When has a Boeing jet smashed into a tower at full speed and then debris from that tower fell through a near by smaller building causing massive structural damage and a fire that raged for 7 hours? It wasnt minimal at all.
"truthers" arent motivated by sense, but by emotions and mysticism.
Tons of examples of building fires and other destruction that still have there skeleton structure standing. Some burn for days yet this time they pulverized to dust...🤣
Again only a retard believes this and seeing how u keep posting the same shit u gotta be one of em.
No dude, like I said when has a building had a fucking boeing jet smash into it at full speed and then have huge chunks of it smash into a smaller tower near it?
You fucks always do this shit, ask "w-why didnt this building fire cause it to collapse?" while you completely ignore the massive structural damage. It very obviously wasnt just a fire. Is this your "common sense" in action?
I know I know, it was sooo destructive they found passports intact in the rubble....tards....🤣
Just going to ignore the fact that you did the classic "truther" thing of completely ignoring the intense structural damage to the buildings and that pretending it was just a fire didnt work?
Thanks for copying and pasting the same proven falsehood again.
The owner of the tower admitted on video that it was demolished. You have nothing. Burn in hell.
If wind blows into fire, does the fire get hotter?
I'll bet this is cheaper than the normal method of demolition. If this really works, I'm going to start a demolition company where we fly drones into condemned buildings to bring them down. As a bonus, it will pulverize the building, resulting in easier cleanup.
We should all pool our money together and go buy a decommission 737 and fly it into a condemned building somewhere just to see what happens.