WTC-7 Was A Controlled Demolition Inside Job

NIST WTC 7 Investigation Finds Building Fires Caused Collapse
Report and Recommendations for Improving Building Safety Released for Comment

August 21, 2008





GAITHERSBURG, Md.—The fall of the 47-story World Trade Center building 7 (WTC 7) in New York City late in the afternoon of Sept. 11, 2001, was primarily due to fires, the Commerce Department’s National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) announced today following an extensive, three-year scientific and technical building and fire safety investigation. This was the first known instance of fire causing the total collapse
Our study found that the fires in WTC 7, which were uncontrolled but otherwise similar to fires experienced in other tall buildings, caused an extraordinary event,” said NIST WTC Lead Investigator Shyam Sunder. “Heating of floor beams and girders caused a critical support column to fail, initiating a fire-induced progressive collapse WTC 7 used a structural system design in widespread use.
To reach the conclusions in its report, NIST complemented its in-house expertise with private-sector technical experts; accumulated an extensive collection of documents, photographs and videos related to the WTC events of 9/11; conducted first-person interviews of WTC 7 occupants and emergency responders; analyzed the evacuation and emergency response operations in and around WTC 7; and performed the most complex computer simulations ever conducted to model a building’s response behavior and determine its collapse sequence due to a combination of debris impact damage, fires and a progression of structural failures from local fire-induced damage to collapse initiation, and, ultimately, to global collapse


http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/releases/wtc082108.html


Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation
August 21, 2007



NIST used computer models that they said have never been used in such an application before and are the state of the art. For this they should be commended for their skill. But the validation of these modeling results is in question. Others have computed aspects with different conclusions on the cause mechanism of the collapse. Moreover, it is common in fire investigation to compute a time-line and compare it to known events. NIST has not done that.



Why were not alternative collapse hypotheses investigated and discussed as NIST had stated repeatedly that they would do? ...

Dr. Quintiere also expressed his frustration at NIST’s failure to provide a report on the third skyscraper that collapsed on 9/11, World Trade Center Building 7. “And that building was not hit by anything,” noted Dr. Quintiere. “It’s more important to take a look at that. Maybe there was damage by the debris falling down that played a significant role. But other than that you had fires burning a long time without fire department intervention. And firefighters were in that building. I have yet to see any kind of story about what they saw. What was burning? Were photographs taken? Nothing!”

OpEdNews - Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation



[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65Qg_-89Zr8[/ame]
 
Last edited:
Top Ten Photos 9/11 Conspiracy Nuts Hate | The Lay Scientist

from the end of the page
Ultimately this sort of blogging is an exercise in futility. There is no evidence, no matter how convincing, that will ever be accepted by the 9/11 "Truth" Movement's hardcore evangelists. The irony is that the people who claim to be searching for the truth are so willing to ignore evidence and react angrily to those with conflicting evidence and testimony.
A bigger irony is that if there is a conspiracy, truthers with their deluge of disinformation are doing more than anyone else to help cover it up.
:lol:

there is a truckload of truth in that statement
 
Last edited:
there is a truckload of bullshit,,,you have no case for building fires took down wtc 7 and once agian your debunking site makes up its own facts with no regard for the official data ad findings of NIST
FOR EXAMPLE


Debris from the Twin Towers falling onto WTC7. Many conspiracy theorists still believe that fires and debris couldn't have reached WTC7 (the tall building lower-right) to inflict significant damage, claiming that WTC7 must have been subjected to a controlled demolition.

FIRST OFF USING THE TERM CONSIRACY THEORIST IS LIKE USING THE TERM SOME PEOPLE BELIVE...most people that don't buy the official story are well aware of the damage to WTC 7..and that according to NIST and the official story ..structural damage played no significant role in the collapse....so already your debunker is already spreading disinformation
WTC6 lies in ruins. Conspiracy theorists have also argued that WTC7 couldn't have been struck by debris since WTC6 - which lies between the twin towers and WTC7 - "wasn't that damaged". Note that the center has entirely collapsed. In spite of evidence like this, and reports from fire-fighters, who used instruments to measure the gradual movement and distortion of WTC7's structure over several hours up until its collapse, Truthers still prefer to believe that a controlled demolition occurred.

no where is it stated in any official document that special instruments were used to measure the movement of the wtc 7..more lies and disinformation and it is still operating on the flawed premise that structural damage contributed to the collapse of wtc 7

Fires rage in WTC5 and WTC6. Many conspiracy theorists refuse to accept that fire could have spread to WTC7, even though fires clearly raged across much of the WTC complex.


MORE DISINFORMATION...the fires are not in dispute ..the theory random office fires could cause an implosion is what is disputed


so thanks for proving once again the disinformation and myth spread by so-called debunkers
 
Last edited:
there is a truckload of bullshit,,,you have no case for building fires took down wtc 7 and once agian your debunking site makes up its own facts with no regard for the official data ad findings of NIST
FOR EXAMPLE


Debris from the Twin Towers falling onto WTC7. Many conspiracy theorists still believe that fires and debris couldn't have reached WTC7 (the tall building lower-right) to inflict significant damage, claiming that WTC7 must have been subjected to a controlled demolition.

FIRST OFF USING THE TERM CONSIRACY THEORIST IS LIKE USING THE TERM SOME PEOPLE BELIVE...most people that don't buy the official story are well aware of the damage to WTC 7..and that according to NIST and the official story ..structural damage played no significant role in the collapse....so already your debunker is already spreading disinformation
WTC6 lies in ruins. Conspiracy theorists have also argued that WTC7 couldn't have been struck by debris since WTC6 - which lies between the twin towers and WTC7 - "wasn't that damaged". Note that the center has entirely collapsed. In spite of evidence like this, and reports from fire-fighters, who used instruments to measure the gradual movement and distortion of WTC7's structure over several hours up until its collapse, Truthers still prefer to believe that a controlled demolition occurred.

no where is it stated in any official document that special instruments were used to measure the movement of the wtc 7..more lies and disinformation and it is still operating on the flawed premise that structural damage contributed to the collapse of wtc 7

Fires rage in WTC5 and WTC6. Many conspiracy theorists refuse to accept that fire could have spread to WTC7, even though fires clearly raged across much of the WTC complex.


MORE DISINFORMATION...the fires are not in dispute ..the theory random office fires could cause an implosion is what is disputed


so thanks for proving once again the disinformation and myth spread by so-called debunkers
you guys are nothing but the fucking CLOWNS of the internet
everyone laughs at your delusional bullshit
:lol:
 
there is a truckload of bullshit,,,you have no case for building fires took down wtc 7 and once agian your debunking site makes up its own facts with no regard for the official data ad findings of NIST
FOR EXAMPLE


Debris from the Twin Towers falling onto WTC7. Many conspiracy theorists still believe that fires and debris couldn't have reached WTC7 (the tall building lower-right) to inflict significant damage, claiming that WTC7 must have been subjected to a controlled demolition.

FIRST OFF USING THE TERM CONSIRACY THEORIST IS LIKE USING THE TERM SOME PEOPLE BELIVE...most people that don't buy the official story are well aware of the damage to WTC 7..and that according to NIST and the official story ..structural damage played no significant role in the collapse.... so already your debunker is already spreading disinformation


no where is it stated in any official document that special instruments were used to measure the movement of the wtc 7..more lies and disinformation and it is still operating on the flawed premise that structural damage contributed to the collapse of wtc 7

Fires rage in WTC5 and WTC6. Many conspiracy theorists refuse to accept that fire could have spread to WTC7, even though fires clearly raged across much of the WTC complex.


MORE DISINFORMATION...the fires are not in dispute ..the theory random office fires could cause an implosion is what is disputed


so thanks for proving once again the disinformation and myth spread by so-called debunkers
you guys are nothing but the fucking CLOWNS of the internet
everyone laughs at your delusional bullshit
:lol:
This is what you consider a response to the undeniable fact that once again YOU have posted a debunking site that is in complete contradiction to NIST AND THE OFFICAL STORY ???if anyone should be laughing it should be at debunkers like yourself that don't even know the official story they defend...now that's a clown...stop posting your lies
 
Last edited:
there is a truckload of bullshit,,,you have no case for building fires took down wtc 7 and once agian your debunking site makes up its own facts with no regard for the official data ad findings of NIST
FOR EXAMPLE




FIRST OFF USING THE TERM CONSIRACY THEORIST IS LIKE USING THE TERM SOME PEOPLE BELIVE...most people that don't buy the official story are well aware of the damage to WTC 7..and that according to NIST and the official story ..structural damage played no significant role in the collapse.... so already your debunker is already spreading disinformation


no where is it stated in any official document that special instruments were used to measure the movement of the wtc 7..more lies and disinformation and it is still operating on the flawed premise that structural damage contributed to the collapse of wtc 7




MORE DISINFORMATION...the fires are not in dispute ..the theory random office fires could cause an implosion is what is disputed


so thanks for proving once again the disinformation and myth spread by so-called debunkers
you guys are nothing but the fucking CLOWNS of the internet
everyone laughs at your delusional bullshit
:lol:
This is what you consider a response to the undeniable fact that once again YOU have posted a debunking site that is in complete contradiction to NIST AND THE OFFICAL STORY ???if anyone should be laughing it should be at debunkers like yourself that don't even know the official story they defend...now that's a clown...stop posting your lies
except i have never(and have told you so over and over, DUMBFUCK) defended ANY "official story"
but i know YOU are totally fucking delusional

but, you are 1 level above Christophera, at least you dont claim a concrete core when there wasnt any
 
you guys are nothing but the fucking CLOWNS of the internet
everyone laughs at your delusional bullshit
:lol:
This is what you consider a response to the undeniable fact that once again YOU have posted a debunking site that is in complete contradiction to NIST AND THE OFFICAL STORY ???if anyone should be laughing it should be at debunkers like yourself that don't even know the official story they defend...now that's a clown...stop posting your lies
except i have never(and have told you so over and over, DUMBFUCK) defended ANY "official story"
but i know YOU are totally fucking delusional

but, you are 1 level above Christophera, at least you dont claim a concrete core when there wasnt any

yes you created a convenient out for yourself by not having any theory except denial of controlled demolition but it does not change the fact the sites you post that do claim to support the official story are full of disinformation and in direct contradiction to the official story
 
This is what you consider a response to the undeniable fact that once again YOU have posted a debunking site that is in complete contradiction to NIST AND THE OFFICAL STORY ???if anyone should be laughing it should be at debunkers like yourself that don't even know the official story they defend...now that's a clown...stop posting your lies
except i have never(and have told you so over and over, DUMBFUCK) defended ANY "official story"
but i know YOU are totally fucking delusional

but, you are 1 level above Christophera, at least you dont claim a concrete core when there wasnt any

yes you created a convenient out for yourself by not having any theory except denial of controlled demolition but it does not change the fact the sites you post that do claim to support the official story are full of disinformation and in direct contradiction to the official story
LOL no they arent
you just think they are
because you are fucking delusional
 
smiley_pizza.gif
~BH
 
where is the proof of explosives? saying that thermal expansion could not possibly have caused the collapse is not proof explosives were used.

so far you have posted videos that i have proven were lies. now we are just supposed to think that explosives were used just because you say they were after you posted lies?
 
except i have never(and have told you so over and over, DUMBFUCK) defended ANY "official story"
but i know YOU are totally fucking delusional

but, you are 1 level above Christophera, at least you dont claim a concrete core when there wasnt any

yes you created a convenient out for yourself by not having any theory except denial of controlled demolition but it does not change the fact the sites you post that do claim to support the official story are full of disinformation and in direct contradiction to the official story
LOL no they arent
you just think they are
because you are fucking delusional

you are in complete denial.. you support nothing you assert..they are without any question in direct contradiction to NIST and the official story by claiming structural damage was a significant factor in the collapse of wtc 7 and that fire depts used special instruments to track the movement of the wtc before the collapse...and if you can not recognise that fact..then there is no question who is delusional....none
 
Last edited:
this is an AWESOME picture!! why dont people looking for the "truth" ever post this picture?
8.jpg
 
yes you created a convenient out for yourself by not having any theory except denial of controlled demolition but it does not change the fact the sites you post that do claim to support the official story are full of disinformation and in direct contradiction to the official story
LOL no they arent
you just think they are
because you are fucking delusional

you are in complete denial.. you support nothing you assert..they are without any question in direct contradiction to NIST and the official story by claiming structural damage was a significant factor in the collapse of wtc 7 and that fire depts used special instruments to track the movement of the wtc before the collapse...and if you can not recognise that fact..then there is no question who is delusional....none
thats just ONE thing, not everything
the NIST says that structual failure was not the SOLE reason
 
LOL no they arent
you just think they are
because you are fucking delusional

you are in complete denial.. you support nothing you assert..they are without any question in direct contradiction to NIST and the official story by claiming structural damage was a significant factor in the collapse of wtc 7 and that fire depts used special instruments to track the movement of the wtc before the collapse...and if you can not recognise that fact..then there is no question who is delusional....none
thats just ONE thing, not everything
the NIST says that structual failure was not the SOLE reason

stop lying..they say it played no significant role in the collapse ...you cant just change that to they said it is not the sole reason..just because it suites you...that is called.. LYING
 
you are in complete denial.. you support nothing you assert..they are without any question in direct contradiction to NIST and the official story by claiming structural damage was a significant factor in the collapse of wtc 7 and that fire depts used special instruments to track the movement of the wtc before the collapse...and if you can not recognise that fact..then there is no question who is delusional....none
thats just ONE thing, not everything
the NIST says that structual failure was not the SOLE reason

stop lying..they say it played no significant role in the collapse ...you cant just change that to they said it is not the sole reason..just because it suites you...that is called.. LYING
"playing no significant role" is the same fucking thing you moron
as in they discounted the damage
 
this is an AWESOME picture!! why dont people looking for the "truth" ever post this picture?
8.jpg

IS THAT WTC 7...NO.. not only is it is a ridiculous picture ..but it is also completely irrelevant to the dissuasion of wtc 7
you dont like that photo because it PROVES how fucking DELUSIONAL you nutcases are

no its an opportunity to distract and run away from your lies and misquotes of NIST and the fact your debunking sites including the one this picture came from are in direct contradiction to the official story and NIST that they claim to support
 
thats just ONE thing, not everything
the NIST says that structual failure was not the SOLE reason

stop lying..they say it played no significant role in the collapse ...you cant just change that to they said it is not the sole reason..just because it suites you...that is called.. LYING
"playing no significant role" is the same fucking thing you moron
as in they discounted the damage

no I am sorry my little retarded friend but not the sole reason..and no significant role a two very different statements
 

Forum List

Back
Top