9/11 WTC 7 Demolition - Why The Building Really Fell (Explosive NIST Lies)

[EvenStar303]

It clearly shows that the bottom of the building was taken out first by explosives.

Nothing else can take out the whole bottom floor at the same time.

The rest of the building has collapsed onto the bottom footprint.

But even that there had to be explosives pulverizing each floor into dust.

Otherwise you would end up with big chunks of concrete.

The east penthouse was the only thing that must have collapsed from the fires.

That will NOT bring down the whole building under any circumstances.

[Earthlinked]

You simply have to take into consideration that WTC 1 and 2 and Building 7 were about 55% occupied - they were money loosers. So why did Silverstien sign a 99 year lease a few months before???? You do not get to be a billionaire - by making STUPID investments like that. And you can bet the farm that Silverstien made SURE that if the buildings were destroyed, he would still get paid - it is in the lease!!!!!!! Just does not make any sense!!!!!!!!

[ilikeblondie]

If it was a controlled explosion the roof wouldnt have collapsed seconds before the rest did, its the angle you dont know what the other side looked like.

[ho2cultcha]

@ilikeblondie who do you think you're kidding? we know enough about the other side of the bldg to know that this was no progressive collapse due to fire, that's for damn sure!

[jennifer1223pink]

y didnt none of the other old buildings collapse..

[JAYJAY70693]

10th anniversary of 9/11...RIP all those who lost their lives that day!

[megamogx]

/watch?v=j5FhQc-LJ-o /watch?v=5qFsjdymqSk /watch?v=KhdppHwUJ9k /watch?v=zhnNy5EsebA /watch?v=iGqjzFQvfdI /watch?v=WxqoChniKVU /watch?v=9QWvkAgyIY4 /watch?v=qFpbZ-aLDLY /watch?v=HfmliaqIRBE /watch?v=HSjDCwN2i3w /watch?v=8XRMrMdn0NQ /watch?v=wKuLUu7SQU4

[ewingsco]

Explosions and lateral ejections clearly visible.

watch?v=NxGJHTlpOc8

[tybrady64]

Reference of "pulled", means that the firefighters were pulled from the building. The building was on fire for seven hours, that's a lot of heat! Steel beams loose their strength from heat, thus the inside fell first as demonstrated by the penthouse falling first a full eight seconds before the shell fell.

IT WAS THE HEAT OF THE FIRE.

[Gruelmeister]

@tybrady64 Does not explain free fall. Which would have required all load bearing members on each floor to fail at the same instant. Free fall is not a characteristic of fire, but it is of CD.

[tybrady64]

@Gruelmeister Freefall can be explained. Did you see the penthouse fall eight seconds before the outside shell fell? You're only seeing the outside shell fall, you're not seeing what's happening inside the building. The inside load bearing support fell before the outside shell fell, thus the freefall speed.

[Gruelmeister]

@tybrady64 Sorry, unlike the towers the exterior shell of WTC7 was not load bearing. It could not support the building if the load bearing members failed. WTC7 did not even have fire on each floor. The fires did not burn very hot or very long. Google the Windsor tower, Mandarin Oriental hotel, First Interstate Bank fires. They burned hotter and longer and didn't collapse. What you/NIST described has never happened before and NIST refuses peer review of their model. It's a lie, they know it

[tybrady64]

@Gruelmeister Thanks for making my point. I never said the outside wall was load bearing. I'll say it again, you can see the penthouse fall a full eight seconds before the outside shell fall. The interior of the building was falling inside of itself before the outside wall fell. As far as buildings falling from fire, there is a first for everything. What about the highway bridge in California that fell because of a fire in April 2007? That was steel too. Or did the government do that too?

[Gruelmeister]

@tybrady64 You simply don't understand. As the exterior wall of the building is not load bearing, it cannot support itself, for any length of time. When the load bearing members inside the building failed the exterior facade would collapse at the same instant. Your collapse scenario is not possible. Your bridge in question is not a high rise steel framed building, you're comparing apples and oranges. And I never mentioned the government except to state that NIST NCSTAR1-9 is a fraud. 

[Earthlinked]

@tybrady64 The only flaw in your theory is that steel melts and looses it's strength at appx 2500F degrees. PERIOD!! That is a fact and CANNOT be debated. And the problem is that there is NOTHING that can burn that hot for any period of time. Even a chunk of steel from WTC 1 or 2 will cool before it starts another fire. So how did ALL OF THE steel columns get so hot - ALL AT THE SAME TIME? You cannot make a 2500F fire with 1700F fire from another source! PERIOD!!!

[tybrady64]

@Earthlinked Steel will loose strength at 1,000 degrees. It does not have to "melt", that is crazy talk, it only has to loose strength, and this happens at 1,000 degrees. "PERIOD!! This is a fact CANNOT be debated." Only a few load bearing beams would need to fail. When the extra load is then slammed onto the supports of the next floor down, those supports will give-out too because the weight and inertia of the floor above is too much for it to hold. Quite simple actually.

[Earthlinked]

@tybrady64 ou forget that teh load bearing steel was on the OUTSIDE of the building - NOT MUCH on the inside!!!! This was a new new building method in the 1970's to have more floor space - NOT taken up by columns of steel INSIDE the building!!!! And you are WRONG - steel MELTS (begins to bend) at 2500F - and the WTC fires never got that hot!!!!!!!

[tybrady64]

@Earthlinked We're talking about WTC7, for this building the main load bearing columns were on the inside. Plus it is not just the columns, the horizontal floor joists carry a heavy load too. I'll say it one more time. The steel does not have to melt. At 1,000 degrees the steel does not have the same load carrying abilities, it is a fact that it looses a lot of its strength. This is starting to go in circles, fun chatting, I'm out of here.

[Earthlinked]

@tybrady64 Yes we are - and this building had no reason to collapse - expecially to collapse within it's own footprint!!!!!! For this to happen MANY of the steel columns had to collapse a the same time - and the ods are a bazillion to none! I have no answers for Building 7 - and neither did anyone else. The only possible answer was that between the twin towers and Building 7 - the lease that was rescently signed for 99 years - was a terrible money looser!!!!! That brings up many questions!!

[soulinite]

@Earthlinked WTC7 did not fall into it's own footprint.It damaged many of the buildings around it when it fell.

[Earthlinked]

@soulinite WRONG!!!! IT did fall into it's own footprint - watch the film!!!!!!!!!! And of course some of the debris was spread aross the streets and hit other buildings!!! I am NOT saying that htere was not other damage - I am saying that WTC7 - fell into it's own base - period - and that fact is not deniable - PERIOD!!!!!!!!!!! Watch the film - if falls straight down - not to the side!!!!!!!!

[soulinite]

@Earthlinked WTC7 fell onto Fiterman hall which later had to be demolished from the damaged. Can you explain why the east penthouse collapsed before the rest of the building?

[911InvestigationVids]

@tybrady64 WTC 7 was at least 5 times over engineered, by the most conservative estimate. Steel maintains its full molecular box centered crystal structure until a phase change setpoint at 1330, losing less than 10% strength through expansion and torsion. The fires in WTC 7 were isolated and VERY poorly combusted, as confirmed by the high smoke to no visible diffuse flame at the oxy rich perimeter. WTC 7 fell 570 feet in under 6.5 seconds, impossible for a fire induced mechanical collapse

[soulinite]

@911InvestigationVids You have to time WTC7's collapse from the collapse of the east penthouse.

[egologics]

i dont want to be little the nyfd but by saying this was a controlled demolition- and the firefighters stating that they knew it would collapse- where did they get this intel from and could this possibly indicate that somebody in the nyfd was an accomplice?

[challenge405]

we all know that building catch of fire all the time how come they did not come down? I will tell you why because are own Gov. had something to do with it .The owner of the world trade center had owned it for years then 6 months before the trade center fell he took out a terrorist inc. policy. Now I I had put a fire policy on my hose then ^ months later it burned down I am sure I would be put in jail

[wolfdaddy205]

,,The u.s. has clearly falling behind in education.

[Akileze]

Never before and never since has NIST served to lead an investigation into a fire or explosion event. They are a Department of Commerce group.....what does that have to do with fires/explosions?

At the very least you would think they would use the guidelines used by professionals that actually do investigate fires/explosions which is NFPA 921. This is what would be used if your house or any other structure showed signs of accelerated fire or explosive damage.

WTF is going on in this country??

[Akileze]

Per NIST final report NCSTAR 1A after first denying in their draft version that free fall acceleration occured a High School physics teacher using freeware physics toolkit proved to them that free did in fact occur for a large portion of the collapse.

After getting corrected by a high school teacher they modified their final version to admit that Stage 2 of the collapse (over 100') occurred at a rate 'indistinguishable from free fall'.

Maybe high school teachers should lead the investigation??

[Akileze]

From NIST Web Site:

Over the years, the scientists and technical staff at NIST have made solid contributions to image processing, DNA diagnostic "chips," smoke detectors, and automated error-correcting software for machine tools. Just a few of the other areas in which NIST has had major impact include atomic clocks, X-ray standards for mammography, scanning tunneling microscopy, pollution-control technology, and high-speed dental drills.

Why were they investigating anything??