wtc_build1

[MazJax]

You can see the critical column that failed which caused the collapse...

[admx94]

The building fell, because the fires burned inside the lower floors for HOURS...also the floors under the fires were ACTUALLY a sub-station... most people don't even know that... yet they try to make up theories about why wtc7 collapsed... it fell quickly b/c the bottom was taken out beneath most of the buildings weight!!! Haven't any of you ever played jenga????? Gtfo

[CalumGilhooly]

@admx94 Really? andd what fuel was feeding those fires for HOURS? Where are the massive, all engulfing flames from such an inferno? All we see are normal office fires that moved around the building as they consumed the available fuel, office furnishings, paper and other equipment. These fires would burn for approx 20 mins and then move on, nowhere near long enough or hot enough to affect structural steel. GIRFUY!

[admx94]

@CalumGilhooly where do you get your facts about the fires burning for 20 min????? Try this experiment... drop a book onto the floor so that it lands flat... you may even put peices of paper under and around it before hand. Then! Notice how the paper will FLY OUTWARD AS THE BOOK NEARS THE FLOOR! This is because of the massive amount of possitive pressure produced in such an event. NOW! multiply that by ______ (?) to apply to a skyscraper and MAYBE you will understand. get jobs people

[CalumGilhooly]

@admx94 The fuel loading for each area of the floors affected by fire give a burn time of around twenty minutes before the fuel is exhausted and the fire moves on. No idea what you are dribbling about the book and paper and pressure, sounds like you are tripping on something, your tongue certainly. Got a job thanks and a wife and family. Grow up!

[admx94]

@CalumGilhooly You don't have the mental capacity for reality. Stop wasting my time.

[CalumGilhooly]

@admx94 Wasting your time? Hahahaha, You are a waste of fucking space and oxygen. Do some research. Apparently office fires don't actually last that long before moving on to the next area with fuel. NIST ignored data they didn't like and inflated the fuel figures until they managed to create a model that produced a collapse pattern like the one seen on 911. They asked staff about what was on the floors. Chose the densest level and applied that to the entire floor, despite some floors being empty

[zenoist2]

and of course it falls perfectly evenly

all that damage to one side made the penthouse in the middle fall first. It somehow affected the back of the building as well so down it all came symmetrically.

what could be more obvious? the fact it was scientifically measured at free fall is neither here nor there.

buildings fall at free fall from fire damage all the time HAHAHAHAHA. especially if they are steel framed HAHAHAHAHA

[SmoothCriminalAaron]

What the value or taking down tower 7?

If it was a conspiracy, which I don't think it was, because Why would they take down 7?

[simonnaylor]

@SmoothCriminalAaron Research what was in it

[SmoothCriminalAaron]

@simonnaylor -_- You could move a few computers and files, you don't need to destroy a 50 stories building over some secret documents

[simonnaylor]

@SmoothCriminalAaron The destruction of the tower gave an excuse for losing the files on some big scandles - may not have been able to say they were lost otherwise. I know the Twin towers were going to cost over $billion to take down/fix up. They were outdated and full of asbestos. They were worth more ensured and destroyed by terrorist attacks. The money that would have been spent fixing them up was instead rewarded for their destruction. WTC7 was probably the same. Also, look into 9/ll gold.

[SmoothCriminalAaron]

@simonnaylor They could just make up some shit that the files were moved to WTC 1 or 2

If they were gonna do a huge lie like you say they did they might as well than risk getting caught over 7

Pluse, how could WTC be outdated compared to the rest of New York?

[simonnaylor]

@SmoothCriminalAaron The emense size and height were part of it. The monet it would have cost to fix these buildings up was huge and there is lots of information on it. You won't have to research to hard to find the literature on it. It isn't debated by anyone. It is well known. Saty in touch. If you are unable to find info on it, I will try and get some for you. I appreciate that you are calmly and intelligently asking questions and looking for evidence.

[Globamegauniversal]

I should know better that to do this but let's say that it's a fact there were no explosives or anything sneaky at all. Wouldn't that still leave the fact that WTC 7 collapsed because of the official reasons. And at the very least the owners, builders etc should be charged with crimes in just the same way any shoddy operator would? If not with crimes then at least for the cost to the taxpayer.? An arguement strangely missing from all the TRUTH DEBUNKING presentations I've seen. Am i wrong?

[Alfaidiot]

was it realy any special people worked with at the wtc?

[wtsun1]

wow good

[ArcanineKing]

LOL,

You're going to tell me all of that support failed under a few trusses?

Are you f'ing kidding me?

All of those columns could have stabilized the entire building. If one or all trusses fail, you still have the outer and inner perimeter cores, holding the whole building upright... AND EVERYONE MISSES THE FREAKING CORE, MORE SUPPORT! and the concrete floors and walls, another form of support, and the steel construction around the perimeter... oh, geez.

How does a building well-built falls?

[Skeptic121]

This is a great video and an important contribution to the historical record. Decades from now the successors to our CAD programs will model the collapse in ways we can only imagine. The programmers of the day will use this video as a starting point.

Kids will do simulations for physics class that only NIST and large institutions can do today. My prediction: it will be difficult to replicate the collapse videos without some bizarre assumptions. Kids in 2101 will laugh at all of us.

[rashkavar]

Excellent work on the CAD animation. Really helps show just how interconnected everything was in the building. Thanks for providing it (and making it if you did so)

[Tot4ln00b]

they didn't expect anything like this to happen.

[Skeptic121]

After 9/11 many claimed that WTC7 had been poorly designed.

Interesting that no one noticed the poor design BEFORE 9/11. Building inspectors, engineers, architects...no one said a word beforehand.

[rashkavar]

That was one of the proposed theories in the investigation, which seemed to be inconclusive from the bit of documentary I saw on it.  Other theories include the burn duration was enough to overcome the fireproofing, or that a leak of the generator's deisel lines caused the problem, or that fireproofing was shaken loose by falling debris.

They did note it was a tricky design, cause they had to build around an existing substation, so it's understandable that it wasn't all that durable.

[Skeptic121]

Do you know anyone who has applied for a building permit in NYC to do ANYTHING? To say the process is onerous is an understatement. So along comes WTC7 for approval. An unusual design, one that is supposedly inadequate in hindsight.. So inadequate that the the entire structure drops like a controlled demolition because of fires and debris damage. But the approval process was no problem for WTC7. THAT FACT ALONE is worthy of an aggressive investigation.

[Skeptic121]

The mystery is not that WTC7 collapsed. WTC6 collapsed the way one would expect, partially and unevenly. So did the Marriott, WTC3, after the first tower fell. The mystery is the MANNER of its collapse, similar to a controlled demolition but better! Better because most CDs of large buildings do not show such a simultaneous and even collapse. Take a look on YouTube at other CD videos of large, wide buildings. One side, or the middle, usually drops many floors ahead of the other parts.

[rashkavar]

Please point out to me where I have approved the lack of proper investigations in these comments. I seem to have missed it.

[Skeptic121]

Sorry, my comment about the lack of appropriate investigation are not meant to criticize your posts. They are directed to supporters of the official story.

[girlyoudontknow2]

Incredible work. Thank you for this.

[OmarJ88]

that music. captivating.

sweet.

[OmarJ88]

is that a slinky. lol

[aredditor]

It's an accordion.

[OmarJ88]

who`s ready to get chipped up n made into slaves. who`s ready baby! not me. but.....

hey hey, make a video with the constitution burning slowly n throw some of that music behind it.

later cheif.

[OmarJ88]

thumbs up 4 the music.

sweet.

but what was that a slinky. lol

[Question1981]

Fire and damage to the southwest corner couldn't have caused this collapse, because as you can see all the columns had to be destroyed at the exact same time.

[nineelevensies]

I can solve this whole WTC7 debate right now

Simply compare:

WTC7 collapse due to structural failure low down on one side:

watch?v=uKeENdyIluI

-------

with this video of some random building being brought down by controlled demo

watch?v=LD06SAf0p9A

[djmdb]

I wish it was only so simple....

There is no building collapse in history that looks like WTC7, or even the twin towers for that matter. Still there is this insitence that the building collapsed!

Irelevant is that fact that it fell in a manner IDENTICAL to controlled demolition just bleting on about the damage from the north tower collapse and the fires.

Lets see some proof, a computer simulation of the collapse and proof the fires were hot enough to be a relevant factor.

[rashkavar]

Build me a time machine, and I'll dump a thermometer in the fire. It's impossible to get 100% proof of things like that.

As for the simulation, even this video shows just how delicate the buildings were, if you know how support models work.

Also, it looks like controlled demolition because the process was more or less the same. Whether you blast out the supports with a plane or blow them up with dynamite, you'll still end up with a telescoping collapse.

[djmdb]

rashkavar

There would be no need to dump a thermometer in the fire to discover temperature exposure in the steel if almost all the physical evidence had not been destroyed.

And if your wondering about this video its designed to imply these skyscrapers were delicate when in reality they were not!

"you'll still end up with a telescoping collapse"

How did you draw this conclusion? because thats what authority sources told you, and your assuming its true!

[rashkavar]

No, actually cause I'm an engineering student. Not civil, so I can't be 100 percent sure, but even mining engineering students can get more out of this than the average person.

destruction of load bearing members, regardless of the reason, will result in a telescoping collapse. I still find it surprising that it could take the impact itself, though (which, as a lateral force, would have toppled the building).

[rashkavar]

Couple more things:

1: steel does not have a built in temperature record - the best they could do is say "it bent," and theorize that either the redistribution of forces after the impact of the plans was too much for them, or that the fire heated the beams enough to make them bend (or that explosives redistributed the forces as the planes would have)

2: you're saying this video is completely innacurate, then? Cause I've seen diagrams like this before and I know how delicate looks in this view.

[rashkavar]

I will admit that the removal and subsequent destruction is a bit suspicious. However, one of the important things about monitoring any blast is to map the results carefully. In short, "where did everything land, and how broken is it when it got there?" Since they were more interested in digging people out of the debris field on the day, this sort of investigation was pretty much cancelled.

I also was surprised that they could positively identify the terrorists so quickly. Beyond my knowledge

[djmdb]

rashkavar

If your not sure about the processes involved in demolition I can strongly recommend the following;

Megastructures Vegas/Miami Demolition

and on discovery

The Detonators

The Blasters

Try and consider the effect of gravity driven impact and kenetic energy transfer in a steel structure. Ask yourself in basic physical terms what would happen after iniation when the steel framework of the tower top impacts the steel framework of the undamaged floors below...

[rashkavar]

I've seen those programs, so I know that much (I was just saying I'm hardly an expert - a few hour long documentaries can only teach so much)

Basic kinetics, allowing for structural deformation, suggests there are a variety of possibilities in such a collapse:

1 - with low mass, the collapsing structure would impact and you'd just have a pile of ruined building ontop of a semi-stable tower

2 - with high mass, the collapsing structure hits and starts deforming supports...

[rashkavar]

this deformation has 2 possible outcomes

a - everything bends more or less evenly (this would typically happen in a good design focused on directing forces toward the center), and the entire structure goes downward

b - everything bends, but part of the structure bends less due to uneven support, and the collapsing structure slides outward and begins to topple. If this was purposefully done, like in demolition, they'd probably make the uneven support on a lower level for maximum effect

[rashkavar]

the videos clearly show that what happened is 2a - officially triggered by loss of structural integrity throughout the floors into which the planes crashed.

This is the part people have difficulty believing - it seems more likely that there would be more loss of integrity on the side the plane hit...temperature distribution on those floors just prior to the collapse would be the best evidence to prove or damn the official story, but, of course, it's not available.

[djmdb]

rashkavar

Three busses are connected to each other then parked against a wall. They share the same resistance charicterisics (A)... Another identical bus (B) crashes into the other three. Will it continue all the way through to the wall, deforming and displacing the mass of the three busses?

Now repeat the same scenario but connect the busses together and place them vertically into the ground.

Driven by gravity is it possible for the mass of the bus (B) to pass through (3A)

A = B

[rashkavar]

Slight problem. The structural properties of a bus and those in any skyscraper are completely different. I can't really think of any relevant examples that are all that similar, though.

Sequential diagrams are worthless, and if you give a computer simulation the right inputs, it can show you anything you want. Neither can be trusted, so why bother. Scale demonstration is pretty expensive, but still...*shrug*

[rashkavar]

Also, the easiest way to defend a conspiricy most people don't really want to believe in the first place is to marginalize the people trying to expose the conspiricy, either by ignoring them or calling them insane. This looks very much like the average reaction of people accused of having such a conspiricy when none exist.

We've debated this topic enough for my tastes. I'm firmly entrenched on the fence, and you've made your position known. Shall we agree to disagree?

[djmdb]

rashkavar

Instead of three busses there are 80 units of structure in a collision with 30 units of almost identical strucutre...

Conservation of Momentum along with the force of gravity drive the motion of the upper section of the tower but kenetic energy transfer in collisions is NOT directed by gravity.

Becasue of Newton's third law, the tower top also has a force acting upon it as a result of impacting the tower base. It should surely therefore break apart or displace at the Same rate

[rashkavar]

Indeed. The reactionary force goes up. Consider all the chunks of debris coming off the sides of the towers (all 3) as they went down.

This happens regardless of how the tower was destroyed - it is basic physics. You have no point here.  Goodnight, and Goodbye.

[djmdb]

rashkavar

And what happens as the resitance of the mass of the tower top is compromised...

Which structural mass is going to be displaced?

If the top section of the tower breaks apart at the same rate as the tower base structure then by around the 50th floor the structural resistance of the upper section will be nill and the mass will be displaced.

[rashkavar]

Your argument still has one critical flaw. You're assuming the physics of a skyscraper are simple newtonian statics and the collapse thereof is basic kinetics. Skyscrapers are not block models.

You'll note in the videos that entire floors were not removed. Only critical load bearing structures were destroyed, turning the collapse inwards. The debate is whether this is possible or not through uncontrolled means.

[rashkavar]

The rubble pile ontop of the towers as they went down is not a coherent block. The initial momentum sends a shockwave through the building that disappates in the ground. This impact also pulverizes the top floors, and pieces start to come off. At the same time, the tower's reaction to the overwhelming deadweight still ontop of it, already weakened by the initial shockwave, is to continue to collapse.

[rashkavar]

Since this shockwave effect is pretty specialized, I'll cite my sources. The most common example of the shockwave effect in small scale is in hard body training demos (Punching through concrete blocks and other such feats of insane strength). I don't know of any dedicated documentation of this effect, but I do know one documentary that included it, along with a bunch of other martial arts stuff:

National Geographic's Fight Science.

It's a pretty good documentary in general, too.

[djmdb]

rashkavar

However even if you treat the towers as block structures without core columns the THEROY simply does not hold up under scrutiny...

A virtual construct of the towers, along with visual simulation would show if Bazant's theory can be applied in reality. This is becasue any occurences outwith the realms of physicall possibilty will be visually apparent.

Just consider, what other factor is KNOWN and PROVEN to punch through concrete blocks and seperate steel framework???

[djmdb]

rashkavar

I completely agree, skyscrapers are not block models. They are highly complex structures with massive vertical resistance charicteristics.

My point is that the offical Dr Bazant NW paper theory involves treating the towers as block models. A basic summary of his work is that the potential energy contained in the strucuture converted to a massive amount of kenetic energy allowing the top section to "crush down" the base structure before it was "crushed up"

Contin...

[djmdb]

rashkavar

Do you have any examples of a steel framed structure exhibiting a telescopic "collapse"?

Also wher did you get this idea that a lateral force is required to topple a structure?

Yes, demo crews will sometimes use cables to "pull" a structure over, but more commonly with steel framework they compromise the loadbearing charicteristics of a structure shifting its centre of gravity, the unbalanced load causes the structure to topple.

Maybe u should be studying harder!

[rashkavar]

Well my profession is making things NOT fall apart, so it should be understandable I'm somewhat ignorant in the matters of deliberate destruction.

And admittedly, my toppling physics is currently limited to massive-body approximations (approximating the building to one solid hunk of material with no interior failures). In this case, to topple, you need to move the center of gravity outside of the base. Lateral force is the most simple method (though due to interior forces, not the only one)

[djmdb]

rashkavar

I dont have issue with moving the physical evidence to another site to facilitate the rescue and recovery effort. Its the fact almost all this vial crime scene evidnce was then destroyed with all possible haste.

An while I think NYPD officers did a heroic job of sorting through buckets of rubble I dont think they were suitibly equiped or trained for such an investigation.

Blast signatures on the steel would clearly indicate IF explosives were involved if the steel remained.

[rashkavar]

The problem with moving the debris out of the way is that it makes it impossible to do what miners call "mapping the muckpile." Without that map, it's very hard to do anything conclusive. (I'm not saying they shouldn't have moved it - getting the victims out is more important)

They had cops do the debris investigation? That's pretty foolish - should have contracted it out to a blast crew - cops don't have the experience to recognize what might be relevant...

[djmdb]

rashkavar

Every section of the twin towers, each column and floor truss were marked with embossed or raised lettering. These markings make it very easy to locate where each steel memeber would be located within the original structure.

Only a very limited investigation team were allowed access to the steel and saw fit to retain less than 1% of the total material available.

Everything else was rushed away for "recylcing".

Only a very small team actually considered the evidence...

[rashkavar]

Looking back on my comments, it seems I agreed with you that the investigation was largely botched. My point was just that the debris mapping is an important part - being able to identify where it was in the building doesn't tell you where it was on the ground before it moved. The investigation was definately botched, though it was already compromized somewhat by recovery efforts. Hard to prove if the botching was through design or incompetance (short of finding documented proof).

[djmdb]

rashkavar

Here is a simple experiment for you, draw a rough 2D approximation of the twin towers design (you dont need to include all the floors just the core, floors and perimeter columns)

Now remove two or three upper stories to represent the inital failure iniation. Try and draw sequential diagrams showing the progress of the collpase/destruction...

Now ask yourself, why no offical;

Sequential diagrams

Visual simulation

Scaled demonstration

Of the "collapse" process?

[Skeptic121]

Depending on which sources we accept, there was one victim in WTC7 or none at all.

In any case, the debris was moved to the inactive Fresh Kills landfill on Staten Island where it could have stayed indefinitely. Instead, it was sent to Asia for recycling with unseemly haste.

[noklarok]

in reply to your post about WTC7

i saw US CNN 'news' about how the melted twin towers steel has now been made into a battleship.

it's like hiding the dead bodies from your barber shop in your meat pies.

it's unreal about the steel, and lack of looking really closely at all of it.

[monkinator66]

sweeny todd is a great analogy. if you look at squibs, debris and perimeter & CORE COLUMNS you will see a relationship of three (columns 'cut' every three floors) in WTC 1,2 & 7. makes for a more tidy clean up.

[ebola111]

Bless the poor imbeciles who think that the government or Larry did it.

[trevorpickering]

reading thought the comments no one has sugested larry or the goverment did it, people are just pointing out fire did not destry wtc7 which you would be an imbecile to think fire did that

[17thknight]

@trevorpickering So all the firefighters who decided that it was going to collapse from the fire and decided to evacuate the building in preparation for that exact event are idiots? I'm sure you're much more knowledgable about firefighting. Dipshit.

[flavour54]

Oh, I see, steel columns simultaneously collapse from floor 6 to floor 47 from isolated pockets of fire on 3 floors?? I feel so dumb even joking about it.

[RichardC111165]

The collapse of WTC7 was BETTER, smoother and straighter, than any other controlled demolition on video. This simulation shows all the "red columns" failing at the same time. It is hard to believe that they all failed at the same time because of a chaotic fire and debris impacts. If they had not failed simultaneously, the collapse would have been uneven, like most CDs.

[fred10538]

when the central cores are removed suddenly it it seems that the model matches the real footage of the collapse of WTC7!

[catrapesdog99]

911 blogger

[RichardC111165]

fred: Why should anyone believe FIRE removed the central cores suddenly? Of course, explosives could have done it perfectly.

[fred10538]

As it turns out, explosives did indeed do it perfectly!

[ctasker]

Computer simulations are great! You can get them to do anything you want them to do. Probably the reason Hollywood love CGI so much. When it comes to scientific use of models they have an expression though; garbage in > garbage out

[catrapesdog99]

911 was inside job 911blogge

[ctasker]

Wow this is another interesting piece of creativity. Once again we have the magical simultaneous symmetrical eradication of all of the core columns from top to bottom apparently as a result of asymmetrical damage and fires. Does the creator of this animation also work for Nova? Irrespective of how zany the structure of this building might or might not have been, fire and gravity driven collapses do not look like this.

Sudden onset and near freefall speed = controlled demolition. Next question

[Zabooka1]

What is the MUSIC? I want that music, its so beautiful!

[ctasker]

The music is contemporary composer Philip Glass. This is one of his better ones called Glassworks. Some of his stuff can seem very repetitive or even manic but at his best he is very powerful.

[knave2]

That was beautiful. 10 for whoever created this.

[bushisacommie]

If I dropped a grand piano from the same height at the same time it would have been beaten to the bottom by the WTC explosions even with taking wind resistance out of the equation.

This is impossible! Even if the pancake theory is correct it would take much much longer for the collapse to reach the bottom. The only computer model that even remotely comes close to the official story has major supports removed and still it takes over 60 seconds.

[MollyGodfrey]

Nice work.

[bopn]

To date noone has modelled the WTC7. Edinburgh university modelled WTC 1 +2 and found the collapse pattern possible. However noone has tried WTC7.

[delano3421]

So all those columns in red on every floor were blown out with none of the explosions and flashes of light associated with CD. And no one saw any of this being implemented. Next we will hear that it was all done with silent and invisible explosives that were planted by invisible men made to go off 7 hours after the towers collapsed to trick us into thinking it was really the fires burning for 7 hours that caused the collapse.

[seandulac]

The majority of on-site news reports and witnesses reported multiple explosions.

[mmmlink]

The red columns are the obvious points to blow out. But I would submit it was supposed to fall at the same time WTC #1 came down. The smoke from #1 would have covered it up completely and we wouldn't be discussing pre-positioned explosives that Larry Silverstein talked about in Sept. 2002. Too bad something went wrong.

[SkuIICrusherGhost]

@mmmlink Wheres the damage to the right front corner fuchead??

What kind off jackass video is this??

[mmmlink]

I believe the 9-11 Scholars for Truth are working on that. I forwarded them my models (which were in ProE). I have worked on some FEA's and it is interesting how strong this design was (due to the redundancy). You could take out over 1/2 of the central columns and the towers still would have been structurally intact.

[dfst7]

I didn't study your model, but when I watched it, it looked like a typical high rise structure. Although designers would like to have them, rarely there is any redundancies in columns due to obvious reasons. While actual failure of a column in upper floors might not be as catastrophic, failure of columns on other floors is almost always catastrophic.

[RichardC111165]

dfst7 says "failure of columns on other floors is almost always catastrophic"; fine, but "catastrophic" does not mean a perfectly straight and smooth collapse like WTC7.

Can you find some videos of collapses like WTC7 and post the links?

[nonagon1]

Where are depictions of the uncontrolled fires and the massive structural damage (eg. a 20 story hole on South side) due to the debris from the falling WTC tower? And the fact that it fell towards the damaged southern side, not straight down? Add those important missing elements and bombs on each floors aren't necessary for a collapse!

[Thrashaero]

uncontrolled fires? the fires wee tiny and didn't even reach the north side. the 'massive' structural damage wouldn't induce a relatively symmetric and straight down collapse. yes it tipped slightly to the south side. but if it was purely south side damage, why not fall over to the south? why the sudden onset and the collapse in under 7 seconds? what about the molten metal? what about the explosions heard?..what about...nevermind....

[seandulac]

WTC7 fell straight down according to NIST.

The damage did not reach the inner support columns.

Open fire does not melt steel. IE: lookout the wood burning stove is about to go!

Simple science even a most children understand.

[satipip]

WTC7 committed suicide, didn't you know? Motive: it fell into deep depression when it overheard "Lucky Larry" Silverstein saying it was a money looser. However, it cowardly waited for no closeup camera shot to be present and witness it.

[mmmlink]

I'm not saying my animation was correct in the way it fell. I was pointing out the main columns (in red) that needed to be removed to bring the building down into it's footprint. Some of the videos of WTC 7 on this site show explosions on the east side moving up the building prior to it's collapse. I am more than open to suggestions to improve upon my animation though.

[FinalTimes]

We don’t explode steel as concrete. It’s needed to cut or unsettle in advance the internal carrier columns at some basement levels and, at least, at some upward levels. Then it’s possible to use few explosives -Big heat on concentrated points needed ! The D day, it’s necessary to explod the internal basement structure to provoke the weakness, then start the internal collapse from the top. It’s going to fall vertically. What about to unsettle it floor by floor, as it was built up ?

[FinalTimes]

@FinalTimes

Oops, sorry, i didn't get that people were talking about 9/11 here.

I can't say nothing about this terrorist attack.

I'm just very sorry for all the victims and families.

[mmmlink]

The interior was built as close to the FEMA and NIST reports as I could get (there were discrepancies in both on the lower structure, in red). I will admit the animation software I use is very limited in what it can show.

[andrewlowewatson]

I thought Building Seven suffered from Depressed Syscraper Syndrome - it was severely lacking in self-esteem after its two bigger brothers fell so spectacularly. So it collapsed just to spite the Twin Towers, but then tragically no-one could be bothered to watch it falling. I know just how it must have felt.

[bopn]

Hahaha thats a good one.  WTC 7 Topped itself!!

[killingamps]

time magazine just came out and stated that WTC7 fells because of an unusual design due to the ConEd substation, the damage to the SE corner, extreme weight bearing on floors, and that infamous deisel fire, which I guess HAD to melt something in there, right? Say MMM, could you do a similar video of one of the WTC towers? If we could graphically see what might have been damaged.

[DarthKazi]

Gimmeabreak.

"Unusual design" is a nice way to *magically* reduce physics to an afterthought. If the building had an unusual design that led to a collapse, then it stands to reason that could have been inherent in the design. All the telltale signs of implosion are present, including the same 2700+ degree molten metal in the basement that was in towers 1 and 2.

[willdfw]

Uh, are you kidding me? Does anyone really take this conspiracy crap seriously? Anyone over 25 I guess I should say. I understand the younger folks, but cmon guys.

[bopn]

Who said it was conspiracy. That was the pancake theory right there.

[DanielsNews]

Great job!

[killingamps]

It is plain to see from this video that WTC7 was a poorly designed piece of go-se that was bound to keel over in the first strong wind. How the building lasted 30 years is beyond me!

[bopn]

I agree had about as much strength as a deck of steel cards.

[nickzucc]

I would love to see a human character thrown in there at some point just to drive home the scale factor.

Great work, thank you for putting this all together.

-Nick

P.S. Where is the NIST model of the collapses? I would like to take a look at it. Can anyone point me to where it is? (wink, wink)

[Thrashaero]

http://www.kolumbus.fi/totuus/­doc/foia-nist.html is trying the FOIA request to obtain the DATA of the START of collapse. there is apparently no model for the rest of the collapse itself (how convenient of them to not try to explain the biggest hole in the collapse theories)

[RichardC111165]

nickzucc: google WTC7 + NIST. It's pretty lame; they don't even consider anything after the start of the collapse. I think they are trying to keep their integrity AND their jobs...Often difficult in politics.

[seraph101]

Yeah, it is really stupid to even consider that a pancake collapse caused by fire and damage brought those buildings down.

[vatolegato]

lol killtown

[Killtown]

Man, didn't you know fire can bring down skyscrapers? It's only happened zero times before 9/11 and zero times after 9/11. You nutty conspiracy theorists. ;-)

[CrazyBlade]

Fantastic work, highly commendable!!

[JAStewart]

This is incredible!

[Ross11988]

Awsome, good work,

[chrissarns]

Awesome

[armouredamazon]

Amazing. God bless you.

[MelloB]

Absolutely amazing, how long did it take you?

[mmmlink]

Overall, studying the FEMA and the NIST reports took 3-4 months to gain a full understanding of the framework of WTC7. Building the model and animation, another month.

[Reflecter]

Thats absolutely awesome. A beautiful video and really bangs home how tough that structure was. Many thanks.