you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]jagworms 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (11 children)

No it wasn't. That NIST report is a complete smokescreen, and "F" level engineering homework. Dr. Leroy Hulsey has done a proper investigation. Look into it.

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

Link me to a text report or you and L.H. are both full of hot air.

[–]jagworms 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

https://www.ae911truth.org/wtc7 https://www.ae911truth.org/news/658-in-the-name-of-engineering-science-and-truth-leroy-hulsey-and-roland-angle-on-the-final-wtc-7-report https://ine.uaf.edu/wtc7

Knock yourself out. In the absence of Hulsey's report, the NIST paper and it's conclusion don't align with the multiple angles of video that exist. The NIST report is unscientific and fake. Hulsey modeled the building multiple ways, ultimately proving that the only way to make the building behave as seen in the video is to remove all vertical support nearly simultaneously.

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

The NIST report actually does align with videos and plot twist it actually adresses the videos LOL here's a video of a presentation including their simulation that shows it collapsed from inside first https://www.c-span.org/video/?280569-1/investigation-world-trade-center-building-7

Check this calculator. The spans were up to 16.4m long. Plug in the temperature you like. I used 700c as a mid-range temperature an office fire might burn. It expands such a length of steel by 15cm. A 15cm length change on a structural member with nothing pushing on the other side is going to bend beams and/or break bolts.

From the linked page: One guy without relevant experience and a guy with an axe to grind. This should be stupid. They said fire didn't bring it down, which was true. They handwaved and said 'our model showed the very top floors collapsed first' but didn't explain why a couple of failed floors at the very top would take the building down. They didn't explain why nobody heard or recorded the amount of noise that would be required by explosions inside if explosives were used, either.

They mention this report https://ine.uaf.edu/projects/wtc7/ which says fire did not cause the collapse, but the building structure failed near-simultaneously, which is approximately what NIST concluded with a retarded twist. It was done by a couple of students (vs. a larger team, scores of world-class experts @NIST). The study says the building collapsed in a way which the video clearly shows it did not do, so it can be pitched for that reason alone. You can watch the failure progress across the width of the building. They also said

We cannot completely rule out the possibility that an alternative scenario may have caused the observed collapse

which is weasel-words for "we're not sure". They ran a different set of numbers than NIST did and came to different conclusions, these students. They found another set of experts agreed with NIST but poo-pooh'ed their conclusions. They said the other experts who studied it were dum-dum heads because fires don't burn hot. Having hand-waved away and poo-pooh'd the conclusions of literally experts, these students said they must all be wrong because this novel kind of building had a novel kind of failure. They made assumptions which were questionable. Possibly the silliest is treating steel pins as springs in their model. They said if you change a bunch of things then NIST's analysis would be wrong, without adequately addressing why NIST was wrong and these students are right. They guessed at the construction of WTC7 in a few places, even! They changed significant parts of their models to save computing time (vs. NIST who just let their simulations run for.e.ver). Critically, they changed juuuuust enough in their models to cause juuuuust enough less shift than would then lead to the failure NIST said happened. They even said their modeling software couldn't keep up with NIST's version. They went on to infer that something else must have happened and came up with an even less-plausible scenario than NIST's progressive collapse.

And then, just when it was getting good, the paper stopped. They concluded with "it all broke at once" and gave exactly zero reason for it to have done. Rubbish. The report from these university students may have earned them some cachet, but for me it was only a brilliant display of chutzpa.

The only way it could have collapsed literally all at the same time was with explosive charges, which were 100% not heard or reported by anyone. It would have been loud as, and it wasn't, ergo that doesn't explain it, which means the students were wrong and y'all are bamboozled.

But thanks for the link, it gave me something to read for most of an hour.

[–]jagworms 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

A hundred eye witnesses said it sounded just like a controlled demolition - boom boom boom, as at fell.
A dozen angles of video show a freefall collapse.
The NIST model stops running as soon as the collapse begins, and then they assume what comes next.
If the NIST conclusion of thermal expansion is correct, there would be entire semesters of engineering curriculum dedicated to studying this failure mode so it doesn't happen again.
Barry Seale said explosions followed him out of the building as he and a colleague tried to escape. They worked in the building. You must be tired from reading for a whole hour.

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Multiple search engines give me one barry seale: a drug smuggler

Thermal expansion of steel is very well known already and the international building codes went through dozens of changes to reflect the NIST findings. A novel application and a novel failure don't make a novel branch of science!

The timing of the "freefall" is not actually a freefall LOL

People also heard explosions as the twin towers came down, which also didn't happen. There's video of the fall and it doesn't have explosion audio. You know what people may have mistaken for explosions before the free-fall collapse? Destruction of the building during the cascading not-actually-freefall collapse. Bystanders are not as reliable as video (which we have) and experts (who say unanimously there were no explosions).

You (all troofers actually) are grasping at straws and bad science. Do better.

[–]jagworms 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

My bad, it was Barry Jennings.

It's pretty gullible of you to believe that WTC 7 was built like a house of cards and could essentially liquidate itself through its own core because one beam fell off of it's column seat.

"The final report was issued by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) on October 26, 2005. That report lists 13 NIST investigators, 78 contributors to the investigation, and 5 NIST “experts and consultants.” That’s a total of 96 people versus the 3,486 architects and engineers who say the federal government’s report is unreliable and must be re-opened." https://wallstreetonparade.com/2021/09/the-federal-investigation-of-9-11-ignored-recorded-eyewitness-accounts-of-firefighters-who-heard-explosions-just-before-the-towers-collapsed/

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Today I watched a video with sound. There were no explosions. You people are genuinely pitiful. Find something meaningful to care about in your life. Fall in love with the Jesus instead of nonsense conspiracy whackiness.

[–]jagworms 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Jesus told me to stay away from liars and people who repeat those lies. Defense of the fake-ass official story of 9/11 is defense of the wars that followed, and misery that came with it. The attack was a false-flag op meant to get us into war, and the correct response would be to wage war on Washington DC for killing 3000 Americans.

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Beleive whatever you need to in order to preserve your twisted worldview bby

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Yea, all those who reported the explosion and fire in the basement have been suicided. The denial is strong in you.

[–]iamonlyoneman 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

denial is strong in you

Right back atcha babe. Notsorry for looking at reality with an unaltered eye