There is more scientific proof suggesting Building 7 was destroyed by controlled demolition than the resulting fires from the debris.
A new scientific study found the official story surrounding 9/11 was not compatible with the laws of physics. Several studies have already reached similar conclusions. However, this is the 1st to provide the long-awaited definitive answers.
The new study conducted at the University of Alaska Fairbanks took things one step further – we now know with a high degree of scientific accuracy that the official NIST explanation of how the World Trade Center 7 building collapsed is not only suspect, it’s 100% false, according to the findings of this academic study.
This study replicated and remodeled every factor relating to that infamous day involving building 7. Complete study results and the undeniable scientific evidence indicating Building 7 was a deliberate job on the next page:
Has been in any reports I have seen.
It would take months of preparation for a controlled demolition of these two buildings. So you’re telling me that no one working in these two buildings noticed tons of explosives being brought in and placed in positions to bring these buildings down? Hogwash!
So where is,was the explosive residue?
Just like you have always thought. Now let’s get down to who we might know in government that were present that day in those towers.
Why is it Tom, that you are so opposed to finding out whether or not there’s validity of a planned bombing? It might not be 100% fact to date, but why are you so oppose to an investigation to rule it out? Because if the Brits announced this disaster 20 minutes before it happened, I , personally, would like to get to the bottom of it. As any PATRIOT of this country would.
Watch Jesse Venturas special on the Pentagon! If you can watch that and not start waking up then you can continue to believe the Kennedy lies as well!
Follow the money trail! Who benefited by it!!
If that (British knew 20 min before) happened there would be an investigation! But all this hearsay is just that! Where is the proof that happened, none, so you do your investigation!
Bob Heaton I am not going to write a demo manual or explain physics but you need access to more of the building than just the elevator shaft for an implosion. furthermore the fire would have damaged too much of the firing system for the implosion to even function without having a “low order detonation.” I renew my insurance policies every six months and often change the what is covered, since WTC was attacked by terrorists prior to 9-11 so it makes sense.
Paul Ashlock Wikipedia is not a reliable source, anyone can edit it. If you want you can even say the moon is made of cheese. For this reason it is not allowed as a source for research papers.