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:
have to add the fact of the wings being full of fuel that’s a lot of mass
We should learn the truth….
Greg I will help you out with the myth of the towers being built to withstand a hit from a jetliner. During the initial design they tried to consider the impact of a jetliner to the building. At that time the towers were going to be eighty stories tall. Due to the many variables of where the plane might hit it was pretty much impossible to design the building to withstand the strike. They decided that the top floor would be the most likely place it would be struck. The intent was to beef up the top of the building and include a ten foot thick concrete roof. The port authority then decided they had to have more space so the additional floors were added. They never reconsidered what a strike might do to the building after that redesign. During the initial evaluations of a strike by a plane they never took into account what the impact of the burning fuel would do to the building. It is a complete falsehood that they were built to withstand a strike from a jetliner. A lot of the original testing results and calculations from that study has been lost. There are a few pretty complete sets of documents around and I have one of them along with all other construction plans and documents. A interesting note the first two designs failed in wind tunnel testing at Colorado State University. The third and final design included angling the corners to reduce the wind impact on the buildings. They also included a system of plates that allowed the building to move without causing structural damage. So now let me know if you would like some more actual facts regarding those buildings.
Hologram
Thomas Peterson which would certainly explain the fireball upon impact.
You can’t bring down a steel building with aviation fuel no possible way does not burn hot enough if it did the steel Mills would be saving millions by using it!
A bumblebee is not compatible with the law of physics.
Brent Davis
Greg I’m really curious as to your experience with structural design and construction standards and methods also what your experience is in building commercial buildings and multi story buildings.
Do the research they will do whatever it takes to achieve their agenda!