[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

George Washington University raises the Hamas flag. American Flag has been removed.

Alabama students chant Take A Shower to the Hamas terrorists on campus.

In Day of the Lord, 24 Church Elders with Crowns Join Jesus in His Throne

In Day of the Lord, 24 Church Elders with Crowns Join Jesus in His Throne

Deadly Saltwater and Deadly Fresh Water to Increase

Deadly Cancers to soon Become Thing of the Past?

Plague of deadly New Diseases Continues

[FULL VIDEO] Police release bodycam footage of Monroe County District Attorney Sandra Doorley traffi

Police clash with pro-Palestine protesters on Ohio State University campus

Joe Rogan Experience #2138 - Tucker Carlson

Police Dispersing Student Protesters at USC - Breaking News Coverage (College Protests)

What Passover Means For The New Testament Believer

Are We Closer Than Ever To The Next Pandemic?

War in Ukraine Turns on Russia

what happened during total solar eclipse

Israel Attacks Iran, Report Says - LIVE Breaking News Coverage

Earth is Scorched with Heat

Antiwar Activists Chant ‘Death to America’ at Event Featuring Chicago Alderman

Vibe Shift

A stream that makes the pleasant Rain sound.

Older Men - Keep One Foot In The Dark Ages

When You Really Want to Meet the Diversity Requirements

CERN to test world's most powerful particle accelerator during April's solar eclipse

Utopian Visionaries Who Won’t Leave People Alone

No - no - no Ain'T going To get away with iT

Pete Buttplug's Butt Plugger Trying to Turn Kids into Faggots

Mark Levin: I'm sick and tired of these attacks

Questioning the Big Bang

James Webb Data Contradicts the Big Bang

Pssst! Don't tell the creationists, but scientists don't have a clue how life began

A fine romance: how humans and chimps just couldn't let go

Early humans had sex with chimps

O’Keefe dons bulletproof vest to extract undercover journalist from NGO camp.

Biblical Contradictions (Alleged)

Catholic Church Praising Lucifer

Raising the Knife

One Of The HARDEST Videos I Had To Make..

Houthi rebels' attack severely damages a Belize-flagged ship in key strait leading to the Red Sea (British Ship)

Chinese Illegal Alien. I'm here for the moneuy

Red Tides Plague Gulf Beaches

Tucker Carlson calls out Nikki Haley, Ben Shapiro, and every other person calling for war:

{Are there 7 Deadly Sins?} I’ve heard people refer to the “7 Deadly Sins,” but I haven’t been able to find that sort of list in Scripture.

Abomination of Desolation | THEORY, BIBLE STUDY

Bible Help

Libertysflame Database Updated

Crush EVERYONE with the Alien Gambit!

Vladimir Putin tells Tucker Carlson US should stop arming Ukraine to end war

Putin hints Moscow and Washington in back-channel talks in revealing Tucker Carlson interview

Trump accuses Fulton County DA Fani Willis of lying in court response to Roman's motion

Mandatory anti-white racism at Disney.


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

911
See other 911 Articles

Title: “Preliminary Results of WTC7 Study Show Fire Could Not Have Caused Collapse” Could’ve Brought Down World Trade Center Building 7
Source: Activist Post
URL Source: http://www.activistpost.com/2016/09 ... -not-have-caused-collapse.html
Published: Sep 17, 2016
Author: Derrick Broze
Post Date: 2016-11-24 10:55:56 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 23111
Comments: 54

building-7

By Derrick Broze

Preliminary results of a two-year study looking into the destruction of World Trade Center 7 indicates that fire could not have caused the collapse. 

To mark the 15th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, the collective 9/11 Truth movement gathered in New York City for two days of street actions, outreach, and the “Justice In Focus” 9/11 Symposium. At the symposium, organized by the Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, the Lawyers Committee for 9/11 Inquiry, and other co-sponsors, there was a heavy emphasis on the possibility of a civil or criminal trial as a means of exposing the truth about the 9/11 attacks.

Many 9/11 researchers now focus on the mysterious collapse of building 7.  A number of 9/11 family members point to the collapse of WTC7 as a possible crack in the official story that could spark a new national conversation on the events of that day. WTC7 was not hit by a plane that day; however, it collapsed at 5:20 p.m. according to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the official cause for the collapse was office fires. A growing number of family members, activists, architects and engineers question the official theory for collapse and are seeking a new investigation into WTC7.

In May 2015, a team of researchers from the University of Alaska Fairbanks began a two-year investigation of the collapse of WTC7. Dr. J. Leroy Hulsey, of the University of Alaska Fairbanks, and two Ph.D. research assistants are partnering with the non-profit Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth for a two-year engineering study known as “World Trade Center Building 7 Evaluation.” The researchers are using finite element modeling to evaluate the possible causes of World Trade Center Building 7’s collapse.

“We will investigate the collapse. We probably will not be able to tell them what caused it, but I could tell them what did not,” Hulsey told MintPress.

I am approaching it like most forensic engineers would. We’re looking at the structure itself, trying to put together all of the details of what was available, and in this case very little was available. Because most of it has been destroyed or it’s locked in vaults somewhere. So I have very little to work with.

Hulsey explained that he addresses issues raised by NIST, but will not be reading anything about NIST or other previous studies. “I have to maintain an open scientific mind. I don’t want to be led down a path that others have gone down,” he said. “I will read about it once we reach our final conclusions and then cross-check to make sure we don’t have any issues with respect to the science.”

googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display('div-gpt-ad-1470694951173-5'); });

During an interview at the Justice In Focus Symposium, Hulsey said that the team has already investigated the theory that fire caused the building’s collapse. “It is our preliminary conclusions, based upon our work to date, that fire did not produce the failure at this particular building.” 

When their study concludes in April 2017, Hulsey and his team will allow a panel of experts to analyze the data and submit the study to peer-reviewed journals. The researchers are promising a “completely open and transparent investigation into the cause of World Trade Center Building 7’s collapse,” and will post every step of their scientific process on WTC7Evaluation.org. The WTC7 Evaluation project will also include a review by a committee of technical experts who will vet the research being conducted by Dr. Hulsey and his students.

Ted Walter, Director of Strategy and Development for A&E 9/11 Truth, is in charge of working with the professor and raising money to fund the WTC7 Evaluation. Walter told Activist Post that the project began in May 2015 and should should wrap up in April of next year.

“They are coming up with different scenarios of how hot the fires could have been in different parts of the building, and then for the next 6 months they will be running tests and scenarios,” Walter told Activist Post. “The last few months, early next year, will be all about putting the findings into a final report.”

Stay tuned to Activist Post for updates on Dr. Hulsey’s study. (1 image)

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 36.

#2. To: Deckard (#0)

"Preliminary results of a two-year study looking into the destruction of World Trade Center 7 indicates that fire could not have caused the collapse."

I see. So what DID cause the collapse and, more importantly, where's the proof?

misterwhite  posted on  2016-11-24   13:00:46 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: misterwhite (#2)

So what DID cause the collapse and, more importantly, where's the proof?

Is there proof that fire brought WTC7 down?

While I've seen fire cause at least one partial collapse of a steel building (and a relatively small percentage of the building at that), the thought of an uncontrolled fire causing WTC7 collapse so uniformly with all 4 upper corners dropping at the same time is quite peculiar.

Was it a controlled demolition? I don't know, but it is peculiar that a fire could have made WTC7 fall the way it did.

Pinguinite  posted on  2016-11-24   13:18:23 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: Pinguinite (#3)

"Is there proof that fire brought WTC7 down?"

Yes, according to the NIST report. There is zero proof that explosives were involved.

misterwhite  posted on  2016-11-24   13:46:04 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: misterwhite (#5)

Yes, according to the NIST report.

Was there proof, evidence, or just a conclusion that fire brought WTC7 down?

I understand the 911 commission report made no mention of WTC7 at all.

Pinguinite  posted on  2016-11-24   14:46:36 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#33. To: Pinguinite (#12)

"Was there proof, evidence, or just a conclusion that fire brought WTC7 down?"

The conclusion was that the evidence provided proof that WTC7 was brought down by the fire created by the contents of the building and the failure of the sprinkler system.

misterwhite  posted on  2016-11-25   10:53:58 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#35. To: misterwhite, Pinguinite (#33) (Edited)

The conclusion was that the evidence provided proof that WTC7 was brought down by the fire created by the contents of the building and the failure of the sprinkler system.

Really?

And you believe them(NIST)?

9/11 Truth: The Mysterious Collapse of WTC Seven: Why NIST’s Final 9/11 Report is Unscientific and False

NIST and Scientific Fraud

With regard to the question of science: Far from being supported by good science, NIST’s report repeatedly makes its case by resorting to scientific fraud.

Before going into details, let me point out that, if NIST did engage in fraudulent science, this would not be particularly surprising. NIST is an agency of the US Department of Commerce. During the years it was writing its World Trade Center reports, therefore, it was an agency of the Bush-Cheney administration. In 2004, the Union of Concerned Scientists put out a document charging this administration with “distortion of scientific knowledge for partisan political ends.” By the end of the Bush administration, this document had been signed by over 15,000 scientists, including 52 Nobel Laureates and 63 recipients of the National Medal of Science. [10]

Moreover, a scientist who formerly worked for NIST has reported that it has been “fully hijacked from the scientific into the political realm,” with the result that scientists working for NIST “lost [their] scientific independence, and became little more than ‘hired guns.’”11 Referring in particular to NIST’s work on the World Trade Center, he said everything had to be approved by the Department of Commerce, the National Security Agency, and the Office of Management and Budget—“an arm of the Executive Office of the President,” which “had a policy person specifically delegated to provide oversight on [NIST’s] work.” [12]

One of the general principles of scientific work is that its conclusions must not be dictated by nonscientific concerns – in other words, by any concern other than that of discovering the truth. This former NIST employee’s statement gives us reason to suspect that NIST, while preparing its report on WTC 7, would have been functioning as a political, not a scientific, agency. The amount of fraud in this report suggests that this was indeed the case.

According to the National Science Foundation, the major types of scientific fraud are fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism. There is no sign that NIST is guilty of plagiarism, but it is certainly guilty of fabrication, which can be defined as “making up results,” and falsification, which means either “changing or omitting data.” [13]

Alternate text if
image doesn't load

Deckard  posted on  2016-11-25   11:18:23 ET  (1 image) Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#36. To: Deckard (#35)

"And you believe them(NIST)?"

Well, I have yet to read your version of exactly what happened. So I'm keeping an open mind while I'm waiting on you.

It's been 15 years. Any idea when your version of the events will be published so I can can compare your evidence with the NIST report?

misterwhite  posted on  2016-11-25   12:00:21 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 36.

        There are no replies to Comment # 36.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 36.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com