Why the NIST WTC 7 Report is False

Few people seem to know why the official report for World Trade Center building 7 is false and unscientific.  Some might have heard that the National Institute of Standards and Technology (or NIST) has admitted that the building fell in free-fall acceleration for a period of time.  But the fact is that the building could never have begun to fall the way NIST said it did.

Here are some reasons why NIST’s final collapse initiation theory is unscientific and false.

  • NIST ignored previous findings on the WTC 7 steel samples
  • No physical tests were done to confirm the mechanisms NIST proposed
  • The fire theory is contradicted by the known fire resistance plan

–The fires in WTC 7 lasted only 20 minutes in each area while the steel components were rated for hours of fire resistance

  • NIST’s final theory was based entirely on computer simulations that are not based on evidence and are not available to the public

–The fire initiation, fire spread, and fire loads were based on assumptions

–The case B assumption used was arbitrary and biased

–NIST’s fire modeling contradicts the photographic evidence

  • The fires in the critical areas (NE corner of floor 12) were out long before collapse
  • NIST contradicted itself and known facts about shear studs on the floor beams and the girder in question
  • The maximum thermal expansion possible could not have caused the girder to “walk-off” its seat

This short video explains the falsity of the NIST WTC 7 report in detail.

WTC 7 was a 47-story skyscraper that fell into its footprint at 5:20 in the afternoon on September 11, 2001.

About these ads
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Why the NIST WTC 7 Report is False

  1. Pingback: wrecking ball « the crow

  2. Pingback: The BBC to take another shot at 9/11 Truth | Dig Within

  3. Pingback: STJ911 Blog » Blog Archive » The BBC to Take Another Shot at 9/11 Truth

  4. Pingback: Are Tall Buildings Safer As a Result of the NIST WTC Reports? | Dig Within

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s