UA Anchorage releases the final report on WTC-7: Fires DID NOT cause the collapse

a reply to: neutronflux

Lmao . Yes you do trust the government and you try to get every 911 thread shut down with your spam . Can’t you find a different job . Anything must be more fulfilling

originally posted by: Thenail
a reply to: neutronflux

Lmao . Yes you do trust the government and you try to get every 911 thread shut down with your spam . Can’t you find a different job . Anything must be more fulfilling

What does trust have to do with the lack of evidence as in zero evidence planted charges brought down the WTC? And you trust the known and proven lies of the truth movement?

And I believe there are good people in the government. There are lazy people in the government. And power hungry SOBs in the government.

That has nothing to do with the lies and falsehoods of Richard Gauge and Architects and Engineers. And nothing to do with my first two posts in this thread.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Jchristopher5

You

What we can say is that this is real scientific study, not someone’s opinion.

Really?

Might want to look at this?

UAF WTC 7 Evaluation Simulation Plausibility Check (Leroy Hulsey, AE911Truth)

You

The data was made available for peer review.

Might look who “peer” reviewed the study and tell us who they are. They were individuals tied to the truth movement. With being biased. The paper was not peer reviewed by impartial individuals with experience in forensic engineering.

The are reports of the comments from the public questioning period being totally ignored and not addressed.

You

You can disagree, but no longer can someone be called a “crazy conspiracy theorist”

.

Richard Gauge at this point right out lies.

Hulsey presents research arguing WTC7 not brought down by fires/University of Alaska

www.internationalskeptics.com...

By Oystein

www.internationalskeptics.com...

Nope, not really.
You might think different if you gullibly believed every word Richard Gage says, who recently flew to tropical Acapulco to spread his lies, where he was interviewed by some sycophant propagandist:

YT: NEW 911 Report By UAF DESTROYS Official Narrative On Collapse Of Building 7!!!
uploaded yesterday, 2020/02/19, it apparently took place between Feb 13 and 16

The title of the video is a lie, to start with: The report (final release) cannot "destroy" anything because it does not yet exist, and the draft isn't "new".

Gage fires of an incredibly fast scatter-shooting of lies, start at 1 min 33 seconds:

Originally Posted by Richard Gage lies
“If uh Building 7 could come down at freefall acceleration[1], straight down, uniformly[2], symmetrically[3], into its own footprint[4] in under seven seconds[5] just like the old hotels in Las Vegas, which are controlled demolitions, then we have a problem[6] with how these similarly designed, hundreds of them, buildings[7] could behave in an office fire. And these were not huge office fires[8]. They were relatively small[9], few and scattered[10] in this building.[2:00]“


10 lies in 27 seconds. WOW! I hilighted the lies. He speaks the truth about Vegas demolitions. That's it.

The study totally ignores:

The detectable shaking of WTC 7 before collapse.

The penthouse did not just stop a few floors down.

The WTC 7 underwent a total interior collapse before the facade began to move.

The most accurate measurements of the facade collapse has it accelerating for a shot time at a rate faster than free fall, which would be only possible if it was placed under tension due to an interior collapse.

The study ignored actual fire loading and fires on other floors.

There is no physical evidence of a namable event that matches the studies conclusion that every column over an eight floor span had an event that made the columns spontaneously and instantaneously lose support. Something along the lines of 600 devices if the study is to believed. And that is not taking into account kicker charges to misalign the columns.

Hulsey’s model also is missing key components of the WTC 7 collapse as recorded/seen on video.

The Hulsey paper is based on false assumptions, ignoring video evidence before and during collapse, with no observable event that matches/explains what triggered the paper’s conclusion, and solely a biased AE paid for piece of propaganda.


————————————

Do you want to make false accusations about me.

Or address the known and documented shortcomings of the Hulsey report, and the ridiculousness of its modeling. And as far as trusting government, and the truth movement seeing government agents everywhere. Wonder where Feng Xiao is now? And his role in the communist party. How do you get to top tier universities in China? How did the Chinese government feel about him being part of the Hulsey report? It’s fun to play the innuendo game...

a reply to: Thenail

Richard Gage lost his marbles long ago...

Anything to keep the illusion of WTC CD on life support to keep those donations coming.

Why 9/11 Truthers Are Obsessed With the Plasco High-Rise Fire in Tehran

gizmodo.com...

Before the dust had even settled in Tehran, AE911Truth issued a press release urging President Hassan Rouhani to investigate the “possible use of explosives” in the destruction of the tower.

Wowzer quite the thread. The instant I saw the event live on TV I knew. I have spent years trying to prove it but cannot as the information is tucked away. That alone tells me I am right. For now I am satisfied with that.

For proof of a false flag all we have to do is look at a few key facts.

1. Building 7, 5, 1, 2 ...... Nothing that happened there was similar to when any aircraft hit a building ever. It did however look like a mini nuke had hit it, but looks are not everything and all though there is radiation present I have not done enough "research" into it so going with my gut and I think there is a thread with it explained far better than I ever could try right now so if interested go take a peek.
2. Somehow some planes flew into the towers and the fell down inwards as opposed to being knocked over or absorbing the impact as it was "designed."
3. Sometin about Joey B wiring the pakistani Isi a large sum of $ then predicted the day before this type of attack would someday hit the US.
4. Within hours a CiA contractor named obl was named the boogey man who could never be cuaght (on dialysis) and yet somehow mr soetero had a seal team took him out and bury him at sea.

Link

A New To Me Theory On 911

Do I know how it actually happened nope. Don't care I know who caused it and know what they are capable of.

Knowing is half the battle.

One of my favorite documentaries on 9/11 is "ZERO An Investigation Into 9/11".

I remember when I first watched it, it removed ALL doubt concerning what really happened.

The first 2 minutes are a MUST watch for those who haven't seen it yet. The first link is the trailer and the film itself has been all but removed from YT for the most part, the link below is the only one currently remaining. EDIT: See this link if it vanishes from YT again...

"This is the film that makes it impossible to accept the "official" version of the "911" tragedy any longer. So the question really comes down to: who's telling the truth - the government or this group of Italian/French/German producers? I would say, go with the one that hasn't lied to you. And that only leaves one choice."

a reply to: Murgatroid

WOW

It took only 15 seconds before they started to lie

There were 2 impact holes un the Pentagon

Upper was created by fuselage ad was measured at about 16-17 feet

The lower hole , the one the conspiracy loons always omit, Is some 96 feet across, created by the wings and engines '

I stopped at this point knowing what would come next would be an incoherent mess

a reply to: CrazyFox

You

Wowzer quite the thread. The instant I saw the event live on TV I knew. I have spent years trying to prove it but cannot as the information is tucked away

Contradict much? The “information” is right there in the video evidence....

a reply to: Murgatroid

I remember when I first watched it, it removed ALL doubt concerning what really happened.

I don't know what really happened. But I do know this.
When a story isn't believable people ask questions. When the questions
have no believable answers it's safe to assume someone is lying.
I give no credibility at all to someone repeatedly saying the person who
is asking questions, digging for the truth and pointing out lies, is lying.

No one can defend the insurmountable plethora of bull# concerning 911.

To claim it's all a perfectly viable story is just a joke by the endless number
of questions alone. if it was just a terrorist attack it would be so much more
believable. We wouldn't have a phantom 757 jet hitting the pentagon. Or the FBI
confiscating all the camera footage that shows no jet. We might even have
a couple tires from the jet. On and on the official story can't even be defended
as truth.

No one can squawk about lies if they're defending the official bull#. Complete
and total ignorance.

Appreciate your post.

a reply to: carsforkids

Then you should be outraged by the lies of those pushing claims the twin towers were brought down by:

Richard Gage, fizzle no flash hush bombs?

Steven Jones, thermite which is too slow and inconsistent burning to carry out the fantasy sophisticated split timed CD.

With no way the ignition systems would survive jet impacts, being hit by debris, and the building fires.

The people that don’t believe jets hit the towers. And with the use of holograms, missiles and or lasers?

Dr Wood and Dustification?

WTC nukes.

By all means please do tell which is the most credible truth movement explanation after 19 years? When does an “alternative” view turn to a right out lie and misinformation?

a reply to: neutronflux

Then you should be outraged by the lies of those pushing claims the twin towers were brought down by:

No I'm not outraged by people looking for the truth.

I'm not outraged by anything.

I stand by my post.

WTC 7 was a global failure involving the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building.

Proof positive that Harry Potter did it.

Interesting that they say why it collapsed.
But not a word about what caused the collapse.

That's like a coroners report concluding he died because his heart stopped beating.
All that time and money wasted.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: CrazyFox

You

Wowzer quite the thread. The instant I saw the event live on TV I knew. I have spent years trying to prove it but cannot as the information is tucked away

Contradict much? The “information” is right there in the video evidence....

Okdoke that proves the "official story" go back 2 bed
Show me how the 911 documents have been developed classified, until then my facts show false flag his does not prove otherwiae.

a reply to: CrazyFox

The collapse video, the audio, seismic evidence is all available.

Please show me where there is evidence that the resistance of columns was removed floor by floor. How many charges on how many columns?

Please show where the twin towers collapsed through the path of greatest resistance?

Please state the actual collapse rate of the twin towers. The floor system vs the toppling of the core columns.

What was the truth movement argument the twin towers had to be CD? Seems the truth movement argument is based on falsehoods and lies? Unless you can prove otherwise? And which theory should I find the most credible?

a reply to: CrazyFox

Or if you want to make it topical to the original post...

The accessible video, audio, seismic evidence for WTC 7 points to a progressive internal collapse, then facade movement. With no reason in the study why the penthouse would only fall a few floors then stop.

There is little evidence that all the columns throughout WTC 7 instantaneously and simultaneously disappeared over a eight floor span. With no evidence of a mechanism for such an event.

We knew this, most people don't care anymore, which is sad.
Not sure if the the truth will ever be revealed to the masses.
Everybody is concerned with disease as it is the the most immediate threat to people right now, not something that happened 20 years ago.

I just don't see how such a small section of the building can cause the collapse.

Remeber the videos of what sounded like explosives going off with a pattern sound. Ot explosions.

And I know they turned their transponders off. but for a plane to have no contact with the air traffic controllers is sketchy.

These guys are telling planes to change altitude and speed constantly

a reply to: Grenade

What should I believe from the Video, Audio, Seismic evidence?

What mechanism did the Hulsey report state caused the studies flawed conclusion? Magic?

a reply to: neutronflux

You could use your own eyes, a little physics and logic.

If you can watch footage of building 7 collapse and attribute the cause to fire then you're either dumb or purposely misleading people.

I tend to plump for option number 2.