The SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT ANALYSIS of the events of 9/11.

a reply to: GenRadek

GenRadek, is that not exactly what I wrote in the last part of the post above yours?

This construction type resembles the WTC Towers quite well.
And a good fire insulation proved sufficient to not cause a collapse.

Damage
The total burnout of four and a half floors did not cause damage to the main structural members due to a good application of sprayed fire protection on all steelwork. There was only minor damage to one secondary beam and a small number of floor decks

.

This is what lots of online experts tell us for years already.
The fireproofing in the undamaged floors was good for 1.5 and 1 hrs.
So why would fires in those floors in the top parts of the Twin Towers, indict so much ASSUMED damage to perfectly insulated steel trusses and beams and columns?
And the fires at some sides of the impact region were already smoldering or totally out, after 30 minutes or so.

Those four examples shown by me, indicate foul play at the three WTC Towers, they burned much longer, and did not collapse.
The Windsor Tower in Madrid had no fireproofing insulation attached on ALL floors above the 17th, and that's why the fires did not get lower than that floor, which was perfectly insulated.!
The renovation of that Windsor Tower was initiated exactly for that, applying new fireproofing.!

Regarding hgfbob :

1. He is not worth calling a member as he has been banned under EVERY user name (at least 6) within days, what do you think spanned between the beams (which are not that massive they DON'T have to be)

2. Have you checked the construction of the buildings on your so called steel building fire post.

1. This a standard forum behavior. If a member gets banned, all the new applicators for a new member name (from a certain IP-address (wink/wink)) are automatically also banned.

2. Yes, have you read my responses? (SQ-SA)

Btw, the posts of hgfbob were showing that he read the NIST reports and came up with the right conclusion.
NIST's researchers in 2005 were a LOT more honest than the NIST directors in 2008, who gave up to find an acceptable conclusion for the WTC 7 collapse, thus at last they OUTSOURCED that task to another contracted by them, firm, that swiftly came up with that TOTALLY HUMBUG about new physical events that took place at WTC 7.
And the obedient appointee that Shame-on-you-Shunder was, even tried to defend that shoddy outsourced WTC 7 report !

Davis Chandler made him look like a school boy that failed a basic physics test....
He at least knew immediately that he got caught with his pants down, when David at that press conference showed him their intentionally faked collapse speed numbers in their report, and gave his EVIDENCE for a 2.5 seconds long, naturally progressing gravitational collapse speed acceleration.

Which means in EVERY PHYSICS BOOK, that there was no resistance at all over a vertical space of 8 floors.
During those first 2.5 seconds of the global collapse of building WTC 7.

And David also gave firm evidence that the two collapses of the Twin Towers were meeting no resistance in the first 6 seconds of their collapse sequences. His measured roof points proceeded along a perfectly straight line in his S-diagrams.
Firm indication that NO RESISTANCE at all was met by the collapsing roof and underlaying top part of the buildings.

SEE IT IN MY 3 LINKS-------------------V

originally posted by: beijingyank
a reply to: douglas5 The best information about the Jap war booty falling into the CIA/Bankster/Oligarch/Military Industrial Complex's/Shadow Government's hands come from the book Gold Warriors by the Seagraves.
Dulles and his minions are all over this capper.

thank you for that tip i will look it up as i hearsd about it years ago

originally posted by: GenRadek
a reply to: LaBTop

Also LaBTop, was this 1st Interstate Bank building a trussed design? Cause a structural steel frame is more in tune with steel beams and columns than columns and trusses supporting floors.

I am sure you have read about One Meridian Plaza burned and what happened inside there:
failures.wikispaces.com...

Pay close attention to the steel beams supporting the floors above and what happened to them. Mind you, WTC Towers did NOT have floors built this way. They had light steel trusses that are much thinner than the beams we see at One Meridian Plaza. But look closely, if that can happen to steel beams in a fire, what do you think would have happened to the thinner trusses? Ask a firefighter if you get a chance what their views are on going into a burning building with a truss supported roof. (Hint: Never trust a truss)

You meant : (Hint: Never trust a truss without a concrete floor on top )

What you meant are trusses under a relatively thin steel roof deck.
Any other roof is supported by steel beams, or wooden ones, with a concrete roof deck on them.
Which is much more reliable in the eyes of my questioned firemen.

Autoexposure occurred when fire lapped out of broken windows on the 22nd floor up the side of the building to the 23rd and 24th floors. Without the ability to extinguish the fire, the fire was able to spread further and further up the building.
--snip--
Because the fire had consumed multiple floors and structural damage and sagging was evident, the building was feared to collapse, and all firefighting efforts on the interior were abandoned at 7:00 AM on February 24th. Efforts continued on the exterior of the building from some surrounding high-rises, but the fire was ultimately quenched when it reached the 30th floor, where a tenant had installed ten automatic sprinkler heads. These sprinkler heads alone stopped the vertical spread of fire, and it was declared under control at 3:01 PM on February 24th.

As you see, fire spreads upwards, and sometimes downwards, when there are holes left in the fireproofing in the wall outlets, or floor spaces between wall and floor.
This was not the case at the WTC's, extra care was taken to stop all leaks, where fire could creep through. And yes, there were impacted opened up, damaged floors. Especially in those, the fires burned out quickly.

The floor beams sagged in the Meridian fire :

Engineers concluded that the spray-on fireproofing had in fact done its job in protecting a majority of the structural steel (Fireproofing 1991).
The columns of the building seemed unaffected by the fire and were supporting their loads without problem. However, girders and beams did sag from the heat of the fire, some as much as three feet as is shown in Figure 4.
Cracks were noticed in the concrete floors and stairwell walls

Spray-on fireproofing, steel columns and concrete floors did their job as expected. Just as should be expected at the WTC.
Why did those 1 meter sagging floor beams not pull the exterior, and the core columns inwards, as NIST said occurred at the WTC Towers? Why did the floors not pancake, just as Bazant once said? But were blown up in huge clouds of concrete dust, and their steel floor-plates they were poured on, were never found.
The tons of steel re-bar in those concrete floors? Where did it go?

Can ANYBODY show me a photo of 10.000s of steel floor plates, in pieces, crumbled, or in total, the ones we should expect to survive a natural, progressive collapse.

You know instinctively that these would survive that natural occurring collapse, but you guys and galls that trust your government unconditionally, because you were brainwashed in the Military, and/or in your TV sets, in your Hollywood films full of misplaced Patriotism, in your schools, your churches, your newspapers and weekly magazines, in short :

EVERYWHERE you LOOK !

You have been molded.....
Ask yourselves who are the modelers....?

Seems not such a difficult task, after you read all of David Guyatt's and E.P. Heider's masterpieces of investigative journalism, ONLY to be found on the INTERNET anymore.

If I had 3 Trillion dollars per year at my hands, I would let you ALL jump up on INDEPENDENCE DAY, and the resulting earthquake would destroy all those pesky spooks buildings....I just had to alter the indoctrination settings for your Boobs Sets a tiny bit.

Thank you for your attention, read my LINKS in my signature, which you can only see as an ATS member.
Membership is free....at a price... you just have to BEHAVE yourself !

WISDOMwillWIN--->9/11=a LIE !--->EVIDENCE--->LIST-------V---------(For the LURKERS)

originally posted by: samkent
I think it would be fair to say the floor construction of WTC was very similar to the roof construction at your local Walmart.
Except that Your Walmart doesn't have the added weight of concrete.

Aha, I just saw samkent underwrites the advice of my firefighters.
Nice to know you have friends in strange places.

I hope it did not slip under your attention span, that the WTC trusses were paired (double) under each floor-plate, each floor-plate was filled up with a 4 inch thick steel re-bared lightweight concrete, in fact concrete slabs on double steel bar trusses.

I just gave irrefutable evidence in my other latest thread, that the NIST proposal that they saw sagging floor trusses hanging in front of windows, is a load of Hogwash.
They based their whole sagging floor trusses theory as the initiating event for the global collapses, on that photo.
They are not thorough researchers, or they were stopped by their bosses, and they were told by the Bush White House to stop digging too deep into their WTC disasters.

For GenRadek, who tries with all corners of his molded brain to ignore the existance of them : My Advanced Thermobaric weapons posts all over page 6. This is just one of them, read them all at page 6.

Trusting and Doubting 9/11, a neverending story. Additional T&D-evidence, page 6. The HARD EVIDENCE that NIST it's photo where they hung their whole SAGGING FLOOR TRUSSES on, was hogwash, and thus their theory TOO.!


Read this photo of a text out of William Engdahl's book, Title : Full Spectrum Dominance, again, and remember,
""The full spectrum Dominance of the world by Amerika as the sole Superpower seems clearly the only item on the Washington agenda. An end to the OBSESSIVE military agenda of this WarFare state will be necessary. Not only for the world, but also for the survival of the United States as a functioning true democracy.""

Young men of America, overthrow this heinous government, and install a honest one.
Then stop the fear mongering on your Boobs Sets..

a reply to: LaBTop

LaBTop, look at the One Meridian Plaza fire damage again. Notice something about the horizontal beams? They too had a steel decking above them and concrete. And yet, look at how much sagging occurred including the steel decking with the concrete. Quite a bit eh? So, if these were far larger, thicker, and better attached to the vertical columns than the floor structure of the WTC, and they still managed to have such a degree of damage that it had be torn down, how can you say the trussed ones should have fared better? The sagging would be more pronounced of the trusses and the steel decking would have added MORE weight to the trusses already sagging, aggravating it.

Also you forget one major factor at WTC and that was the aircraft impact. The impact knocked loose a lot of fireproofing and the fireproofing was already substandard to begin with. You mean that this would not have affected the fire safety of the structure either? All the truss needs is one spot to be affected and it will do the rest. The other fire scenarios had intact fireproofing and even superb fireproofing. WTC 1 and 2 did not. All it needed was the floors to buckle and cause the exterior columns to bend in and that did the rest. Also according to reports, there werent any steel rebars in the concrete pourings. The steel decking itself just had the concrete poured on.

Do you have an explanation as to why we see the exterior columns bending inward prior to the collapses of both towers? What is your insight as to how this happened if there were supposedly explosives all over the place? I have yet to see explosives cause exterior columns to get pulled inside like that.

a reply to: LaBTop

You may want to catch up on the fireproofing issues here:
www.debunking911.com...

www.nytimes.com...

If the gentleman that inspect the towers last in mid- 2000 and had seen these issues up to the 78th floors, then is it not reasonable that the problems he saw continued higher up? It is simple really, LaBTop. You have thin crappily applied fireproofing that either didnt take or was completely missed, plus years of neglect, and then to top it off, impact with a speeding 767 that rocked the building like a young boxer that just took a vicious hook to the face from Mike Tyson, and you think the crappy fireproofing would withstand it?? I wish I shared your optimism. The fires spread via the fireballs and the burning jet fuel and then the flames themselves propagated via the cracks, fractures and openings left by the initial blast of the impact. Elevator shafts channeled the blasts as well as the HVAC systems and the fires could have easily spread through all of these methods.

Also in regards to hgfbob, he did not read the reports at all, and was just copying and pasting the same nonsense I found on other truther websites, word for word. He was siting the preliminary reports rather the final reports, and he still couldnt figure out what they said. Even the dumbed down media versions. He had not read the reports. If he did, he would have answered all of his demands on his own. But he didnt. And now you too also dont even understand how the acceleration of WTC7 happened, and it shows, because they explained it clearly even in the "dumbed down" media tech briefing. If you and he cannot understand something that was "dumbed down" (those were his words describing it) then I find it hard to swallow anything else more advanced you try to bring forward. If you cant understand the reason why WTC7 did what it did, and the collapse part and what caused the acceleration of freefall, then there is no hope of you understanding more complex things. I read the media tech reports, both of them, and they explain it clearly why there was acceleration seen. I'd suggest you go back and reread them ad the reports, and then come back to us when you do. Ive explained it to hfgbob numerous times and he still refused to listen, even though it was in his precious media tech briefing. If they explained it there and he missed it, well its not my fault or NIST's fault. Can you figure it out? I know I can.

a reply to: GenRadek

GenRadek, you observe those floors as separate floor plates. That is your mistake, they were locked together as huge strong floor sections, held up by double welded trusses under EACH of their steel floor-plate decks,

The floor system comprised lightweight steel bar trusses spaced at 2.03 m centers and braced by secondary trusses spaced at 4 m.
The secondary trusses supported a profiled steel deck with 102 mm (4 in.) thick cast-in-situ lightweight concrete slab.
The top bends (or knuckles) of the diagonal truss bars extended above the top chords and were embedded into the concrete slab to make the whole system composite.
The floor system spanned between the external walls and the core. At the external walls, truss top chords were bolted to the seats welded to the spandrels. At the central core, trusses were bolted to seats welded to a girder supported by the core columns.
Viscoelastic dampers were installed between bottom chords and spandrels to reduce the sway and vibration of the buildings by winds.
The floors supported the gravity loads and provided lateral stability to the external walls.
Source[/e x]

And see my above post with its EVIDENCE that those trusses were NOT hanging in front of a row of windows in that "famous" NIST photo in their final report, where they based their whole "sagging trusses" fairy-tale on.
They were obviously sagged aluminum ceiling rims.

edit on 28/8/14 by LaBTop because: (no reason given)

originally posted by: GenRadek
a reply to: LaBTop

LaBTop, look at the One Meridian Plaza fire damage again. Notice something about the horizontal beams? They too had a steel decking above them and concrete. And yet, look at how much sagging occurred including the steel decking with the concrete. Quite a bit eh? So, if these were far larger, thicker, and better attached to the vertical columns than the floor structure of the WTC, and they still managed to have such a degree of damage that it had be torn down, how can you say the trussed ones should have fared better? The sagging would be more pronounced of the trusses and the steel decking would have added MORE weight to the trusses already sagging, aggravating it.

LT : ""On February 23, 1991, at 8:23 PM, the lobby guard desk in One Meridian Plaza and the security company contracted to monitor the building were both alerted to a fire alarm on the 22nd floor. --snip-- it was declared under control at 3:01 PM on February 24th (Chubb 1991)"" GenRadek, do you realize HOW LONG those fires burned like CRAZY.? 18 hrs and 28 minutes.....WTC 1 burned ONLY 102 minutes, WTC 2 even less, ONLY 56 minutes Sprayed-on fireproofing was certified for either 1 or 1.5 hrs !

Also you forget one major factor at WTC and that was the aircraft impact. The impact knocked loose a lot of fireproofing and the fireproofing was already substandard to begin with. You mean that this would not have affected the fire safety of the structure either? All the truss needs is one spot to be affected and it will do the rest. The other fire scenarios had intact fireproofing and even superb fireproofing. WTC 1 and 2 did not. All it needed was the floors to buckle and cause the exterior columns to bend in and that did the rest. Also according to reports, there weren't any steel re-bars in the concrete pouring. The steel decking itself just had the concrete poured on.


I am 100 % sure that is wrong. I read in NIST that there were re-bars laid in the concrete, and the decks even had extra steel "hats" welded on them, to even let the concrete have a better grip on the steel deck it was poured on. I'll look it up for you.
"All the truss needs is one spot to be affected and it will do the rest." No, wrong, the whole floor was one huge PLATE, just one deformed truss or its seat would do NOTHING to that floor PLATE.

Do you have an explanation as to why we see the exterior columns bending inward prior to the collapses of both towers? What is your insight as to how this happened if there were supposedly explosives all over the place? I have yet to see explosives cause exterior columns to get pulled inside like that.

Yes, I gave that in the other thread's page 6, I just linked to for you to read my TB posts.
In short, they blew up the welds in the outer rows of 47 core columns at every third floor, since that was their full length, 3 floor heights. Cutter charges took care of that or shaped TB charges. That's why you saw my post with all the dented inwards column ends, that happens when a cutter charge is exploded horizontally besides a column-end its weld.

The columns were thus blown inwards and aside a bit and slipped down about a meter or so, taking the huge steel COMPOSITE floor plate with them down also a meter. Do the math how much the exterior columns will then be pulled inwards. It's a simple Pythagorean calculation. The denting inwards proved already that the floor plates and floor trusses and their SEATS welded and bolted to those exterior columns their Vierendeel triple columns packs, did NOT FAIL, as NIST likes us to believe.

a reply to: GenRadek

I know I can.

Then do.

All your text did not hold any explanation AT ALL for the 2.5 secs free fall.
Only conjecture.
Make my day, prove to me and David Chandler and a LOT of professional physicists that we are wrong.
I am really really waiting eagerly, to learn any new physics from your side.

PS : I studied the Final WTC 7 NIST report directly from top to toe, the first day it came out, and I never saw a more misleading piece of crap in my whole life. I am waiting. Your words are meant for casual readers, vote-cattle, but not for real physicists, they tear your arguments apart.

WTC Twin Towers fireproofing measures :

Fire compartmentalization :
In the core area, the stairwells and elevator shafts were enclosed by 2 hour fire-rated walls made of gypsum wallboard on steel studs.
In the open-plan tenant area, 1 hour fire-rated floor-to-slab partitions were used to separate the tenant spaces from each other and from the common core area.
Fire stopping materials were used to fill gaps in walls and floors to prevent the spread of smoke and flames.
The external wall was connected with the floors without gaps.

Fire protection to steelwork :
Most of the core columns were protected by gypsum wallboard.
Slab trusses, perimeter columns, spandrels and some faces of core columns were coated with three different sprayed fire protection materials.
Source[/e x]

a reply to: LaBTop

Oh really? you read the entire WTC7 Report? Sure could have fooled me.

Did you miss the entire part where they discuss probable collapse initiation which started with interior floor collapses prior to total collapse and failure of that significant column 79?
I'll take this from the media tech report:

The fire-induced thermal expansion of the floor system surrounding Column 79 led to collapse of Floor 13. That in turn triggered a cascade of floor failures. In fact, there were a cascade of floor failures that led to loss of lateral support to Column 79 over nine stories, resulting, then, in the failure of Column 79 through buckling.

911speakout.org...

Now to me this means that the floors around column 79 failed and collapsed, causing a cascade of floor failures, This means that, internally and around column 79, the floors fell, causing lateral support of column 79 to disappear. Once these floors all fell, what do you think was left underneath that entire segment? Come now, this is as easy as 1-1=0. When the floors collapsed all around the column and then it snapped, this means what? Thats right! NOTHING is underneath that section to slow down the initiating collapse. Come on LaBTop I know you are better than this. You can post oodles and oodles of text that appears to be well read, and yet, you cannot stop and visualize for a second how interior floors failed first leaving a wide open space underneath for the rest of the building to come through? The column snapped and the interior columns were failing rapidly and then once the rest of the building came down, the remaining sections below offered little resistance since most had already collapsed. Didnt one police officer who was at the base of WTC7 say it looked like the building just peeled in on itself? Craig Bartmer. Thats his name. He makes no mention and even points out that he heard nothing to indicate the building was going to collapse. Until the radio alerted him to the collapse.

Also, direct me to actual professional physicists that say WTC7 NIST report is a load of crap. and I mean real professionals from any of the accredited engineering organizations in the US, or physicist professionals form similar organizations. Mind you, AEfor911Truth does not count, and neither does Richard Gage or any of his friends. I mean actual professionals. also David Chandler is not a reliable source either. Some of the crap from him just makes me wonder how he managed to get a physics degree.

David Chandler has been caught lying before:
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...

NIST pretty much explains in a nutshell that that little bit of acceleration comes from the fact that interior floors collapsed first before the global collapse we saw. Nothing more. Now if you could direct me to actual proof that explosives were used I'd listen. But truthers had over 10 years to come up with something, and failed.

YES, REALLY !!!

I found in this 9/11 photos repository the first ever photo I saw from a vertical gash in the SOUTHWEST top side of the top SOUTH face of WTC 7.

files.abovetopsecret.com...


That gash is visible in the WEST side of that south face, while the first dent in the roof of the EAST penthouse set the scene for the unfolding event of the global collapse of WTC 7 8.3 seconds later.

While NIST later proposed that column 79 its seats from its crossbeams first failed over 8 floors, followed by buckling of that column 79 over 8 floors. That column was situated at the EAST side of WTC 7, in its NORTHERN section.

Strange, ain't it?

Especially when you read this lately released report that found that there were stiffeners under those seats, that NIST had totally ommitted in their build up of their "evidence" for the shearing-off of those 8 seats for the crossbeams holding up column 79, followed by their proposed buckling of that column 79 :
www.consensus911.org...

Conclusion :
NIST’s claim that the collapse of WTC 7 was initiated when Girder A2001 was pushed off its seat at Column 79 is untenable.

With the alleged initiating event ruled out, all of NIST’s claims about subsequent structural failures must be considered baseless and invalid.

Yes, Really.!!!

I was OBSTRUCTED in posting all those hours after GENRadek's above post, by this obstruction window, that kept popping up the moment I wanted to post from my posting window this above post that I had standing ready, since I knew he could not resist biting anymore, after all these years I have challenged him to answer my signature LINKS:

files.abovetopsecret.com...


Could it be that your ATS 9/11 conspiracy forums are COMPROMISED by those pesky CIA hacker-groups which they admitted were construed as part of their CYBER WARS efforts.???

The only trick to circumvent that is to first post a two word post, then edit that post.

A reply to: GenRadek

NOTHING is underneath that section to slow down the initiating collapse.

You mean that column 79 and all its adjacent cross beams DISAPPEARED suddenly? Not just buckled as NIST proposed (wrongly).

Bravissimo, you just proved the reason for that 2.5 seconds gravitational collapse speed ACCELERATION.
Over the space of NINE floors all over the SURFACE of the WHOLE building, there was NO RESISTANCE at all.

Otherwise that correctly MEASURED collapse speed ACCELERATION equal to the falling of a body of mass through a VACUUM, measured from a point on the roof rim of WTC 7, is totally untenable.

Did you miss the fact that that whole roof rim went down as ONE PIECE? Not as a partial denting of its eastern roof followed by crumbling and buckling of OTHER columns and beams in that NORTHEASTERN part of WTC 7. Then progressing to the western part.
That however, didn't happen.

The whole building's upper 38 floors (from the 47 total) SLIPPED down.! As a solid box.
Through the now non-existing anymore, nine floors
That can only occur, when SOMETHING removed all resistance ALL over the total surface of the WTC 7's lower 9 floors, that thus were obliterated by a huge explosion.

And Bartmer saw a whole cloud of explosive particles, once part of those lower 9 floors, spitting out from its wall, just a few feet above his HEAD.
Then he went running. It is very common that people caught in a disaster like that, do not remember the biggest sound accompanying it.
Did you forget his last remarks :
""I know explosions when I HEAR them......""
I posted that a "million times", but you guys have a selective memory, and it shows.

DID you miss the fact that NIST weeks after David Chandler's remark at their triumphant press conference, teeth-grindingly had to admit they fixed the numbers of their collapse speed acceleration calculations.
They took a few seconds before, and a few seconds after that correctly MEASURED by David, period of 2.5 seconds of REAL gravitational collapse speed through a VACUUM, calculated the mean value of those "upgraded seconds" and declared that to be the collapse speed acceleration.
Ever seen a more heinous art of DECEPTION from an official US Institution?

NIST pretty much explains in a nutshell that that little bit of acceleration comes from the fact that interior floors collapsed first before the global collapse we saw. Nothing more. Now if you could direct me to actual proof that explosives were used I'd listen. But truthers had over 10 years to come up with something, and failed.

You mean that column 79 and all its adjacent cross beams DISAPPEARED suddenly?
And that little bit of acceleration such as you say, occurred however over the height of 9 stories...that's not a little bit, that's THE MAXIMUM acceleration in my books.

And the EVIDENCE of explosives? See my sig-LINKS !
The first, seismic-WTC 7 post from the research solely done by me.

a reply to: LaBTop

A clarification, I copy/paste my post-text and directly hit post.
Then still this comes up, so it isn't a case of too long waiting, it's just 3 seconds copy/pasting, and then I post.

a reply to: LaBTop

I see, this is an INTERNET broad occurrence.!

Title : god almighty, what's with the timeouts?
www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: GenRadek

GenRadek.
Both your posted videos are made by someone who has not the slightest idea how physics works and must be interpreted.
Do you ever read the comment sections of the videos you adore?

TNT Productions
2 months ago

Yes but you're ignoring his fundamental premise that PART of the collapse took place at freefall speed. You never even address it, which sounds like a subtle admission that David Chandler is right. This video does nothing but reiterate the AVERAGE acceleration that NIST presents, while ignoring the INSTANTANEOUS acceleration, which David Chandler correctly points out.

In short, this video is bulls_hit.

Exactly what I wrote already in one of the above posts.

I invite you to another try to counter my Sig-LINKS.

The actual video of WTC 7 its destruction, played beside the full version of the NIST computer simulation, clearly undermines the NIST simulation.
The shown one, is the full one released by NIST, they stopped at 1 second into the global collapse sequence.

Especially when you know the reason why and when the NIST its simulation stops. That NIST video at the right, when it stopped, started to lean to the right and went crumbling backwards, performing not in the next, not publicized frames, what we saw in every WTC 7 collapse video.
We saw it sliding and sinking down as one huge facade-INTACT block, with all visible sides still 99 % intact too :

www.youtube.com...


When the NIST simulation stops about 1 second after the WTC 7 roof-rim started its descent, in that NIST simulation its last video-frame fragment at the right of the video-screen, their external WTC 7 frame is folding up at this point in the computer simulation. Especially its top rim lines.

But that did not happen in the actual video of the WTC 7 collapse. The only reason that NIST would have to stop showing the further descent at this point would be to hide the obvious "folding up" and "falling over" that is beginning to occur, as everybody can see.

Also, the "cascading" failure of the structural framing system at the 3 interior columns at the left (east) side of the building, if it had actually occurred, would result in a very noticeable deformation of the visible exterior walls, which is clearly not occurring.

I really hope for everybody believing the crap NIST threw at us with this simulation, that the day will come that you are able to talk to a real architect, engineer or a high rise builder, who will explain to you that core columns and exterior columns are connected through cross beams with concrete floors on top of them, which floors will fall down in that NIST 9-stories-column79-failure scenario, pulling every exterior column with them, inwards. (As was observed in both WTC twin towers pre-collapse pictures).

We do not see that happen, it was exactly as if that whole building was resting on top of a huge party balloon (out of sight of the camera), which got punctured and exploded, followed by a sinking downwards of all visible exterior sides as one block, all the way, until out of camera sight. Without exceptional deformation.

And to top-off that whole heinous and deception-rich conglomerate of NIST lies, they refuse to this day, to publicize the parameters they fed into their WTC 7 collapse simulation software. And the used software too.
Based on a White House directive nr 12333, precisely construed for exactly that purpose. Declaring everything what threatens to cause exposure of government involvement in the events of the 9/11 murders, a case of "national security".

I repeat, the overwhelming majority of genuine and honest researchers still working at NIST, should first find a new honest boss, then resign from that deceptive vipers nest's, staffed with political appointed directors, acting solely as perfect abeyant slaves-of-the-system. A system based solely on deception, already for nearly a hundred years.

There's not one really honest to the core, politician walking the floors of all those government buildings.
It's impossible, because when there were such persons, they wouldn't stand a chance to ever get voted into any position of real power. You have to ignore lies, corruption and deceit on your way up in the system, or you will be swiftly removed by the more powerful ones, still above you in the chain of command.
Even when you, all the way up to power were constantly giving and taking bribes, reached the in your eyes most powerful position, that of US president, you can't suddenly change attitude and become an honest politician, then the system controllers come in action.
As many presidents, disgusted with such corrupt to the backbone systems, too late, found out.

a reply to: LaBTop

I posted that picture 15 DAYS ago on another thread KEEP UP, also other images of the vertical gash and even a VIDEO have been available on line for YEARS!!!

As for you sig well YOU can't even identify the TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION used in buildings can you!