University of Alaska Fairbanks Professor Launches New 9/11 Research Project

Dr. J. Leroy Hulsey, Chair of the University of Alaska Fairbanks’ (UAF) Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, is conducting a study into the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 on September 11, 2001.

Published: March 30, 2016

Source

For some, there is no mystery behind the collapse of Building 7. That doesn’t bother me, I respect their opinion as most of us really don’t know what happened that day. It’s just easier to accept what we’ve been told rather than carrying the burden of disbelief.

I looked this gentleman up and from what I can tell, he’s clean. His education seems solid and he is well respected amongst his peers. Since 1993, he has owned and operated Alignment Systems, Inc., which handles software development, advanced structural composite systems, bridge and complex structure design, such as water slides. He also provides consulting services to anyone requiring forensic engineering, instrumentation and monitoring. Sounds like he’s qualified to me.


His information: 1, 2

Website: Link

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 an 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.

Building 7's Evaluation: An Introduction

Dr. Hulsey and the WTC7 Evaluation project hope to answer some of the remaining questions. The project is a two-year study that is being crowd-funded through Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. Dr. Hulsey has invited professionals from the fields of structural engineering, civil engineering, mechanical engineering, architecture, building design and construction, physics, math, and science, as well as everyday citizens, to get involved.

Dr. Hulsey's Presentation to the Associated General Contractors of Alaska

“Over the next year, with a team of PhD students, I will be rebuilding World Trade Center building 7, using the same drawings that were used to build it originally we will reconstruct it digitally,” said Dr. J. Leroy Hulsey. “NIST says the building fell down due to office fires. Our investigation will evaluate the probability that this was the cause of the collapse.”

Dr. Hulsey's Presentation to the UAF ASCE Student Chapter (may be redundant)

If you have Google Drive, you’re in luck. If you don't, you'll have to download a 1.1G zip file in order to view his research data and analysis. I encourage you to download and review the data in order to make a more informed opinion.

Research Data and Analysis: Download

WTC 7 Evaluation Lab Videos: Link

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. The professor and his team are soliciting financial support from the public from now until the completion of the study in April 2017.

The team is coming up the different scenarios of how hot the fires could have been in different parts of the building. They will then try and simulate as many of them as possible in hopes to either validate the official story or blow it out of the water. If they’re allowed to get that far...

Walter said the goal is to get the report published in peer-reviewed engineering journals. “We hope to gain significant traction in the engineering community by providing an authoritative refutation of NIST’s report, by showing that there is no way that fires could have brought down building 7.” Walter also mentioned the possibility of getting the report into the hands of every member of Congress.

Ted Walter is the Director of Strategy and Development for A&E 9/11 Truth and is in charge of working with the professor to help raise money in order to fund the project. Many philanthropists are afraid to attach themselves to such causes, especially if they are well integrated and respected members of society. Telling someone you don’t believe the official story can be a “kiss of death” to one’s image and credibility. Many are unwilling to stick their necks out and hopefully will agree to donate anonymously.

If I was Mr. Walter, I would tone down the anti-government rhetoric until any major revelation happens. I find Dr. Hulsey’s approach to the subject refreshing and without fault. He appears to respect the scientific method and strives to maintain the utmost transparency in his work. The research should remain pure at heart and though it may not tell us what exactly brought down Building 7 that day, it sure as hell will tell us what didn’t. Never forget...

The more the merrier I say especially when it comes to investigating ANY of the events of 9/11. You can spend all the time and money you want but somebody hit a button to make WTC 7 come down. If office fires or random plane crashes could make skyscrapers fall down nobody would be willing to work in them. The laws of physics were not suspended for a day despite what the 911 Commission or NIST may have to say about the matter.

For me WTC 7 is the biggest mystery of all time.

2 planes 3 buildings? The media script being exposed prior to its collapse by the BBC?

Then there is the "pull it" comment.

If the building had half collapsed, then it could be attributed to falling debris from the Towers collapsing, but as been said, the laws of physics were not suspended for the day, despite the enormity of the unfolding events.

Good luck to the gentleman.

a reply to: eisegesis

That doesn’t bother me, I respect their opinion as most of us in existence really don’t know what happened that day.

Edit: Speak for yourself. instead of saying 'most of us really don't know what happened that day', speak to what you personally don't understand about events.

Which part was mysterious?

a digital experiment funded by truthers ?

seems legit

I looked this gentleman up and from what I can tell, he’s clean. His education seems solid and he is well respected amongst his peers

He was. One character assassination coming right up!

a reply to: eisegesis

Thanks for sharing this. Most of the scientists, physicists, engineers, etc. researching 9/11 are credible, well-educated individuals. Unfortunately to the official conspiracy theory believers, it doesn't matter how many PhD.'s one has, or what top-tier university they went to to obtain those PhD.'s. Once they start researching 9/11 and espousing alternate theories, their PhD.(s) instantly mean absolutely nothing.

And that's unfortunate because universities don't hand out PhD.'s like candy in a store for nothing.

originally posted by: syrinx high priest
a digital experiment funded by truthers ?

seems legit

that's the exact same thing 'truthers' say about NIST. Because you put the word 'truther' in a sentence it doesn't mean the man lacks in integrity or qualifications.

a reply to: syrinx high priest
I would rather be labelled a "truther" than a blind believer.

a reply to: intrptr

Lack of evidence combined with a poor presentation equals a lack of understanding. And we all know that the absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, especially without proper means of detection. About 80% of the steel was scrapped without being examined because investigators didn't have the authority to preserve the wreckage. This man is attempting to give us what NIST failed to even acknowledge in their report. I can't begin to understand what doesn't exist.

a reply to: eisegesis

Thank you for posting this, I read a little about this about a month ago.

I can't wait for their final Report next year. It will be interesting to see what new propaganda against Dr. J. Leroy Hulsey will be used to discredit Leroy Hulsey and his work.

The fact is, some of the official stories believers have already discredited A&E For 911 Truth and all the scientist.

Their claim is A&E For 911 Truth is a money making scam and nothing more.

The fact is, it will not matter what Leroy Hulsey is able to prove, he will be discredited as a charlatan.

It is very important for Truth seekers to avoid this trap.

We have all heard and read about “cognitive diversity” this is a divide and conquer technique method to break up the Truth movements in many fractions.

It is a fact that “Cognitive diversity” has been used by our government to fracture the 911 Truth movement to create confusion and create diversities in the movement.

What, you all don't believe me? Just step back for a minute and look at all the different 911 Truth movement groups and their belief.

Some believe WTC 7 fell down because some of the debris from WTC 1 & 2 fell on it.

Some of the 911 Truthers believe that a few fires on several floors brought down WTC 7.

Some believe just one major support column gave away and the whole building fell.

And then there is the one's that believe demolition was used to bring down WTC 7.

This is evidence of just four groups divided into fractions in the Truth movement. There are many more fractions in the Truth movement about other events in 911 as well.

This is why no one can take 911 seriously, because no one is on the same page when it comes to 911. This technique of “Cognitive diversity” was also used in the USS Liberty attacks, the president John F Kennedy assassination, the Robert Kennedy assassination, the WTC bombing in 1993, the Oklahoma City bombing, 9/11, Boston bombing, Sandy Hook and many other events.

For me, I will stand behind credible science and Peer Reviewed Papers that can prove the official narratives are wrong.

I trust that Leroy Hulsey will be able to prove the official narratives about the WTC 7 will be true or not True.

If one part of the official narratives can be proven wrong, then why would anyone want to believe the rest of the official narratives of 911.

as to the title of this thread.....why?.....how many people are going to keep doing this.....there is simply nothing that is going to be done about it...it's over, the evidence is destroyed or hidden, the history has been written.

And if this group finds that the building collapse could have started with column 79, what will be the output from ae911?
Flawed models ?

Will the conspiracy community say they were bought off?

originally posted by: samkent
And if this group finds that the building collapse could have started with column 79, what will be the output from ae911?
Flawed models ?

Will the conspiracy community say they were bought off?

Two possible outcomes.

Collapse happened according to official account. 50% don't pay any attention.

Collapse didn't happen according to official account.
50% don't pay attention.

a reply to: samkent

And if this group finds that the building collapse was due to control demolition.

What would be the output from A&E, that they were correct all alone?

It will prove part of the 911 Truth movement was correct.

a reply to: Informer1958

And if this group finds that the building collapse was due to control demolition.

I'll tell you why that's not going to happen.
They would then put themselves in the position of proving to the world what they believed happened.
As in which columns were cut 1st then 2nd. etc
How the explosives survived the fires. etc
And how the OS experts got things wrong.

Up til now all ae911 has said is that it could NOT have happened the way the OS says.
That's huge jump.

I'll bet this fades into memory like Putin's revelations.

originally posted by: sg1642
I looked this gentleman up and from what I can tell, he’s clean. His education seems solid and he is well respected amongst his peers

He was. One character assassination coming right up!

^This

originally posted by: jimmyx
as to the title of this thread.....why?.....how many people are going to keep doing this.....there is simply nothing that is going to be done about it...it's over, the evidence is destroyed or hidden, the history has been written.

It's far from over.

a reply to: eisegesis
Delighted to see this happening, watching the second video presentation "Dr. Hulsey Presentation to the Associated General Contractors of Alaska" and at the 11:00 minute mark he kind of mumbles about the name of the bunker in WTC7, wasn't it Giuliani's Bunker? Surely he must know Rudy Giuliani.

Or did it have another name? The mumbled one.

a reply to: samkent

You can discredit A&E 9/11 Truth all you want. They're only funding the research.

They would then put themselves in the position of proving to the world what they believed happened.
As in which columns were cut 1st then 2nd. etc
How the explosives survived the fires. etc

Wrong. Please stop the nonsense.

From the source,

“NIST says the building fell down due to office fires. Our investigation will evaluate the probability that this was the cause of the collapse.”

It would help if you stopped mentioning what they're NOT doing and focus on what they are. You're either deliberately trying to confuse others or are confused yourself.

a reply to: samkent

I'll tell you why that's not going to happen.
They would then put themselves in the position of proving to the world what they believed happened.

Believed what happened?

I don't think science is based on belief, do you?

If belief is science, why would we need science? What's the point?