He's President of all. We should work with him - Right?

What does "no" refer to?

CI: It was my understanding that hitting the top of the towers, the floors started to collapse from top to bottom. That momentum could not be stopped.

What scientific study did this come from?

No aircraft hit WTC7. It collapsed at free fall speed.

There is no Figure 1 or Figure 2. What do they mean?

Type, why did wtc 7 collapse

Tlking about 9-11 as if there is a scientific disagreement as to what caused it is ridiculous nd without any evience.
=========

There is a great deal of scientific disagreement as to what caused it. If you are unaware of this simple fact then you must be unaware of a lot more.

I'm quite certain I told you of the U of Fairbanks study on WTC7 and the engineering professor who says that the NIST description of how WTC7 fell has zero chance of being true.

Please, can you guys take your argument to a new thread?

I certainly know of the volumes of info there is out there about WTC7.

Better, why not describe how you think it is possible for WTC7 to have fallen at free fall speed for the first 2.25 seconds of its collapse. That equates to about 100 feet, 8 floors.

Buildings cannot collapse at free fall speed unless they have had all that underlying support structure removed.

Here's a very good summary of the scientific disagreement about the science of 911. It's only six pages long but it covers the topic very well. On page two there is a picture of WTC5 engulfed in flames to a much greater degree than WTCs 1, 2 or 7. Another picture to the right shows WTC5 still standing, virtually unaffected by the much more devastating fire.

I hope the link works for everyone.

http://www.europhysicsnews.org/articles/epn/pdf/2016/04/epn2016474p21.pdf

I wouldn't know, because I'm not a structural engineer.

I didnt know Hulsey was don with his project. I only heard tht he qnd a team of students were going to do a FE model of the collapse of WT7. ??
Mybe youre jumping a couple years ahead?

If you want to dicuss this, I think you should strt a thread and leave this on, Its kind rude.
Im not going to answer anything else about 9/11 on this thread

How were the milkshakes?

The study ends in May, something I've already posted a number of times. He has described the work he has done a number of times. NIST's column 79 story is untenable.

One doesn't have to be a structural engineer to know that free fall can only occur with a controlled demolition.

Was the MSM so vociferous and ferocious in their constant attacks on the last POTUS?

That's about the only reason I'm still watching the show, because I'm not aware of a time, or place in time, where the corporate-owned MSM has been so cohesively attacking and/or undermining an elected representative of the people.

Do you remember Nixon?

German engineers were dismissive of the initial reports, and totally in concerted disagreement with the NIST report.

It's not like we don't know that those in govt at that time, were the most corrupted and duplicitous in the history of the nation.

There's now several countries who would gladly arrest any of those peeps, if they stepped off a plane there.

Still wondering WTF happened to our international criminal courts. Maybe they got bought and sold in the fire sale.

Tricky Dicky? Paid the mafiosa to kill his rival?

Naah, I'd prefer to forget him. But it's apt that the "crimes" that brought him unstuck, are now swept under the table, or overshadowed by a new drama.

The NIST report has been shown to be false. Actually, it has been shown to be impossible. These are scientists who should have known that.

If you are aware of Professor Hulsey's study why did you say, "Tlking about 9-11 as if there is a scientific disagreement as to what caused it is ridiculous nd without any evience."

Do you consider Professor Hulsey to be the equivalent of a creationist?

The football season starts soon. Right?

I'd be happy to see an international tribunal established, with a rotating board of suggesters (as opposed to rulers) and a voting database of people all around the world making judgements based on evidence presented by the tribunal, as opposed to corporate media crapola.

I don't know. What's football?

"making judgements based on evidence presented by the tribunal"

Would you like a link?

I have no opinion of his work as he has not done anything reportable yet. If he comes up with some BS to satisfy his "thruther" sponsors, then YEH, hes no better than some IDer. I spend a lot of time dissecting math models in contaminant migration and Im always amazed at how model results mostly seem to coincide with the position that the sponsors want to hear.

A mosel is a test of an option for design IT SHOULD NEVER BE USED AS A FORENSIC TOOL BECAUSE A MODEL IS "DESIRED OUTCOME BASED"

Thats all Im saying about it. Start a thread

How scientific of you. You are willing to accept the "science" of NIST but not the science of an independent scientist who is anxious to have his work peer reviewed, unlike NIST, who hid everything about their "study".

You are willing to accept NIST's free fall? How is that possible? Are there buildings all around us that just go into free fall?

Have you ever looked at NIST's computer simulation? It looks nothing like the free fall of WTC7. Isn't science supposed to match reality?