• Most of the evidence available points to yes.

    Just do a little research on the subject. If WTF Building 7 collapsed for the reasons outlined in the 9/11 Commission Report--that small office fires caused thermal expansion of the floor system--it would have been the first building ever to have done so. This defies the basic concepts of structural engineering. Numerous engineers, architects, scientists, etc. Have come out and stated that the collapse of Building 7 could have only been caused by a controlled demolition.

  • Nist, Just Open Up to Scientific Peer Review

    This is not even a debate. Its really quite simple, Nist should open up their underlying assumptions like any other reputable scientific organization. They won't share it. They had to reply to a FOIA request and their formal reply is that they cannot share due to "National Security". . . . Complete bullshit. Can anyone on here give an explanation to this? No. There is no debate here.

  • NIST is a joke

    In NIST's own report on Building 7, they said it right in the text that they never tested the debris for explosive residue because they think that it's completely outrageous. If we do not have an open mind about anything whether it be completely unbelievable or not, we are in big trouble. Big, big trouble.

  • NIST lied and were lied to.

    The NIST engineers tasked with explaining 7's collapse were given incorrect structural drawings that omitted essential fire protection components including shear studs on girders designed to prevent the exact type of thermal expansion that they concluded caused the collapse. They did NOT examine the steel. Their main evidence (multiple video shots) was tampered with. Watch all the FOIA building 7 vids and ask yourself why multiple independent shots would all be missing essential split seconds in the early stages of collapse.

  • Of course not.

    No reputable, verifiable evidence indicates that this is so. It's just the nonsensical rantings of conspiracy theorists who just can't believe the government isn't secretly behind absolutely everything and is some massive evil entity out to get everyone...For no discernible reason.

    Anyone can read the facts of the NIST report to see for themselves. Claiming a controlled demolition for a collapse that took the amount of time the WTC did is ridiculous from the start anyway.

  • It wasn't caused by controlled demolition.

    It could not have been controlled by humans. The fires from the Twin Towers broke through 7 WTC, and caused fires. The fires bent the columns, causing it to collapse. There would never of been a possibility that someone could sneak into 7 WTC with an explosive, because of security. The only other way that it could be a controlled demolition is if they put a bomb UNDER 7 WTC, like the 1993 Bombing on the Twin Towers. Don't be stupid, and move on.

  • Of course not!

    It was hit by the highest collapsing building in the history of collapsing buildings. FDNY evaluated the damage and concluded the collapse due to structural damage and fire was inevitable. The whole south facade was engulfed in fire for hours. No demo artifact (bomb, wires, whatever) could survive 7h of raging fires. No 130 dB loud bangs + flashes were present prior to the collapse.

  • No, it wasn't

    Stupid conspiracy theorists as usual. Freaking conspiracy theorists make me goddamn laugh. How in the hell was the the thing an explosion. If so, then how come the towers fell the way they did? Only a plane could have caused a tower to fall the way that these towers did.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.