So the question of the century is, how could building 7 have experienced freefall acceleration without using controlled demolition? How did eight floors of this modern, well-constructed building quickly vanish into thin air?
In yesterday's article, we spoke about the existence of nano-thermite in the 9/11 dust. There are many unanswered questions regarding the events on that beautiful September day with its clear blue sky 21 years ago at the World Trade Center.
Questions regarding the fact that the fires below the rubble at ground zero burned for so long that a November 19, 2001 piece by the New York Times stated that some firefighting experts called the fire the "longest commercial building fire in United States history." How firemen and first responders gave testimony that they witnessed rivers of molten steel, "like lava," flowing down the channels under the debris pile at ground zero even though the government says such molten steel did not exist. Or the fact that the Pentagon has never produced a video or a single photo of the plane that crashed into it.
No steel-framed building on planet earth has ever had a total collapse before or since 9/11
But of these unexplained anomalies, the one event that stands out the most that the government has refused to explain is the perfectly symmetric collapse of World Trade Center Building 7.
World Trade Center Building 7 was a modern 47-story high-rise steel-framed building, taller than any building in 33 states.
It had 40 thousand tons of structural steel, 24 steel beam core columns, and 57 perimeter columns and met all of the building codes when constructed in the mid-1980s.
Building 7 was not soaked by jet fuel and didn't have its fireproofing insulation blown off since it was not hit by a plane. Yet, it was the third steel-framed building in world history to experience a total collapse due to office fires. The first and second time such a total collapse was known to have occurred with steel-framed buildings was on the same day WTC buildings one and two collapsed. No steel-framed building on planet earth has ever had a total collapse before or since 9/11.
Building 7's freefall acceleration is the critical question that needs to be answered. To understand freefall acceleration, consider dropping a brick from a height of 100 feet toward the pavement below. As long as the brick has an unimpeded, straight-down descent to the ground, the speed at which it lands would be freefall acceleration. Meaning nothing got in the way of the brick to slow it down as it fell all 100 feet and hit the ground.
If the brick hits an object after falling the first 75 feet, then that brick fell at freefall acceleration for the first 75 feet before it met resistance and slowed down.
Building 7 fell at freefall acceleration for nearly 105 feet or approximately eight floors
It took a quick 6.5 seconds for all 47 floors of building 7 to plummet into a neat pile. Using video footage and physics software David Chandler, M.S., who holds a B.S. in Physics and an M.S. in mathematics, proved to NIST (The National Institute of Standards and Technology) that building 7 fell at freefall acceleration for nearly 105 feet or approximately eight floors.
"What we are seeing is a building coming straight down through itself with zero resistance." Said Chandler adding, "Buildings don't have zero resistance." Chandler also stated that floors have to be instantly removed for a building to fall at freefall speed. And the only way to remove floors and obtain zero resistance is by controlled demolition.
Even though the U.S. government's position changed to agree with Chandler that there was freefall acceleration in building 7, the government still contends that no controlled demolition was used.
According to NIST, simple office fires caused one column (column 79) on the 12th floor to fail, which caused the entire building to fall for 105 feet at freefall acceleration symmetrically.
Roland Angle, P.E. civil and structural engineer, said, "NIST is telling us that the building below it (building 7) ceased to exist for the first few seconds of the collapse of the building." Angle added that things in physics don't cease to exist.
Support Canada Free Press
Steel structural high-rise buildings "simply do not collapse due to fire"
Since the conclusion made by NIST did not make scientific sense, many scientists wanted to examine the input data that NIST used to explain building 7's freefall collapse. However, Catherine Fletcher of NIST denied the Freedom of Information Act request for the collapse calculations used by NIST. She stated that releasing such information might "Jeopardize public safety."
"Impossible," Kamal Obeid C.E., S.E, stated regarding NIST's explanation for the collapse of WTC building 7. A civil and structural engineer with over 30 years of practicing engineering, Obeid said that the one-column theory offered by NIST, whereby the collapse of column 79 on the 12th floor caused the entire building to fall symmetrically, is "embarrassing." "This is the crime of the century," the veteran engineer said, urging other structural engineers to look at the evidence. According to Obeid, the collapse of building 7 was "a classic case of controlled demolition."
Scott Grainger, a fire protection engineer with over 40 years of experience and licensed in 13 states, said that steel structural high-rise buildings "simply do not collapse due to fire." He added that other steel buildings have had much worse fires burning for much longer times and yet did not collapse. According to Grainger, the fires in building 7 were scattered, and many earlier fires were already out. Yet, with the building having asymmetrical damage, it collapsed uniformly and symmetrically. "That just does not make any sense."
So the question of the century is, how could building 7 have experienced freefall acceleration without using controlled demolition? How did eight floors of this modern, well-constructed building quickly vanish into thin air?
Rick Hayes lives in the epicenter of liberal land where reality and truth will never encounter a welcome mat.
An award-winning writer and photographer, with over twenty years of professional experience in both fields, Hayes started his journalism adventure after a successful, eye-opening career as a Banker in Wall Street. Although he spent his early work life surrounded by custom made shirts, expensive ties and the shiniest of shoes, Hayes was an accomplished singer, cutting a few records with a local band and appearing on one of the first cable shows.
Working for a weekly New York paper, in one of the most politically corrupt areas in the State, he began investing his time trying to understand the nature of corruption.
