« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

NIST report on WTC 7 released

First gold, now trutherism sinking for the Ronulans

Via Slashdot, the NIST report on the collapse of New York World Trade Center building 7 is out. The statements of the cause of the collapse are conclusive.

“Our study found that the fires in WTC 7, which were uncontrolled but otherwise similar to fires experienced in other tall buildings, caused an extraordinary event,” said NIST WTC Lead Investigator Shyam Sunder. “Heating of floor beams and girders caused a critical support column to fail, initiating a fire-induced progressive collapse that brought the building down.”

“Video and photographic evidence combined with detailed computer simulations show that neither explosives nor fuel oil fires played a role in the collapse of WTC 7,” Sunder said. The NIST investigation team also determined that other elements of the building’s construction—namely trusses, girders and cantilever overhangs that were used to transfer loads from the building superstructure to the columns of the electric substation (over which WTC 7 was constructed) and foundation below—did not play a significant role in the collapse.

Got that? No explosives, no demolition, no conspiracy. But what will they have to talk about at the Ron Paul Kiddy Table Protest Convention in Minneapolis? They can’t talk about their Truther theories, and with gold prices plummeting and the dollar rising, nobody will want to talk about finances.

I suppose there’s always Israel.

COMMENTS

  • bk

    “It’s not surprising that this pack of lies was released on a weekend of heavy political news in order to try to have it escape notice.”

  • ConservaGeek

    I’ll just point to my previous comments on the psychology of conspiracy theorists.

    In short, this won’t shut them up. Nothing will.

  • Neil_Stevens
  • ConservaGeek

    In fact, making fun of Ronulans is almost as fun as making fun of Obamamaniacs is… perhaps more fun, come to think of it.

  • ConservaGeek

    “This report is from the same government that faked the attack and has been covering up all these years, why should we believe them?”

  • Rod_Patrick

    Everyone saw it in his/her naked eyes… but No!

    The skeptics unrighteously manufactured some shocking twists to the truth and in so doing, destroyed good names especially of those who have been working so hard to keep America safe.

  • ss396

    nor fuel oil, nor explosives. Just your ordinary “run of the mill” fire that weakened a critical support column.

    Quite frankly, that scares me more than if it had been deliberately brought down by sabotoge. That the building was so poorly designed that it could fail so innocuously makes me wonder how many and what other buildings are so similarly vulnerable.

  • Neil_Stevens

    Ordinarily a fire such as that which attacked WTC 7 could have been dealt with properly. But the problem with WTC 1 and 2 kinda distracted firefighters from it.

  • skey

    Well, there’s always their dear leader’s endorsement of Don Young. That should cover a bit of time.

  • tankertodd

    It’s a regular Worst Week Ever for the Truthers. Someone at least suggest the Sun revolves around the Earth or something to salve the wound. More here
    Catch the show August 27th at 9pm on Discovery.

    The truth is out there. It’s just not your whacked out version of it.

  • hunter

    I doubt if the report stated that. It was an uncontrolled fire that burned for many hours.
    Are you a truther?

  • devCharles

    but it won’t. I deal with the truthers a lot because I’m a libertarian, and they used to show me this video of buildings on fire that didn’t collapse and go, “Aha! That building was on fire and didn’t collapse!”

    I’m an engineer, so I tried explaining it to them…slowly how silly they were. The buildings aren’t to scale, all kinds of possible labor problems (unions, whatcha gonna do,) the surrounding buildings weren’t by big airplanes, and just on and on and on. They don’t get reality. At some point it’s like making fun of a dog for chasing its tail.

    Oh well.

    The last part of the post kind of made me double take though. Inflation is at a 17 year high. Gold Prices are still 120 dollars above where they were a year ago.

  • StandardCandle

    I’m not one to join the conspiracy theorists ranks…

    However, I visited NISTs site…

    The physics behind their model are indeed accurate and difficult to argue the “possibility” of this explanation.

    However, what has not been said and… what’s going to fuel the TinFoil Ronulons… is this… the model proves only an alternate theory to demolition.

    Demolition is a much more likely factor considering they found molten thermate/steel under WTC7.(byproduct of sulfuric thermite particles in the steel, as well as evaporated steel… this would require extreme temperatures, which a building fire could not have sustained this kind of heat, which was discovered during the clean up period)

    Scientifically speaking the evidence of materials points more towards the demolition theory, however… I still find it hard to believe that this was some sort of CIA/NSA exercise… I wouldn’t give them that much credit for organizing this from a series of events uncontrolled.

    If I had to postulate a theory… I’d say their model is correct… and there was materials in that building that the CIA/FBI didn’t want to admit to storing in that building…

    I see a JFK grassy knoll type series by the History Channel in the next 20 years concerning all of this…

    agreed… I wish there was more trust for those trying to protect our freedoms… the scariest part for most Americans who hear about these theories comes posited in the question of “what if it is true?”… I don’t think our society is ready to accept some things… such as “truthiness is employed to protect national security”…

    ergo we aren’t going to know… at least not by any admission of people who would know…