NIST Report on WTC7 debunked and exposed!

9/11 Truth responds to NIST with HARD FACTS & Evidence! Please copy and re-post! Spread this like virus! Make sure to use different search tags too! NIST pro…


(Visited 82 times, 1 visits today)

Share This Post

39 Comments - Write a Comment

  1. +WarCrime911 great video! But tower 7 did not fall @ free fall speed. It
    only did so for 8 stories. The total collapse is around like 15secs. 

    Reply
  2. Thermate isn't the same as TNT. Oh, I hope people start to focus on our
    insane government trying to kill us all and start focusing on the
    Underground cities that they are building underneath our noses. Jesse
    Ventura exposed these underground cities on his last episode The Ozarks on
    TruTV. Message by the…tea…party….truther…do…com

    Reply
  3. HA HA!! you can't come up with ONE SINGLE legitimate source for your
    nonsense, so now you're trying to enlist the help of another conspiracy
    kook?? HA HA!! good luck with that jackass!!

    Reply
  4. @12weasel100 Ok show me facts explaining the free fall of wtc7.. PS dont
    look at the official report. its a total mystery to NIST as it would be if
    you rely on fire and rubble damage alone. No matter how much they load the
    official story it still wont go at all.

    Reply
  5. @admiralPs Thanks for your comment. I read both NIST Reports on WTC7 and
    WTC1 and WTC2. (did you?) You can rely on a 9 minute "real 9/11" youtube
    video to make up your opinion on this subject or actually spend time and
    read the reports. Minor inconsistency are expected in a report of this size
    but don't mean it's a conspiracy. I would be more suspicious if a report of
    this size was flawless.

    Reply
  6. @12weasel100 " thermite/ thermate cools quickly it would not be found
    molten weeks later."thats BS – It contains its own supply of oxygen, and
    does not require any external source such as air. Consequently, it cannot
    be smothered and may ignite in any environment, given sufficient initial
    heat. It will burn just as well while underwater, for example, and cannot
    even be extinguished with water, as water sprayed on a thermite reaction
    will instantly be boiled into steam

    Reply
  7. @12weasel100 LMAO! I did, in fact listen to statements that claimed the
    buildings were in trouble. But I find it odd how they came into play much
    later than those that claimed they heard explosions. Also, if the buildings
    were "leaning", wouldn't logic tell you that they would fall the way they
    were supposedly "leaning"? The simple facts that there were claims of
    explosions and the 1993 bombs, should have lead NIST to investigate for
    bombs not just fires that caused the collapses!

    Reply
  8. /watch?v=HvAJQnUJUVY&feature=related in this YT it is claimed a FDNY
    engineer calculated the collapse of 7 at appx' 12.15pm 911 as "five hours"
    They don't give his/her name or his/her calculations but if this claim was
    true the NIST WTC7 report released 2008 would have been a redundant
    duplicate and waste of public money.

    Reply
  9. @Tricky1ish there were also statements from professionals on site that
    clearly made statements like the building is in trouble. The buildings are
    leaning and we cannot save them. It is no a matter if the building will
    fall but when. Seems you clearly chose to ignore those statements and
    substitute in yours because the others clearly conflict with your bullshit.
    Nothing you state is any fact that proves your bullshit. You moron.

    Reply
  10. THIS is exactly why we have all been clamoring for a REAL investigation. so
    that we can find answers to the millions of little questions, and of course
    the real big ones like: who did this to us and why? in light of all the
    evidence debunking the official stories, questions like these take on a
    whole new meaning.

    Reply
  11. one must ask themselves a question….Is it better to blindly trust those
    that stand to gain from that trust and be misled into a situation or
    allways be skeptical and ask questions. Many jews said "the government
    would never do……." well those jews end up in concentration
    camps……The ones that did not say that (Albert Einstien) and left
    germany….well look where they end up….not concentration camps

    Reply
  12. Its only falling perfectly symmetrically at PROVEN free fall with everyone
    and their dog reporting explosions. The only time a building can EVER fall
    at free fall is due to demolition no matter what alternative explanation is
    offered. So NIST with thier official story come up with "fire damage"!!!!
    Its a lie its bullshit its not even scientifically possible and NIST should
    be in court for fraud.

    Reply
  13. Ryerson University,Dept.of Civil & Environmental Engineering,Toronto
    University of British Columbia,Dept.of Science and Engineering,Vancouver
    University of Calgary,Emergent Information Systems
    Laboratory,Calgary,Alberta University of Ottawa,Dept.of Civil &
    Environmental Engineering,Ontario University of Waterloo,Dept.of Civil &
    Environmental Engineering,Ottawa,Ontario University of Western
    Ontario,Boundary Layer Wind Tunnel Laboratory,London,Ontario, Canadian
    Society for Civil Engeneering(CSCE)

    Reply
  14. "AMR Corp. warned investors Friday that it would lose a lot more money this
    quarter than last quarter and would have a "significant" fourth-quarter
    deficit. If the losses materialize as expected, it will mark the first time
    since 1993 that AMR has posted a full-year loss" this was 2 days before
    9/11. No wonder there were put options. No surprise, no conspiracy.

    Reply
  15. SwissMoneyLaundering · Edit

    Moreover, you conspirators never deliver positive evidence. You always
    refute the official stance, then skeptical, like me, refute your
    counterargument and then you find something new. I'm sick of this viscous
    circle. What about you come, just once, with a single piece of positive
    evidence!?!

    Reply
  16. It is deceptive to claim Building 7 fell at or near free-fall speed. When
    measured from the moment of penthouse collapse, it was at least 12 seconds.
    If you measure from the moment the corners started to drop, it is erroneous
    to claim the whole building collapsed in that time because the core had
    already collapsed, as evidenced by the penthouses collapsing prior to that
    time.

    Reply
  17. your proof is that a photo taken possibly 5 minutes apart shows an inferno
    going out and starting again on the north face of wtc7 floor 12? i'm done
    here….

    Reply
  18. I'm a retired career firefighter, so I know a little about fires. If diesel
    can burn hot enough to melt steel, then why don't diesel fueled engines
    melt the block? 9/11 was a FALSE FLAG/INSIDE JOB PULLED off by the WH, the
    CIA, FBI, Pentagon and ISRAEL.

    Reply
  19. If this were true why wouldn't we just light building on fire and watch
    them fall into themselves? This is the only event on 9/11 that doesn't fly
    with me. Pentagon the plane could have lost it's wings before it hit (It's
    possible) 2 Towers were hit by planes so it's possible for them to fall. I
    don't believe they should have fell the way they did, but that's just
    opinion. Building 7 was not hit by a plane and should have never fell into
    it self.

    Reply
  20. Oh yes, I know Ronald Weak. I've watched all of the debates with his top
    "debunker" Mark Roberts. There are serious overlapping flaws in the logic
    used by these "debunkers". For one: If, NIST's conclusions is that a single
    column (79) was responsible for the global symmetric collapse of WTC 7.
    Then, couldn't they have just used a small amount of nanothermite to sever
    that beam, triggering the cascading collapse in their model? That's an
    interesting engineering flaw either way.

    Reply
  21. NOT impossible. To state 'impossible" without considering how it fell is
    weak at best, and the mark of a con at worst. Careful study of debris and
    collapse video shows it indeed, not only possible, but likely, for the free
    fall portion of perimeter wall collapse to have been gravitational. Joe Hill

    Reply
  22. NIST's (gov wannaB's in labcoats) computer model collapse alone should tell
    one this is a farce and a smokescreen. Jeeez don't get me started
    again…lol, this is the needle-dik of the tick on the tip of the 9/11
    iceberg illusion 😉 Law of physics would never allow a building to do what
    NISTS ver did. great stuff WarCrime 😉

    Reply
  23. @HardcoreJungFunk NIST did not test for explosives because there was no
    need to. Nothing indicated that explosives were used. All indication and on
    site statements clearly pointed to fire being the cause of collapse.
    Research and facts support that it was fire that caused the collapse.Anyway
    you still fail to logically explain your bullshit statements using facts
    and examples. You fail you retard.

    Reply
  24. Your assertion of foreign govt involvement is probably spot on. But, we
    cannot get caught up in a name calling match. The people who wrote PNAC
    stole TRILLIONS outright and ran home to Palestine to kill more Natives
    with the money. I don't argue that. The seat of the US President is a
    throne who's king is chosen by the so-called, Middle East's, most
    aggressive Nuclear power. No doubt. Hide it? How? Every seat of power in
    this nation and our press is filled by them?

    Reply
  25. Maybe the diesel engines have protective material inside. & The puffs of
    material below the collapse points were strongest as they ended, proving
    that they were implosions of the building, NOT bomb explosions.

    Reply
  26. no. the official story is that thousands of pounds of explosive would be
    needed to bring down the building, because that's a conspiracy theory so
    the laws of physics would have to apply, whereas ordinary and fairly small
    fires could cause sudden collapse, because that's official truth, where the
    laws of physics have been repealed. isn't that clear?

    Reply
  27. Representative Press · Edit

    Firemen said they would not be able to contain the fires. They were not
    fighting the fires either so they burned out of control. Do you have a
    logical reason why you think you know more about a building fire than the
    firemen at the scene? Firemen were predicting WTC7 was going to collapse.
    Are you actually arguing that is a coincidence?

    Reply
  28. The building was brought down by uncontrolled raging fires weakening the
    steel and destroying the core of the building so when it actually fell, it
    was only the outer shell you saw falling. These fires lasted an estimated 7
    hours. Long enough for all of the damage on the inside of the building to
    occur. Steel expanded, weakened, and failed leaving a hollow center. It's
    as simple as that.

    Reply
  29. @SPAGHETTIMONSTER1 You need a lot of Thermate to do that. How did they put
    them in place with no one knowing? Who did it and how did they do it?
    Warcrime911 is full of crap. There was no conspiracy. Please produce
    evidence based on reality and not what's in your head. You have nothing
    because there is nothing.

    Reply
  30. But we do have answers, in fact the only answer still remaining is what are
    we going to do about it now?, shall we continue to wait on answers from
    people who are NEVER going to give them to us, or are we going to start
    filing lawsuits aginst those WE have found to be complicit. Ask Sorros why
    he sent all those israelis back to israel who were actually arrested
    before, on and after 9/11. Im sure you have heard about the israelis caught
    by cops in a van loaded with explosives on the GW bridge?

    Reply
  31. NIST NCSTAR 1A aka the? official final report on wtc7? direct quote "This
    acceleration was 32.2ft/s² (9.81m/s² ) equivalent to the acceleration of
    gravity g." Thats the official report admiting free fall BTW

    Reply
  32. NIST NCSTAR 1A aka the official final report on wtc7 direct quote "This
    acceleration was 32.2ft/s² (9.81m/s² ) equivalent to the acceleration of
    gravity g." Nist cant explain it but stick to fire damage story whern its
    obviously impossible.

    Reply

Leave a Reply to HardcoreJungFunk Cancel reply