A Truther’s Nightmare … Tower 7 Revealed - Video Added
9/11 third tower mystery ’solved’
By Mike Rudin - BBC
The final mystery of 9/11 will soon be solved, according to US experts investigating the collapse of the third tower at the World Trade Center.
The 47-storey third tower, known as Tower Seven, collapsed seven hours after the twin towers.
Investigators are expected to say ordinary fires on several different floors caused the collapse.
Conspiracy theorists have argued that the third tower was brought down in a controlled demolition.
Unlike the twin towers, Tower Seven was not hit by a plane.
The National Institute of Standards and Technology, based near Washington DC, is expected to conclude in its long-awaited report this month that ordinary fires caused the building to collapse.
That would make it the first and only steel skyscraper in the world to collapse because of fire.
The National Institute of Standards and Technology’s lead investigator, Dr Shyam Sunder, spoke to BBC Two’s “The Conspiracy Files”:
“Our working hypothesis now actually suggests that it was normal building fires that were growing and spreading throughout the multiple floors that may have caused the ultimate collapse of the buildings.”
‘Smoking gun’
However, a group of architects, engineers and scientists say the official explanation that fires caused the collapse is impossible. Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth argue there must have been a controlled demolition.
The founder of the group, Richard Gage, says the collapse of the third tower is an obvious example of a controlled demolition using explosives.
“Building Seven is the smoking gun of 9/11… A sixth grader can look at this building falling at virtually freefall speed, symmetrically and smoothly, and see that it is not a natural process.
“Buildings that fall in natural processes fall to the path of least resistance”, says Gage, “they don’t go straight down through themselves.”
Conspiracy theories
There are a number of facts that have encouraged conspiracy theories about Tower Seven.
Although its collapse potentially made architectural history, all of the thousands of tonnes of steel from the skyscraper were taken away to be melted down.
The third tower was occupied by the Secret Service, the CIA, the Department of Defence and the Office of Emergency Management, which would co-ordinate any response to a disaster or a terrorist attack.
The destruction of the third tower was never mentioned in the 9/11 Commission Report. The first official inquiry into Tower Seven by the Federal Emergency Management Agency was unable to be definitive about what caused its collapse.
In May 2002 FEMA concluded that the building collapsed because intense fires had burned for hours, fed by thousands of gallons of diesel stored in the building. But it said this had “only a low probability of occurrence” and more work was needed.
But now nearly seven years after 9/11 the definitive official explanation of what happened to Tower Seven is finally about to be published in America.
The National Institute of Standards and Technology has spent more than two years investigating Tower Seven but lead investigator Dr Shyam Sunder rejects criticism that it has been slow.
The collapse of Tower 7
“We’ve been at this for a little over two years and doing a two or two and a half year investigation is not at all unusual. That’s the same kind of time frame that takes place when we do aeroplane crash investigations, it takes a few years.”
With no steel from Tower 7 to study, investigators have instead made four extremely complex computer models worked out to the finest detail. They’re confident their approach can now provide the answers. Dr Sunder says the investigation is moving as fast as possible.
“It’s a very complex problem. It requires a level of fidelity in the modelling and rigour in the analysis that has never been done before.”
Other skyscrapers haven’t fully collapsed before because of fire. But NIST argues that what happened on 9/11 was unique.
Steel structure weakened
It says Tower Seven had an unusual design, built over an electricity substation and a subway; there were many fires that burnt for hours; and crucially, fire fighters could not fight the fires in Tower 7, because they didn’t have enough water and focused on saving lives.
Investigators have focused on the east side where the long floor spans were under most stress.
They think fires burnt long enough to weaken and break many of the connections that held the steel structure together.
Most susceptible were the thinner floor beams which required less fireproofing, and the connections between the beams and the columns. As they heated up the connections failed and the beams sagged and failed, investigators say.
The collapse of the first of the Twin Towers does not seem to have caused any serious damage to Tower Seven, but the second collapse of the 1,368ft (417m) North Tower threw debris at Tower Seven, just 350ft (106m) away.
Tower Seven came down at 5.21pm. Until now most of the photographs have been of the three sides of the building that did not show much obvious physical damage. Now new photos of the south side of the building, which crucially faced the North Tower, show that whole side damaged and engulfed in smoke.
I almost forgot about this … Talking about the heat from an intense fire ‘weakening’ the strength of steel … Recall just over a year ago a tanker truck that crashed and caught fire on an Oakland, Calif. bridge and weakened the bridge’s steel enough for the weight to collapse the bridge … If I recall correctly, this accident came on the heels of Rosie O`Donnell on The View making the asshole statement that fire doesn’t melt steel … Tell THAT to anyone who has worked in a steel mill … I fucking know, I live in a former steel town. Now, if you go to youtube to read the “Truther” comments there about THIS video, they believe it to be staged too … When you tell some people to “Get a fucking life” … they ACTUALLY have to be mentally able to …
Be respectful of others and their opinions. Inflammatory remarks and inane leftist drivel will be deleted. It ain’t about free speech, remember you’re in a private domain. My website, my prerogative.
If you can't handle using your real email address, don't bother posting a comment.
So I’m guessing the fire was started by the plane crashes, just curious why the many other buildings didnt suffer the same fate?
July 4th, 2008 at 4:48 pmIt’s called the modulus of elasticity. Steel heats up and deforms to the point of failure, then the structures collapses. It doesn’t have to melt, as the truthers claim. Ask any licensed structural engineer about the modulus. But then again, that would require effort.
Happy 4th!
July 4th, 2008 at 4:48 pmAs steel alloy heats up it loses it’s yield strength. At 700 F steel has lost nearly 40% of it’s yield (stress/strain), I’ve got some yield strength vs, temperature charts around here some place, I know I have them in my steel construction manuel. Steel alloys do not have to melt into a liquid for a structure to fail. Rosie O Donnel and Charlie Sheen are not engineers, I believe neither of them actually finished high school, I could be wrong but I’m sure neither one ever took mechanics of materials classes! All three towers fell because of fires that raged for long periods of time and heated the steel framing to over 1,000 degrees F. Building 7 probably lasted longer because its fire proofing wasn’t ripped off of the steel structure by a 500,000+ pound fully loaded and fueled Boeing 757 traveling over 500 mph. There is no secret as to why these buildings came down, you heat steel hundreds and hundreds of degrees F and the steel loses MOST of it’s modulus of elasticity (the ability to spring back to it’s original position) and MOST of its yield strength (toughness, stiffness, ability to resist a load). The real miracle as I see it is that both of the 110 story towers weren’t literally knocked over by the shear kinetic energy of the jets colliding into them near the 90th floors at over 500 mph and nearly 1000 feet from the base of the buildings. Had that happened, tens of thousands of people would have been killed.
“However, a group of architects, engineers and scientists say the official explanation that fires caused the collapse is impossible. Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth argue there must have been a controlled demolition.”
Utter bullshit. If these are true engineers, and architects (architects are more skilled at telling you the difference between a Baroque and Rocco architectural facades than they are about structural and civil engineering by the way!) then they know that (yes Rosie) fire actually does melt steel and way before it melts it turns into limp spaghetti. I am completely sick of the Ron Paul devotees and Rosie O Donnel types conspiracy junkies who suddenly think they’re forensic engineers qualified to analyse the collapse of multi story steel framed structures when they couldn’t pass a high school algebra quiz! Geesh! The buildings burned, the steel was weakened, they fell. It’s not really that complicated.
July 4th, 2008 at 5:17 pmHappy 4th to you to Ken!!
July 4th, 2008 at 5:20 pmBut, but, but, fire doesn’t melt steel, isn’t that what the renown physicists Rosie said?
July 4th, 2008 at 5:39 pmOT
July 4th, 2008 at 5:47 pmHave you seen this?
http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Politics/12956.htm
One of the things about Tower 7 is that I understand that a diesel fuel tank loaded with gallons of fuel was damaged from the impact of debris from the North tower. The fuel was spilled and ignited in the building.
Underground fires continued to burn under the street; in addition, the building was heavily damaged by falling debris from the North Tower.
Furthermore the whole area was undermined by the collapse of both towers.
With weakened foundations, connecting utility tunnels clogged with flamming debris and the destruction of one face of the building, coupled with an intense fire from below and above, as well as burning debris that was thrown into the building from the towers collapse, and the large amount of combustable materials in the building, there’s no doubt there were enough heat, combustable materials to feed that heat to such a degree that concrete was made brittle and steel tensile strength was weakened enough to cause a total collapse of Tower 7.
Forensic science is pure common sense. It doesn’t take an expert to figure it all out.
Conspiracists are insane space cadets. Don’t waste your time with them.
July 4th, 2008 at 6:24 pmWithout physical evidence to investigate, any conclusions drawn are still speculative and based on their best guesses from models created after the fact. The bottom line is, for all we know, it could have been a controlled demolition from al qaeda having an inside man plant explosives without anyone knowing…unlikely, but plausible speculation.
Clearly tedders knows what he’s talking about, and I for one am willing to believe the laws of physics over some conspiracy theorist hippie that just got done eating grass brownies!
No one will ever know for sure, but I’m sure of one thing: accusing our own government of murdering American citizens is unjustified and downright irresponsible. The American government has one job, to keep Americans safe, and it’s been doing that job very well since our forefathers charged it with that task.
July 4th, 2008 at 6:47 pmGreat explanations everyone, I enjoyed them very much!
One thing I was amazed at, when visiting the site: All the twisted metal and utter devastation, and just across the street at the church where George Washington prayed for our country, not even a single window was broken! Now that’s a miracle!
July 4th, 2008 at 6:50 pmHaven’t truthers ever asked themselves how steel columns and i-beams are molded into shape to begin with??? With heat you morons!
Iron ore on its own ain’t worth diddly if high temperatures aren’t applied to make steel. Likewise steel will always buckle at certain temperatures and when that does the integrity of any supporting structure will be compromised. Compound buckling steel due to heat with the mass and weight of loads above and the laws of gravity take over..
July 4th, 2008 at 6:59 pmThe conspiracy people are always the same. They are still wondering who killed JFK and now they think Bush ordered the 9/11 attacks to start a war with Iraq. Thus they look for clues that support their premise. I shot this BBC film as well as another on 9/11 Conspiracies. Mike did a great job of talking to everyone and was more than fair minded. This month we’ll be going back to NIST to hear their final report.
One more thing, in 93 I shot a film about Lee Harvey Oswald. The conclusion after months of investigation here and in Russia. He acted alone.
July 4th, 2008 at 7:00 pm“they look for clues that support their premise”
How right you are. That saying is so true: “Don’t confuse me with facts, my mind is made up!” If you discount their premise on one front, they’ll simply look for another front. Sane minded people (like what you find here at Dollard) appreciate facts and good reporting.
July 4th, 2008 at 7:27 pm
Dan 
July 4th, 2008 at 7:57 pmAnyone who thinks a controlled explosion dropped tower 7 knows nothing about controlled explosions. It takes weeks to prep a building so it will drop straight down into itself when the supports are blown. There are also sequened explosions on other parts of the building. Unless tower 7 was closed for weeks before 9/11 there was not demolition going on.
July 4th, 2008 at 8:55 pm
Dan 
July 4th, 2008 at 9:10 pmNuh uh.
July 4th, 2008 at 10:06 pmNice try but totally definitely had to be absolutely positively faked.
Just like that moon landing thing.
Controlled Detonation leaves a very obvious mark on the steel as you cut it with the linear shape charges.
You CANT hide it. Cut steel has a copper coating. To demolish the building would have taken thousands of linear shape charge’s. The steel would have been obvious to see that explosive cutting had occurred.
Since that obviously doesn’t exists there was no demolition.
Now for the wacko’s to save their stupid theory they have to argue that the government somehow secretly sorted out all the steel beams and hide them without anyone seeing it happen.
No copper coated Cuts on steel beams = No Demolition.
July 4th, 2008 at 11:19 pmMost of the people coming out with the conspiracy theory that ‘Bush destroyed the towers’ are muslims and americans Symps. I recall some idiot hacker from Indonesia who was “analizing” the films from 9/11 and he was going around spouting that demoliotion nonsense…inside job…the CIA etc. right like your gonna plant explosives all through a building filled with security guards and nobody is gonna catch on.
Steel beam consistiency affected by the fire, rivet bolts popping from the intense heat, the foundation weakened by collapse of nearby towers and damage from debris are the only thing that make practical sense.
Billy
July 4th, 2008 at 11:47 pmPowerful explanations–educated and well explained thank you!!
July 5th, 2008 at 4:48 amim a certified welder, although i dont weld anymore. i kinda got the certificate and then oddly enough got into the homebuilding industry instead. but when Rosie said said fire does not melt steel i just laughed my ass off lol. anyone ever seen an acetylene torch or a plasma cutter.
July 5th, 2008 at 5:54 amand i need to add also that when you’re dealing with thinner types of steel you have to go across and tack the seam your welding before you fully weld it or it will bend the steel and compromise its strength.
makes sense to me
July 5th, 2008 at 5:56 amThe lib-traitors are covering their ears, rocking in their chairs, and humming real loud as they read this article.
July 5th, 2008 at 6:37 am“That would make it the first and only steel skyscraper in the world to collapse because of fire.”
July 5th, 2008 at 6:58 amA change was made here to add skyscraper after this theory was shot down by the McCormick Center in Chicago and the Sight and Sound Theater in Pennsylvania,both of which were steel structures and both collapsed due to fires.
Like going from global warming to global climate change just change it, or reword it, to make it fit into the theory.
www.debunking911.com has all the answers should you ever be approached by a troofer.
This issue should have been over with by September 12th, 2001.
July 5th, 2008 at 8:49 amJust a passing thought here … Don’t know if it has ever been addressed.
Wondering if the whole “Truther” shit was started by whoever is responsible somehow for the design (which I did hear was flawed in the 2 towers) and/or the construction/materials involved in the buildings …
You know, easier to deflect [responsibility] for the collapse to the ’selected’ President (just a few short months after his election) … for many different people who SHOULD have had a heads-up on this … i.e., the Clinton Administration during whose time the hijackers entered the country and stayed and trained for 9-11.
Not to mention I am continually amazed and appalled at the people who insist on DEFLECTING direct responsibility from the damn terrorists.
July 5th, 2008 at 9:12 amDrillanwr, Ask any 9/11 truther and they will tell you the only terrorist is George W Bush. This is one of how many parts to deride Bush and make him into some kind of criminal worse then OBL. BHO will be an angel compared to GWB and the left has the power to print it.
July 5th, 2008 at 10:38 am