Top 10 Reasons to Believe WTC 7 Didn’t Fall Due to Fire
1. The Hulsey Report Offers a Contradictory Explanation to the NIST Findings
Conducted by Dr. Leroy Hulsey and a team from the University of Alaska Fairbanks, this report challenges the NIST conclusions by demonstrating through detailed structural analysis that WTC 7 could not have collapsed solely due to fire. Their findings suggest that the building's failure was more consistent with a controlled demolition than a natural collapse. For an in-depth comparison of the Hulsey report, the NIST study, and debunking efforts, see:
2. Firefighters, Architects, and Engineers Dispute the Official Report
The Firefighters for 9/11 Truth, along with thousands of architects and engineers from AE911Truth, strongly oppose the NIST report’s conclusions. These professionals, especially firefighters who understand fire behavior and building responses, argue that the localized fires in WTC 7 were insufficient to cause a complete structural collapse. More about the firefighter response can be found here:
3. Lack of Significant Fireproofing Damage in WTC 7
Unlike the Twin Towers, WTC 7 was not hit by an airplane and had robust fireproofing throughout. AE911Truth highlights that even prolonged, uncontrolled fires in a steel-framed building would not typically lead to a collapse. This anomaly makes the fire-based explanation for WTC 7’s fall highly questionable.
4. Absence of Precedent for Complete Fire-Induced Collapse in High-Rise Buildings
No other steel-framed skyscraper in history has experienced a total collapse solely due to fire. This lack of precedent has led many experts to question the viability of the NIST findings, suggesting that alternative collapse explanations should be considered.
More Info: Debunking the Debunkers: Debunking Ryan Dawson
http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2018/02/debunking-ryan-dawson.html
5. Eyewitness Reports of Explosions
Many witnesses, including firefighters and first responders, reported hearing explosions before and during the collapse of WTC 7. Their accounts align more with controlled demolition scenarios, as explosions are not typical in fire-induced structural failures. Learn more about these firsthand accounts:
6. Unusual Fire Progression Patterns in WTC 7
Observations of the fire’s behavior in WTC 7 show that it was mostly confined and beginning to die down on several floors before the collapse. The UAF study suggests that the collapse characteristics and timing do not align with the kind of structural weakening expected from fires alone.
7. Lateral Ejection of Steel and Debris
Analysis from UAF and independent researchers shows lateral ejection of debris from WTC 7 during the collapse—a phenomenon not typically associated with structural failure due to fire. Controlled demolitions, however, often display similar ejection patterns.
8. NIST’s Exclusion of Key Structural Components in Modeling
NIST’s modeling of WTC 7’s collapse has been criticized for excluding vital structural components, such as certain girders and beams, which may have skewed the simulation results. The UAF model, which included these elements, indicated that WTC 7 would not have experienced a global collapse under fire alone.
9. Seismic Data and Anomalies in Collapse Symmetry
Seismic data recorded at the time of the WTC 7 collapse includes anomalies not usually observed in fire-related collapses. Additionally, the building fell almost symmetrically, in a manner consistent with controlled demolition rather than a natural collapse. Analysts argue that these data points suggest an alternative explanation to fire.
10. Redundant Safety Features in Building Design
WTC 7 was constructed with multiple safety redundancies to prevent total failure, even in the event of major fires or other disasters. These design features should have safeguarded the building from a fire-based collapse, making the official explanation less plausible.
