AE911Truth Challenges NIST's WTC 7 Floor 12 Fire Analysis

AE911Truth will soon publish its response to NIST's final report on WTC7. In the meantime, this graphic illustrates that NIST's analysis is NOT consistent with photographic and video evidence. A higher resolution PDF may be found here: Please forward this blog and document link to anyone you think can help spread the truth.
(graphic below the fold)

Hats off to all the work involved in responding to NIST.

Responding to NIST takes tremendous effort. Hats off to all those who have worked so hard in responding to NIST.
ANYONE can sign the petition at -- Tell every 9/11 Truther to sign the petition.

Richard Gage - September 11, 2008 - Peter B Collins Show

September 11, 2008

Peter B Collins talks to Richard Gage, founder of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, about NIST's finding that the third building that collapsed into its own footprint at the speed of gravity on 9/11/2001 did so because of a "new phenomenon" they call "thermal expansion".

Although the analysis below

Although the analysis below is based on the leaked confidential and predecisional WTC7 report, it's stil very relevant. Well worth watching.

The p.c. WTC7 Report part1
NIST WTC7 Report - a Confidential and Predecisional Document

The p.c. WTC7 Report part2*
NIST WTC7 Report - a Confidential and Predecisional Document

The p.c. WTC7 Report part3
NIST WTC7 Report - a Confidential and Predecisional Document

The p.c. WTC7 Report part4
NIST WTC7 Report - a Confidential and Predecisional Document

The p.c. WTC7 Report part5
Free Fall inside the building? ...through 47 floor slaps? ...may be after column 80 was gone without a broken window? It fits the NIST global collapse theory as discibed in the WTC7 Interim Report. - Structural engineers should decide!

Please watch my movie: The Third Tower


Exceptionally informative

I second that


Excellent as always.

Just to clarify, the video's

Just to clarify, the video's are not mine, but achimspok's. Very talented guy:
Please watch my movie: The Third Tower

Let's go for the jugular instead...

I am a member of AE911Truth and a materials engineer. While, of course, I want to encourage and applauded all of the work by Richard Gage and AE911Truth, I have some concerns about the approach being taken here.

This idea of attacking the details of fire in WTC7 seems is the same approach to that of chemist Frank Greening: I think we have good reason to be suspicious of Greening and I seriously question the wisdom of taking his approach. Even the retarded "debunking" crew at JREF recongized that Greening is purposely leaving open a non-controlled demolition scenario for WTC7:

Instead, I believe that we should be going for jugular. here. The details of the fire just do not matter. Even if there would have been perfectly ideal fires around every column on every floor, the "collapse" could not have happened as observed. It is thermodynamically impossible for fire to cause the floor by floor simultaneous failures of the columns which must have been occurred in WTC. The idea is absurd.

While NIST should certainly be criticized from every angle, these types of technical details should not take precedence over exposing the elephant in the room.

>> Let's go for the jugular

>> Let's go for the jugular instead...

Or also. No reason we can't cover all bases . . .

a problem

As usual on this site, the graphics and graphics text all get cut off when viewed on my humble PC. Is there any way I can correct this?

Browser problem?

You might want to try a different browser. Firefox is a good choice:


Got firefox -- that may be the problem.

I'm having the same problem with these graphics

and I'm running a very fast system, a 21" monitor (at 1024 x 768) and Firefox. I'll try a different browser and see if that makes any difference.

I'm assuming some here are seeing all the graphics...

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

Video card

if the pc is old enough, you may be viewing the web at 640 X 580 rather than the 800 X 600 or greater. 640 X 580 and this site are probably not compatible.

I'm not there with you so I'm just throwing an idea into the hat.


Will seek pro help.

How go for jugular?

I agree with this jugular thing in spirit. It seems the Greening-style constantly picking over the arcane minutiae appears very sterile to any casual observer, and may also be technically a deadend, red herring, or even deliberate disinfo (not Gage but others).

But - if not that, then what? How do you "expose the elephant"? Just keep yelling that it was OBVIOUSLY a controlled demolition? Is that going for the jugular? That doesn't seem to work either. Nothing works because:

(a) the media is thoroughly controlled, pure Soviet style. I don't think anything can bust through that.

(b) The top down media control is only part of the picture. The other part is that many Americans of the "Outer Party" (the work-a-day semi-intelligent professional classes that are the crucial element in turning the tide if it's ever going to happen) have actually benefited economically from 9/11 and ensuing security concerns. So they have a subconscious resistance to ever grappling with this as an obvious Reichstag Fire event.

I think in the USA it will stand forever as its been played all along: Boxcutters, Collisions, Fires, Arab Villains, American Heroes.

Let's plan for a hundred year war...

You are raising a number of complex points that I think everyone in the know agrees with. I just want to make a couple quick comments:

(1) I am only talking about going for "jugular" of the NIST WTC 7 cover-up as a short-term tactic , no one should think that this or any other approach will solve the real problems. The real problems did not start in 2001, rather it seems they began took root in USA with formation of the CIA in 1947, but we know the lines of conspiracy are much older than that. These problems are fundamental to the structure of societies, but they ultimately lead to revolutions. The USA is already cooked, when it goes down, it is going to take much of the "free" world with it.

(2) We are a resistance movement. Our main long term strategy is to expand the awareness of 9/11 Truth and to confront the traitors. Like in the "Matrix" movie series, people are plugged into a network and their brains are being being controlled. We need to disconnect as many of them as possible from their television sets, video games and iPods (or at least change the channel to 9/11 Truth). In terms of the NIST WTC7 report, we should follow NIST's own lead in is distributing animated non-sense by making our own cartoons to expose and ridicule their fraud before the general public:

(3) On the technical front, skilled people need to continue to develop mathematical models that irrefutably prove NIST report are false. Charles M. Beck appears to be taking the lead here:

(4) Perhaps more importantly, the "oh, so silent" universities need to be systematically confronted with the absurdity of the NIST reports. I read that Kevin Barrett could not find anyone from the University of Michigan, College of Engineering to publicly defend the NIST reports. This is my alma mater. I want to document this fact by emailing the entire Civil Engineering faculty, staff & grad. student body, ask them to comment and post the results on a new website. I think we should go through the top ranked American universities one by one, expose the fact the almost nobody will publicly defend NIST and viciously attack the traitors who do.

I am very serious about the last point and I will be starting a thread in the forum: to discuss my plans there and invite others join in:

clairying question

" ...,and viciously attack the traitors who do."
- You meant that people within these universities who challenge NIST are attacked for it by those higher up in the university, correct?

There was also

a good video from a high school physics teacher proving the freefall speed on a previous post here.
Has this been sent to Richard Gage?

A note on the graphic.

The original that ae911truth posted is 800 pixels wide. It won't show up properly unless you have res. set to 1280.

I have asked users in the comments sections a couple of times if these X-large graphics were a problem, (on different blog entries), and nobody responded. In the future, they will be trimmed down a bit.

Ok, I shrank it down to 600 wide.

Izzat bettah?


"In fact, it had burned out in the east end before 4:00 PM."

Is there a photograph that clearly shows this?


Good question. Does this cover it?

Image Hosted by

Size adjustment


Thank you for fixing the oversize problem. :-)



Still not working my old HP. Will ask a grandchild for help.

Viewing problem

I just tried to view my last post without logging in and got a chopped off image.
Maybe that's your problem.