free fall

Interview Transcript : Tony Szamboti : On NIST's 9/11 Sins of Omission

Interview with Tony Szamboti
Transcript published 23 May 2016

For this important interview we welcome Tony Szamboti, mechanical engineer and 9/11 researcher, who joins us for a detailed discussion on crucial evidence that, in the words of his research group, "clearly demonstrate(s) that the reports produced by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) on the destruction of the World Trade Center (WTC) were unscientific and fraudulent."

With the group's white paper as our focus, "Areas of Specific Concern in the NIST WTC Reports" which lists 25 Points seriously challenging NIST's work in this area, we discuss striking new evidence demonstrating that NIST intentionally omitted significant structural components from its analysis of Building 7, and explore the almost inescapable conclusion that this was done in order to avoid the explanation of controlled demolition. We also discuss the potential these findings might have for legal action.

NIST Replies to Three Questions: WTC7, Nano-Thermite, & Microspheres


With the help of a volunteer from, Wayne Coste, three members of my local community and I engaged in a correspondence with NIST that was “shepherded” by our congressman’s office.

Our complete correspondence can be found here: All Three Letters and Responses.

In the first letter we asked three questions: (1) How does NIST explain building 7’s 2.2 seconds of free fall, and the apparent visual discrepancy between video of the collapse and NIST’s visualization based on their computer simulation? (2) How does NIST explain the documented presence of nano-thermite in the WTC dust? (We cite the relevant article.) And, (3) how does NIST explain he the abundance of iron-rich microspheres in the dust? Our other two letters are follow-ups regarding NIST’s initial answers. Our third letter summarizes and puts the whole thing in context.

Below I’ve pasted the text of (most of) our third letter, which summarizes the first two. Below that I’ve included NIST’s final response.


"It Fell in Silence: The Collapse of World Trade Center 7"

"It Fell in Silence: The Collapse of World Trade Center 7"

Nathan Janes

Many Americans are unaware that three buildings within the World Trade Center complex fell on Sept 11, 2001. Located just 300 feet from the North Tower,World Trade Center Building 7 (WTC 7) was a forty-seven story steel framed building, which collapsed vertically in 6.5 seconds more than 6 hours after the collapse of the Twin Towers. Although the collapse of the towers was televised hundreds of times in the days following 9/11, the collapse of WTC 7 was seldom shown or discussed. The widely publicized 9/11 Commission Report fails to mention the collapse of WTC 7 in its 568 pages. Looking beyond the limited information provided by the mass media about the fall of WTC 7, a number of questions arise.

How long is it going to fall?

Nearly as fast as it would fall through air?

Can an object fall through mass 5 times greater than itself nearly as fast as it would fall through air? (When only force available is gravity?)

You need to be no expert in physics or structural engineering to answer this question. And you also need no expert to tell you what the answer is. All you need is a little bit of common sense.

Undamaged part of the WTC1 under the impact zone was approximately 5/6 of whole tower. Photos of impact zone of WTC1 can be found here to check that there is only 1/6 of the tower mass above the impact zone. Use sky lobby as a reference point. See also this picture and this video.

Rosie O' donnell: on video talks about getting physics experts on the View

Hopefully this embed script works, this was posted today on rosie's video blog. Im not sure how often she does this i just noticed the second one of two today, the previous one has no mention of 9/11. YOU GO ROSIE!!!