The 2,700 members of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth Continue Their valuable work into the New Year 2017!
Two days ago, Europhysics News released its first issue since the publication of “15 years later: On the physics of high-rise building collapses,” which has now been viewed nearly 350,000 times since its release — and which even caused the magazine’s server to break down at one point.
Lo and behold, on page 43 is a startling and extraordinary letter to the editor by a former employee of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Peter Michael Ketcham, who worked at NIST from 1997 until 2011.
Learn More & Read the Letter >> http://action.ae911truth.org/o/50694/t/0/blastContent.jsp?email_blast_KEY=1361224
Dr. Leroy Hulsey, chair of the Civil and Environmental Engineering Department at the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF), is now 18 months into his two-year computer modeling study on the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 (WTC 7).
Dr. Hulsey first announced his preliminary findings at the Justice In Focus conference in New York City on September 10 and 11 — where he stated categorically that there was “zero” probability that WTC 7 collapsed due to the fires it experienced on 9/11.
Since then, he has given two more presentations. The first was on September 29 to the UAF student chapter of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE). The second was on October 19 to the Fairbanks Branch of the ASCE (where Dr. Hulsey previously served as president). We enthusiastically invite you to watch these presentations and the Q&As that follow, which provide a stimulating glimpse into how the engineering community may respond to Dr. Hulsey’s groundbreaking research when his findings are released next year.
As Dr. Hulsey explains in the presentations, he and his team will exhaustively examine other conceivable scenarios that may have led to collapse over the final six months of the study. They will also study the building’s response to losing individual columns and will attempt to simulate the kinds of failures that would be required to bring the building down in the manner observed on 9/11. After their final report has been published, Dr. Hulsey will begin submitting his findings to leading engineering journals and will attend conferences around the country.
Read more here
Thanks again to 911 truth artist and activist Roger Morris for conducting this excellent interview with Richard Gage, AIA which aired on Access Radio Taranaki in September. Roger and Richard discuss the scientific evidence behind the collapses of the World Trade Centre buildings including Building 7 on 9/11 and why the official NIST building reports are flawed. They also talk about the 911 Justice in Focus conference at the Cooper Union Building, New York, September 10-11 2016 and the plans to bring this evidence into the court system.
A huge thank you and congratulations to Wellington Activist Chris Ashley who recently made a presentation at his Toastmaster’s club about Building 7. His presentation was so compelling that he not only won Toastmaster of the Day but also interested his colleagues into learning more about the scientific evidence behind the three building collapses on 9/11.
You can read a post about Chris’s award and presentation at the Terrace Toastmasters website
NEW YOUGOV POLL SHOWS INCREASE IN BUILDING 7 AWARENESS, SAYS DIRECTOR OF STRATEGY
“A 7 percentage point gain . . . translates to at least 15 million American adults becoming aware of Building 7 over the past 2½ years.” — Ted Walter
Interview with Ted Walter and analysis of results here
“FREE FALLIN’ starring BUILDING 7” is a riff on the classic Tom Petty song Free Fallin’. Twenty-seven years after the release of this beautiful song, it provides a perfect platform to bring attention to the troubling destruction of World Trade Center Building 7, which came down in free fall late in the afternoon on September 11, 2001. According to the official account of 9/11, Building 7 collapsed due to normal office fires ignited by falling debris from WTC 1 (structural damage and diesel fuel fires did not contribute to the collapse, according to the government). However, scientific and circumstantial evidence strongly contradicts that explanation
The fact that Building 7 instantaneously entered free fall – the acceleration of gravity – for a period of 2.25 seconds over a distance of eight stories is very strong evidence of controlled demolition. Free fall can only be achieved when there is no resistance provided by the structure below. A free-fall drop of eight stories indicates that all 81 columns in Building 7 were simultaneously severed over eight stories. Only explosives can account for this kind of structural failure. Indeed, fires have never caused the total collapse of a steel-framed high-rise, let alone in the manner of a classic controlled demolition.
The infinitely small chance of a fire-induced failure bringing down the entire building – in particular, through the improbable series of structural failures which the government alleges caused the collapse – cannot be reconciled with the strong foreknowledge on the part of local authorities that Building 7 would eventually collapse (which the video highlights prominently). If Building 7 actually collapsed from fire, the authorities’ prediction of Building 7’s collapse would be analogous to confidently and correctly predicting one specific lottery ticket to win the lottery.
The inexplicable foreknowledge on the part of authorities is made all the more apparent by the inability of the engineering community to explain it after the fact. Nine months after the collapse, FEMA would state, “The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown at this time…. [T]he best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence.” More than four years after the collapse, the government’s lead investigator would state, “[T]ruthfully, we don’t really know. We’ve had trouble getting a handle on building No. 7.”
In reality, the warnings of Building 7’s imminent demise must have originated from someone who knew that Building 7 was going to be brought down in a controlled demolition. Beyond that, Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, which represents over 2,400 architectural and engineering professionals, does not speculate on who brought down Building 7 or why. Instead, we are dedicated to educating the public about the destruction of all three World Trade Center buildings with the expectation that others with the responsibility and authority to conduct a proper investigation will do so.
Please share this video widely and visit http://AE911Truth.org for more information on how you can help advance the cause of truth!
The following statement was released by Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth on December 18, 2015.
Please share it on Facebook and post it in the comments section of the YouTube video and of the online news outlets listed below. Thank you for helping AE911Truth quell the misinformation!
Viral 9/11 Truth-Debunking Blacksmith Gets It All Wrong
Much hay has been made in recent days about a YouTube video posted by a blacksmith named Trenton Tye, who tries to debunk the theory that the World Trade Center Twin Towers and Building 7 were destroyed by controlled demolition.
Within the first two days of being posted, Tye’s video received five million views and was covered by the Washington Post, the Daily Mirror, and the Huffington Post — the latter with the celebratory headline, “Metal Worker Shuts Down 9/11 Truthers… With His Pinkie.”
In fact, Tye’s attempt to disprove controlled demolition by heating a half-inch piece of steel to 1,800°F and bending it like a “noodle” is way off. He seems to think the controlled demolition argument goes like this, “Fire can’t melt steel, so the buildings couldn’t have collapsed from fire.” He couldn’t be more mistaken.
The only reason that melting steel is discussed at all is because government officials, engineers, first responders, and others observed large amounts of molten metal (requiring temperatures of more than 2,800°F) in the debris of all three buildings.
Tye’s sixth-grade-level demonstration that structural steel loses strength at 1,800°F does nothing to address the presence of molten metal at Ground Zero. If anything, Tye proves that the fires in the World Trade Center could not have generated the molten metal that witnesses saw. What did? The only plausible explanation is thermite, an incendiary that can be used to cut through structural steel.
Putting aside the molten metal, Tye’s demonstration is wholly irrelevant for the simple reason that the fires in the World Trade Center could not have heated the structure anywhere near as high as the 1,800°F to which Tye heated his piece of steel using a furnace.
Jet fuel fires reach temperatures of around 1,500°F only under optimal conditions. In open air conditions like the WTC buildings, they burn at around 600°F. Even according to the government agency that investigated the disaster, there is no evidence that any of the steel was heated to the point where it would lose its strength.
There have been literally hundreds of hotter, larger, longer-lasting fires in steel-frame high-rises over the last century, and never has one caused the total collapse of a building. Tye’s simplistic logic implies that many of these infernos should have led to a total collapse. Of course, none has — and that also goes for the three steel-frame high-rises that were destroyed on 9/11.
That this YouTube video has become an overnight sensation testifies to the alarming lack of journalistic rigor and scientific acumen with which the media has approached the debate surrounding the World Trade Center destruction on 9/11 — and to the rampant misinformation that has followed.
We encourage anyone who thinks there might be some validity to Tye’s confused science experiment to visit AE911Truth.org and to read our most recent publication, Beyond Misinformation: What Science Says About the Destruction of World Trade Center Buildings 1, 2, and 7, for real expert analysis of the evidence.
Published on Dec 9, 2015
Dr. Niels Harrit expresses his support for Dr. Leroy Hulsey and the WTC 7 Evaluation project.
World Trade Center Building 7 Evaluation is an engineering study at the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF) using finite element modeling to evaluate the possible causes of World Trade Center Building 7’s collapse. The study is being conducted by Dr. J. Leroy Hulsey, Chair of UAF’s Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, and two Ph.D. research assistants. Professionals from the fields of structural engineering, civil engineering, mechanical engineering, architecture, building design and construction, physics, math, and science, as well as everyday citizens, are invited to get involved. Every aspect of the scientific process will be posted onhttp://WTC7Evaluation.org. The study is being crowd-funded by the nonprofit organization Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth.
For more information visit http://WTC7Evaluation.org
Evidence still raises questions over World Trade Center collapses
DECEMBER 04, 2015
ALEX BEAM’S portrayal of “architect truthers” is yet another disappointing example of a journalist resorting to ad hominem attacks and avoiding the facts when discussing the destruction of the three World Trade Center skyscrapers on Sept. 11, 2001 (“The ‘truthers’ and 9/11,” Opinion, Nov. 16).
Sadly, not one sentence of Beam’s column examines the evidence for or against the controlled demolition of the Twin Towers and WTC Building 7. Instead, he devotes 600 words to revealing his own ill-founded bias.
He cherry-picks the appearance of three nonexperts from the 15-minute video “Architects & Engineers — Solving the Mystery of Building 7,” but doesn’t highlight any of the film’s “various experts.” Noting that some Americans think that what happened that day hasn’t “been fully explained,” he declares, “I don’t agree,” but gives no evidence-based reason for disagreeing. His position rests on his revulsion at the idea that someone — “our own government,” he supposes — consciously demolished the World Trade Center.
As building professionals, we at Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth try not to let personal feelings interfere with investigating the three worst structural failures in modern history. Nearly 2,400 architects and engineers, not including the 109 who signed our petition at the recent annual trade show ABX, have joined us because we stick to science.
The physical evidence shows that scattered office fires could not have caused the 47-story WTC 7 to collapse symmetrically into its footprint. (Imagine Boston’s 52-story Prudential Tower completely collapsing in seven seconds from small fires — it’s hard to, isn’t it?) The evidence also shows that the twin towers were not leveled by the airplane impacts and ensuing fires.
The implications are indeed far-reaching, and that is why we urge people to study all the evidence before reaching a conclusion.