AE911Truth — Architects & Engineers Investigating the destruction of all three World Trade Center skyscrapers on September 11Dec 17
All things being equal, the fire would have spread consistently. But the NIST computer model inexplicably bypassed the offices to the southwest of column 79, burned around column 79 on the east side, and then, two hours later, burned the offices to the southwest of column 79.
By Chris Sarns
Dec. 14, 2016
Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth
Editor’s Note: To this day, most people, including many architects and engineers, are not aware that a third skyscraper, World Trade Center Building 7, mysteriously collapsed a few hours after the World Trade Center Twin Towers on September 11, 2001. The official report by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) on this building’s collapse has been challenged by many reputable and credentialed technical professionals. They point out that the NIST analysis has not undergone the rigors of scientific peer review — the typical pathway for validating significant scientific theories.
Chris Sarns’ research appears in Dr. David Ray Griffin’s book, The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7. Sarns has been deeply involved in the work of AE911Truth, where he provides his expertise on WTC 7.
The studies in this five-part series, written for Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth and originally published between May and September 2013, represent years of work that Sarns did in unraveling some of the most glaring inconsistencies and outright frauds in the NIST report on World Trade Center 7. He demonstrates that NIST’s theory of a fire-induced collapse of Building 7 is faulty and misleading. The destruction of this skyscraper on September 11 was truly unprecedented in the history of high-rise buildings.
Part 1 of Sarns’ series (below) was first published in May 2013, when close to 2,000 architects and engineers at AE911Truth were demanding a new investigation. By December 2016, the number of A/E petition-signers had swelled to nearly 2,750.
In this five-part series, I will expose and disprove NIST’s false claims in five critically important areas:
BURNED-OUT FIRE — The timing of the fire on Floor 12 exposes NIST’s false claim that fire led to the collapse.
MAGICAL THERMAL EXPANSION — NIST used numerous unscientific methods and fraudulent inputs to get the key girder to fail in its computer simulation.
MISSING SHEAR STUDS — NIST’s claim in its Final Report about the lack of shear studs on the floor support girder between columns 44 and 79 is exposed.
FICTITIOUS DEBRIS DAMAGE — The fictitious “10-story gouge” claimed early on by NIST in WTC 7’s south face is exposed.
NON-EXISTENT DIESEL FUEL FIRE — NIST’s fraudulent diesel fuel fire hypothesis is exposed.
NOTE: Quotes from NIST’s WTC 7 reports are shown in Bold Light Blue.
The timing of the fire on Floor 12 exposes NIST’s false claim that fire led to the collapse.
Below, the four images in the middle column are photographs taken of World Trade Center 7 at four different times in the afternoon of September 11, 2001.
The four graphics in the left column are my approximations, using the photographs as a guide, of where—and at what times—a fire was actually burning on Floor 12.
And the four graphics in the right column are NIST’s ANSYS computer model of where the fires were burning in the building at the same four times.
“Note that only window glass breaking times were prescribed in the fire model. The observed fire activity gleaned from the photographs and video were not a model input.” — NCSTAR 1-9, Vol. 2, page 378 [PDF page 444]
NIST will not release the input data because doing so, it claims, might “jeopardize public safety.”