WTC7 Simulation Evaluation - World Trade Center 7 Collapse Research Study

Jesus Christ what’s up with the mania of “truthers” in the comment section. It seems like the majority of y’all can’t even argue actually factual information and choose to blindly follow random people on the internet who clearly are pseudo-intellectuals with 0 logical reasoning whatsoever instead of actually taking the time to look at officially published reports, witness statements, or just general knowledge on how structural collapses work.

And I hate to say this again but an opinion is not a factual statement, therefore, stop making baseless claims about “cOnTroLlEd dEmOlItIon” when it’s VERY obvious that you have no logical reasoning or any evidence-citing skills whatsoever.
Oh and the evidence that you try to prove your already baseless claim literally contradicts everything you just said.

Jfc y’all you need to actually go back to school or something or go seek a therapist cause you REALLY need to seek help.

I never knew sky scrapers can be made from steel structure until the 9/11. I always thought they were from reinforced concrete

Das sieht in den Liveaufnahmen aber doch anders aus, da kommt das Gebäude gerade nach unte und kippt nicht zur Seite weg. Aber vielleicht lässt sich das ja anpassen.

Get one professional explosives guy or girl to say those buildings didn't blow up..where is this person?

Buildings can't fall in there own footprint unless you cut all the main columns at the same time and as it falls..All these buildings where blown up period..stop living in a lie people.

Pretty model, but it doesn't explain why there was virtually no resistance as the structure was falling, near free-fall speed.

How does a building which whole structure is made up of steel beams collapse because of a fire? It just wouldn’t happen. It’s structure would’ve been too strong.

Which floor were the CIA terrorists located?

What is the purpose of this video?
And if debris from the tower impacted the right side exterior of the building why did the building start collapsing from the left side interior?

Hey look! a 3D simulation!

This simulation while we'll done does not match the video of the building collapse.. The front 2 corners dropped together. This simulation shows the left corner dropped first. Not trying to be argumentive here.. that is with always bother me about building 7. The front two corners both dropped at the same time. Can't see the back Corners the video but the two front Corners drop exactly the same time. That is not possible unless we are talking about a intentional demolition. The simulation is very well done but I don't believe it matches the facts of the video.

No building fall like this whitout help in the middle of a city full of important people and intelligensia! Period.

F demolition experts xD Apartly you need them to bring buildings strait down, or you just set off random explotions...

It wasnt collapsed like this.
Look the Real videos it collapsed straight ahead like a demolition.

Complete nonsense.

Kostack Studio, financed by the CIA.

Nice try, all of these models you made show the outside frame falling to the side at an angle. Every video shows it dropped straight down into its own footprint

So we are saying that if any part of any floor collapses inside a high rise, we are all fucked. Oh goody.

some flaming papers flew inside a wndow and did all the destruction

And the building just falls down, why?

Wtc 7 just saw all his brothers collapse and couldnt hold on anymore.

Im forgivin about 9/11 And Wtc7 Destroyed is it based in True story

Professor Hulsey University of Fairbanks Alaska. Look him up. Official story is a fairy tale.

The building had the same chance of collapsing from fires on 911 as if i had walked up to it the day before and kicked it !

What a fraud. WTC 7 was imploded.

The building came straight down and no deflection, The NIST report had made a lot of Mistakes in there model DATA.

In the early 1900s in the US, a lot of kids had to leave school early to help earn money for their families, which led to a stunted education.
Not sure what exactly the fuck everyone here's excuse is. lol

A LOT of ditch-digging smoothbrains down there in the comments, folks! 🤦‍♂

“Officially published reports” don’t make me laugh. That’s the same as taking health advice from the Marlboro Man and Big Pharm.

simulation or not how when the outside of the building burned . can the center of the building collapse first and not the outside where the most damge was of the debries

What did the firefighters do until 5 in the evening? shit u .s .a .. The planes did not crash. The planes were holograms. shooting from satellite..

Can any of the truthers in the comment section explain to me how a building with pre planted explosives burn for 7 hours without setting any of them off

This nonsense has no resemblace to what can be seen in the actual video of the controlled demolition of WTC Building 7.

Civil engineers, structural engineers, experts with technical expertise in 47+ story metal structures...really boring, competent professionals DO NOT AGREE WITH THE whitewash, NIST report.

All the competent experts ask for is a neutral, un-compromised third party to examine their specific FINDINGS.

How is it that on September 11th, 2001 scientists were (seemingly) unable to understand basic science? We've known for quite some time the mechanics of what causes things to collapse, and those buildings and aircraft (though full of individual components and lots of chemicals) scientist were pressured into ignoring the rather obvious physics of what happened. Unfortunately the most logical explanation is the most obvious and the difficult for people to accept, all three buildings were brought down using controlled demolition, a process that has been used to bring down tall buildings for quite some time now. No other explanation accounts for the physics and chemistry involved. No other explanation accounts for the incredible statistical IMPROBABLITY of 3 buildings collapsing in essentially the same manner, near the same location. Keep in mind that WTC 7 was not hit by any aircraft and yet it somehow collapsed in the same manner as the other 2 buildings, without aircraft or jet fuel being necessary. Before or since that day, not a single other steel framed building had experienced such a collapse (essentially straight down into their own footprint, for ANY reason other than controlled demolition. Other buildings have experienced much worse fires, some of them even completely engulfed in flames. Other buildings have been hit by aircraft, most famously that other tall building in New York, the Empire State Building, hit by a large military aircraft on July 28th, 1945. Keep in mind the Empire State building is still standing TODAY., and it is a much older building than any building at the WTC complex, meaning that its fireproofing and suppression systems (IF it had ANY at the time of the crash, it was built in 1930 and I don't know if such things were required at that time) weren't as modern. It was closed for less than a week before it was reopened. One would assume that it was only reopened AFTER it was deemed structural sound by engineers (meaning that based on scientific analysis the building wasn't in danger of eminent collapse.) So the question no one asks is why aren't all of the skyscrapers in the United States inspected to make sure that they can survive being hit by large aircraft? If the danger is real, and it is real, then all such buildings should be closed until they are inspected, it's a matter of public safety!

The answer to all of these issues (and there are many, many more problems with the official government narrative) is that the scientist were told to ignore common sense, assume that gravity and thermodynamics and chemistry are baffling and sometimes their behavior can be weird in cases where it really shouldn't be. By that I mean the laws of quantum physics ( the physical rules that govern the behavior of subatomic particles) as weird as they may seem from the perspective of classical Newtonian physics have been tested through experimentation and have produced consistent results time and time again, therefore they are true representation of reality(though with no loss of irony, one of the principles of quantum physics is that objects don't have a definite reality until they are observed). Said another way, in classical physics (or chemistry) there's no reason why an object (chemical )or system should randomly NOT obey the laws of classical physics. If jet fuel yesterday could not burn hot enough to melt or even soften steel then, there's no earthly reason for it behave that way tomorrow, and on, and on, so forth and so on. An object will fall toward the ground, straight to the ground, when all of its supporting structure fails (IN A CONTROLLED AND ORGANISED FASHION) if the structure does not fail in a controlled fashion the object will accelerate toward the weakest side first. Not at all what happened THREE DIFFERENT TIMES in New York on September 11, 2001.

Ok truthers, i cant take anymore, i must confess....i led the demo team. You were right, and your intelligent and well informed theories have worn me down, i can no longer live the lie. To avoid detection i assembled the greatest stealth team consisting of bigfoot, nessie, mothman and a group of chupacabra. The charges were space age tech, alien poop. After eons of travel through the endless void, the little green poop was full of radiation which eats through steel like a migrant through a border. Special flat earth calculations were used to determine the proper ratios. We spent months planning, and we would have gotten away with it if it werent for you meddling kids.

Goverments really should crack down on "truthers"!

Well is pretty nice simulation of how buildings is been destroy sadly, but I've seen a real footage that building been destroy by a free fall, with out falling randomly left or right, Building 7 destroy straight line,

😅😅😂😂I see this 9/11 video World Trade Centre one and two world, wtc1 WTC 2 this building is collapse a target plane, but World Trade Centre 7 wtc7 he is the heart attack and automatically collapse this is very big comedy how funny man 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂🎉🎉🎉

great simulation very realistic ....

Ha ha ha....
Who made this video???
This video don't make any sense at all...
Maybe to those who believe in Santa....ha ha.

is the model published anywhere so it can be peer reviewed?

180m tall and they "forgot" to mention it in the official report of 2004 with 860 pages. Okay.
Maybe they wanted to get rid of it because it was pretty much damaged (none of the supporting 81 main pillars) and would cost more to repair than to quickly bring it down and build another building. As the computer models show here, it was a controlled collapse because it does not look the slightest similar to the real footage. According to the official report from 2007, pillar 79 "broke lose".

Collapse 😂😂😂😂, more like a demolition 😂😂

These commenters are a social parasite mutant of H. sapiens.

what about the 72 columns that was found with 45° angle cuts like the columns in the twin towers

Даже не знаю, кто в это поверит...

nasa globalist

Has anyone built a computational model under the assumption that explosives were used?

I realize models aren't perfect, but in this case we know what the result was, so any model that doesn't come close is a bad model. Visually to me this seems like the NIST data where the initiation is pretty good and everything after that is ignored.

Should have started the collapse where it was already damaged.

Incredible how they try to convince us that it collapsed naturally.... 😂