In the NIST 2004 " preliminary " report, page L-51, it states;
The working hypothesis, for the collapse of the 47-story WTC 7, if it holds up upon further analysis,
would suggest that it was a classic progressive collapse that included:
• An initial local failure due to fire and/or debris induced structural damage of a critical column, which supported a large span floor area of
about 2,000 ft2, at the lower floors (below Floor 14) of the building,
• Vertical progression of the initial local failure up to the east penthouse bringing down the interior structure under the east penthouse, and
• Horizontal progression of the failure across the lower floors (in the region of Floors 5 and 7 that were much thicker and more heavily reinforced
than the rest of the floors), triggered by damage due to the vertical failure, resulting in disproportionate collapse of the entire structure.
Emphasis mine, but where has this " classic progressive collapse " ever happened before or since???
I believe the correct answer to this question is in ONLY in a controlled demolition.
The most profound thing I got out of this hypothesis is the fact that if someone WANTED to initiate a total collapse one would only have to perform
the following;
A vertical collapse appears to have occurred after interior columns 79, 80, and/or 81 failed.
This vertical progression causes a horizontal progression which in turn causes total collapse. No need to wire the whole building with expolsives!
According to NIST's own hypothesis, it would be this easy. If this is so then wouldn't this answer questions like;
" If this was a controlled demolition then why didn't anybody find DET cord/blasting caps/etc. during the cleanup process?"
You can read the whole report
here
And for those of you that state this building didn't fall into it's own footprint;
The debris of WTC 7 was mostly contained within the original footprint of the building. From aerial photos, the debris visible on top of the pile
is mostly façade structure. This failure sequence suggests that the interior of the building collapsed before the exterior.
NIST does not agree with you. . .
How can anyone state that it would have been impossible for someone to have performed a CD on this building and not get caught when NIST is directly
telling you how easy it could have been done?
2PacSade-
[edit on 7-8-2007 by 2PacSade]
spelling
[edit on 7-8-2007 by 2PacSade]
