Dr. Leroy Hulsey WTC 7 report to be released soon, any predictions?

I am going with they find a way to ask for more money to complete the research. If they had the holy grail and smoking gun of CD, they would have announced it by now.

I didn't know fire caused the collapse of WTC 7. I thought it was the properties of steel to increasingly resist load when heated, to become increasingly workable when heated, steel expands when heated, and steel contracts when cooled. Properties of steel combined with deficient fire insulation, long floor trusses with no concrete supports along their spans, and the use of nonstandard floor connection angles.

WTC 7 Final Report Due in August
Today we are thrilled to announce that the final report of the WTC 7 computer modeling study, which is being conducted by Dr. Leroy Hulsey at the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF), is set to be released in August of this year, shortly before the September 11th anniversary.

SOURCE


Moderator Note Please Read
Posting Work Written By Others

edit on 8/11/2017 by Blaine91555 because: No source for quoted article.

I predict that it will conclude that the building was not brought down by controlled demolition.

originally posted by: CulturalResilience
I predict that it will conclude that the building was not brought down by controlled demolition.

Of coarse it will, even if it did come down by demolition. "Pull it".

a reply to: kurthall

Just the pics is all that is needed

It was brought down by North Korea. Time to invade.

I mean liberate those poor North Koreans from their brutal, oppressive regime.

a reply to: neutronflux

I hoped they followed the money in the "investigation"
I hoped they looked into almost every single office in the Building 7 was rented by the CIA, the Secret Service, or the military, which could have made things much easier.

There will never be a real investigation.

Oh wait, this was a report of a computer modeling study, smh.

originally posted by: kyleplatinum
a reply to: neutronflux

I hoped they followed the money in the "investigation"
I hoped they looked into almost every single office in the Building 7 was rented by the CIA, the Secret Service, or the military, which could have made things much easier.

There will never be a real investigation.

Oh wait, this was a report of a computer modeling study, smh.

One, mostly off topic.

Two, the majority of floors were rented by Salomon Brothers. More floors were rented to insurance companies and American Express. Your comment is mostly false. Unless you can prove otherwise.

List of tenants in 7 World Trade Center

en.m.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: kyleplatinum

Which branch of the military rented space in WTC 7?

a reply to: neutronflux

The question is if this study concludes it was a controlled demolition, will you accept it?

originally posted by: AgarthaSeed
a reply to: neutronflux

The question is if this study concludes it was a controlled demolition, will you accept it?

Again, off topic. The thread is about predicting the conclusions.

Do except the NIST peer reviewed material in the NIST reports? If not, cite examples why the scientific findings are not accurate in your own thread.

a reply to: AgarthaSeed

In fact, the NIST material was published in scientific journals. Would you like to refute the published items with scientific rebuttals.

And I thought the WTC 7 report by Hulsey was going to be submitted to scientific journals for peer review. Would you like to cite if that is still true? Or has that mysteriously changed?

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: AgarthaSeed
a reply to: neutronflux

The question is if this study concludes it was a controlled demolition, will you accept it?

Again, off topic. The thread is about predicting the conclusions.

Do except the NIST peer reviewed material in the NIST reports? If not, cite examples why the scientific findings are not accurate in your own thread.

Way to dodge my question.

I suppose it's rhetorical anyway, because I know you won't accept it. In fact, your tone in the OP suggests that you're only making this thread because you feel the study didn't find a smoking gun.

And for the record, I'd wipe my ass with the NIST report. As would many of the victims' families.

originally posted by: AgarthaSeed

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: AgarthaSeed
a reply to: neutronflux

The question is if this study concludes it was a controlled demolition, will you accept it?

Again, off topic. The thread is about predicting the conclusions.

Do except the NIST peer reviewed material in the NIST reports? If not, cite examples why the scientific findings are not accurate in your own thread.

Way to dodge my question.

I suppose it's rhetorical anyway, because I know you won't accept it. In fact, your tone in the OP suggests that you're only making this thread because you feel the study didn't find a smoking gun.

And for the record, I'd wipe my ass with the NIST report. As would many of the victims' families.

Sad you cannot provide an intellectual and scientific response. Or provide specific examples.

A REMINDER ABOUT THE FORUM RULES -

IMPORTANT: STRICT RULES

Within the 9/11 Conspiracies forum, the Terms and Conditions will be strictly enforced, along with the following additions:

Name Calling: Tossing around indiscriminate name calling such as "OSer," "Shill," "Troll," "Truther," and all the other related nonsense will not be tolerated. Depending on the severity, you may experience an immediate account termination with no warning.

Personal Attacks: Taking focus off the subject matter and toward each other will not be tolerated in any form. You will experience an immediate account termination with no warning.

Thread Derailment: Posting of any irreverent or ridiculous information that disrupts the flow of productive discussion will not be tolerated. Depending on the severity, you may experience an immediate account termination with no warning.

Trolling: The repeated posting of content that supports any specific position, without interacting with members regarding that position will be considered Trolling in the 9/11 Forum. Depending on the severity, you may experience an immediate account termination with no warning.

Stay with the topic or move on.

Do not reply to this post.

a reply to: neutronflux

It's difficult to determine which offices were legitimate and which were fronts- the whole idea behind using a front is to hide operations and confound those without a "need to know".

A secret office operated by the CIA was destroyed in the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center, seriously disrupting intelligence operations. The undercover station was in 7 World Trade Center, a smaller office tower that fell several hours after the collapse of the twin towers on Sept. 11, a U.S. government official said. The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that immediately after the attack, a special CIA team scoured the rubble in search of secret documents and intelligence reports stored in the station, either on paper or in computers. It was not known whether the efforts were successful. A CIA spokesman declined to comment on the existence of the office, which was first reported in Sunday's editions of The New York Times. The New York station was behind the false front of another federal organization, which the Times did not identify. The station was a base of operations to spy on and recruit foreign diplomats stationed at the United Nations, while debriefing selected American business executives and others willing to talk to the CIA after returning from overseas. The agency's officers in New York often work undercover, posing as diplomats and business executives, among other things. They have been deeply involved in counter-terrorism efforts in the New York area, working jointly with the Federal Bureau of Investigation and other agencies. The CIA's main New York office was unaffected by the attacks, but agents have been sharing space at the U.S. Mission to the United Nations, and have borrowed other federal government offices in the city. The agency is prohibited from conducting domestic espionage operations against Americans, but it maintains stations in a number of major United States cities, where CIA case officers try to meet and recruit students and other foreigners to return to their countries and spy for the United States. The New York station was believed to have been the largest and most important CIA domestic station outside the Washington area. ©MMI The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed

SOURCE

a reply to: seattlerat

One, off topic.

Two, do you have a prediction.

Three, the entire office building was not rented by the government.

Four, there is no proof any branch of the military had offices in WTC 7 as the individual claimed.

Again, the claim WTC 7 was entirely rented by the government is mostly false.

originally posted by: neutronflux
I am going with they find a way to ask for more money to complete the research. If they had the holy grail and smoking gun of CD, they would have announced it by now.

I didn't know fire caused the collapse of WTC 7. I thought it was the properties of steel to increasingly resist load when heated, to become increasingly workable when heated, steel expands when heated, and steel contracts when cooled. Properties of steel combined with deficient fire insulation, long floor trusses with no concrete supports along their spans, and the use of nonstandard floor connection angles.

WTC 7 Final Report Due in August
Today we are thrilled to announce that the final report of the WTC 7 computer modeling study, which is being conducted by Dr. Leroy Hulsey at the University of Alaska Fairbanks (UAF), is set to be released in August of this year, shortly before the September 11th anniversary.

SOURCE

 

Moderator Note Please Read
Posting Work Written By Others

Steel becomes softer when it is heated. The melting point varies on the amount of Carbon present:

qph.ec.quoracdn.net...

WTC7 did have emergency generators and floors contained tanks of diesel fuel, with the 5th floor being the largest.

I remember watching a documentary when i was a kid. It was about controlled demolition and how every explosive had to be timed exactly right to bring down a building in its own footprint.

They must have got lucky on september 11th.

What a good excuse for endless war.

Make the lie big, repeat it often, and everyone will believe it.

originally posted by: booyakasha
I remember watching a documentary when i was a kid. It was about controlled demolition and how every explosive had to be timed exactly right to bring down a building in its own footprint.

They must have got lucky on september 11th.

What a good excuse for endless war.

Make the lie big, repeat it often, and everyone will believe it.

Off top, do you have a prediction?

a reply to: neutronflux

don't know the man but if he is honest he will say it had to be a controlled demolition.