How did tower 7 collapse?

>>509367722 (OP)
It was me, I made tower 7 collapse

Shit fell on it

>>509367722 (OP)
From the other towers falling. Ignore any antisemitic dogwhistles itt which are not based on any evidence whatsoever

>>509367722 (OP)
white supremacy

>>509367722 (OP)
it didn't, it's all a collective delusion, I saw it with my own eyes, it's still standing there and I'm tired of pretending that it's not

>>509367864
NIST's own reports on the skyscraper collapses conclude that each imploded due to
>office fires

What the fuck are (You) talking about?

>>509367722 (OP)
Same way the others did. Explosive charges planted in a routine controlled demolition.

Frank would like to know as well

>>509367722 (OP)
how did what do what? you fucking retard
utterly incomprehensible post

>>509367722 (OP)

The filthy jews blew it up, to blame it on muzniggers, to pursue 'greater pissrael' with burger ZOGbot assistance.

You been in a coma, cunt?

>>509368005
Israel would never attack us you antisemitic retard, they’re one of our closest allies. If you like muslims just say so fucking traitor.

american special ops planted c4 explosives in the basement

>>509367722 (OP)
The explosive certainly helped. Aside from that it was about sending the message. Look at the streets that contained the buildings and think why would destruction of those things mark a new era and who would choose to attack those things?
Church
Liberty
West
Vesey (a person who escaped enslavement and became free)

Now who would ever wanna attack and destroy those things?

they did studies on this, it had structural problems even before the planes hit it.

Nigger

>>509368057
>>509368113
it didn't explode, go look at the videos of it on youtube.

>>509367778
>off by 1
lol, lmao

>>509367722 (OP)
Controlled demolition. I mean, office fires.

>>509368245
Yes no explosives. It definitely just collapsed on top of itself due to fire. Retard.

WTC Building 7 (WTC 7) collapsed on the afternoon of September 11, 2001, at 5:20 PM, several hours after the North and South Towers fell. Here's a concise summary of the official account and the controversy:
Official Timeline of Events Leading to WTC 7 Collapse:

Proximity to Towers:
WTC 7 was located about 370 feet north of the North Tower (WTC 1).

Damage from WTC 1 Collapse (10:28 AM):
When WTC 1 collapsed, large debris struck WTC 7, causing significant structural damage to the south face and igniting fires on multiple floors.

Uncontrolled Fires:
Fires burned for approximately 7 hours on multiple floors. Due to the evacuation of the building and water supply issues (e.g., broken mains), automatic sprinklers failed, and the fires were not fought.

Collapse at 5:20 PM:
Video footage shows the building's penthouse falling first, followed by the entire structure collapsing symmetrically.

NIST Explanation (National Institute of Standards and Technology):

Cause:
The failure of a critical column (Column 79) due to thermal expansion of steel beams caused a progressive internal collapse.

Mechanism:
The heated floor beams expanded, pushed a girder off its seat, and caused the collapse of column 79, triggering a chain reaction.

Free-Fall Observation:
NIST acknowledged that for ~2.25 seconds, the building fell at gravitational acceleration (~9.8 m/s2) — but explained this as consistent with the global collapse mechanism once internal support was lost.

>>509368403
you are vietnamese

Controversy and Free-Fall Debate:

Critics (e.g., Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth):

Argue that free-fall acceleration and symmetrical collapse over the building’s footprint indicate controlled demolition.

Highlight that no steel-framed high-rise had ever collapsed solely due to fire before or since.

Point to video evidence showing uniform descent, suggesting all columns failed simultaneously.

NIST Counterpoint:

Asserts that the observed free-fall period followed internal collapses and was due to the sudden removal of support over a broad floor area.

Summary:

Collapse Cause (Official): Fire-induced structural failure (Column 79), not explosives.

Free-Fall Observation: A 2.25-second period of gravitational acceleration occurred, acknowledged but explained by internal collapse.

Controversy: Disputes center on whether fire alone could produce the observed collapse features, especially symmetry and free-fall.

Would you like a breakdown of structural diagrams, quotes from the NIST report, or summaries of independent investigations like the University of Alaska Fairbanks study?

>>509367722 (OP)
But where's the plane on this one?

>>509368606

>>509367722 (OP)

No idea Anon but the whole thing is strange and was strange then

>>509368545
Yes. So I know a false flag when I see one.
The CIA, secret service, DOD, SEC and IRS all had major offices within that building right at a time when trillions was reported missing. Not to mention you don't think major intelligence agencies don't rig their buildings to blow as a last resort?

The most parsimonious explanation — meaning the one with the fewest assumptions — depends on how you weigh two competing factors: physical evidence vs. institutional credibility.
Based on available data, here's a breakdown of the two leading theories:
1. Fire-Induced Collapse (NIST explanation) – "Official story"

Strengths:

Consistent with known physics of thermal expansion and material weakening.

NIST simulated a chain reaction from Column 79 failure, leading to progressive collapse.

Building burned unchecked for ~7 hours, with no firefighting efforts and extensive interior fires.

Internal collapse was not externally visible until the façade dropped — consistent with a sudden structural failure.

Weaknesses:

First and only time a steel-framed high-rise collapsed from fire in a symmetrical, near-free-fall manner.

The explanation requires a very specific failure sequence, including beam dislodgement and multiple cascading failures, all without asymmetrical collapse.

Critics argue that the model used by NIST was never fully released for peer review, limiting transparency.

2. Controlled Demolition (Independent researchers’ view)

Strengths:

Symmetrical, vertical collapse at near free-fall acceleration is highly characteristic of controlled demolition.

No resistance in the early moments implies simultaneous removal of core structural supports.

WTC 7 wasn't hit by a plane, and fires were isolated — raising doubt about fire being sufficient.

Weaknesses:

Requires a highly coordinated, concealed operation to plant and time explosives in a secure government building (which housed offices like the Secret Service and SEC).

No audio of explosions typically heard in demolitions was conclusively captured.

No forensic evidence of explosives was documented in the official investigation (though NIST did not test for thermite).

Occam’s Razor: Which is simpler?

If you assume good-faith, physics-based institutional analysis:
Fire-induced progressive collapse is simpler and doesn't require conspiracy.

If you assume the physical signature (symmetry, free-fall) demands independent validation:
Controlled demolition explains the collapse dynamics more cleanly, but introduces enormous complexity in motive, logistics, and concealment.

My conclusion:

From a strictly physical standpoint, the symmetrical, rapid, free-fall collapse of WTC 7 is more characteristic of controlled demolition. However, the logistical and institutional implications of that conclusion are extreme — requiring assumptions about motive, cover-up, and coordination at scale.

So, structurally, demolition appears simpler. Institutionally, fire collapse is more plausible — but strains physical expectations.

Would you like an engineering-based comparison of NIST vs. the University of Alaska Fairbanks study (2019)?

>>509367722 (OP)
>pull it

>>509367722 (OP)
>How did tower 7 collapse?
They rigged it with explosives prior to 9/11 like the other towers.

>>509368245

Go look at your tiny mutilated cock, kike

>>509367722 (OP)
>How did tower 7 collapse?
WOAH WOAH WOAH! Cool it with the anti semitism

>>509368545

You are a filthy jew

jew magic

>>509367722 (OP)
Fairy dust