“The principal conclusion of our study is that fire did not cause the collapse of WTC 7 on 9/11, contrary to the conclusions of NIST and private engineering firms that studied the collapse. The secondary conclusion of our study is that the collapse of WTC 7 was a global failure involving the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building.”
was a global failure involving the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building.
That's common. Once some of the columns have failed, the rest now have to carry the weight of the entire building. Often that force is at odd angles they aren't designed for, too. So they fail too.
Pretty sure they have a much better grasp of what took place than most people do, considering their reputations are on the line by speaking out.
No one said you had to agree.
I'm not willing to base the entire belief that it was "severely damaged" on two individual pictures of the SW corner. That's fine if you are. No one is forcing you to think anything.
Definitely. WTC7 still makes no sense to this day. Here's a really good read about WTC7 by a team of engineers:
https://ine.uaf.edu/wtc7
Here's a quick video clip for those unfamiliar:
https://streamable.com/nmitqg
That's common. Once some of the columns have failed, the rest now have to carry the weight of the entire building. Often that force is at odd angles they aren't designed for, too. So they fail too.
Read their report.
These are some of the brightest engineers in the world from two different schools collaborating. You're sorely mistaken.
I decide to skim through the report.
It's pretty bad that they mention almost no damage to the structure of the building at all, despite major structural damage to the building.
I suspect that that wrong assumption probably has an effect on their conclusions.
Pretty sure they have a much better grasp of what took place than most people do, considering their reputations are on the line by speaking out.
No one said you had to agree.
I'm not willing to base the entire belief that it was "severely damaged" on two individual pictures of the SW corner. That's fine if you are. No one is forcing you to think anything.
"top minds"
Not an argument. Discredit the merit of what's they're discussing, not make pointless ad hominems because you feel it somehow validates your opinion.