AE911Truth will soon publish its response to NIST's final report on WTC7. In the meantime, this graphic illustrates that NIST's analysis is NOT consistent with photographic and video evidence. A higher resolution PDF may be found here: http://ae911truth.org/downloads/WTC_fire_sim_comparison_080912c.pdf. Please forward this blog and document link to anyone you think can help spread the truth.
(graphic below the fold)

Shyam Sunder describes in the NIST technical briefing and the slide show/document titled;
NIST Response to the World Trade Center Disaster Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster August 26, 2008
states on page 32: “Forces from thermal expansion failed the connection at Column 79, then pushed the girder off the seat.” [to the west]

In NCSTAR 1-9 Vol.1 page 353 [397 on pg counter] it says:
“Axial compression then increased in the floor beams, and at a beam temperature of 436 °C, the northmost beam began to buckle laterally. Buckling of other floor beams followed as shown in Figure 8–27 (a), leading to collapse of the floor system, and rocking of the girder off its seat at Column 79 as shown in Figure 8–27 [to the east]

Dylan Avery posed the question "Who writes this stuff?"

I can't say for sure but the evidence seems to point to one of the founding fathers.
Note text at 0:30
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMtdXUoc_mQ&feature=related

See http://www.cool-places.0catch.com/911/GreeningCommentsNCSTAR1-9.pdf for a detailed rebuttal to the final report on WTC7 by NIST. It clearly shows that the NIST explanation is not credible.

Comments on the Draft Report NIST NCSTAR 1-9: “Structural Fire Response and Probable Collapse Sequence of World Trade Center Building 7”, issued by NIST August 21st, 2008

(Revised and Extended Version of Comments Issued September 11th 2008)

By F. R. Greening

1.0 Introduction

A preliminary (draft) version of NIST’s final report on the collapse of WTC 7 was issued on August 21st 2008 together with a call by NIST’s Investigation Team for the submission of comments on the Draft Report from interested parties within the general public. First I wish to thank NIST for producing such a detailed technical report on the collapse of WTC 7 and secondly, I applaud NIST for allowing researchers from around the world to offer technical feedback that hopefully will be duly considered by NIST before a final version of the report is issued.

This relates to a video I posted on the YouTube AE911truth channel ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gC44L0-2zL8 ) and a related question I posed to Shyam Sunder in the August 26 Tech Briefing (with his answer):

Regarding the video:
Contrary to the August 2008 NIST report on WTC7, the acceleration of Building 7 has been measured and is found to be indistinguishable from the acceleration of gravity over a period of about 2.5 seconds during the fall. Freefall indicates zero resistance. It also indicates that the energy of the falling mass is not available to do work on the lower structure (i.e. such things as breaking, bending, crushing, etc.) A video detailing the measurement process and commenting on the results is posted on the AE911Truth YouTube channel, accessible through http://www.ae911truth.org/freefall. The video responds to the recently released NIST WTC7 document.

The following comment has been posted to my blog (repeated below). It purports to come from:

Arthur Scheuerman
Ret. Battalion Chief
FDNY

It was in response to my reposting of John Wyndham's letter to Nist at http://www.theprogressivemind.info/2008/09/dr-john-wyndhams-comments-to-nist-wtc7.html .

Who the heck is Arthur Scheuerman? Is he on the up and up? This is the internet mind you, and I could pose as the Queen of England if I wanted.

It is a very long and detailed comment on my very inconsequential blog, which I find curious. I believe that Scheuerman's claims are specious, but it would be nice to have some heavyweights weigh in with rebuttal.

I have allowed the comment to be posted on my site, The Progressive Mind, even though I suspect Scheuerman may not be everything he says that he is. See his site: http://www.blogger.com/profile/14211118872671048625 .

He has two posts on his blog, both on 9/11.

Regards
Michael Zimmer

Arthur Scheuerman has left a new comment on your post "Dr. John Wyndham's comments to NIST (WTC7) | 911bl...":

Perhaps we should invite David Scott, chairman of CTBUH, to a live open debate. He says he has examined the truth movement's claims and finds in our movement "no credibility whatsoever."

"I believe that the NIST report is a responsible attempt to find the cause of the failure, however there are many questions that are not answered in any detail and several of these questions are already on the discussion forum. I think that with a responsible dialog and debate that the NIST report can be much better and clearer than it is in the current form.

http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/2008/09/clarifying-collapse-time-of-wtc-7.html

Government apologists have argued that WTC 7 took 13 or more seconds to collapse, thus disproving the "virtual free fall" argument. However, this argument entirely misses the point.

Why?

Because the videos show that the penthouse collapsed long before the main building. In fact, everyone admits that there was a delay of several seconds between the collapse of the penthouse and the collapse of the rest of the building.

"An object at rest tends to stay at rest". So once the movement stopped, it should have stayed stopped.

Therefore, the collapse of the main portion of building 7 - several seconds after the collapse of the penthouse stopped - should be treated as a discrete and new event (see discussion below).

http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/2008/09/wtc-7-collapsed-at-same-speed-as-known.html

Here is a video of the demolition of the Landmark Tower, Fort Worth, Texas:

The Landmark Tower was 380 feet high.

According to the timer on Youtube, it took about 7 seconds from the start of the collapse (once the building started to fall) until the last of the building reached the ground.

Or check it yourself: here is an online stopwatch (click the green arrow on the left).

The fire on floor 12 is critical to the NIST hypothesis because the collapse of floor 13 in the north east corner of the building is supposedly the beginning of the initiating event that led to the implosion of WTC 7.

On page 383 of NIST NCSTAR 1-9 volume 1, the fire simulation graphic of floor 12 shows the fire conveniently burning around column 79 and then coming back to it at 5:00 p.m. The NIST fire simulation is not consistent with the photographs of the fire. The photographs show, and the NIST Appendix L report states, the fire on floor 12 had burned out by 4:45 p.m. In fact, it had burned out in the east end before 4:00 p.m.

Therefore, the fire did not cause floor 13 to collapse at 5:20 p.m. and the implosion of WTC 7 did not occur as NIST has proposed.

Below is a link to a composite graphic that compares the NIST graphic with a more realistic representation of the progression of the fires on floor 12.
http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/4214/firesimulationcompositeyf6.jpg

A professional version of this graphic will be published soon.

Chris Sarns
World Trade Center Building 7 Adviser
Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth

Yesterday the german ZDF /second german state channel brought their longer teaser for the german version of BBC/Mike Rudins take on WTC 7.

Here it is on youtube (german language)

It was quite good- besides they don't point out Richard Gage name and profession and Dr. Steven Jones profession.

Flyby News Notes -
Editor - Jonathan Mark - www.FlybyNews.com
September 2, 2008 - NIST Lies * Jehan Box * Ice Tipping * Nukes

"The future is in the past
with no escape present."

- Bart Jordan

1) NIST supports 9/11 cover-up
- - Debunking NIST's Conclusions About WTC 7
- - The Financial Times and the 'Self-Confessed Mastermind of 9/11'
- - FBI Sweeps Anthrax Under the Rug
- - Sarah Palin, grazing animals and the herd mentality
- - "The Reflecting Pool" receives award at Moondance Film Fest
- - September 08 Month of Truth – campaigns and events
2) Jehan Abdur-Raheem Hunger Strike to Get Out of BOX
- - McCain’s military father and betrayal of USS Liberty
3) Nuke Fight Nears Decisive Moment
- - Sally Shaw - rain, meetings, and rad waste
- - Radiation levels raised at Vt. Yankee
4) Arctic ice 'is at tipping point'
- - Warming and 9/11 Related Danger Zones

Editor’s Notes:

The NIST report on WTC 7 lays its focus on Column 79 on floor 8 to 13 and some hypothetical damage in its computer modeling.

I want to focus on real visible damage to the columns on the west side of the building near the Verizon building, and there especially on E3 and E4.

I just combed trough the NIST report on WTC 7 regarding these cuts. There is just no word on these cuts. As if they do not know these images.

A few days ago I posted a graphic from NIST's latest WTC7 report that depicts the exterior buckling after global collapse initiation. In no way does it resemble how the structure actually looks when it imploded. I had not noticed that this was the model for the scenario without debris impact damage. You see, NIST actually has models for the scenario without debris impact damage and for the scenario with their best estimated impact damage (the damage to the south side). They conclude that the building would also have collapsed without any impact damage.

So I checked the report for their modeling of the exterior buckling with the best estimated impact damage; the model of what actually happened. It's there but there is something missing: the top 23 floors are not shown and the north side is not shown; the side that can actually be seen in the videos and photographs of the collapse.

Without damage

Dr. Frank Greening (Hamilton, Ontario, Canada) has written a withering critique of the new WTC7 report and has submitted it to NIST as public comment. If this is all NIST can come up with after 7 years, the assisted collapse (demolition) hypothesis becomes all the more relevant.

Read Dr. Greening's critique at The 9/11 Forum

"In reading the Draft WTC 7 Report a number of issues emerge that are crucial to the credibility of NIST’s proposal as to how and why building 7 collapsed on September 11th, 2001. These key issues center on the narrative surrounding the ignition of the fires in WTC 7 and the spreading of these fires within the building prior to its collapse. The accuracy of NIST’s account of what transpired within the confines of building 7 during 9/11, is vital to NIST’s entire WTC 7 Report because it provides the basis for the computer modeling/simulation of the heating of structural elements on the fire-affected floors, which in turn, leads to NIST’s proposed collapse initiation and propagation mechanism.

In the following comments I will attempt to address each of the key topics - fire ignition and spreading, fire intensities and durations, structural heating, collapse initiation and propagation – and in so doing, highlight my concerns or objections to NIST’s position on these topics as presented in its Draft WTC 7 Report."

Continued...
http://the911forum.freeforums.org/withering-critique-of-the-new-wtc7-report-t44.html#341