”Because the only loads present on 9/11 after the impact of the aeroplanes were gravity and fire, many engineers were surprised that the Twin Towers completely collapsed. The towers had been designed specifically to withstand the impact of a jetliner, as the head structural engineer, John Skilling, explained in an interview with the Seattle Times” in 1993.
More: 15 years later: on the physics of high-rise building collapses

The paper ”15 years later” was written by:
– Steven Jones, former full professor of physics at Brigham Young University
– Robert Korol, professor emeritus of civil engineering at McMaster University in Ontario, Canada.
– Anthony Szamboti, a mechanical design engineer with over 25 years of structural design experience.

1. Explosions

When the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, occurred, most people were convinced that the highrise buildings were destroyed because of explosions. Many heard explosions. They said for example: ”We heard very loud explosions, blasts.” ”There was another major explosion.” (There is even audio.)

Thanks to Graeme MacQueen who analyzed many hours of tv-sequences, we now know that the number of witnesses to explosions is overwhelming!
– Graeme MacQueen: What Journalists Actually Witnessed on 9/11 – YouTube
– or jump right in @2min 10

Only later, by repeated statements from so-called experts on tv, the word ‘pancaking WTC buildings’ was imprinted into the public mind. The promotion of the ’pancaking theory’ started on the same day of the event from the tv couch when the dust had not even settled! The propaganda machine was in the highest gears!

2. What Is Pancaking at a Building Collapse?

Normally “pancaking” is the informal word used to describe when buildings or bridges with multiple floors collapse due to earthquakes.

The image above is a prime example of the pancake theory, however, that is not the case when dealing with the WTC, nothing of the sort can be seen in the WTC2 or 3 or 7 rubble. Image from: The Pancake Theory

3. Office Fires or Something Else?

Now let’s compare two buildings in New York, WTC5 and WTC7.
Here you see the office fire of WTC7 a few hours before the collapse.

from – A Structural Reevaluation of the Collapse of World Trade Center 7, p.11
This scientific research group came to the conclusion that WTC7 did not come down due to fires (as is claimed by NIST)! It was led by
– Dr J. Leroy Hulsey, Professor
– Dr Feng Xiao, Post-doctoral Researcher
– Zhili Quan, PhD Student
at University of Alaska Fairbanks (Institute of Northern Engineering & College of Engineering & Mines)

(See the video for WTC7 collapse here: Shortlink Proof WTC7)

WTC7 building, which collapsed in the afternoon of 9/11, without being hit by any flying object, with office fires burning only in a few stories, suddenly collapsed at 5:20 pm on that day in 7 seconds!

But fires have never brought down a highrise building! It has not happened in the history of modern steel highrise buildings, neither before nor after 9/11. So why did NIST insist on this flawed theory?!

This is about Normalizing the abnormal
Watch: Foreknowledge | World Trade Center Building 7

Compare the above images with those of another WTC building, WTC5, which was hit by debris and burned, and this is what it looked like after 8 hours of burning. The fires were more intense than the WTC7 fires, but the WTC5 did not collapse – how come?

WTC 5 is an example of how steel-framed high-rises typically perform in large fires. It burned for over eight hours on September 11, 2001, and did not suffer a total collapse.
– 15 years later: on the physics of high-rise building collapses

4. HOW Three WTC Buildings Collapsed

Now let’s turn our attention to the way those 3 WTC buildings collapsed.

4.1 WTC7

Velocity – elapsed time – measurements

– Free-Fall Acceleration | World Trade Center Building 7

4.2 If Not Office Fires – Then What?

If it was not because of ’office fires’ as claimed for WTC7 or because of ’pancaking’ due to the weakening of the large steel beams supposedly induced by the crashed aeroplane’s petrol, so what was it then?

Remember the ‘pancaking’. Does this look like WTC stories are falling upon each other? Where is all this powder coming from?

Judge for yourself: How does it look?
We are not experts here, but there are many real architects, structural engineers, etc. who have analysed these events in great detail.

4.3 Comparison

Then compare those pictures (and there are many more, although much is being taken down from the internet!) with this video from Dubai, around 2019/20, when those buildings were ‘taken down.’ See how they were taken down.

Tallest building demolished using explosives – Guinness World Records – YouTube.
Controlled demolition of UAE building in 10 seconds that set a world record. (From around 2020)
Recommended: Free-Fall Acceleration | World Trade Center Building 7

5. More Proof of Explosives Used

In the Dubai video above, we can see (you may need to zoom in) those squibs, coming out of the building at several levels horizontally.

Compare this to the WTC:

High-velocity bursts of debris, or “squibs,” were ejected from point-like sources in WTC 1 and WTC 2, as many as 20 to 30 stories below the collapse front.

So what we see here, what does it mean for the official, by the US government peddled conspiracy theory, which brought humanity immense suffering, at least two wars, destroyed countries, destroyed lives – millions!
– Explosive Features | Twin Towers
– Related: Shortlink Numbers War Terror

Then is this not worth investigating? Yes, very much so.

6. What We Need

We need a new, impartial, and thorough investigation into what happened on Sept.11, 2001.
– More than 2,700 U.S. veterans call for a new investigation November 11, 2021

7. Related

Shortlink Strange Details 911
Shortlink No Coincidence
Shortlink Proof WTC7
Shortlink 5 Conspiracy Theories
Shortlink What is a Conspiracy Theory
911 links
Researchers Find Flaws in NIST’s WTC7 Theory