, , ,

[PLEASE NOTE  (16 Feb. 2017): the original videos to which I had linked  are no longer available. I’ve substituted  two new links to two videos whose content is to all intents and purposes the same as what they replace.  I still haven’t been able to find an equivalent for the third.  If and when I do, I’ll fix that too.  Otherwise, everything is as it was first posted in September of 2016.]

Norm’s note: merely for a bit of context, a comment left by myself at OffG:

Good morning, to you, too, CloudSlicer,

“Hulsey shows that NIST artificially assumed stiffness in certain parts of the floor structure in order to produce the required elongation of the beams through thermal expansion, sufficient to dislodge the girder. This is similar to heating a steel rod which is constrained at one end only, thereby ensuring that all the displacement through thermal expansion occurs at the unconstrained end. Applying such an artificial constraint to the floor beams is clearly a nonsense because it does not accurately model the real structure of WTC7.”  [– by CloudSlicer]

Quite ri[g]ht. In fact, apart from all the mechanical elements that NIST simply ignores in its modeling of WTC 7, this is the crux of their deception and what Hulsey underscores: if you have an elongated piece of steel, like a girder, and it is “rigidly fixed” at one end and not at the other, the ‘movement’ of the entire expansion of the steel is all in the direction of the end that is “not fixed” or that allows for ‘movement.’

And Hulsey proves that that is how NIST models the whole of WTC7, first by bringing your attention to the floor plan of floor 13 — ( @ 17 minutes [@ roughly 15 minutes 35 seconds in the new video] to roughly 22 minutes of the first video above [– posted here, below –] and titled “WTC 7 Evaluation Finds: Fire DID NOT Cause the Collapse of WTC 7”) — to point out that NIST purposely leaves more than half of the floor area without what he calls “springs,” that it is to say, without properly modeled ‘joint’ or ‘connection’ substitutes, thereby creating a scenario whereby the girders are effectively modeled as being fixed (or more rigid) at one end and free to expand at the other.

It is in this way that NIST ensured that “all” of the girder’s expansion must happen at the ‘free end,’ pushing, so to speak, against the “fixed end,” thereby in their model, finding the necessary “anchor point” to unseat the intended and purposely targeted column. Ironically, because this is how they had to model WTC7 to reach their predetermined conclusion, when they run their animated version, the movement of the overall collapse is not anything like what was actually observed . . .

Once this work gets peer-reviewed and ends up as a respectable and legitimate area of academic research, the “investigating team of NIST” (sic) will be exposed in the gross misconduct of their so called investigation. I can’t imagine how comfortable they must be in their skins with Hulsey at their heels . . .

Dr. Leroy Hulsey presents the findings of his WTC 7 Evaluation study at the Justice in Focus 9/11 Symposium in New York on Sep 10, 2016. I added a couple of videos into this presentation as Dr. Hulsey had a problem playing them.

Source of quote and where I pilfered the links to all the videos below: 9/11 Blogger

WTC 7 Evaluation Concludes: Fire DID NOT Cause WTC 7 Collapse


Published on Nov 19, 2016

“This is [NIST’s] simulation. Do you notice something kind of strange? Does it look the same? (Audience: “No.”) So that should have immediately gotten someone’s attention.”
– Dr. Leroy Hulsey, October 19, 2016

WTC 7 Evaluation is a two-year study by Dr. J Leroy Hulsey, Chair of UAF’s Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, and two Ph.D. research assistants. It is being crowd-funded through the nonprofit organization Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth.

WTC 7 Evaluation Website:

This presentation is the latest update from Dr. Hulsey.

Don’t forget to subscribe to our YouTube Channel and stay updated. WTC 7 Evaluation YouTube Channel link:

Video description as quoted from YouTube:

Published on Sep 11, 2016

For the complete video archive from the ‘Justice in Focus 9/11 | 2016’ event, please visit: http://911justiceinfocus.org. And please support the event producer, Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth at: http://AE911Truth.org9/11

Dr. Leroy Hulsey presents the findings of his WTC 7 Evaluation study at the Justice in Focus 9/11 Symposium in New York on Sep 10, 2016. The WTC 7 Evaluation is a study at the University of Alaska Fairbanks using finite element modeling to evaluate the possible causes of World Trade Center Building 7’s collapse. For more information and to support the project, visit: http://www.wtc7evaluation.org

Watch Dr. Hulsey’s second presentation to a panel of attorneys here: https://youtu.be/QxG4lYyitsI

Attorneys Are Told: “Possibility of WTC 7 Collapsing Due to Fire is ZERO”

Video description as quoted from YouTube:

Published on Sep 11, 2016

For the complete video archive from the ‘Justice in Focus 9/11 | 2016’ event, please visit: http://911justiceinfocus.org. And please support the event producer, Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth at: http://AE911Truth.org9/11

After a short introduction from Richard Gage AIA, founder of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, Forensic Structural Engineer Dr. Leroy Hulsey presents the findings and conclusion of his WTC 7 Evaluation study to a panel of attorneys at the Justice in Focus 9/11 Symposium in New York on Sep 11, 2016. Using finite element modelling, Dr. Hulsey and his team found that the official explanation by NIST for the collapse of WTC 7, which is that ordinary office fires brought the building down, is wrong.

After his presentation, when asked by Public Interest Attorney Daniel Sheehan, “On a scale of 1 to 100, what is the possibility that WTC 7 could have collapsed simply because of fires?” Dr. Hulsey replied “Zero”. He also said that if any of his Ph.D. students had submitted the explanation for the collapse of WTC 7 that NIST gave us, he would have failed them.

The attorneys on the panel – who sat alongside guest panelists Daniel Sheehan, Barbara Honegger and Judge Ferdinando Imposimato, the Honorary President of the Supreme Court of Italy – were Mick Harrison, David Meiswinkle, Mustapha Ndanusa, Andrew Kreig and Bill Veale.

For more information about Dr. Leroy Hulsey’s WTC Evaluation Study:

Explosions Before The Collapse of WTC 7

Video description as quoted from YouTube:

Published on Oct 17, 2015

Explosions that were recorded on 9/11 after both WTC towers collapsed, but before WTC 7 collapsed. Thanks to Nathan Flach, WTCFOIAVideos, MrKoenig1985, danp5648, CTV911, Glenn Zarmanov and David Chandler for some of the video footage and information. All footage is used under fair use, for non-profit purposes and its use does not imply that the owner of that footage shares my view about 9/11.Thanks also to Joel van der Reijden from the Institute for the Study of Globalisation and Covert Politics, whose article at the following link prompted the making of this video:


Thanks also to ‘broken sticks’ who on page 4 of the forum discussion at the link below worked out that 95 West Broadway was the location where the explosion at 06:36 in my video was filmed:


WTC 7: Sound Evidence for Explosions By David Chandler:

NIST FOIA: WTC 7 – “Thud” & Collapse Dust Cloud (Ashleigh Banfield, MSNBC-TV)

9/11: WTC 7 Collapse (NIST FOIA, CBS video)

NIST FOIA CBS-Net Dub5 09 (original video released by NIST )

It seems that the sound we hear in the above video may also have been caught (although not as clearly) in David Vanadia’s 9/11 video. Start listening from 55.10 in this video:


Other Related Videos and Reading:

Kevin Ryan: Toronto 9/11 Hearings:

Kevin Ryan: A New Standard in Deception:

September 11 – The New Pearl Harbor (full):

Tony Szamboti Interview 2014 : On NIST’s 9/11 Sins of Omission

Ed Munyak, FPE – Fire Protection Engineer – AE911Truth.org:

Tony Szamboti, M.E. – Mechanical Engineer AE911Truth.org:

Kevin Ryan : On Why NIST’s 9/11 WTC Reports are False & Unscientific:

9/11: The Best Physical Evidence of Explosives – David Chandler Lecture:

9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out:

9/11 Exposed Second Edition:

The Twin Towers And Their Destruction:

WTC 7 Fell Due to Fires Fuelled by Office Furnishings!?

Take the 47 Minute Building 7 Challenge!:

Areas of Specific Concern in the NIST WTC Reports:

Kevin Ryan: How Science Died at the World Trade Centre:

Kevin Ryan: Why the NIST WTC Report on the Towers is False:

Kevin Ryan: Why the NIST WTC 7 Report is False:

Related:  “The NIST WTC 7 Report: Bush Science reaches its peak”  by Kevin R. Ryan,  September 10, 2008