mercredi 19 juillet 2017

University of Alaska Fairbanks $300000 model that disproves NIST theory on wtc 7?

I have been out of the whole 9/11 conspiracy debate for some time. So not sure if this has been addressed. I grew tired of the truthers and their stupidity.

I saw this post on this reddit post (contains so much woo)

The University of Alaska Fairbanks is set to release its $300,000 computer model of Building 7. This finite element analysis of the 3rd tower collapse on 9/11 has exposed the official NIST report as fraudulent. Here is the UAF presentation for members of the American Society of Civil Engineers:*

Why is this important?

Just this year, a former NIST employee of 14 years made his first public appearance speaking out against the official report with Dr. Hulsey from UAF:

If NIST truly believes in the veracity of its WTC investigation, then it should openly share all evidence, data, models, computations, and other relevant information unless specific and compelling reasons are otherwise provided.*—Peter Ketcham, NIST 1997-2011

Some of the professionals who helped fund this research along side the University of Alaska Fairbanks:

David Topete, MSCE, S.E., Structural Engineer

Mr. Topete discusses how WTC Building 7's column 79's failure could not have caused the symmetrical and simultaneous global collapse at free fall acceleration.

Kamal Obeid, C.E., S.E. – Civil/Structural Engineer

Mr. Obeid, a 30-year structural engineer explains how NIST's analysis actually disproves it's own theories on how WTC Building 7 collapsed, thereby confirming the use of controlled demolition.

Tom Sullivan - Former Explosives Loader for Controlled Demolition, Inc.

Tom discusses the complex process of preparing a building for controlled demolition and explains the reasons why WTC Building 7 was a textbook controlled demolition in his eyes.

WTC Chief Electrical Design Engineer, Richard Huemenn P.E.

"An international commission should be formed to look at this in an unbiased manner."

The NIST report is fraudulent and this fact is now being discussed across the world. Here is a physics magazine article dissecting the NIST fraud, which has now been read over*550,000*times:

Subscribers include the Deutsche Physikalische Gesellschaft, the world's largest organization of physicists.

Any thoughts on this model? Perhaps it offers a different explanation, but doesnt prove CD?

Sent from my LG-H850 using Tapatalk

via International Skeptics Forum

Aucun commentaire:

Enregistrer un commentaire