Conspiracy Theory or Hidden Truth?

[wildbilln864]

snip/
"However, one of this article’s co-authors, David Chandler, used video analysis to show conclusively that for 2.5 seconds (about 100 feet) WTC 7 was in complete free-fall. He publicly challenged NIST’s claims at the technical briefing and he, along with others, filed formal requests for corrections.

NIST were forced to reverse themselves in their Final Report and acknowledged 2.25 seconds of absolute free-fall. Yet they did not reconsider how this was compatible with their analysis. A network of heavy steel girders had to be forcibly removed suddenly across the width of the building for eight floors. However, a free-falling object cannot exert force on anything in its path without slowing its own fall, so the structural support had to be removed by something else—explosives. The free-fall of Building 7 is a smoking gun."

Article

[KDLarsen]

1. No, just Gage & Chandler babbling

They're spouting off long-debunked non-sense in that article. The molten steel picture says it all really, I mean, how exactly is it possible to pick up molten steel?

[Subdivisions]

5. Please linik to NIST's updated simulations which take this free-fall

period into account. Thanks.

[Bolo Boffin]

8. NIST didn't have to update their simulations. The freefall period already fits in.

The model predicted buckling over eight floors when the perimeter columns failed. That's the exact distance needed for the 2.25 second freefall.

Chandler's measurements VERIFIED the NIST modeling.

[Bolo Boffin]

2. "Yet they did not reconsider how this was compatible with their analysis."

This is a factual inaccuracy.

[lovepg]

4. So explain it then. Come on your the knights who say NIST,, NT

[Subdivisions]

6. I'm sorry, I can't find it...could you link to the revised simulations that

takes this free-fall period into account? Thanks.

[Bolo Boffin]

7. They didn't have to revise their simulations. The freefall period fits into them quite nicely. n/t

[wildbilln864]

9. thanks for admitting there was free fall! nt

[Bolo Boffin]

11. Well, the facts show that a 2.25 second time is there, wildbill.

The fact that this freefall period fits nicely into the NIST conclusions continues to escape you, though.

[wildbilln864]

12. well of course it does.

what would we expect after they'd been forced to admit there was indeed free fall by Mr. Chandler! For years though you guys were saying there was no free fall at all. Correct?

[Bolo Boffin]

13. It didn't change anything about the NIST conclusions, wildbill.

A section of the building fell freefall for 2.25 seconds, a fraction of the time the building was actually falling. This fit perfectly into what NIST was already saying had happened to the building.

[wildbilln864]

14. so before NIST admitted free fall....

there was no free fall according to you and others here in the DUngeon. Now that they've admitted there was free fall then you change your mind and say there was free fall but it doesn't matter. It didn't fit before until NIST said it did.

[LARED]

3. Or Muddled Magical Thinking - nt

[William Seger]

10. Gee, a "Comment" written BY Gage and Chandler

... endorses Gage and Chandler. Very impressive.