Monday, March 19, 2007

Smoke did Not (Entirely) Come from WTC 7

Best viewed with Internet Explorer.

Defenders of the official story about the collapse of WTC 7 often show photographs of the South side of the building to bolster the claim that raging fires caused building 7 to collapse.

However, the following photos from the North side indicate that the huge quantities of smoke may actually have come from an entirely different building: WTC 5 or 6.

Look at these photos also:

Update # 1: 911Veritas has this: "The quality is not great, but this screensnap was from video taken across the Hudson at the exact moment the building started to collapse.

You can see the amount of smoke added to the plume from where the towers came down + WTC5/6.

Wind is blowing north-easterly."

Update # 2: A few videos pointed out by a reader seem to cloud the issue:

A physicist who has viewed these videos states:

"Actually, it may be that the smoke in these videos/photos is rising up the south face of WTC 7 rather than emerging from 7... A video showing the bottom of 7 and ANY FLAMES would be helpful."

Update # 3: Our updated conclusion is that some some did come from Building 7 itself, but that much of the smoke came from buildings 5 and 6. Additional images showing the base of Building 7 will be helpful in determining the respective contributions of smoke from the various buildings.

Bottom Line:

The debate about the smoke is ongoing. However, controlled demolition is the only way to explain the partial evaporation of steel, molten metal, symmetric collapse and free-fall speed seen with building 7.

Specifically, an expert stated about World Trade Center building 7:

"A combination of an uncontrolled fire and the structural damage might have been able to bring the building down, some engineers said. But that would not explain steel members in the debris pile that appear to have been PARTLY EVAPORATED in extraordinarily high temperatures" .

(pay-per-view). Note that evaporation means conversion from a liquid to a gas; so the steel beams in building 7 were subjected to temperatures high enough to melt and evaporate them.

However, even ignoring the evaporation, the molten metal by itself is very telling. The molten metal under building 7 appears similar to the molten metal under buildings 1 and 2. Molten metal is not generally found under collapsed buildings. Even ignoring the evaporation, the molten metal cannot be explained absent high-explosives.

Additionally, the fact that building 7 collapsed in an extraordinarily symmetric fashion is obvious if you watch any videos of the collapse (like this one, for example) (also, why did the penthouse collapse first?).

And the free-fall speed, possible only in a demolition, has been documented scientifically.

Partial evaporation, molten metal, symmetric collapse, free-fall speed . . . these facts prove demolition. Indeed, two structural engineers at a prestigious Swiss university said that, on 9/11, World Trade Center 7 was brought down by controlled demolition (translation here). And a Dutch demolition expert said that WTC 7 was intentionally imploded.

Credit goes to Robert Moore for the catch.


Anonymous Soeren DK said...

I don't even think that the smoke is relevant at all. Those fires shouldn't be there anyway. I mean, if WTC 1 and 2 just collapsed, those small pockets of fire started by the planes would have been extinguished, and nothing would even come close to starting a fire in a building as far away as WTC 7. Those fires just add to the fact that something "un-natural" happened.
What's more interesting are the pictures where you can see those HUGE chunks of steel grid from the towers sticking out of the building. It takes an enormous amount of energy to shoot something that heavy that far. Not just a piece of steel falling by the force of gravity.
Seems like every time they try to explain the official report, they just make it even more crazy...

10:32 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The WTC7 case is such a huge obvious plot, and the signs are so overwhelming, one can only wonder how some corporate reptilian mastermind can still be at large. This kind of blindness can only exist in a sick hypocritical system where even the most astronomical of greed is still largely revered as God.

10:45 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And if the THREE WTC buildings collapsed in perfect symmetry just by fire, as the official story goes, why has not the whole building and the insurance industry gone to alarm mode and the building codes and safety measures been re-written? You would expect, if the official explanation where true, that all skyscrapers around the world would have to be evacuated as a consequence and checked, if a simple fire could bring them down. All skyscrapers would have to be retro-fitted based on this brand new explanation. But none of this has happened and its business as usual. And if the terrorists "invented" a new way of collapsing buildings, would you not expect that somebody clever would patent this new method and use it since 9/11 to demolish buildings? After all by just spilling a few thousand gallons of jet fuel in a building, you can bring it down much cheaper and better then by traditional explosive demolition, the government tells us. Why still use very expensive demolition experts that need computer simulations and months of preparation? But again nothing changed in the demolition industry and buildings are still brought down by explosives. All this shows, since no consequences resulted from the "official" explanations of the collapses, the whole building, engineering, insurance and demolition industry does not believe the government.

10:53 AM  
Blogger Masher1 said...

"Seems like every time they try to explain the official report, they just make it even more crazy..."

I would add

Every time that they try to cover there butts the MORE positive we are about the things we Know and the criminals we already have identified and investigated.

A mass of trials IS coming for the heads responsible for the attack and the cover up of 9/11. The masses are done with the lies. Done with the lairs.

Now we see just how bad it can get for those that don't play by God's rules.

10:53 AM  
Blogger Vadim Rapp said...

> A mass of trials IS coming for the heads responsible for the attack and the cover up of 9/11. The masses are done with the lies. Done with the lairs.

Maybe the masses are done, but those who have any right to initiate the actual investigation, obviously are not. Neither anyone in the government, nor anyone in the media, is not going to say one word against the official story. Speaking of the masses, there are no serious demonstrations either. Regardless of what blogs say, the society has accepted official theory, and is actually becoming increasingly more security-concerned. The security everywhere is being tightened, new measures are being implemented every day. Whenever there's new panic, new limitations are quickly introduced, and they are not removed even after the panic goes away - take for example the recent phony scare about liquids on airplane. Debunking the official tale of 9/11 can't be popular not even because it would blame the powers-that-be, but because it would negate this popular mood of security paranoia, which besides having become de-facto lifestyle, is a multi-billion-dollar business. So no, no trials are coming anywhere.

> Now we see just how bad it can get for those that don't play by God's rules.

They are and will be doing just fine, thank you.

12:22 PM  
Blogger HeyLeroy said...

So, all the testimony of firefighters in this paper are lies? Is that what you are saying?

WTC 7 and the Lies of the 9/11 "Truth Movement"(.PDF)
WTC 7 and the Lies of the 9/11 "Truth Movement"(.DOC)

12:45 PM  
Blogger ISRAOIL said...
Bldg codes do NOT allow any type of combustable fuel to be stored above ground. No-one has come out and stated how many gallons stored at the 9 th floor. It is impossible for anyone to locate or approve thousands of gallons of diesel fuel to be stored above ground. Trucks unloading fuel don't have the pumps for 100 ft up.
To the poster who asked why no insurance company investaged the scam--simple,this company was run by Marvin Bush.

1:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

WTC#7 is the smoking (or lack of smoking) gun. Its collapse has never been explained.

There's only one important question concerning the attacks, did the US gov't allow/participate in 9/11?

The answer to that query would explain the illegal wire-taps, suspension of habeas corpus, banning of books like "America Deceived" from Wiki, detaining of dissenters in fences miles away from events, and multiple wars based on lies.

How can the gov't be innocent in 9/11 when we have caught it lying so many times (WACO, Ruby Ridge, no WMDs, USS Liberty, Operation Northwoods, Gulf of Tonkin, Pearl Harbor, ETC.)?

In law, if you determine a person lies ONCE during his testimony, it can be assumed that he lied in the remainder of his testimony. How come we do not hold the gov't to the same standard as it holds us to?

The gov't lied to us about Iraq and more Americans have died there than in 9/11. If the gov't lied about Iraq then why is everyone so reluctant to believe that the gov't lied about 9/11?

Final link (before Google Books bends to pressure and drops the title):
America Deceived (book)

1:23 PM  
Blogger Tom said...

WTC 7 was severely damaged on the south side of the building and was on fire for about 7 hours

At 10:29 a.m., WTC 1 (the north tower) collapsed and contrary to the claims of 9/11 conspiracy people, it did not collapse into its footprint like a controlled explosion. (See the diagram) Instead, as the building collapsed, the debris from WTC 1 spilled into the surrounding streets and onto WTC 7 among others, damaging the building.

Captain Chris Boyle
Engine 94 - 18 years:
... on the north and east side of 7 it didn't look like there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down on the building and it didn't look good. ... We headed toward 7. And just around we were about a hundred yards away and Butch Brandies came running up. He said forget it, nobody's going into 7, there's creaking, there are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped. And probably about 10 minutes after that, Visconti, he was on West Street, and I guess he had another report of further damage either in some basements and things like that, so Visconti said nobody goes into 7.

Deputy Chief Nick Visconti
Division 14 - 34 years:
... what do you want, Chief? He answered, 7 World Trade Center, imminent collapse, we've got to get those people out of there. I walked out and I got to Vesey and West, where I reported to Frank. He said, we're moving the command post over this way, that building's coming down. ... the fire was going virtually on every floor.

Deputy Chief Peter Hayden
Division 1 - 33 years:
... also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse.
Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o'clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o'clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse. ... Yeah, we had to pull everybody back.

3:18 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And what about WTC6 anyway? The one that went off like a volcano with a huge mushroom cloud of smoke, and was left with a caldera in it's middle? Has ANYONE looked at what happened to it also?

4:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Even if it were damaged, it would never collapse like THAT.

Have you ever seen a grid-like structure collapse all at once??? I am a skeptic and even *I* can't believe people are buying it!

5:06 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Watch some other implosions and then watch WTC7. Problem: WTC7 looks like a BETTER implosion, smoother and more symmetrical, than any other implosion video I can find.
The deputy chief saw a bulge in southwest corner of WTC7; a firefighter heard noises. Fine; we could understand a partial collapse or one that started at the damaged area and spread to the rest. Problem: the NIST report says the west end and east end started dropping within a half second of each other. Either some very good engineers did WTC7, or it looked that way just by chance due to the fires.

5:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And while those buildings were on fire, Bush was waiting in the classroom telling stories to those kids, until both buildings collapsed first...
And some Americans believe (I mean, be serious here) that the the American Government had nothing to do with this...
I understand now...
We should just burn buildings and they will all collapse better than using such complicated dynomites and symmetrical explosions...
Care to eat rocks and drink oil, guys? Coz, that's what most poor Afghans and Iraqis are doing right now...

6:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here's something you should all consider... Watch as WTC 7 Saloman Brother's building collapses.

The first thing you see collapse in most of the videos is the small structure on the ROOF of the building. What caused that central structure on the roof to cave in and fall downwards, since there were no visible fires or any smoke on the roof of WTC 7 ?

Also consider that the melting point of steel is 1532 C, and the temperature of air fires fueled by jet fuel (like kerosene) in still air are about 233 C to 300 C... not even hot enough to melt Aluminium foil at 660 C ! Every time you use your steel frying pan, or barbeque cook-out grill, or aluminium frying pan, or cooking pot, or even a motorcycle engine, you are proving that fire (air-fuel combustions) cannot liquify or melt steel... ! How can 9/11 and the lying mass media change the rules of materials science? The presence of molten metal or pools of melted steel in the basement... this is the "smoking gun"... you need not look any further for evidence of foul play... and deliberate MASS MURDER... call it what it is! MASS MURDER & MASS DECEPTION all for profit and control, so a few elites can profit from endless war and human misery.

11:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Watch the best 9/11 Movies at:

9/11 Mysteries

Loose Change 2

Terror Storm 2

and watch more collapse videos at

Click on "9/11 Archives"... this is
probably the biggest collection of
information about 9/11 on the net!
Scientists and academics should
visit to read
evidence of scientific fraud and
fallacies that are being treated as

11:21 PM  
Anonymous Tex Hexman said...

It is vital that an independent investigation concerning 9-11 be done. One way I try to reach people is through my music. Check out Sad Song, Tower 7 and False Flag (and more) at:

12:08 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You HAVE to include this movie if you want to at all the aspects of burning associated with WTC 7

3:44 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And all those fires in WTC 7 with
all the smoke? So what! WTC 7 is
so far away from WTC 1 and 2, there
is no good reason for it to catch
on fire... most neighbouring high
rise buildings did not catch on
fire around it... and it is quite
possible that WTC 7 was set on fire

How could a perfectly stable steel
and concrete high-rise building
WEEKS AFTER 9/11... Honestly, to
think Americans would believe this
BS... makes me wonder if they have
any ability to think independently!

Watch the "9/11 Mysteries" movie:

and watch the small flow of orange
to white hot molten iron flowing
out of the South Tower (WTC 2) just
a few minutes before its collapse.

FIRE (eg. over your gas stove)...

6:43 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Those people who still believe that
fire can melt steel and concrete
must face these engineering FACTS:

Flame temperature of hydrocarbon
jet fuel in still air = 233-300 C
(Burning temperature of paper fire
is Fahrenheit 451F = 233 C)

Melting point of steel = 1532 C

Melting point of concrete = between
1800 C to 2500 C (typically)

No matter HOW MUCH jet fuel you
have, it is the available oxygen
that determines the combustion or
reaction rate (reaction with the
Hydrogen in the fuel), and there is
simply NOT ENOUGH OXYGEN in 1 atm
or 101.3 kPa standard air pressure
(open air that we all breathe) to
deliver enough oxygen to get a jet
fuel fire hotter than 600 C, even
under a very strong wind. (red hot)

Aviation fuel (jet fuel) does not
come with oxygen built in to help
the temperature get hotter. Air
only contains about 19% Oxygen by
mass, about 80% inert Nitrogen and
1% trace gases like Helium, etc.
Air fires that produce a lot of
dark or black smoke are "cold", low
temperature, oxygen starved fires,
typically from flames below 300 C.

The fact that you can drive your
car or air-cooled motorbike engine
for more than an hour, without the
steel/iron pistons and cylinders
melting or going all weak & guey,
is proof that air fires/combustions
is why steam engine boilers were
made of steel, while exposed to
lots of air fires. That is why
your frying pans and cooking pots
exposed to controlled-burning fire
(gas flames) do not turn into soft
guey molten metal, dripping over
your kitchen...

Ask any materials engineer or
experts about these facts. They
are all true. In fact, I am a PhD
qualified Mechanical Engineer who
specialises in manufacturing and
materials engineering for a living.
I teach materials science and
mechanical engineering for degree
courses at University level. 9/11
is an obvious INSIDE JOB... You can
find the REAL CULPRITS &
tracking down and arresting those
suspiciously trying to stop rigorous
independent investigations, or by
rounding up those trying to hide or
suppress all these 9/11 facts...

6:47 AM  
Blogger Mark said...

G.W. your selection of photos omits those that best show the smoke and fire conditions in WTC 7. My document linked below will set you straight with plenty of photos – and especially videos and first-person testimony – of the building's dire condition.

Thank you.

Mark Roberts

Word Doc

or PDF

6:54 AM  
Blogger Mark said...

Oh, I see heyleroy beat me to the links.

My apologies.

Hey, hey!

6:57 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

One of the reasons I tend to discount the idea of a plot has to do with the insurance on the buildings. The conspiracy theories assume that the companies insuring WTC 1, 2, and 7 were complicit in the plot. They would have to have been, since they made good on the policies. Hard to imagine that the corporations would surrender hundreds of millions of dollars for a known fraud!

11:59 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To those who still believe every
single thing that mass media and
G W Bush says, answer this:

1. Why was there so much molten
steel (red to orange hot, between
600 C to 1100 C) stuck in all the
basements of all 3 WTC buildings,
which stayed at temperatures much
hotter than jet fuel fires in air
(over 600 C) for up to 6 weeks
after September 11? Why did the
clean-up crews describe the 3 WTC
basements as being full of molten
metal? Where did this all come
from? ("It looked like a foundry")

2. How can solid super strong
fire-proof engineering materials
all of a sudden disintegrate and
convert into molten metal or very
fine powder, instantly, all the
way down to the ground floors,
7 hours after the Twin Towers fell?
All the collapse videos show free
fall (accelerating) collapses, as
if there were no strong materials
below to slow down the collapse, or
as if the lower materials were all
as weak as air.

5:13 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Think about it... if all it takes
to melt steel or aluminium metals
is kerosene fuel, why would
materials engineers and foundrymen
bother to design and use induction
furnaces, arc furnaces or blast
furnaces (which pump in lots of
oxygen) if they could simply get
molten steel or aluminium from
burning kerosene or jet fuel in
open air?

Why? Because you simply cannot
melt steel or aluminium in still
air, no matter how much fuel you
have. Dark smoke is basically
carbon particles rising up with
hot gases, and smoke does not mean
very hot fire conditions. The fact
that you use barbeque grills and
hotplates, exposed to air fires,
proves that steel does not turn
into liquid or molten gooey fluid
when exposed to air fires.

5:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Another interesting fact is that
the WTC 1, 2 and 7 lease owner
himself, Larry Silverstein, said
about WTC 7: "...maybe the smartest
thing to do is pull it...and then
we watched the building collapse"
(or bring it down with controlled
demolitions)... he later retracted
this slip-up and said that he meant
"pull" the fire-fighting operation,
ie. remove all fire-fighters from
WTC 7, but the truth is, there was
so what was there to pull? Larry
really meant "pull" as in the use
of explosives, because WTC 7 was
still on fire. It takes weeks
or several days of planning to
prepare a building for controlled
demolitions (to set all charges
and wiring) for a high-rise 47
storey building like WTC 7, so how
could WTC 7 be "rigged" to be blown
up in just a few short hours after
the Twin Towers collapsed, when it
was still on fire, and with that
giant toxic dust cloud surrounding
the area?

Watch the PBS Documentary: America

5:26 PM  
Blogger Freudian Slip said...

Very interesting pics, thanks for posting them.

8:35 PM  
Anonymous free ps3 said...

Thanks for the nice post!

3:19 PM  
Blogger R said...

Dr. Barnett and Mr. Baker are part of an assessment team organized by the American Society of Civil Engineers and the Federal Emergency Management Agency to examine the performance of several buildings during the attacks

"But that would not explain steel members in the debris pile that appear to have been partly evaporated in extraordinarily high temperatures, Dr. Barnett said. "

A NATION CHALLENGED: THE SITE; Engineers Have a Culprit in the Strange Collapse of 7 World Trade Center: Diesel Fuel

Published: November 29, 2001
New York Times

4:19 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home