A new investigation into 9/11 suggests that the Twin Towers were destroyed by a controlled explosion.
Ever since the government’s line on the collapse of the Twin Towers on 9/11 was issued to the public, there have been numerous dissenting voices questioning the official narrative. The story from the authorities that the collapse was caused by the intense heat inside the building following the hijacked plane crashes.
All signs of a controlled implosion
Official investigations have never been able to thoroughly and coherently explain how this might have happened and various teams tasked with examining the collapse have raised difficult questions about the veracity of the government’s story. In 2002, the UN National Institute of Standards and Technology remarked that the case was exceptionally bizarre, saying that there were no other known cases of total structural collapses in high-rise buildings caused by fires and so it is deeply unusual that it should have happened three times in the space of one day.
Now perhaps the most comprehensive challenge to the official narrative has emerged in Europhysics Magazine. Steven Jones, a professor of physics, Robert Korol, a professor of civil engineering, Anthony Szamboti, a mechanical design engineer and Ted Walter, the director and strategy and development for a not for profit organization called Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth issued a joint article casting doubt on the story. The four experts concluded that; “the evidence points overwhelmingly to the conclusion that all three buildings were destroyed by controlled demolition.”
The experts claimed that the fire story was unconvincing for several different reasons. The explained that fires do not tend to last long enough in a single area to generate enough heat to destroy the structural safeguards in buildings such as the World Trade Centre. After examining the steel used in the construction of the high-rise building, the scientists estimated that the heat would have had to reach levels of 660 degrees to melt the girders, something that seems even more unlikely because of the presence of fire suppression systems throughout the building. The collapse of the buildings is also perplexing because structures tend to be built separately from one another to prevent total collapse in case of a disaster. It seems very unusual that the Twin Towers, which were built with numerous safety mechanisms, designed to withstand various scenarios including fire and even airplane crashes, would fail to be built with such a rudimentary safety mechanism.
Perhaps most damningly of all the experts claimed that after reviewing the video footage of the building’s collapse that it betrayed all of the signs of a controlled implosion. They said that the building fell so rapidly and symmetrically that they could see no other feasible explanation for the sudden collapse.
These experts’ voices now join the many clamouring for a fresh and impartial investigation into the collapse of the World Trade Centre, but whether these calls will be heeded is, of course, another story.