Such material should come with a link to an official source. Right now, I lack the motivation to research on my own, but until I see a confirmation, I can’t exclude a hypothesis that the above text was concocted by a conspiracy theorist.
I’m not sure how to source something not mentioning something, but this is the official 9/11 commission report, if you’d like to not read about building 7 at all.
This link is to a conspiracy theory site, with inline comments by conspiracy theorists! The link to the original document at the end of the page doesn’t work.
And this is the NIST report
This is a news piece about the report, not the report itself. It contains a link to the report. In the report, page 33 begins the executive summary. As opposed to the summary you posted, it’s isn’t optimized for sounding ridiculous, while acknowledging the fact that similar fires never collapsed similar buildings before, etc.
Factors contributing to the building failure were: thermal expansion occurring at temperatures hundreds of degrees below those typically considered in design practice for establishing structural fire resistance ratings; significant magnification of thermal expansion effects due to the long-span floors, which are common in office buildings in widespread use; connections that were designed to resist gravity loads, but not thermally induced lateral loads; and a structural system that was not designed to prevent fire-induced progressive collapse.
Within the building were emergency electric power generators, whose fuel supply tanks lay in and under the building. However, fuel oil fires did not play a role in the collapse of WTC 7.
Such material should come with a link to an official source. Right now, I lack the motivation to research on my own, but until I see a confirmation, I can’t exclude a hypothesis that the above text was concocted by a conspiracy theorist.
The summaries certainly were written by conspiracy theorists.
Here’s the FEMA report
And this is the NIST report
I’m not sure how to source something not mentioning something, but this is the official 9/11 commission report, if you’d like to not read about building 7 at all.
This link is to a conspiracy theory site, with inline comments by conspiracy theorists! The link to the original document at the end of the page doesn’t work.
This is a news piece about the report, not the report itself. It contains a link to the report. In the report, page 33 begins the executive summary. As opposed to the summary you posted, it’s isn’t optimized for sounding ridiculous, while acknowledging the fact that similar fires never collapsed similar buildings before, etc.
I would like to reply to you, but Eliezer Yudkowsky has requested that further discussion on this subject be moved to the new 9/11 conspiracy topic he made in order to mock it in more detail, over here.
Please repost your comment there, I’m on thin ice and I don’t want to break the rules by replying to you in an unsuitable zone.
I’m not going to repost my comment, but you are welcome to reply on the other thread.