European Scientific Journal Concludes 9/11 Was A Controlled Demolition

yournewswire.com

The third building to fall at free fall speed on September 11, 2001, was WTC7. 

It was not hit by a plane on 9/11 and yet imploded on itself at free fall speed like the other two towers, meaning that there was no resistance to its collapse, indicating a perfect demolition job by experts.

The building’s collapse was mistakenly reported by the media ahead of time, at a time when news channels were all clambering over themselves to read from the same hymn sheet.The BBC managed to announce the collapse of the building before it happened, adding to the confusion of the day.

Fifteen years later, empirical evidence and the laws of physics are still being ignored while millions have lost their lives and the world is on the brink of war.

The third building was not even mentioned in the official 9/11 report.

WTC7 housed a command center and other important offices. 

An alarm was sounded for rescue workers to evacuate the area prior to its collapse.

anonhq reports:

15-years after the attacks on September 11th, the European Scientific Journal, a publication of the European Scientific Institute (ESI), published an article titled “15 Years Later: On the Physics of High-Rise Building Collapses,” in which they analyze the collapse of all three World Trade Center buildings. The results of their findings continue to indicate that the WTC towers were destroyed by controlled demolition, and the fact that this controversial topic was covered by a publication that boasts an editorial committee from reputable colleges and universities around the world (despite the article’s disclaimer), can be considered yet another small victory for 9/11 Truthers.

The study was written in collaboration by Steven Jones of Brigham Young University (now retired), Robert Korol of McMaster University – a Mechanical Design Engineer in the aerospace industry, Anthony Szamboti, and Ted Walter of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. The highly-sourced study breaks down the scientific evidence while revealing the discrepancies in NIST’s official report, and we suggest our readers – especially the skeptics – read it in its entirety.