After reviewing the 9/11 Commission Report and the NIST Report on the global collapse of the World Trade Center Towers, I find it very unlikely that the Twin Towers suffered a global collapse strictly due to gravity as the official story explains.
Why would I question that official explanation? Afterall they are professional engineers and I am not and we should trust their work. However, there would be no need to criticize, question, or debunk a report if it were a complete, error-free analysis, correct?
However, there have been many sites and engineers that have already begun to question the NIST Report.
NIST-New Standard Of Deception
NIST FAQ Debunked!
Vermont Engineer Questions NIST report
NIST In Violation Of The Data Quality Act
Critique of Official Collapse Theories
New Civil Engineer Calls For Release Of Computer Models
Many people fail to realize the NIST did not explain how the initiation of collapse led to the global collapse of the building. They failed to examine their primary purpose! How could they do this? How can this help future engineers construct structures with first and foremost the safety of its occupants as a priority? Why would the NIST not release their computer models to the engineering community? Whose interests are they serving? Shouldn't the safety of current and future steel framed high rise buildings be of the utmost importance?
For the layman, ask yourself, how does gravity take this:
and turn it into this?
and this...oh and the top part of the Tower leaning to its side, didn't end up on the street. It turned to dust and debris on the way down! Gravity is really amazing.
Gravity did this too!
Ahh the power of gravity. It truly is one of the most destructive forces on Earth.
Perhaps if the NIST would have listened to the head structural engineer of the WTC Towers regarding explosives, Jeffery Skilling, they might have tested for this hypothesis and arrived at an explanation for the total collapse of the towers.
"Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the fuel (from the airplane) would dump into the building. There would be a horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed," he said. "The building structure would still be there."
"However," he added, "I'm not saying that properly applied explosives - shaped explosives - of that magnitude could not do a tremendous amount of damage."
Although Skilling is not an explosives expert, he says there are people who do know enough about building demolition to bring a structure like the Trade Center down.
"I would imagine that if you took the top expert in that type of work and gave him the assignment of bringing these buildings down with explosives, I would bet that he could do it."
Apparently gravity became substantially more powerful after Mr. Skilling's death because the NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition using explosives planted prior to Sept. 11, 2001.
Do the orders still stand?