Why did the World Trade Centers and WTC 7 Collapse?

In the fight between conspiracy theorists and those that believe the official story of the 9/11, there is one theory that has been raging since the beginning over whether or not the World Trade Centers' collapse was caused by the planes, or by a controlled demolition. In my research, I've uncovered the truth, that it was not a controlled demolition, but rather, raging fires and structure damage are what caused the trade centers to fall. In this blog post, I'll be deconstructing the articles of both sides and showing just how Popular Mechanics made the more convincing argument for the truth.

The Popular Mechanics article, titled "Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report-the World Trade Center" is part of a larger report debunking a number of myths from 9/11. In this part of the report, however, it focuses heavily on the World Trade Centers, including the North and South Tower, and WTC 7. In the article, it takes on five different conspiracies associated with the WTCs. The first is that Widespread damage wouldn't have been enough to cause the WTCs to cause damage to the lobbies; however, the Popular Mechanics (PM) shows that burning fuel would have fallen down the elevator shafts and exploded in the lobbies. Another popular theory is that jet fuel can't melt steel beams. While this is true, PM shows that it didn't have to melt the steel beams, but instead would have to simply warp and bend them enough to collapse, which occurs at a lower temperature than the melting point. Another theory states that puffs of dust wouldn't have blown out the windows during the collapse, so it had to be a controlled demolition. Yet, it is shown that pressurized air from the immense for of the collapsing tower would have exploded out of the tower, sending dust outwards. Other conspiracy theorists have said that seismic graphs show there was a sharp spike before collapse, meaning it was a bomb; yet PM clearly shows that those graphs were misinterpreted, and that there had been building seismic activity up until the collapses. In the last theory, it is believed that WTC 7 couldn't have collapsed because of damage it received, and was clearly a controlled demolition. However, PM shows that it was the odd design of the building, extensive fire damage, and more damage from the planes than originally thought, that caused the building to collapse.

The second article which I dug into came from 911truth.org and was written by the staff--a conglomerate of writers from the site--about a man named  Doctor Griffin, who is a Christian theologist. In the article, called "Theologian Says Controlled Demolition of WTC Is Now a Fact, Not a Theory," the authors quote Doctor Griffin claiming that there are ten characteristics to a building collapsing from controlled demolition (911truth), and that the world trade centers followed those characteristics to a tee when they collapse. The ten characteristics prove it was a controlled demolition and that the government has been lying to us, the people. The authors then explains that eyewitnesses saw and heard bombs going off in the trade centers. Then, following that, they explain that many "intellectuals" (911truth) believe in the 9/11 "inside job" (911truth) theory. In the end, the authors state their belief that the American people need to know the truth and bring down the people that caused this catastrophe, and that it is better to get rid of these people than to live in ignorance.

The two articles come at the issues from two completely different sides of the aisle, and there isn't much room for agreeing between the two of them. While both of them agree that fire was definitely prevalent in the destruction of the towers, they disagree in how the towers came down, or why they came down. However, Popular Mechanics (along with a number of other sources which I will be providing) clearly establish that trade centers were not a controlled demolition, instead telling the readers that the buildings collapse because of "intense fire" (Popular) and damage "caused by the planes," which directly contradicts many of the 911truth.org article writers' claims. Doctor Griffin, in the 911truth.org article claims that the buildings couldn't have fallen at "free fall" (911truth) speeds if it had just come from the plane impact and fires. While the buildings may have fallen at "essentially free fall" (NIST), it is because the buildings supports were weakened significantly by the "raging fires" (Popular). Following the weakening of the structures, gravity did the rest of the work. Areas hit by the planes had been weakened enough by the fires that it began its collapse. The floors underneath it weren't able to withstand the "crushing" speeds and "pressurized air" which crunched the floors beneath them with tremendous power. To add on to that, the 911truth.org article states that there debris was "ejected horizontally," and that there was no "physical mechanism" to explain that. However, this too isn't true. In Popular Mechanics, the authors explain that these puffs of dust were caused by the "pressurized air" (Popular) being crushed into the floors below it. It is thus clear that there is no merit to these claims made by 911truth and Doctor Griffin.

In the end, the conspiracy theorists are found meritless. Doctor Griffin and 911truth have made claims that are very widespread, but were made because of misunderstandings and misinformation. Popular Mechanics, among other sites, shows that the misinformation being spread is just that: misinformation. Indeed, it shows that the World Trade Centers fell because Al-Qaeda hit into them. The government was not part of it, and that has been shown conclusively in these articles.

Works Cited

911 Truth Staff. "Theologian Says Controlled Demolition of WTC is Now a Fact, not a Theory." 911 Truth. October 26th, 2005. http://911truth.org/theologian-says-controlled-demolition-of-wtc-is-now-a-fact-not-a-theory/. Accessed February 2nd, 2018.

NIST. "FAQs - NIST WTC Towers Investigation." National Institutes of Standards and Technology. September 19th, 2011. https://www.nist.gov/el/faqs-nist-wtc-towers-investigation. Accessed February 3rd, 2018.

Popular Mechanics. "Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report-The World Trade Center." Popular Mechanics. July 31st, 2017. https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a6384/debunking-911-myths-world-trade-center/. Accessed February 2nd, 2018.