Breaking: UAF study says government wrong on World Trade Center collapse



(Editor’s note: In response to reader comments, the photo illustrating this story was replaced to show Building 7. It’s an image from the website.)

The leading program in Alaska for engineering at the University of Alaska Fairbanks and an organization called “Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth,” have created a partnership in an investigative study of what brought down Building 7 of the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001.

The release of the draft report on Sept. 3 triggered a two-month public comment process.

[Read the report at this UAF link]

The draft report concludes that fire did not cause the collapse of WTC 7 on 9/11, contrary to the conclusions of the several national private engineering firms and the government’s National Institute of Standards and Technology.

The study concludes that the collapse of WTC 7 was instead a “global failure involving the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building.” According to the study’s authors:

“The UAF research team utilized three approaches for examining the structural response of WTC 7 to the conditions that may have occurred on September 11, 2001. First, we simulated the local structural response to fire loading that may have occurred below Floor 13, where most of the fires in WTC 7 are reported to have occurred. Second, we supplemented our own simulation by examining the collapse initiation hypothesis developed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). Third, we simulated a number of scenarios within the overall structural system in order to determine what types of local failures and their locations may have caused the total collapse to occur as observed.”

The study had three objectives:

  • Examining the structural response of WTC 7 to fire loads that may have occurred on Sept. 11, 2001,
  • Ruling out scenarios that could not have caused the observed collapse, and
  • Identifying types of failures and their locations that may have caused the total collapse to occur as observed.

The UAF research team simulated the local structural response to fire loading that may have occurred below Floor 13, where most of the fires in WTC 7 are reported to have occurred.

The team then “supplemented our own simulation by examining the collapse initiation hypothesis developed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).”

Then, the team simulated a number of scenarios within the overall structural system in order to determine what types of local failures and their locations may have caused the total collapse to occur as observed.

The research team is currently organizing and uploading all of its data into a format that can be readily downloaded and used. We expect to post the data sometime between Sept. 16-30, 2019.

Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth was started by San Francisco architect Richard Gage, who postulates the government has been hiding evidence of a controlled demolition of the third Trade Tower building that collapsed during the 911 attack.

There will be a two-month public comment period from September 3 to November 1, 2019, with the final report to be released later this year.

“During this period, we welcome any and all members of the public to submit constructive comments intended to further the analyses and presentation of findings contained in the report.

Reviewers outside of the University of Alaska Fairbanks and Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth will also review the report during this period. Commenters are asked to send their comments in an attached PDF or Word document to [email protected].”

The government study came to different conclusions, explained in this NIST video:



        • I don’t know what everyone else was looking at but I saw a building fall into its footprint and disappear into nothing and if it hadn’t been for that I would not have understood the scope of these events. I just wish someone with the goods would just please show your face cause that building told a much more horrific story than the other two

      • That’s what a re-investigation will figure out, how is anyone expected to know until then? Are you trying to toss a red herring?

    • The fire burned unchecked for 7 hours. The heat cause the floor supports 2 buckle causing the floor to fail in a chain reaction. With no floors there the tall vertical supports buckled and led to catastrophic chain reaction failure that dropped it just like charges were set but no witnesses and no decibels in the way of dynamite sound and no forensic evidence has ever been found. For $100, I will show you an alien body though.

      • Yep! An alien body.
        Let’s see! Nationally recognized engineering firms and the national
        agency in charge of standards and technology concluded that the explosive fire and extreme affect of the heat in the structures caused the eventual collapse of the buildings. But students at UAF did a study that claims those conclusions were erroneous. Right!
        Add this to a long list of why the budget of UAF needed to be cut. Next the students will, at considerable cost, conclude that there was a conspiracy led by , yep you guessed it, aliens, that led to the shooting of JFK.

  1. The problem with simulated, be it local structural response to fire loading or Global Warming or Earthquake design………..when the real thing occurs…..they are mostly WRONG. Why? Simulated events are calculated and depend on mathematical modeling with assumed constants. You can tweek the result by tweeking the constant the programer applies. This is not a repeatable “in laboratory type” of testing. There is no way to test the “simulated and modeled” event.

    I wish these things would not be used to make news stories and I give them little attention.

    • OTOH, it is not all that difficult to build a smaller model and play with it for a while. The report has everything done on computer via finite element analysis. Sooner or later, you gotta build something and break it. These guys didn’t. Neither did they offer any explanation on why all columns failed simultaneously. Of course, the guys funding all this believe in planned detonations.

      I would suggest building a few models and break them. One to prove the NIST conclusions. One to prove the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth conclusions. Successfully break them and see how far the design of both differ from what was built. In complex systems under catastrophic forces, modeling doesn’t capture everything going on. These guys are PhDs. They ought to know that by now. Cheers –

    • Yet the climate models have been given so much credence by the media and advocacy groups that the general public believes they are ACTUAL reflections of the climate. The New York Times, Washington Post and NBC consider these models to be absolutely authoritative. (BTW- the models miss the real climate results by miles; almost all of the models run “hot.”)

      • Good point, JMark. Weather data has only been collected and used since about 1860. Today, weather data is collected from nearly the same places that it was collected 40 and 50 years ago. During that period, there has been much development around those data collection points. Radiant heat from the sun tends to drive up temperatures slightly in developed areas and become heat traps. This, in part, will explain a rise in temperatures at the collection points. Thus, the collectivity of weather data becomes skewed and unreliable, usually showing a marked rise in temperatures.

    • that is true…just because kerosene has never burned hot enough to melt steel girders before that day….and has never burned hot enough to melt steel girders since that day…….doesn’t prove that it didn’t burn hot enough that day.


    Words from Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount, in the Gospel of Matthew, were found by a firefighter in March 2002, under the Tully Road, a temporary truck route that covered the last remnants of the south tower. The pages of the Bible in which they were printed had fused to a chunk of steel as the World Trade Center turned to dust in mid-air, to be found only months later.

    “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I tell you not to resist an evildoer. On the contrary, whoever slaps you on the right cheek, turn the other to him as well. If anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, let him have your coat as well. And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go two with him. Give to the person who asks you for something, and do not turn away from the person who wants to borrow something from you.”

    The fabric of the human mind is flexible, but the strings of credulity can only stretch out so far, and then incredulity settles in. The image above depicts an artifact residing in the 9/11 Museum of an open Bible fused to a hunk of steel wreckage, with some of the steel overlapping the pages after it was softened by a type of directed energy. How could this happen and not have burned the paper yet the result can clearly be seen?

    The autoignition point of paper has a range of from 440 – 470°F, depending on the type of paper. Steel melts at 2500°F. How then, did this artifact of Bible pages become “fused” with steel, without the paper combusting into a blackened mass of ashes?

    Revisit that day, and remember all the images of showers of paper floating down through the air and scattering all over the sidewalks and streets, when the towers were destroyed. These papers were intact and surely not burned. What process was at work that could turn steel and concrete towers to dust, and yet not affect paper?

    A process used in directed energy technology can cause a dissociation and alteration of the molecular structure of metal, to fuse with combustible objects and appear as if the materials melted together, but with no discernable evidence of heat or combustion.

    So evidently, a technology exists which can accomplish those results, the results seen in the Bible papers fused to the steel. This is not a miracle, other than this technology being able to appear miraculous to most people. Arthur C. Clarke once opined: “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” Other forces were at work the day of 9/11, other than magic or the hand of the Divine.

    Very much related to this anomalous artifact in the 9/11 Museum, is another one found in the ruins of an almost forgotten and seldom mentioned building which was immediately destroyed on the morning of 9/11.

    St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox church, just across the street from the south side of the South Tower, or WTC-2. When retrieval of the relics in the church was undertaken in the following days, only a few pieces survived and one find was called a miracle. “The great miracle, was the recovery of an icon of St. Spyridon. The silver around the icon had melted, but the paper icon had not been burnt.”

    This discovery was one of the church’s most holy relics, and it was declared a miracle because the silver onlay applied to a paper icon of St. Spyridon had “dustified”, leaving the paper intact and unscorched. The melting point of silver is 1,763°F.

    The best collection of evidence making the case for a directed energy technology at work and used as a weapon on 9/11, can be found at the website of Judy Wood, Ph.D – and in her landmark book: ”Where Did The Towers Go?”.

    A copy of the book is available at The Library of Congress.

    Or, you have the option of purchasing a copy from Amazon.

    This download is the Foreword and book review of “WHERE DID THE TOWERS GO?” by Eric Larsen, Professor Emeritus at John Jay College of Criminal Justice 1971 – 2006 (35 years), plus the Author’s Preface.

  3. Okay conspiracy theorists put your ear plugs in now. Okay now that we’re all alone, it doesn’t take much of a brain to know that heat weakened steel structures and collapse is imminent after that happens. And that conclusion where’s drawn upon by people much smarter then anyone associated with the University of Alaska.

      • According to 9/11 truther nuts, >130 NIST scientists, engineers, and other experts in relevant fields “don’t have any engineering or metallurgical knowledge” either.

    • Your right Greg! These weirdos think a missile hit the Pentagon too just because there were witnesses, only a small hole & no debris. Keep drinking your flouridated tap water & watch Fox News & CNN. Nothing to see here…move along!

      • Unprotected structural steel begins to melt at around 1150 degrees, a jet fuel and paper/wood/furnishings fire reaches a temperature of around 600 degrees. Modern high-rise buildings are designed to have a low fuel load, so that leaves what caused the fire to achieve such extreme temperatures to affect structural steel even if it is unprotected.

        • There were no planes that hit WTC7 though so where is this jet fuel coming from then? office fires and such will not burn hot enough to weaken steel to the magnitude of collapse. there hasnt been a building on record that has collapsed from fires until 9/11 which there was three in the same day. 2 of the buildings were engineered to withstand a full speed impact of a boeing 707 which is not much smaller than the planes that were used on that day. explosions heard around those two buildings were heard by various people including first responders so i guess that these people were just hearing things?

    • Ad hominem is the best you have? Don’t you understand that’s the lowest levels of Graham’s Hierarchy of Disagreement? Don’t you think your reaction more in line with ‘conspiracy theorist’ at this point, asserting with no evidence?

  4. So then…….WTC 7’s collapse was an anomaly? WTC 1 and 2 were brought down by a 2000 degree fire caused by the release and ignition of jet fuel from the 767s hitting the upper floors. The melting structural steel eventually failed, causing thousands of tons from the upper floors to give way, resulting in a pancake style collapse of the entire structure. That has been well documented. But WTC 7 is somehow different. It wasn’t put through the same direct rigors of stress as WTC 1 and 2. This is very interesting. The problem with the “government did it” theory, is that the government would have had to have prior knowledge of an attack in order to construct a controlled demolition on 9/11. That just doesn’t pass the smell test. More likely than not, WTC 7 failed because of a construction design flaw, whose collapse may have been triggered by shock waves released from the collapse of WTC 1 and 2.

  5. Honest question, as I’m unfamiliar with “alternate theories” about 9/11– with regards to using controlled charges on one of the buildings, WHO would have done it, and WHY? A short TL;DR answer would be fine.

  6. Well…this is yet more proof that UofA is wasting money. It’s been said from the get-go that the impact and subsequent explosion of the airplane into the tower caused the collapse from top to bottom of the tower. It was a chain reaction of weight that is suddenly improperly distributed causing the cascading collapse. It was never about fire weakening the weight-bearing portions of the structure at all. Good grief. If these are engineering students, give them and their instructors a big FAIL. Think of the towers in terms of a jenga tower. Weaken it at just the right spot and the whole thing collapses. What doesn’t actually collapse, is weakened and unstable because of the collapse of the layers atop it.
    As far as the person in the comments who spoke of demolition charges, while those may or may not have been used (they’ve found no evidence of that, by the way), there would hardly be need for that given that an airplane with a load of jet fuel on it was enough to cause the destructive explosion, don’t you think?

    • Except that a total of zero airplanes impacted Building Seven . . .
      Please become a little more informed about the bigger picture of that day !

      • Okay Irene, I’m going to type real slow so that you have a chance to comprehend this. World trade centers 1 and 2 collapsed, and fires from those buildings spread to building number 7 and it eventually collapsed due to uncontrolled fires in at least 10 floors that weakenrf key structural members causing them to eventually fail. Water pipes were damaged by the collapse of 1 and 2 so no sprinkler systems were in operation at the time.

    • Karen, the study dealt with the collapse of the third WTC building, #7, not the two taller buildings. No one is claiming that a global collapse caused the destruction of the two tall ones. The study claims that it was not the fire and heat from the two buildings struck by the aircraft that caused #7 to collapse. It was an event causing a simultaneous collapse of the building. The inference being that explosive devises were placed throughout the building and set off after the planes struck.
      Imo that is utter nonsense and has been debunked. It was a waste of funds that UAF could have used more productively.

      • Go easy on Karen. She, like most Americans, is probably unaware that a third building completely collapsed into it’s footprint, on that fateful day.

    • It’s been said, yes, but not proven. And UAF’s report just proved what’s been said to be wrong. Are you normally this defensive over debunked science?

  7. This is utter hogwash. The so-called “Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth” got the report they paid for. The failure mode is pretty simple: the fireproofing was knocked off the floor joists, they sagged as they lost rigidity at the elevated temperature, the bolted connections at the joist ends failed under a load they were not designed to resist, the joists became disconnected from the exterior wall framing, the columns lost 3/4 of their capacity when their unbraced length doubled, and they failed.

    • And the federal government “got the report it paid for.” Obviously the same government complicit in the crime would not put out a report implicating itself in mass murder and High Treason.

      • “You have to understand, most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured, so hopelessly dependant on the system, that they will fight to protect it.”

    • Can’t you scientifically debunk it? What about take up the challenge in chapter 4 and come up with a scneario that does produced the observed scenario? Ad hominems are in the lowest level of Graham’s Hierarchy of Disagreement, it’s not a great way to defend debunked science, such as the NIST report.

  8. How much did the study really cost? And, was there a valid educational use of it considering the financial situation of the U of A. Is this another example of overkill because of the perception that the U had no budgetary limits on it’s theoretical endeavors.

    • The study cost $316,000. Private donors paid for the study. The government used tax dollars to come up with its fake report on the collapse. The University of Alaska did what the government would have done were it not totally and utterly corrupt

    • Yep. It’s a cover-up, designed to keep the truth of the JFK assassination plot from being exposed. The Warren Commission Report was a pack of lies. Earl need deflection from the truth so he had Tower 7 blown in 2001, 20 years after his death. It all makes sense.

  9. Eighteen years to figure out “global failure involving the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building.” because, amazingly, stuff got too hot, because, like, it was on fire.
    Wonder how much grant money that “leading program” soaked up.
    If that’s an example of a “leading program” in the University of Alaska system, is it any wonder this group is found nowhere on any nationally recognized list of “leading” colleges.
    Blessed are those whose investigative study generates more controversy for the public, notoriety for themselves, and most importantly, more money for their alma mater.

  10. In the winter Fairbanks gets cold and dark for many months. And alcohol is a factor. This results in an above average number of conspiracy theorists.

    • One persons controlled demolition is another person’s simultaneous failure of key components. Some of the conspiracy theorists on here could look at world trade 1 and 2, block out the airplane an explosion and just focus on the floors collapsing one on top of another and they swear Dynamite charges were set off to drop the thing. I think they’ve been watching too many of those old demolition shows on the history channel.

    • Yes. Dr. Hulsey, one of the country’s top forensic structural engineers is a “conspiracy theorist.” Only Erak is qualified to explain what happened on 9/11. Dr. Erak has a B.S. in bs from jerkwater state university

        • When did Albury Smith become an apologist for the government’s conspiracy theory. Love to know what that pays.

  11. As with too much research, the researchers look at one issue, conclude they might have found something significant, and then blithely state it “is (could be) a factor.”

    What they don’t seem to do is the required work for those positing an explanation and expecting action, the requirement to demonstrate the “how,” mechanically, what they claim to have found actually fits into extant reality.

    I see it all the time in gun control research, the proponents operate as if we don’t know who actually commits crimes and how they actually access firearms when, for example, they claim that access restrictions on the law-abiding are somehow causal to the changes in rates they find. They never show the mechanical interaction.

    In this case, the burden is on those promoting “controlled demo” to go beyond showing a model that they claim shows it “could have happened that way” to explain: Why such a massive undertaking would have taken place, cui bono?, When were the explosives installed? How the installation could have realistically occurred with no one noticing (demo is not a discrete installation, particularly in an occupied and finished structure)? And, why it occurred when it did? They need to show cause and effect or it’s just wind.

  12. Anyone with IQ north of 75 can see that WTC7 was a controlled demolition. Especially given that the BBC and CNN reported its collapse before it fell, indicating foreknowledge of an unprecedented event. I think that AE 9/11 Truth, whoever they are, wasted a lot of money telling anyone with a modicum of intelligence what they already know.

    • So the BBC and CNN were “in on it” too? Lloyd’s, Swiss Re, Zurich Financial, Copenhagen Re and at least 15 other major insurance companies paid out a total of ~$4.68 BILLION for the collapsed WTC hi-rises, so their claims and legal departments must be really clueless. Ditto for the FDNY, NYPD, and PAPD. In the real world, the FDNY reported in mid-afternoon that WTC 7 was EXPECTED TO collapse, and the BBC simply misread the report.

      • I’m sure they would pay whatever they were told too pay. The people who carried out the 9/11 attacks and subsequent coverup could no doubt make them disappear

  13. And then you have Larry Silverstein, the owner of the WTC complex and possibly the dumbest man in America, admitting on national television that he gave the order to demolish the building. He would later say he didn’t mean what he had clearly said, but by then the cat was out of bag.

    • “I remember getting a call from the fire department commander, telling me that THEY WERE NOT SURE THEY WERE GONNA BE ABLE TO CONTAIN THE FIRE, and I said, ‘WE’VE HAD SUCH A TERRIBLE LOSS OF LIFE, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.’ And THEY [THE FDNY!!!] made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse.” –L. Silverstein

      -regarding the term “pull it”:
      “We have never, ever heard the term ‘pull it’ being used to refer to the explosive demolition of a building, and neither has any blast team we’ve spoken with.”
      -Brent Blanchard of Protec in “A Critical Analysis of the Collapse of WTC Towers 1, 2 and 7 from an Explosives and Conventional Demolition Industry Viewpoint”

      (check it yourself on any demolition contractor’s web site.)

      Why did Swiss Re, Lloyd’s, Zurich Financial, Copenhagen Re, and at least 8 other major insurance companies all pay Larry Silverstein a total of $4.68 BILLION for his 9/11-related losses if he publicly admitted to destroying his own property?

      • Silverstein claimed that “pull it” meant the contingent of firefighters in the building. But when he made that statement the firefighters had already ceased their firefighting activities in WTC7 hours earlier.

  14. The Cuckoos have left the Nest. This validates that the folks on the hill are overpaid hacks and not worthy of state funding. At this point why should anything further produced by this institute ever be believed? A flipping joke of educators.

  15. “This is controlled demolition!”
    -Danny Jowenko, European controlled demolition expert when first seeing the collapse of WTC7

    • How did Jowenko now what caused the collapse of your Sacred Tower 7 from watching grainy surveillance video with no audio, pray tell? Why doesn’t the FDNY drink his Kool-Aid?

      • You could ask him yourself if he were alive to tell us. Like Barry Jennings, his truth telling may well have cost him his life.

  16. Y’all forgot to read all of MRAK – the real culprit is BOOM (Suzanne miss-acronymed the Bureau of Ocean Off-shore Management… – the only “energy” involved with that outfit is gaseous). Yep, it’s all due to those evil govt corruption supervisors… And there was a second shooter on the grassy knoll. Seriously, is the Vice Chancellor of Research (that got UA all those shiny new buildings when cheaper alternatives were available) still Fran Ulmer? A Democrat… not even a Walker crony – and all of UA is still trying to justify their budget… The final cuts weren’t enough.

  17. Engineers never make mistakes, just ask them. I’ve had plenty tell me that they’ve never seen anything like that or that’s impossible, or that could never happen…while staring the evidence right in the face.

  18. WTC-7 was a modern 47 story steel high rise built with high-grade structural steel and had a very wide footprint.

    Yet, it fell at free fall speed (like if you dropped a bowling ball from the top of a parking structure) from “normal office fires” according to the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST)

    NIST’s official 9/11 report stated that fire alone could not cause the collapse of any of the three buildings that collapsed on 9/11.

    Fire has never caused the collapse of a modern steel high rise in modern human history.

    To collapse like it did, it would require the simultaneous failure of ALL the steel core columns of the building within a matter of a second or two, at their base.

    The only way that can happen is via shaped cutting charges placed at all the core columns, at their base.

    This is also known as “controlled demolition”

    • The fire-induced collapse of your Sacred Tower 7 took ~8.5 seconds. Free fall time from 610′ = ~6.155 seconds. Trying to divine the cause of a building collapse by timing it is foolish enough, but at least get the time right.

      • However long it did or did not take we know it was a controlled demolition, if for no other reason than the BBC and CNN reported its collapse before it happened. This only makes sense if those networks had advance knowledge of it’s intended collapse from those who intended to bring it down. Thankfully for patriot Americans the conspirators gave themselves away by having their TV presenters tell us that it had been or would be coming down, when such a collapse lacked any precedent, save controlled demolition

        • Then “we know” far more about the collapse of your Sacred Tower 7 than the FDNY and other first responders and live eyewitnesses in NYC on 9/11/2001…
          Regarding WTC 7: The long-awaited US Government NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) report on the collapse of WTC 7 is due to be published at the end of this year (although it has been delayed already a few times [ adding fuel to the conspiracy theorists fires!]). That report should explain the cause and mechanics of the collapse in great detail. Early on the afternoon of September 11th 2001, following the collapse of WTC 1 & 2, I feared a collapse of WTC 7 (as did many on my staff).
          The reasons are as follows:
          1 – Although prior to that day high-rise structures had never collapsed, The collapse of WTC 1 & 2 showed that certain high-rise structures subjected to damage from impact and from fire will collapse.
          2. The collapse of WTC 1 damaged portions of the lower floors of WTC 7.
          3. WTC 7, we knew, was built on a small number of large columns providing an open Atrium on the lower levels.
          4. numerous fires on many floors of WTC 7 burned without sufficient water supply to attack them.
          *For these reasons I made the decision (without consulting the owner, the mayor or anyone else – as ranking fire officer, that decision was my responsibility) to clear a collapse zone surrounding the building and to stop all activity within that zone. Approximately three hours after that order was given, WTC 7 collapsed.*
          Conspiracy theories abound and I believe firmly that all of them are without merit.
          Regards, Dan Nigro
          Chief of Department FDNY (retired) [now FDNY Commissioner]

          • The totality of evidence for controlled demolition is overwhelming:
            1. Foreknowledge by media of an unprecedented event
            2. Larry Silverstein putting his foot in his mouth and admitting he gave the order to have the building demolished
            3. Kevin McPadden and others testifying to hearing a countdown (fires don’t typically bring buildings down to countdowns)
            4. Nanothermite found in the dust
            5. Thousands of engineers, architects, and physicists, who have nothing to gain, and much too lose, saying the building was demolished
            6. Building coming down in absolute free fall for 2.25-2.5 seconds
            7. Building coming straight down, symmetrically into its own footprint
            8. The failure of NIST, an agency of the Bush-Cheney Commerce Department, to even consider the evidence of explosives. The Bush Administration was the primary suspect in the attack, so the behavior of NIST speaks volumes.
            8. Testimony of Barry Jennings of explosives going off in WTC 7 while he and Michael Hess were in the building

      • Albury Smith, please share the names of the books you have published refuting all of Mr. Griffin’s research. We will wait…

        • Read the NIST WTC reports and the 9/11 Commission Report and stop embarrassing yourself. Grifter’s a liar and an opportunist, and no one with any sense takes him seriously.
          For example, he claims that the Pentagon was “ringed with missiles” set to bring down any aircraft not sending a “friendly” IFF code, and Reagan National Airport’s <1 mile from the Pentagon with a runway pointed right at its NE corner. Look it up.

          • The 9/11 Commission Report cannot be taken seriously as it did not even mention the collapse of WTC 7. That alone makes it unworthy of even being considered a serious report by intelligent people.

  19. These people probably conferred with the congressman that said he was afraid that Guam would tip over if the Marines slated to be assigned there were sent to the island.

  20. Man never landed on the Moon.

    JFK was killed by the CIA.

    Aliens landed in Area 51 and the Government is covering it up.

    Hillary operated a child prostitution ring out of a pizza shop.

    Vaccines cause autism.

    Global warming is a hoax.

    The WTC was brought down by a controlled demolition conspiracy.


    Such pervasive illogic can but make one doubt the long-term survival of Humankind. Utterly depressing.

    • The government always tells the truth.
      The media always tells the truth.
      There really were WMDs in Iraq.
      The Gulf of Tonkin incident happened just as we were told.
      The government never withheld treatment of syphilis from blacks.
      The Pentagon is filled with patriots, which is why it conceived of Operation Northwoods.
      The government never actually carried out radiation experiments of foster children.
      Such childlike trust in authorities makes thinking people fear for the future of humanity.

      • Well, if mankind does survive, it will be because of the concerted efforts of governments around the world (Paris Accords, anyone?), and not due to the efforts of individual anarchists.

        Central governments evolved in societies for a reason – and as imperfect as they are, they beat the alternatives hands down. Try living without one for a while (Somalia is a fine example), and you’ll see what I mean.

        I have healthy distrust of government, and I understand that what I see in the media is biased, but nonetheless:

        Man did land on the Moon.
        JFK was probably not killed by the CIA.
        Aliens didn’t land in Area 51.
        Hillary’s pizza shop is just a pizza shop.
        Vaccines save lives, reduce suffering, and don’t cause autism.
        Global warming is real and happening fast..
        Demented Islamists hijacked an airplane and crashed it into the WTC, and the exact mechanism of the collapse is impossible to say with complete certainty.

        Being able to discern truth from fiction is pretty easy. So why gullible people sacrifice rational thought and swallow such conspiracy theories is beyond comprehension, and the phenomenon insults the entire concept of human intelligence.

        • So a “conspiracy theory” is any explanation of events not told told to us by governments and corporate media. Fortunately there are still those of us who can think for ourselves.

  21. Seems like a brilliant, creative strategy succeeded.
    In the balance, nothing changed, nothing’ll happen.
    But such was not the purpose, was it?
    Maybe the purpose and timing, in this era of Dunleavy’s budget cuts, was to resurrect some kind of socially acceptable, comfortably obscure, yet burning controversy to show America the “leading program in Alaska for engineering at the University of Alaska Fairbanks” is, despite indications to the contrary, a vital, vibrant, indispensable enterprise that deserves all the money it gets, and more.
    Good for entertainment, not much else…

    • I care. If we do not care what happened we might as well pull down the flag and put up a white flag and surrender.
      This is probably the biggest question of of lifetimes: why do most people do not care? We only respond in a crisis and we are not in a crisis? Who, What, Why, How?????
      I agree with Richard Gage and what is needed is a new investigation….now. Has any politician mentioned 9-11 at all lately? 9-11-19 is getting close….ask….why?
      thank you, roy

        • Every year around this time government trolls come out in full force to sell the people the government’s conspiracy theory that fewer and fewer people around the world believe

        • You are quite welcome in the next few weeks to submit your expert opinion for consideration for the reports final release..

          I mean.. you have dedicated your life since 9/11 to trolling the internet – so why dont you ??

          you wont – youre scared! 😀

          fact is.. there is nothing of substance that can be used to support the official conspiracy theory… absolutely nothing.

      • Now we care and wave flags, what shall we do eighteen years after the fact?
        What shall caring persons do now that the Peoples University of Alaska Fairbanks and Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth has conclusively refuted findings of several national private engineering firms and the government’s National Institute of Standards and Technology?
        Could it be (most) people appear not to care because the deed’s done, in 18 years nobody (to our knowledge) was held to account, life goes on, nothing’s changed, etc., etc.
        With respect, if this is the biggest question of one’s lifetime, it may be helpful to recall what starts with, “God grant me the serenity…”

  22. There is no statute of limitations on the mass murder of those inside the twins towers on 9/11/2001. This UAF study is one step closer in bringing the guilty to justice.

  23. I find it a little fascinating and also extremely sad to read these comments and witness the vitriol expressed back and forth. Are there conspiracy nuts in this world. Sure. But not everyone who questions what happened on that day, especially to building 7, can just be neatly lumped into that category and dismissed. I also find it a little concerning that so many people seem almost desperate to believe everything our government says to be God’s honest truth, not to be questioned, that they’ll relentlessly mock and ridicule anyone who does. Obviously not everything is a conspiracy … but conversely can anyone really insist that nothing awful or nefarious EVER goes on in this world??? Not one conspiracy or awful deception has ever taken place? 3000 architects and engineers apparently are very troubled by what happened and by the explanations they heard from our government. Are all of them conspiracy nuts? Are they all fakes and none of them know what they’re talking about? (I doubt any one of them is having an awesome time getting ridiculed for their position on this matter.) My understanding of the situation is that what happened to bldg 7 has never before happened in the history of buildings catching on fire and coming down. And the NIST explanation was that “we’ve essentially discovered a new way buildings come down” … who knew?! I’m a little scared sitting on an office chair that apparently is so flammable and burns so hot it can help bring down a building … but I’m more scared of living in a world where no one questions anything anymore or just meekly accepts whatever initial answer is given them.

  24. This is never going to end, is it?
    Leave it to Alaska’s cognoscenti to create the first perpetual-publicity machine.

  25. Just follow the cancers. People who worked the onsite have extremely high incidence of thyroid and prostate cancers. Both of these cancers are prevalent in people exposed to radiation. There seem to have been some sort of tactical nuke that destroyed these buildings. The building in Dubai burned for hours in a wind swept fire and did not collapse, leaving the steel structure. If fire melted steel, we could never barbeque. Even a fire fed with diesel fuel would not melt steel, no to mention, leaving is molten for days. These building were incinerated from the inside like chimneys. As the radiation wave propagated outward, aluminum parts to cars were disintegrated blocks away. Aluminum is evaporated by neutrons. Its very sad that our government used this horrendous event to further their ambitions in the middle east. I remember them bring radiation detectors to the downtown area to monitor the levels. There was no reason for this, the event was over. Tactical nukes dissipate radiation in 3 days. I’m disappointed in our leadership. When you examine this day think about the money. It’s hard for many of us to believe, but it is all some care about. We are all expendable. ask the slaves, indigenous peoples, and now our own citizens. Shame.

    Written before the September 11 attacks, and during political debates of the War in Iraq, a section of Rebuilding America’s Defenses entitled “Creating Tomorrow’s Dominant Force” became the subject of considerable controversy: “Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor.”[45] Journalist John Pilger pointed to this passage when he argued that Bush administration had used the events of September 11 as an opportunity to capitalize on long-desired plans.[48]

  26. NO ONE HAS EVER TESTED A LABORATORY MODEL WITH A REAL 767 jet and 10,000 gallons of Jet fuel.

    As a mechanical engineer with a major in metallurgy.
    You do not need heat to “melt” the beams.

    A structural metal support design shows that at higher temperatures the strength of the metal weakens. No one said the steel structure needed to melt! Basic science is that ALL metal structural members expose to heat will weaken….it’s basic science. So tell me once again where did you get the wild idea melting temperature of steel was so important?

    Lets get back to real Alaska problems…ie The bonding rating of the State of AK has been reduced because Alaska spends more than it makes in revenue. AND BP a 60 year citizen of the State of Alaska left because no past Governor or legislative body can set a policy that allows a major large investor to view Alaska as a place to invest $$$$$. Now that is the REAL 9/11 we face…..get real people!!!!

  27. First off, the details of how the towers collapsed after the attack were meticulously detailed in a PBS Frontline investigation many years ago. I worked on many similarly designed buildings for almost 30 years as an HVAC installer here in Anchorage. The structural failure was not in the “I” beams as postulated, but was a result of heat weakening the connection between the metal floor trusses and outside structure, exacerbated by Monokote fireproofing being dislodged by the impact. Also contributing to the collapse of the truss system and resulting catastrophic failure was the fact that the utility core of the Towers was constructed with core board and not cinder block in order to cut costs and minimize weight. Further, to think that a covert team would be able to install explosives without the knowledge of hundreds of engineers, inspectors,construction workers, maintenance personnel, etc. is ludicrous. Also, look closely at the films of the collapse and you will not see any signs of explosive devises igniting on lower floors. Is it contended that the pilots coordinated with someone to hit the building in an exact spot where the charges were set?

  28. I concur. The melting point is so hot the steel can’t even support its own weight. It loses the ability to support a load at lower temperature

Comments are closed.