Here are some of my reasons for thinking WTC7 was probably a controlled demolition. 1) Let’s start with the obvious. Clearly, it looks like a controlled demolition. See the side-by-side comparison below. According to NIST WTC7 collapses at freefall acceleration for 2.25 seconds (equating to about 8 floors). See NIST’s ‘Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation’. Initially in their 2008 draft-report NIST denied that WTC7 collapsed at freefall acceleration. That is, until they were corrected by the observations of David Chandler, a high-school physics teacher. Shyam Sunder of NIST said that “freefall happens only when there are no structural components below the falling section of the building. Any natural scenario is going to involve a progression of failures and these don’t happen instantaneously.” Free-fall acceleration is acceleration of an object acted on only by force of gravity alone. WTC7 had 25 cores columns and 58 perimeter columns. This implies, that something, must have removed all the columns, instantaneously, within a split second of one another to allow the building to collapse through itself at freefall acceleration without encountering any resistance from the mass below. Basically the building is collasping ahead of the collapse-wave. It’s hard to imagine that fire could have performed such a feat. Fire causes slow and gradual structural-deformation over a long period of time (see video below), not instantaneous destruction. NIST argue that the inside of the building collapsed first, and then the facade followed, although paradoxically, their computer model shows about 2/3’s of the core columns still intact during the freefall-phase. Not only that, but visually the ‘collapse’ of WTC7 looks nothing like the collapse in NIST’s model. In the models the outside of the building caves inwards, which seemingly, is not apparent in the actual ‘collapse’. 2) There was foreknowledge of the ‘collapse’. The BBC reported the ‘collapse’ of WTC7 about 20 minutes before it actually ‘collapsed’. It’s important to understand that I’m not implying that the BBC were in on a conspiracy to deceive the public. There is a little something known as compartmentalisation. 3) NIST has avoided FOIA-requests so that their models can be independently verified on the basis that it would “jeopardize public safety”. See here. If WTC7 did collapse from fire, as NIST say, then we need to know how. Apparently though, we’re all just meant to accept NIST’s models are correct on faith. This makes me think that NIST probably have something to hide (i.e. their models are pseudoscientific rubbish). This is not open-science in anyone’s book. NIST’s models have not been subject to any formal process of public scrutiny and people are generally obliged to accept them (if they do) on sheer blind trust! This is fundamentally unscientific. Apart from NIST’s computer models, they don’t offer any evidence to support their contention of a fire-induced collapse. 4) Upon investigating WTC7’s steel FEMA found evidence of ‘rapid oxidation’ – ‘unexplained sulfidation’ and ‘intergranular melting’ that is consistent with the use of thermate, a high-powered incendiary used for cutting steel. There are different variants, such as nano-thermite, which is more powerful and explosive than regular thermate. NIST did not follow up on these findings. Source. On a side-note, NIST also say that the collapse would have happened even if there was no damage from falling derby. They state: “Even without the structural damage, WTC7 would have collapsed from the fires that the debris initiated”. In other words, according to NIST, it ‘collapsed’ exclusively from fire. 5) NIST have denied the existence of molten steel (again, see the video below) despite countless eye-witness testimonies, tons of physical evidence and photographic documentation. Molten steel is a by-product of thermite and implies very, very high temperatures far in excess of 1,000C. The melting point of steel is 1,370C, which is well-beyond the temperatures that the office fires in WTC7 could have achieved. See these 'hotspots' continuing well-after the collapse indicative of thermite. These intense hotspots far below the rubble (which would be oxygen-starved) continuing well-after the collapse is characteristic of thermite/thermate which contains its own oxygen supply.