Building 7 Thickens 9/11's Epistemological Plot
Are you aware that Building 7’s destruction has raised serious questions? Have you realized that these go beyond the specifics of Building 7’s structural failure and reach all the way to the integrity of the mass media? Would you like to probe them deeper? If so, read on. If not, consider finding reasons to come back here, perhaps by visiting this web’s introductory page to 9/11 Truth.
Building 7’s structural failure is highly enigmatic: it is odd that its official video model matches poorly the actual video evidence that a controlled demolition video matches very well. More disturbingly, although this information easily lends itself to a short, inexpensive, simple, and highly informative documentary, not a single TV network worldwide has offered it.
There are many ways to apprehend this epistemological conundrum, the most straightforward of which is to review the specifics of Building 7’s structural failure. This exercise is best left to the de facto authority on Building 7, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth), who has established that Building 7’s failure was caused by a controlled demolition, as the video evidence suggests, and contrary to the official report. Behold the synthetic diagram of their analysis:
For a comprehensive demonstration, kindly explore AE911Truth’s slide show or comparable materials. Within the scope of this web page, suffice to notice the use of a well-honed version of the scientific method:
AE911Truth formulates the hypothesis that Building 7 was demolished
AE911Truth looks for and lists expected symptoms of this hypothesis should it be true, starting with “if Building 7 was demolished, then its destruction would have started suddenly and at its base”
AE911Truth turns these expected symptoms into possible reasons to doubt the hypothesis, starting with “if we find that Building 7’s destruction did not start suddenly or did not start at its base, then we shall affirm this as a reason to doubt Building 7’s controlled demolition”
AE911Truth explores in turn each of these possible reasons to doubt Building 7’s demolition
AE911Truth finds that none of these reasons can be supported, starting with “we do not find that Building 7’s destruction did not start suddenly or did not start at its base, therefore we clear this particular reason to doubt its demolition”
note that AE911Truth’s findings happen to exceed the minimal requirements to clear these reasons, starting with “we happen to go further than failing to find that Building 7’s destruction did not start suddenly or did not start at its base, we actually find reasons to believe that it did start suddenly and at its base”
the discussion of these reasons happens to indirectly demonstrate the physical impossibility of the official “destruction by office fires ignited by debris from the North tower” theory and the fraudulent nature of the final official technical report that affirms it
since none of the possible reasons to doubt the demolition theory can be sustained and since the official “fire” theory is to be rejected, AE911Truth concludes that Building 7’s demolition shall be accepted as a fact until contradicted by new convincing information
The results of AE911Truth’s exploration of Building 7’s destruction can be fairly summarized as follows:
on 9-11, in the World Trade Center, apart from the twin towers, a third skyscraper experienced a sudden, total, disintegrative, catastrophic structural failure
this failure was due to a state-of-the-art, well-executed, controlled demolition
the U.S. government investigated this event from a technical standpoint
this investigation was an obvious fraud and a mediocre cover-up
the mass media have conspired to censor this.
They lead to paradigm-shifting conclusions:
one important part of the official 9/11 narrative is a fraud
this casts doubts over the integrity of the whole official 9/11 story as reported by the mainstream media worldwide
as such, even though 9/11 Truth’s ultimate conclusions are—as far as you know at this point—doubtful, it is an error to summarily dismiss them
the above demonstration is offered by engineering professionals, but people with average mental abilities can sustain it
This leads us to your next 9/11 action item:
something appears to be wrong about how we get information
consequently, from now on, make a conscious effort to scrutinize every non-trivial piece of information you receive through the mainstream media
AE911Truth’s analysis of Building 7’s disintegration solves the video discrepancy that may have led you here. However, it does not put to rest the epistemological enigma that it exposed. Au contraire, it expands it into the intense mystery of a worldwide and persisting conspiracy by the mass media to censor Building 7’s controlled demolition and uncovers an extremely serious breach of morality on their part. While AE911Truth deserves gratitude for making the public aware of it, this problem begs for a solution.
There are many ways to explore the dramatic implications of the global and enduring censorship of Building 7’s controlled demolition. The most straightforward of them is arguably a critical review of its sister event, which happens to be the core of the 9/11 terror attacks: the spectacularly morbid structural failures of the twin towers with over 2,000 civilians and rescuers inside them.
Dan Noël, 2011-March-19