Part 18 of Gage Blueprint for Truth Rebuttal (Not Debunked): Freefall Collapse Building 7
Channel: Chris Mohr
Date: 2011-08-17

Is the freefall collapse of eight stories of one face of the 47-story WTC Building 7 on 9/11 really the silver bullet that proves controlled demolition? This important video explains as simply and directly as possible the complex set of forces that create zero net resistance, which is not the same as zero resistance. The best explanation I know of for Building 7's freefall from a Natural Collapse perspective. 
Note: I am not a scientist, so I cannot be 100% sure of the information I share here. For an excellent and respectful rebuttal of my claims from 9/11 Truth activist Adam Taylor, visit https://citizenfor911truth.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/responsetochrismohr4-1.pdf.
 Also, here is a video of a very different collapse sequence (not hidden behind its own perimeter wall) that may be of interest: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qmiApjHn4e8&feature=player_embedded#!

Another video showing how, when steel buckles, it loses all strength:
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yG1JrEdt3Mg&feature=player_embedded

An entertaining video (admittedly simpler than Building 7) showing a balsam wood tower where all columns lose strength almost simultaneously as broken columns shift their loads to other columns at almost the speed of sound. The structure collapses straight down and all-at-once:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Bgucy_b5FKk
Notice also at the end of the video, the dynamic load of the falling weight took a big chunk off the end of the table-top. That's an impressive example of the difference between static and dynamic loads.

The NW corner of the building was moving long before the global collapse of Building 7, making the theory of thermate destroying all the columns simultaneously impossible:
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=8358953&postcount=5474

CLARIFICATION: As I said in this video, my analogy of the bending and breaking stick is not identical to the column buckling that actually occurred in the collapse of Building 7. The initial failure point for a timber column is Euler Buckling which steel columns also undergo. I made this clear in the video when I said, "Columns buckled, but in both cases, there is a sudden release and loss of strength." However, a snapping stick and a buckling steel column, while analogous, are not technically identical. The final point of breaking which the lay audience sees as failure with a wooden stick is very different to what happens with a steel column. The steel column does not snap in the catastrophic separation of splinters that the wooden stick undergoes. An assembly of columns bolted or welded may fail at the bolt or weld joints in a manner roughly similar to the snapping of a wooden stick, but most columns in Building 7 actually buckled, losing almost all strength in either case. Bazant et al go further and say, "The high-strength steel has a much lower ductility, which must have caused fractures with a drop of axial force to zero very early during buckling, [...]"
Bažant, Zdeněk P.; Le, Jia-Liang; Greening, Frank R.; Benson, David B. (October 2008). What Did and Did Not Cause Collapse of WTC Twin Towers in New York? Journal of Engineering Mechanics 134 (10) p. 896.

CORRECTION:  this is a remake of part 18 after mistakes in the first version were caught by a 9/11 Truth researcher. 

Rebuttals of Richard Gage Blueprint for Truth and Experts Speak Out

Visit http://911theories.org/ChrisMohr for lionks and more debate.    Discussion welcome at  http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=7317389#post7317389

Next video in this series: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LnYfB4OaDM