The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) maintained in its August 2008 Final Draft Report, and the associated technical briefing, that WTC Building 7 took 40% longer to collapse than if it had been in free-fall.

NIST Project Leader Shyam Sunder explained that WTC 7 could not have come down in free-fall, because there was resistance to the fall provided by the steel structure underneath. But a determined high school physics teacher in central California, David Chandler, demonstrated that NIST was using fraudulently manipulated data to try to show a slower rate of collapse.

David Chandler - "There is ample evidence, from both witnesses and recordings, of explosions associated with the destruction of World Trade Center Building 7 (WTC 7). NIST sidestepped investigating explosions and explosives by setting up an artificially high threshold of interest.

They swept aside any testimony or recordings of explosions that would not register 130-140 dB one kilometer away. They established this criterion using RDX (one of the loudest explosives) in a scenario that produced a far higher sound level than other possible uses of explosives to bring down the building. Then they turned around and used sound level as the sole criterion for deciding whether the use of explosives was a credible hypothesis. By this maneuver, they sidestepped investigating testimony of explosives or possible evidence of explosive residues. This is just one more instance of fraudulent behavior on the part of the NIST investigation of the World Trade Center disaster."

WTC Building 7 in Free-fall

NIST, when confronted publicly with evidence produced by Chandler, finally admitted in its November 2008 Final Report that WTC 7 fell for 2.25 seconds in free-fall, but they brushed off this newly acknowledged fact as being "consistent with the results of the global collapse analysis," despite Sunder's earlier statement. Thus, the NIST simulation and analysis represented a mufti-million-dollar effort to avoid explaining what really happened.

Physics teacher David Chandler uses simple scientific software to understand and show the free-fall demolition of WTC7, WTC 7, Building 7.

Published on Feb 16, 2013

In its draft report, released in August 2008, NIST attempted to cover up evidence that WTC7 fell at free fall, but the cover-up was transparent. In its final report, released in November 2008, NIST finally acknowledged free fall, but couched it in a bizarre framework that continues to deny its clear significance. This video displays the brazenness of the NIST WTC7 cover-up.

[The WTC7 series has elicited a number of questions from people unclear on the details of how I did the measurements, compared to how NIST did them and how the representatives of NIST described their measurements. I have therefore created a WTC7 Measurement FAQ page: http://www.911speakout.org/WTC7-Measu...

I will also use this FAQ as a place of reference

for other questions that arise as well.]

Please watch the following video evidence and draw you own conclusions.