It’s been fifteen years since the 9/11 attacks took place in New York, killing nearly 3,000 American citizens. Rightly so, the anniversary marks a time of sadness and remembrance as people reflect on the tragedy that took place.

While American history teaches that 19 militants associated with the Islamic extremist group al-Qaeda were behind the attacks, however, a number of skeptics aren’t so sure. In recent years, plenty of evidence has surfaced which challenges the story the American people were told by the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).

Now, on the fifteenth anniversary of 9/11, a new academic report adds credibility to conspiracy theorists’ belief that 9/11 was an inside job. Published by Europhysics News, it concludes that all three of the World Trade Center buildings collapsed due to demolitions. It is noted:

“It bears repeating that fires have never caused the total collapse of a steel-framed high-rise before or since 9/11. Did we witness an unprecedented event three separate times on September 11, 2001? The NIST [U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology] reports, which attempted to support that unlikely conclusion, fail to persuade a growing number of architects, engineers, and scientists. Instead, the evidence points overwhelmingly to the conclusion that all three buildings were destroyed by controlled demolition. Given the far-reaching implications, it is morally imperative that this hypothesis be the subject of a truly scientific and impartial investigation by responsible authorities.”

The investigation was conducted by a number of reputable scientists, including Steven Jones, a former professor of physics at Brigham Young University; Anthony Szamboti, a mechanical design engineer; Robert Korol, a professor emeritus of civil engineering at McMaster University in Ontario, Canada and a fellow of the Canadian Society for Civil Engineering and the Engineering Institute of Canada; and Ted Walter, author of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth’s Beyond Misinformation: “What Science Says About the Destruction of World Trade Center Buildings 1, 2 and 7.”

Entitled “15 Years Later: On the Physics of High-Rise Building Collapses,” the report begins by questioning the official explanation for the collapse of the three buildings in 2011.

“Indeed, neither before nor since 9/11 have fires caused the total collapse of a steel-framed high-rise—nor has any other natural event, with the exception of the 1985 Mexico City earthquake, which toppled a 21-story office building. Otherwise, the only phenomenon capable of collapsing such buildings completely has been by way of a procedure known as controlled demolition, whereby explosives or other devices are used to bring down a structure intentionally.”

Four explanations are offered to make sense of why steel-framed high rises could undergo high-rise fires without undergoing total collapse. The Anti-Media relays: (1) the heat of a fire and its duration do not typically generate enough energy to heat the large structural members to the point where they would fail; (2) most high-rise buildings have fire suppression systems (such as water sprinklers) that would further inhibit the fire from reaching anywhere near the heat necessary to create a total collapse; (3) the structural members are protected by fireproofing materials, which are designed to prevent the structure from reaching failure temperatures within specified time periods; (4) steel-framed high-rise buildings are designed to be highly redundant, meaning that the buildings can suffer a partial collapse due to a fire but would not result in a disproportionate collapse of the entire structure.

The authors add weight to their theory by referencing the head structural engineer of the buildings, John Skilling. After the World Trade Center was bombed in 1993, Skilling was interviewed by The Seattle Times. The engineer expressed his concern about a possible airplane attack, but assuaged fear by proving that the towers would withstand the impact of a Boeing 707:

“Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the fuel (from the airplane) would dump into the building. There would be a horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed…The building structure would still be there…However, I’m not saying that properly applied explosives—shaped explosives—of that magnitude could not do a tremendous amount of damage…. I would imagine that if you took the top expert in that type of work and gave him the assignment of bringing these buildings down with explosives, I would bet that he could do it.”

As AnonHQ points out, Skilling was confident that the only thing that could bring down the Twin Towers was controlled demolition. The report explains how only controlled demolition is likely responsible for the fall of the towers:

“In general, the technique used to demolish large buildings involves cutting the columns in a large enough area of the building to cause the intact portion above that area to fall and crush itself as well as crush whatever remains below it. This technique can be done in an even more sophisticated way, by timing the charges to go off in a sequence so that the columns closest to the center are destroyed first. The failure of the interior columns creates an inward pull on the exterior and causes the majority of the building to be pulled inward and downward while materials are being crushed, thus keeping the crushed materials in a somewhat confined area—often within the building’s ‘footprint.’ This method is often referred to as ‘implosion.’”

The authors point out that steel-framed high-rise building has never collapsed from fire. And yet on September 11, 2002, three buildings supposedly collapsed in this manner. This story is retained, despite the fact that one wasn’t even hit by a plane.

On this latter point, the authors conclude their study:

“It bears repeating that fires have never caused the total collapse of a steel-framed high-rise before or since 9/11. Did we witness an unprecedented event three separate times on September 11, 2001? The NIST reports, which attempted to support that unlikely conclusion, fail to persuade a growing number of architects, engineers, and scientists.”

What are your thoughts? Please comment below and share this news!

This article (It’s Official: European Scientific Journal Concludes 9/11 Was A Controlled Demolition) is a free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to the author and AnonHQ.com.