There are several half-formed complaints from people who did not read the article in this comment thread. I'm guessing that the commenters are having a knee-jerk reaction to the fact that there are a lot of conspiracy theorists out there who think that the US government did 9/11 etc.<p>This article is not about that. It revisits a disaster (the collapse of WTC7) which appears to have happened under very unique circumstances. If the accepted explanation is correct, WTC7 is the only high rise to ever have collapsed from fire, and the collapse resulted from a long string of coincidences. The article is a critique of this analysis.
I find the conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11 somewhat amusing.<p>With regards to controlled demolition - how on earth would anyone be able to rig the buildings for controlled demolition without anybody noticing?<p>And why use slow-acting thermite when shaped charges would be more efficient and harder to detect (both before, during and after the event)<p>Not to mention - how have They(tm) been able to keep their conspiracy under wraps?<p>Seriously - you pull off a massive gig like this, hardly the work of a couple of lone wolves - and no-one talks?
> Meanwhile, unreacted
nano-thermitic material has since been discovered in
multiple independent WTC dust samples [13]<p><a href="http://www.911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/bentham_open/ActiveThermitic_Harrit_Bentham2009.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/bentham_open/ActiveT...</a><p>Suspicious Indeed.