World Trade Center Building 7 was not brought down by office fires. I know this because I can apply four fundamental tools of philosophy which make all human knowledge possible. These tools include my physical senses; the information I have received from authorities; my capacity to reason; and my intuition.
Let us begin with the physical evidence. The building fell almost symmetrically straight down in less than 7 seconds at free-fall acceleration for the first 100 feet. The overall building mass fell uniformly through what was the path of greatest resistance. The kink in the roofline is characteristic of a demolition timing sequence where the walls are collapsing inward. Furthermore, all of the debris ended up in a compact pile centered within the building’s footprint. These are all hallmark characteristics of controlled demolition. Of course, this evidence must be viewed in conjunction with the oral history testimony of firefighters, police officers, medics, and other eye witnesses who reported loud bomb like explosions before and during the collapse of all three WTC towers.
Lastly, thermite was found in the dust by former BYU professor Dr. Steven Jones. Thermite is a pyrotechnic composition of metal powder fuel and metal oxide. When ignited by heat, it undergoes an exothermic reduction-oxidation (redox) reaction. The rare type found by Jones in the WTC complex is some of the most destructive material in existence for doing precisely what we saw happen on 9/11.
Regarding authorities, there are thousands of scientific experts who have used their professional experience- and moral conscience- to expose what did and did not happen that day. These organizations include Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, which consists of over 2,000 experts calling for an independent investigation into the destruction of Building 7 and the Twin Towers; Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice, an organization including over 900 hundred faculty members, students, and scholars, in fields as diverse as history, science, military affairs, psychology, and philosophy; and Pilots for 9/11 Truth, an organization of aviation professionals and pilots throughout the globe who are seeking answers about 9/11.
The literature from these groups is substantive and growing. In April 2008, a letter from Scholars for 9/11 Truth was published in The Open Civil Engineering Journal; in July 2008, an article by Dr. Steven Jones and others was published in The Environmentalist; and in April 2009, Danish chemist and STJ member Dr. Niels H. Harrit, of the University of Copenhagen, and eight other authors, including some STJ members, published a paper in The Open Chemical Physics Journal, entitled Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe.
Yet as indispensable as this scholarship has been for the credibility of the 9/11 Truth Movement, academic professors are not needed to employ commonsense logic. There are two major forms of conscious logical reasoning called deduction and induction. Deduction is the process of drawing out (making explicit) the implications of one or more premises or statements of fact. If one infers correctly what the premises imply, then the inference (conclusion) is said to be valid. Induction is the procedure of developing general explanatory hypotheses to account for a set of facts.
So, for example, when one employs deduction to explain the mysterious collapse of Building 7, here is the conclusion that must be drawn.
A high rise, steel-framed skyscraper has never collapsed due to fire
Building 7 was a high rise steel-framed skyscraper
Building 7 fell at free-fall acceleration for almost 100 feet
Therefore, WTC 7 did not collapse due to fire
However, inductive logic leads us to a very different conclusion.
There has never been a high rise, steel framed skyscraper that has collapsed due to fire
On September 11, 2001, three high rise, steel-framed skyscrapers collapsed due to fire
Therefore, we learned that high rise, steel-framed skyscrapers can collapse due to fire
But, there is one major problem with inductive logic. WTC Building 7, a 47-story steel-framed skyscraper which was located one block from the Twin Towers actually collapsed at 5:20 pm but was not hit by a plane! It had sustained some damage and had a few small, scattered fires, but was completely destroyed by “normal office furnishings” according to the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST), the agency responsible for investigating its collapse.
It was Goya who said, “monsters rise up when reason sleeps.”
How could a steel-framed skyscraper collapse at free-fall acceleration for more than 100 feet if it was not hit by a plane?
The answer is simple: it couldn’t.
When we apply the four fundamental tools of philosophical inquiry, we find that the controlled demolition hypothesis is substantiated by the fundamental laws of Newtonian physics, corroborated by falsifiable evidence from the crime scene, hypothesized by experts working in a variety of scientific fields, and conformable to Aristotelian logic. It doesn’t matter if I like such an abominable conclusion or not. No other explanation makes logical, scientific, and intuitive sense.
Although our society suffers from a massive case of collective amnesia, philosophy will not allow us to let this crime merely vanish into oblivion. It forces us to confront it. Like a gadfly ringing in our ear, philosophy reminds us to pay attention to the facts. It shows us the pictures. It leaves its evidence on our computer screens. It uses the voices of witnesses who refuse to be intimidated. It brings us into the locked room with the 28 pages of redacted testimony and dares us to confess what we read.
And confess we must. For it was Dr. King who once said, “Our lives begin to end the day we remain silent about things that matter.”
If 9/11 does not matter, what does?