Few people saw the vids of bldg 7's implosion. Few people will even look at it. Of those who do, not everyone will understand what they are seeing. Even the most basic aspects of structural engineering and basic physical science are beyond most people's grasp.
If a person is disposed to trust the government (and most people are) they will be disposed to accept at face value assertions that there are 'scientific' explanations for the structure's collapse absent a classic controlled demolition. The designers of the event were aware of this.
....
I have knowledge of structural engineering, I have seen the videos, and see no problem with the collapse being a side effect of the towers, eg domino effects of column 76 going down. Such domino effects are what is USED in controlled demolition, but that does not make it a fact that any domino effect in a building collapse is a controlled demolition.
And I don't trust the government.
But saying "I don't trust government" one has to note that there are many governments, each with it's own objectives, not just the US.
Buildings are _always_ way over-designed. In order to demo any building one first weakens the hell out of them by cutting away a huge amount of material either as prep work for the pull or via a carefully timed sequence. Normally both. Nobody can tell me that a 40 story building in the middle of NY city could have such a novice error that a failure of one beam would pull the building into it's own footprint, and at nearly free-fall speed. That makes zero sense. Zero!
I don't need an 'expert' to tell me that bldg 7 or the twin towers were demo'd. It is plain as day just by looking. But I'm happy to have confirmation from
experts in the field.
As always with me, the hypothesis which explains the most observations rises to the top, and the hypothesis that the events of 9/11 were engineered by people with capabilities within the West outweighs the hypothesis that some rag-tag Muslims hiding out in caves half way around the world did it. Outweighs it by a margin of about 1000/1.
Just like with the climate scams the 'official' people telling us what we are supposed to believe are not keen to share their data. Why there would be such resistance to showing the visualizations, especially since the failure of the buildings is a fairly unique and unexpected event which should be analyzed in detail for safety reasons, is (or should be) pretty mysterious. Unless, of course, the data is a bunch of fraudulent bullshit which would would be laughable to qualified analysts.
Also, like the climate scam deal, almost nobody has anything to gain by being on the wrong side of the 'consensus', and a lot to lose. I can only guess that the reason they do speak up is similar to the reason I do; I hope that by having people be awake and aware of such things we'll not move toward being governed by state-sponsored fraud, deception, and terrorism at such a high rate.