Here at AE911Truth, we are excited to be producing a new DVD that will present hard-hitting analysis and testimony from more than 45 experts in several fields of study directly related to the destruction of the three WTC skyscrapers on 9/11. The upcoming documentary entitled “9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out” will contain cutting-edge 9/11 evidence from high-rise architects, structural engineers, physicists, chemical engineers, firefighters, metallurgists, explosives experts, controlled demolition technicians, and others. Richard Gage, AIA, will briefly introduce the evidence sections and the experts will provide the details from their individual areas of expertise. All are degreed. Many are licensed. Several have Ph.D’s – including eminent scientist Lynn Margulis, who exposes the fraud of NIST and explains how the scientific method should have been applied.
We also interviewed a half-dozen psychologists who will help us to understand why 9/11 Truth is so difficult for the public to even touch, much less grasp – and what we as activists can do better to reach them. And we will hear from several family members of the 9/11 victims who support AE911Truth in our call for a new investigation.
One of the experts featured in this documentary is Robert McCoy, high-rise architect, who has been licensed in California since 1964 and has worked on the design of many large steel-framed high-rise buildings. He has even corresponded directly with the builders of the WTC complex during its construction. Like many experts, McCoyÂ’s suspicions about the events of 9/11 started almost immediately following the events of that day.
High-Rise Architect Robert McCoy
Robert McCoy
McCoy questioned many aspects of the mechanics involved in the “collapse” of the Twin Towers and Building 7. He discusses in detail the robustness of the buildings’ design, and how sagging of the upper floors would not be sufficient to initiate collapse and bring the buildings down. He also explains the discrepancies between what we might expect to see in a fire-induced gravitational collapse (though more than one hundred fires have never caused the collapse of a skyscraper) and what actually occurred. McCoy explains that in a pancake collapse scenario, “…it’s going to come down in a staccato kind of way … it’s not going to come as a smooth fall … I saw billowing clouds of dust…”
McCoy talks about another critical aspect of the Twin Towers’ design, the massive core columns: “Those columns were probably four times as strong as they needed to be … Now you have this building coming down, and [it was as if] the columns below were simply not there … The buildings accelerated as they were coming down – not getting resistance from these massive columns in the center of the core of [these buildings].”
Turning to Building 7, McCoy notes that a key point surrounding the destruction of Building 7 revolves around NIST’s claim that the building was fully involved in fire, yet photos and video reveal only isolated pockets of fire. McCoy also wonders how the building fell without encountering any resistance until about halfway into its descent “just like a house of cards – I find that a little hard to believe… There’s something about the way those buildings came down that doesn’t add up in my mind.”
Finally, McCoy calmly notes “What I’m looking for is a new investigation, where all of the original information and tests and hypotheses are re-examined, as well as the ones that have surfaced since, including the allegations of controlled demolition.” Referring to his ongoing association with AE911Truth, he states that “I signed the petition for AE911Truth because I felt it was an organization trying to get at the truth of what actually brought those buildings down.”
