from the NIST report on WTC7, downloaded directly from NIST's own
   website, at
   [1]https://ws680.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=861610
   On Mon, Sep 24, 2018 at 2:41 AM Peter Fairbrother <[2]peter@tsto.co.uk>
   wrote:

     Begins: "Never before or after 9/11 have steel framed buildings
     collapsed due to fire".

   NIST report page xxxv: "This was the first known instance of the total
   collapse of a tall building primarily due to fires."
   in certain ways, having re-read a lot of this for the first time in
   years, I'm inclined to side with the official explanation more than I
   used to be. but if one is going to do that, it is dirty pool to argue
   against what the report itself says in plain English at the same time.
   NIST engineers did/do consider what happened at WTC7 to be unusual.
   & again, a lot appears to be riding on the word "total."
   NIST report, also page xxxv, also contradicting a fair amount of what
   some here have said:
   "Since WTC 7 was not doused with thousands of gallons of jet fuel,
   large areas of any floor were not ignited simultaneously. Instead, the
   fires in WTC 7 were similar to those that have occurred in several tall
   buildings where the automatic sprinklers did not function or were not
   present. These other buildings did not collapse, while WTC 7 succumbed
   to its fires."
   if you want me to accept the NIST report, you can't ask us to accept
   facts/reasoning based on one person's reasoning, when the NIST report
   itself explicitly does not accept those facts or reasoning.
   - z

References

   1. https://ws680.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=861610
   2. mailto:peter@tsto.co.uk