Home / Be The Change / Former NIST Employee Speaks Out, Says Building 7 Investigation Bogus, Govt ‘Denied Evidence’

Former NIST Employee Speaks Out, Says Building 7 Investigation Bogus, Govt ‘Denied Evidence’

A former employee of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has stepped forward and criticized the government agency for ignoring the scientific errors found in its report on the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 (WTC 7) during the September 11, 2001, attacks. Peter Ketcham, who spent almost fifteen years working at NIST, described how the flawed investigation methods were significantly different from the normal standards used by NIST, in a letter to the editor of the respected Europhysics News magazine. Ketcham’s letter was published in the November 2016 issue and comes just months after the magazine’s August 2016 report examining the Building 7 collapse in detail, which has been downloaded over 350,000 times according to the website.

Peter Ketcham was a contributor to numerous scientific papers during his 14 years as a part of the High Performance Systems and Services Division and later the Mathematical and Computational Sciences Division. Ketcham wrote that he felt compelled to speak out about the NIST WTC 7 investigation after reading the report for the first time in August 2016 and comparing the results with the conventional criticism from other professionals. The NIST report on WTC 7 was published in August 2008, more than 6 years after the attacks, and it concludes that the building collapsed after structural failure due to fires caused by damage from debris when the Twin Towers collapsed earlier in the day.

The root problem with the WTC Building 7 report is that NIST could not perform a definitive study under common standards of the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) because it lacked the physical evidence. Most of the structural steel was removed and melted down beginning within days after September 11, and some beams were stolen as reported by Telegraph. NIST only had access to about 150 smaller pieces of steel, called coupons, cut from the whole sections of structural steel beams.

READ MORE:  $1 Trillion Spent on US Police State Since 9/11 -- If they 'Hated Our Freedom,' They Must Love Us Now

Due to the lack of remaining evidence, NIST instead generated computer models of the building’s structure to test collapse theories using simulated fires to recreate the conditions prior to failure. The conclusions of the report have questioned for these reasons by thousands of physicists, engineers, and architects in the 15 years since the attacks, as documented by the group Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911).

The inconclusive methods used for the report are what led Ketcham to speak out after watching documentaries which criticized the report’s conclusions. He noted in his letter that he was “furious” with himself for not knowing and also at NIST for covering up the problems. “How could I have worked at NIST all those years and not have noticed this before,” Ketcham wrote.

“The NIST I knew was intellectually open, non-defensive, and willing to consider competing explanations. The more I investigated, the more apparent it became that NIST had reached a predetermined conclusion by ignoring, dismissing, and denying the evidence. Among the most egregious examples is the explanation for the collapse of WTC 7 as an elaborate sequence of unlikely events culminating in the almost symmetrical total collapse of a steel-frame building into its own footprint at free-fall acceleration,” Ketcham wrote.

The main pre-determined conclusion which Ketcham refers to is the theory created to explain why the 47-story building fell to the ground in about 12 seconds, which suggests the building suffered catastrophic failure in a short amount of time. NIST’s WTC 7 report concludes that fires led to the thermal expansion of long-span steel beams which supported the floors, causing one beam on the 13th floor to fall off of its seat. The report claims part of the 13th floor collapsed, triggering a chain reaction of floors failing around one specific vertical support column, which caused the building to fall in on itself.

READ MORE:  BREAKING: Bill Passes House Allowing Citizens to Sue Saudi Arabia for 9/11 -- But It's a Cruel Hoax

NIST used computer modeling to generate the experimental environment from Building 7’s construction plans. However, professionals have criticized NIST because they have not released the models to the public for peer review. The models and methods have been questioned in many ways. However, the initial cause of the collapse receives the most scrutiny as researchers proved NIST did not accurately model the steel’s connection at the stated point of initial failure. NIST left out multiple smaller design elements shown in the construction plans which would have built a stronger connection in the computer model.

The resulting model simulation was released in a video by NIST. However, it shows the beam that failed is twisting in ways that are different from the physical properties of the steel’s connection. Researchers have shown that the NIST theory is significantly different from the possible sequences based on the construction plans and video evidence for multiple reasons.

NIST’s report on Building 7 has generated an increasing amount of controversy in academic circles and led to AE911 funding a study using computer models, which is still ongoing at the University of Alaska in Fairbanks. Researchers and activists have also been working to investigate the inconsistent methods.

  • Big Horn Staredown

    With these types of articles you’re going to be labeled an alt-right platform. Keep up the great work though

    • Elle

      What to do? 1. Worry about what people think (according to media driven narratives), or 2. Commit to the pursuit of finding the truth? I’m going with #2 and if everyone did we might actually get somewhere.

      • Big Horn Staredown

        Number 2 for sure

      • Alom Fox

        We Must Always Seek Truth, At Whatever Cost.

  • tvsgael2

    INSIDE JOB. Larry Silverstein gives Jewish a bad name. Everyone knows his story. If not, look him up. He bought the insurance not long before, and collected millions. Rats like him are of the low caliber of scum that cheat us everyday. Same thing with another Jewish entity, Goldman Sachs, cheats us daily, and Henry Paulson, another perverted Jewish man, previous Goldman CEO, sold his stock and capitalized on the economic meltdown, making around 5 million dollars. Do people of other religions cheat us? Of course they do. Many of the other banking and Wall Street people who should have gone to jail, skated because they are connected to the dark people that overrule even a president. And those people have no religion except the religion of power, control, and what money can buy. When I was just a babe, I learned one thing. Money is the route of all evil.

    • griseldabailey91

      It’s been one yr since I decided to quit my previous job and I am so happy now… I started doing a job over internet, for this company I found on-line, several hours /a day, and I earn much more than i did on my office work… Pay-check i got for last month was for Nine thousand dollars… Awesome thing about it is that now i have more free time for my kids…

    • Kent Betts

      Hank Paulson sold $500 million in Goldman Sachs prior to being appointed Treasury Secretary. John Paulson made $3-4 billion shorting the sub-prime mortgage market and capitalizing on the economic meltdown.

  • Hugh Culliton

    Very interesting. Perhaps the truth shall be discovered after all.

    • Alom Fox

      This One Is Personal, Hits Home In More Ways Than One. Awakened Veterans Will Eventually Find The Answers They Are Looking For. Never Give Up, We Are Gaining Momentum Each And Every Day!!!! 😉

  • 30yrfed

    the real truth is obvious to anyone who watches the WTC7 collapse..

  • stan

    Never has a crime scene been so quickly scrubbed.

    • Alom Fox



    My wonderful givernment.. I would shoot them all if it were legal.. time to pass new laws?