Are there any credible conspiracy theories?

It has been discovered by the New York Times that seven housed a secret CIA office, which is highly unusual given what we now know about the collapse. There are many theories about the collapsed seven, but the fact remains that it wasn't a fire that brought it down.

There is no dispute over the facts, even NIST admits nothing of WTC7 steel was kept for analysis. It is strange that no plane hits Seven and for the first time ever, a fire collapses a steel-framed tall building and nobody in authority thinks it wise to keep even a single piece of collapsed steel? A great deal of urgency seemed to envelop the authorities when it came to disposing of the steel from WTC7.

In your attack on a theory, you ignore all evidence that points to its failure due to controlled demolition!.

Despite the fact that a well-known 9/11 debunker finally admits that AE911 truth work on column 79 was comprehensive, it's ignored. I be physically upset after doing all that great work for it be ignored. NIST is incorrect because those connections failed first, causing the progressive collapse of the building due to fire. If NIST is wrong there, then their entire theory about how the building collapsed is wrong as well. The point don't seem to get.

Animations of the collapse look nothing like the actual collapse on 9/11, again more proof their theory is wrong. In the case of NIST tampering with data, how much evidence is needed to warrant a new investigation? Mick West has admitted that NIST's girder with connections would have made a difference who's lying here, certainly not the truther community.

The NIST data of the study is secret to everyone outside of this body. Have you ever heard of a university or body of engineers not being able to access the raw data of a study? Science works by repeating the same exercise, and the only thing we have here is a NIST word and some computer animations. Considering this is the first time a building has been brought down by fire, there should be urgency to see the raw data, don't you think?

Smoking gun in all this freefall. There is no building on earth that would not provide resistance in the event of a collapse. Steel one will always have resistance. In every floor inside seven, there is concrete, girders, beams, steel columns, and office items. Even in a buckled weak state, a steel column will provide some strength.

There is no explanation provided by NIST for the sudden lack of support. If a coin fell from a roof and something got in its way, would that be freefall? No, not at all. Nothing about the collapse is answered in the final NIST report. 

False we work on evidence that NIST changed the design of the building to fit with a fire induced collapse scenario. There's no point in removing vital elements from girders unless you're having trouble getting them to fail the way you want. In this case, NIST acted fraudulently by deciding that shear steel bolts (studs) and stiffer plates should not be used here.

In an attempt to have the girder fail, NIST reduced the seat size.

Took off stiffiner plates ( again fact)

There were no lateral support beams in the NIST report, supporting column 79 and 44 but all the drawings for seven depicted them

Increased temperatures (photographs from this point in the day) show no fires on floors 12 and 13 after 4 o clock

There is no validity to NIST thermal expansion measurements.

In light of the fact that the NIST column 79 and girder A2001 (missing all this stuff) collapsed first, it is of utmost importance to find that all of this construction was removed by NIST.

What most likely happened to column 79 and adjacent column 44 was destroyed by controlled demolition. This 79 column is connected to the main core of steel in the building. 

Demolition explosives make a very loud bang. Watch any demolition anywhere. I watched it live on the day, we don't hear any explosives "bang" from the building collapsing, from many angles. Thermite material just burns and gives off a lot of smoke.

You've invented a semi-silent explosive somewhere in between.

Again, you see things in photos that aren't there, and you "hear" stuff in videos that isn't there. If you wanted to make the best possible argument against 9/11 trutherism, you're it.

I don't hear explosive charges, no one does. The only thing I hear is a faint thud, probably the internals collapsing.

Your "nano-thermite" produces your "thud" when it what, burns? How does it work?

Show us a building or anything being destroyed like this with "nano-thermite"..

Keep in mind your logic, if it hasn't happened before it can't be true.

Below are buildings being demolished normally without 9/11 truther magic technology. Note how the collapse of WTC 7 is unlike any controlled demolition in the world.

In the presence of so many people in the buildings, how could people have rigged the towers up? There was a valid argument based on explosives. To do that for a 110-floor building would take a lot of time and effort.

It was because of this that the Truthers decided to examine the dust for explosive remnants. One of the most damning pieces of evidence was found in some WTC tower dust. The evidence of a conspiracy lies in nanoscale nano-thermite chemical chips found

Nanothermite explains why the rubble had high heat spots at ground zero, and why millions of iron molten balls were all around ground zero. It explains all the rivers of flowing red/yellow hot liquid. It explains all the reports of finding steel with holes that looked like Swiss Chess. All these things would be produced by nanothermite, not fire. We have evidence of crime, but its limited due to people's stupid denials that people would do such a thing.

It was a clever way to conceal the operation however they did not anticipate that people would not believe the official explanation and would be able to see all these in the dust in the lab. While it's a highly sophisticated method of destroying steel, it works on fact since it melts steel connections.

Suppose one produced nanothermite in some kind of block form, all would need to gain access to sort points, place it on columns, then move onto the next one while waiting for planes to crash into the towers.

For building seven collapsed 8 floors and the rest of the building just came through the hole. It was not examined by an official study why the steel and dust were disposed of so quickly and none of it was given to NIST. Apparently, one flange piece from building seven was chemically eroded down by an unknown process and FEMA asked for a future study to examine it, but it never happened. 

Is there not a whole forum dedicated to 9/11?

It's impossible according to demolition experts. Even Danny Lowenko said it was utterly impossible.

Truthers didn't find anything. They were sent samples by random people on the internet, which they actually accepted. If I had known at the time I would have gone down to my local building site and sent them whatever shite I picked up down there. I guarantee they would have found traces of "explosives" or "thermite" or whatever because common compounds exist everywhere

Here's the question again.

Your "nano-thermite" produces your "thud" when it what, burns? How does it work?

Show us a building being destroyed like this with "nano-thermite"..

This is false as well. International skeptics debunkers accepted that dust samples came from legitimate sources. They denied it intentionally but one of their board members conducted an investigation and discovered all dust samples came from real people who collected dust in New York.

No one disputes the samples of dust are real, but members dispute the chips are nanothermite. Make sure you have the facts straight.

This is a false take on it since there clearly is an ignition at very low temperatures that causes iron to be produced on the burned part.

Mick West has a habit of producing Iron balls at high temperatures and claiming he can make Iron microspheres without thermite. What he doesn't tell his audience is that these temperatures are over 1400C. Can Mick reproduce the same effect at 430C? He hasn't tried it.

According to my repeated explanations here, the WTC towers collapsed when nanothermite bricks or blocks were attached to steel columns or steel parts and got set off on 9/11.

For seven. There is no evidence for nanothermite. There is no dust or steel as far as we know from the collapse examined by truthers, NIST, or anyone else. Using that video, I proved that NIST was lying again by claiming nobody heard any noise before any collapse, claiming that there was no video with noise on it, and showing you that video to prove this. In that building seven video, you can hear a loud explosion before the Penthouse came through the structure. Why did NIST lie about the sound of that collapse?

You should check your ears if you do not hear a bang between 0 and 1 seconds.

video

I rotated the picture myself to get a better angle along the windows.

A great piece of work by truthers is that NIST claims that the fire simulation animations around floors 12 and 13 were red hot. Having a fire that is red hot would have a temperature above 600 C. Fires occur in this area. Photos taken later in the day show that the fires burned out probably because there were not enough burning materials. It is evident from visual evidence that there were no fires on 12, never mind 13 by 4pm. There is no doubt that NIST's claim of red hot temperatures is one of many false claims made by the organization. 

Exactly

Previously he claimed that it was sprayed on the steel columns in a gel form.

Rather than examining the evidence, you get hung up on what conspirators are trying to accomplish. There's never been any claim that I had the exact right explanation for why it was destroyed. I had a few ideas, but only those involved knew why they did it. I suspect that there are only a few groups in the world with the finances and power to accomplish a job such as this. I speculated on that based on what possible.

Based on what I found after the building was destroyed and lies, misrepresentations, and omissions by NIST, I made the assumption that we would should not accept findings based on flawed analysis. When the design of a building is altered to fit a preconceived notion of what occurred, it is impossible for a fire study to be accepted as accurate. You seem incapable of explaining why NIST deliberately lied about what people saw and witnessed, as shown in my videos and screenshots. If you cannot see the lies, you are stuck in this world you think you know.

Videos and screenshots show the reality of the situation. A fire burned out on floor 12 where NIST claimed hot fires were heating up girders. They lied about noises during collapse events, claimed nobody saw molten steel, despite numerous cleaning up workers and fire workers reporting molten steel in debris fields after 9/11. NIST live in an alternate universe where there was no evidence, mainstream and debunkers just ignored it. You will find plenty of evidence of cover-up if you open your eyes.

Why those government agencies hired to find the reasons for collapse went out of their way to lie about the events on day? It sounds like something out of a movie agreed, but all the evidence indicates men entered the building and placed some military-grade nanothermite materials on steel to bring it down. Motivations are only known to them, but left traces of their attack behind.

Based on speculation, I believe that there was a high upper group that instructed these men to carry out this operation. It wouldn't take a lot of men to transport nanothermite to site and plant it on steel. This doesn't require knocking down walls. You just have to place it near the steel and let the fire do the rest. For towers, they only had to plant nanothermite and wait for planes to strike.

There is no definitive proof that CIA handled the hijacker situation. All we know is that they prevented their capture before 9/11 by concealing their movements and whereabouts. As early as 1998, CIA was tracking two of the alleged 9/111 ringleaders hijackers in Maylasia. The CIA had about three years of tracking 9/11 suspects and tracked them when came through Los Angeles airport in 2000. Much of what CIA did here is still protected by national security and is not subject to congressional oversight or public scrutiny. 

But they didn't find any aluminium oxide, which proved there was no thermite.

Also, it was shown by a study you posted that the iron found couldn't have been formed by a thermite reaction.

They're only silent when they need to explain why there's no explosions. But when they think that they can use explosion sounds to support the theory, the explosives become noisy again.

Like how when it's convenient the thermite behaves totally different from explosives and when it's not, it behaves the exact same as explosives.

And remember this is supposed to be the most credible conspiracy theory they can present.