Recap of videos proving September 11 was an inside job

Composite of published videos proving that 911 was an inside job
engineering reports which debunk the NIST, which has never explained the free fall of the Twin Towers
https://www.ae911truth.org/evidence/near-free-fall-acceleration
According to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) — which is the U.S. government agency that investigated the World Trade Center’s destruction — the Twin Towers came down “essentially in free fall.” 1 Yet NIST provided no modeling or calculations to demonstrate that such behavior was possible. Instead, NIST arbitrarily stopped its analysis at the moment of “collapse initiation,” asserting that total collapse was “inevitable” once the collapses initiated.2
“NIST carried its analysis to the point where the buildings reached global instability. At this point, because of the magnitude of deflections and the number of failures occurring, the computer models are not able to converge on a solution…. [W]e are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse.” — p. 3-4, NIST Response to Request for Correction

In 2011, the ASCE’s Journal of Engineering Mechanics published a paper by Dr. Zdeněk Bažant and Jia-Liang Le titled “Why the Observed Motion History of the World Trade Center Towers Is Smooth,” 8 in which the authors attempted to argue that the upper section’s deceleration was “far too small to be perceptible,” thus accounting for why the observed motion is “smooth.” Specifically, they calculated, the deceleration was “three orders of magnitudes smaller than the error of an amateur video, and thus undetectable.”
In response, researchers Tony Szamboti, Mechanical Design Engineer, and Richard Johns, degreed Engineering Mathematician, submitted a Discussion paper to the Journal of Engineering Mechanics in May 2011.9 Their paper argued that Bažant and Le had used incorrect values for (1) the resistance of the columns, (2) the lower structure’s floor mass, and (3) the upper section’s total mass. Szamboti and Johns showed that when the correct values are applied, Bažant and Le’s analysis actually proves that the deceleration of the upper section would have been significant and detectable (if it were a true fire-induced progressive collapse), and that the collapse would have arrested within three seconds.
https://www.journalof911studies.com/resources/2014SepLetterSzambotiJohns.pdf

Tony Szamboti, Mechanical Design Engineer, and Richard Johns, degreed Engineering Mathematician, along with Dr. Gregory Szuladziński, a world-renowned expert in structural mechanics, wrote another paper refuting Bažant and Le’s analysis [which claimed to explain the free fall] and submitted it to the International Journal of Protective Structures. That paper, titled “Some Misunderstandings Related to the WTC Collapse Analysis,” 10 was published in June 2013.
https://www.ae911truth.org/evidence/technical-articles/articles-in-engineering-and-science-publications/144-some-misunderstandings-related-to-wtc-collapse-analysis
https://www.ae911truth.org/evidence/steel-sulfidation
In a New York Times article published in February 2002, James Glanz and Eric Lipton wrote:
“Perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation involves extremely thin bits of steel collected...from 7 World Trade Center.... The steel apparently melted away, but no fire in any of the buildings was believed to be hot enough to melt steel outright.... A preliminary analysis at Worcester Polytechnic Institute [WPI]...suggests that sulfur released during the fires—no one knows from where—may have combined with atoms in the steel to form compounds that melt at lower temperatures.” 1
The WPI professors, who were “shocked” by the “Swiss cheese appearance” 2 of the steel, reported their analysis in Appendix C of the FEMA WTC Building Performance Study, making the following recommendation:
“The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified.... A detailed study into the mechanisms of this phenomenon is needed....” 3

The NIST ignored this, Then falsely claimed there was no identifiable steel from WTC 7 which they later recanted

a civil engineer named Jonathan Cole was. In his experiment documented in the video 9/11 Experiments: The Mysterious Eutectic Steel, he used a wide flange beam packed with crushed gypsum board, crushed concrete, aluminum scraps, steel scraps, and diesel fuel, and he burned it for 24 hours, continually adding fuel such as brush, furniture, floor panels, and wood logs. At the end of his experiment he reported:
“The aluminum, concrete, drywall, diesel fuel, and building materials did not cause any intergranular melting. So, if [these materials] did not cause the intergranular melting and sulfidation, then some uncommon substance that is not normally found in buildings must have caused it....