When people remember September 11, 2001, the crash of the New York World Trade Center “twins”, the attack on the Pentagon and the plane crash in Pennsylvania, come to mind. The scene where the passengers decide to fight the terrorists before the hijackers experience anything.

Some people will put forward the theory that the American government and secret services were behind all the attacks so that America could go to war and arm itself. People who question the official version of events ask a number of questions – many of which relate to “building number 7”.

Do you remember? Along with the 400-meter-high “twins”, a smaller building, which stood about a hundred meters from the WTC’s north tower, also collapsed eight years ago. No plane hit it. And the fall is very symmetrical. The final report on the third tower, numbered on the World Trade Center site as Building 7, took the US government seven years to complete.

However, it should be added that many people dispute the arguments of the conspiracy advocates.

There is not much evidence of a fire or damage to the seventh building, which is why its collapse is likely to raise speculation. “We have good reason not to believe the official version,” said Dylan Avery, director of the Loose Change film series, which, according to the BBC, has been watched by a hundred million viewers on the Internet.

The CIA, the Ministry of Defense, and the Office of Crisis Management among others rented space in the WTC’s seventh building. That’s why conspiracy theorists say the building must be demolished because there is a massive conspiracy plot, reports the BBC. At the same time, conspiracy refers to directing the hijacked plane to the “twin” building, or the government’s attempt to hide the alleged criminal conspiracy.

Distrust of the official version of events led to the formation of a group of four hundred experts, led by experienced architect Richard Gage. The slender “fastener man” does not give the impression of a stubborn, defiant rebel who denies the terrorists’ guilt. He points out what seems strange to him – but sometimes he admits he’s not entirely sure.

“No skyscraper has collapsed just because of a fire, and we know of more than a hundred cases,” he explained. “If the official version is correct, it means that the building standards on which thousands of skyscrapers were built were fundamentally flawed,” Gage said.

The steel loses some stiffness, but according to testing, it should last a long time

It’s hot in Building No. 7 could reach 600 degrees Celsius, according to investigators. At such temperatures, steel still does not “flow”. But he lost half his stiffness. At the same time, the BBC drew attention to a series of attempts at British Cardington. In the 1990s, simulations of similar cases showed that the structure would fail, but the steel would not ultimately yield.

Conspiracy theorists also often think of testimony that can be interpreted in various ways. For example, the statements of firefighters, who were informed by the on-site structural engineer – when building No. 7 on fire – that they will stay in this state for about five hours. Then the tree actually fell, and the conspiracists exclaimed: You know, even the firefighters are in league with them.

Journalists who reported on the “fall of the third skyscraper”, while the seventh WTC building “only” burned, received a similar label. Today the BBC defended itself by saying that it received an erroneous Reuters report at the time, which it later retracted, and that its coverage that day was chaotic.

But so far, conspiracy theorists have not provided an explanation for how such a large-scale conspiracy carried out by government authorities, secret services, firefighters, rescue workers and the media could have remained secret.

Demolition experts debate videos of building collapses

The master archer, who was approached by the creator of Loose Change, called the event a controlled destruction after watching a video of the “ruler’s” fall. “They had to throw it out,” he added when the filmmakers confronted him with the initially undisclosed information that he was watching footage from September 11, 2001 in Manhattan.

However, for example, Mark Loizeaux from the company Controlled Demolition stated that demolition preparations cannot be carried out quietly and secretly, and that someone must know about it. Additionally, none of the hundreds of people who searched the rubble of the building reported anything to indicate a controlled demolition.

“Loizeaux was not neutral, he worked for the federal government,” said architect Gage. “However, it is possible that the explosives were installed earlier, during floor renovation or during construction – but I admit, this is just speculation,” he added cautiously. Regarding this, Loizeaux said that explosives had a lifespan of several years, thus refuting Gage’s opinion.

Although over time there have also been interpretations from experts who are more supportive of the official version, some opponents consider their beliefs worthy of abandonment. They include, for example, physics professor Stephen Jones, who believes that the unusual heat mapped by NASA aircraft at the Building 7 site may have come from experimental explosives.

NASA thermal imaging cameras reveal intense heat in the ruins of Building #7 (top right) five days after its collapse.

At the same time, they talk about thermite mixtures – which were used, for example, in bombs during the Second World War. A pyrotechnic mixture of (usually) aluminum and iron oxide reacts to form very hot iron and aluminum oxide. So, in theory, it is possible to achieve long-term hot temperatures…

Thermite reaction: Iron and aluminum oxides react to form iron and aluminum oxides.

What exactly did the representatives of each party say? What evidence do they bring to convince the public? Can thermite mixtures be used in controlled explosions, or have demolition experts not yet made that far? A fifty-two minute BBC documentary about conspiracy theories regarding the fall of the No. 7 broadcast on Tuesdays by Czech Television.