Aletho News


Review: Seven, AE911Truth’s new documentary about groundbreaking new study on WTC7

By Kevin Ryan | OffGuardian | December 29, 2020

The new film Seven (trailer above), directed by Dylan Avery, examines the story of the scientific study of World Trade Center building 7 (WTC 7) recently published by the University of Alaska Fairbanks. The study was led by structural engineering professor J. Leroy Hulsey and took nearly five years to complete. It evaluated the possibilities for destruction of WTC 7 using two versions of high-tech computer software that simulated the structural components of the building and the forces that acted upon it on September 11th.

After inputting worst case conditions, and painstakingly eliminating what didn’t happen, Hulsey and his team of engineers came to the following conclusions.

“The principal conclusion of our study is that fire did not cause the collapse of WTC 7 on 9/11, contrary to the conclusions of NIST and private engineering firms that studied the collapse. The secondary conclusion of our study is that the collapse of WTC 7 was a global failure involving the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building.”

These peer-reviewed conclusions directly contradict the findings of the U.S. government’s final investigation into WTC 7 as reported by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).

Seven documents the journey of Professor Hulsey and his team from their introduction to the subject and the related evidence to the final publication of their report in March of this year. It is an interesting story and important for several reasons. First, it shows what an objective group of engineering science professionals will find if they look closely at the destruction of WTC 7. Additionally, it provides a great example of what one concerned citizen can do to make a great difference in shedding light on the truth of the events of September 11, 2001.

The concerned citizen, who was barely mentioned in the film, is John Thiel, a nurse anesthetist from Alaska. In 2010, Thiel began a 3-year process of looking for an engineer to conduct an honest scientific investigation into the destruction of WTC 7. Thiel was not a structural engineer, but he knew that the official reports on the destruction of that building were false and he wanted to do something about it. Ten years later, after contacting 150 engineers, finally finding and gaining Hulsey’s commitment to do it, and persuading Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth to get involved, Thiel’s persistence paid off.

Seven also features comments from some brave engineers who have spoken out in the past about WTC 7. This includes fire protection engineer Scott Grainger, structural engineer Kamal Obeid, civil engineer and AE911Truth board director Roland Angle, and mechanical engineer Tony Szamboti.  All these men make powerful statements in the film about NIST’s failures and omission of evidence.

The film reviews much of the evidence and how it was treated by the initial ASCE/FEMA building performance study and by NIST. It discusses circumstantial evidence including the suspicious tenants of WTC 7 (e.g. the CIA, the Secret Service, the DOD, and the SEC) and foreknowledge about the collapse of the building. It reviews the inexplicable “predictions” of WTC 7’s collapse by media giants CNN and BBC, both of which reported the collapse before it actually happened.

However, the strength of the film is in exposing the viewer to scientific facts and evidence as described by credible experts like Hulsey, Angle, Grainger, Obeid, and Szamboti. This includes the samples of steel exhibiting intergranular melting and sulfidation that the New York Times originally called “the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation” but that were ignored in the NIST reports.  It includes the fact that no tall building had ever collapse primarily from fire and that the fires in WTC 7 were ordinary and were fed by only 20-minutes of fire load in any given area.  The film also highlights concerns about the lack of scientific integrity in NIST’s manipulation of model parameters like the coefficient of expansion of steel and the omission of shear studs on the WTC 7 floor assemblies.

The film is only 45 minutes long and focuses largely on the evidence related to Hulsey’s study. It does not include some facts and evidence about WTC 7 that have been pointed out in the past. For example, it does not detail NIST’s history of failed hypotheses, like the diesel fuel tank hypothesis or the claim that the design of the building contributed to the collapse. It also doesn’t mention that the new WTC 7 was completed in 2006, when NIST was stating it had no idea what happened to the first one.

In the film, Professor Hulsey comes across as very credible and driven by the desire for an objective approach that gives the public an understanding of what happened to WTC 7. His comments about building his study on a clear palate, using pure science, ring true. Avery tells Hulsey’s story simply, without engulfing the viewer in unanswered questions.

Overall, Seven is an excellent presentation for people with a scientific mindset. As John Thiel wrote to me, “Any engineer or scientist with a basic understanding of physics, who does not suffer from cognitive dissonance, should easily be convinced of the truth after watching this video.” I agree.

If people want to help reveal the truth about WTC 7, and therefore about 9/11, they should share this film with every scientist and engineer they know. It is available on multiple streaming platforms, including Amazon Prime, iTunes, Vudu, Google Play, and Microsoft. As a society, our understanding of the crimes of 9/11 continues to be crucial to our understanding of what is going on today.


Seven is directed by Dylan Avery, released by Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth, and available to rent and buy from various platforms, here.

December 29, 2020 - Posted by | False Flag Terrorism, Film Review, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular, Video | ,


  1. You’d have to be a Donkey to believe the NIST report’s explanation of what happened to tower 7 on “9/11″ And the fact that the U.S. Government has shut down any public discussion of what happened in NYC on that day, when it should be welcoming open debate, would seem to suggest that they have something(huge) to hide.
    AE9/11Truth should be congratulated for keeping the issue alive, because no one in the government will discuss it publicly.
    Transferring the ‘suspects” in this case to Guantanamo Bay, and thereby skirting the American Legal System is another indication that the government has plenty to hide. There are still “classified” video’s of the so called Plane that hit the Pentagon that the CIA hold.
    No apparent investigation of “Shorting Airline Stocks” was carried out and Larry Silverstein became incredibly rich with his insurance claims after the “event”, and he even publicly admitted that He(and the NYFD) decided to “Pull the building”(The NYFD have denied his claim).

    The USA Government owes the American people an in depth explanation regarding “9/11” but, the people will never get it.

    “9/11” “Stinks to high Heaven”…….

    Liked by 1 person

    Comment by brianharryaustralia | December 29, 2020 | Reply

  2. Great, provocative, energizing review (by a Brit?!). Now what? Has there been reaction from NIST? Is there not even one whistleblowing NIST employee in the crowd? Associated conundrum: is there crossfeed to the Twin Towers?–isn’t WTC 7 merely a sideshow in the overall matrix of poor science, lies, delays, destruction of evidence, rigorous/credible investigation, etc.?

    Where and when and to what audiences will Seven be distributed? Can Public Broadcasting System be enjoined to air it? Engineering/technical institutions of higher learning? Other professional-trade associations? Families of the 3,000-plus victims of what my gut has told me since 9-12-2001 me is a dastardly false-flag event (and cui bono if so?)?

    Liked by 1 person

    Comment by roberthstiver | December 29, 2020 | Reply

    • The most gruesome crime ever committed in the USA, and the USA Government wont talk about it…..weird Huh?

      Liked by 1 person

      Comment by brianharryaustralia | December 30, 2020 | Reply

  3. Now aproaching two decades of discussing the “how” of 9-11.

    Perhaps in the next decade we can focus upon who benefitted; who had motive; who had means; and who colluded with mass media to keep the false flags operation covered-up?

    Liked by 2 people

    Comment by rediscover911com | December 31, 2020 | Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.