Creative Speculation

> Yes, it's just a "theory", from what I understand they had this "theory" and built a computer simulation to prove it. I could be wrong on that, it may have been one of the other buildings.

For WTC 7, one of the first theories was that structural damage from falling debris weakened the building. Another theory was that diesel fuel feeding the fires was a contributor to the collapse, but the NIST simulations did not support either of those theories. If they wanted to fake the simulations to prove a foregone conclusion, I think they passed up two good candidates.

> As for your excerpt, it would have taken a minimal amount of C-4, or even a grenade, to blow the column, and it would not have registered a blip on the seismic radar. It would be less vibration than a subway train, a passenger train, or a a 110 ton crane moving through the city.

NIST based their calculation on the size of the column. At the level of collapse initiation, column 79 was made from a W14x730 wide flange beam with added side plates. A W14x730 is about 22.42" x 17.89" with a 3-inch-thick web and 5-inch-thick flanges for a total of 215 square inches of cross-sectional area. The side plates were 2" thick and 26" wide for an additional 104 square inches cross-section. Neither a "minimal amount of C-4, or even a grenade" would put a dent in a column that size.