The "debunked" NIST report has all of the calculations in NCSTAR 1-2 & 1-3. Learn structural engineering and statics of steel under heat and then read 1-6.
https://www.nist.gov/engineering-laboratory/final-reports-nist-world-trade-center-disaster-investigation
But none of you would have any idea what you are looking at even if i did bring some different proof. And you would just disagree with the assumptions that were made, that actually the steel came from some other place and its poisson's ratio is actually more like .24 etc. There is no winning here, I shouldn't have gotten involved. 

The best proof I can give is that over a 100 normal people with families, maybe some even lost family members in the attacks, worked on those reports and the people at he forefront of the industry were called on to find out what happened. If you think that all of these people are in on it, then I pity you. So many people have spent "hundreds of hours" researching this stuff but it takes so much more than hundreds of hours to understand all of these concepts and then to study all of the evidence. I spent 4 years learning it and I have already forgotten 50% of it. People can do it, and I can lend you the textbooks if you are in the DC area heh, but the way people think about this conspiracy especially, frustrates me. Research /= watching videos made by other people who don't know anything analyzing fall speed. Or analyzing the fact that it fell "straight down" like a "controlled demolition". How else would it fall!? There aren't any forces pushing it in any direction, so when the structural members at the center are severely compromised around the impact floors where the damage spanned 6-10 floors and floors begin to collapse, they picked up speed and weight as they went and the whole building fell down.

The other thing about the WTC is that it was very poorly designed. If a skyscraper with its design was submitted today it would be laughed at. It was built in such a way that the exterior walls were loadbearing. It would not stand free with just the internal structural members. Some sort of fishy shit happened when the building was approved in the 50s and 60s. When they were built, they would build the central part of the building for a floor, and then build the walls for that floor, then move up to the next floor. 
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4023/4526687387_9832c4e2e3_b.jpg
vs 
http://i3.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article5312430.ece/ALTERNATES/s615b/PAY-Skyscraper-construction-timelapse.jpg

This is not standard practice for skyscrapers, even then, and when 10 floors were CRUSHED by Boeing 767s, and then jet fuel poored down the internal shafts and started fires throughout the center of the building, yeah you bet it fell down. Another factor is that people say there was protection on the structural members! Yes this is true, they had very similar spray-applied insulation that we use today, but because that spray application happens early in a building's construction, every discipline that goes in there that follows needs to attach hangers to beams  or drill through them, and they knock alot of that insulation off which compromises them to heat degradation. Also, the strength of the impact, a BOEING 767 200 TONS GOING AT 600 MPH, had the strength to knock off a good amount more of that insulation. Steel will lose half of its structural integrity around 550-600 degrees (and I am being generous). It doesn't have to melt to fail. 

http://docs.engineeringtoolbox.com/documents/1353/temperature-strength-metals-SI.png

Alright.. what else, what things do you think are unexplainable? I will try to explain them

Also, even if you think I am a sheep, I did put some time into this response and it has some good stuff here so toss your man some steem ;)

The "debunked" NIST report has all of the calculations in NCSTAR 1-2 & 1-3. Learn structural engineering and statics of steel under heat and then read 1-6.
https://www.nist.gov/engineering-laboratory/final-reports-nist-world-trade-center-disaster-investigation
And yeah, I thought you were actually a part of the steem team, you are pretty prolific. But none of you would have any idea what you are looking at even if i did bring some different proof. And you would just disagree with the assumptions that were made, that actually the steel came from some other place and its poisson's ratio is actually more like .24 etc. There is no winning here, I shouldn't have gotten involved. 

The best proof I can give is that over a 100 normal people with families, maybe some even lost family members in the attacks, worked on those reports and the people at he forefront of the industry were called on to find out what happened. If you think that all of these people are in on it, then I pity you. So many people have spent "hundreds of hours" researching this stuff but it takes so much more than hundreds of hours to understand all of these concepts and then to study all of the evidence. I spent 4 years learning it and I have already forgotten 50% of it. People can do it, and I can lend you the textbooks if you are in the DC area heh, but the way people think about this conspiracy especially, frustrates me. Research /= watching videos made by other people who don't know anything analyzing fall speed. Or analyzing the fact that it fell "straight down" like a "controlled demolition". How else would it fall!?There aren't any forces pushing it in any direction, so when the structural members at the center are severely compromised around the impact floors where the damage spanned 6-10 floors and floors begin to collapse, they picked up speed and weight as they went and the whole building fell down.

The other thing about the WTC is that it was very poorly designed. If a skyscraper with its design was submitted today it would be laughed at. It was built in such a way that the exterior walls were loadbearing. It would not stand free with just the internal structural members. Some sort of fishy shit happened when the building was approved in the 50s and 60s, probably involving the mob. When they were built, they would build the central part of the building for a floor, and then build the walls for that floor, then move up to the next floor. 
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4023/4526687387_9832c4e2e3_b.jpg
vs 
http://i3.mirror.co.uk/incoming/article5312430.ece/ALTERNATES/s615b/PAY-Skyscraper-construction-timelapse.jpg

This is not standard practice for skyscrapers, even then, and when 10 floors were CRUSHED by Boeing 767s, and then jet fuel poored down the internal shafts and started fires throughout the center of the building, yeah you bet it fell down. Another factor is that people say there was protection on the structural members! Yes this is true, they had very similar spray-applied insulation that we use today, but because that spray application happens early in a building's construction, every discipline that goes in there that follows needs to attach hangers to beams  or drill through them, and they knock alot of that insulation off which compromises them to heat degradation. Also, the strength of the impact, a BOEING 767 200 TONS GOING AT 600 MPH, had the strength to knock off a good amount more of that insulation. Steel will lose half of its structural integrity around 550-600 degrees (and I am being generous). It doesn't have to melt to fail. 

http://docs.engineeringtoolbox.com/documents/1353/temperature-strength-metals-SI.png

Alright.. what else, what things do you think are unexplainable? I will try to explain them

Also, even if you think I am a sheep, I did put some time into this response and it has some good stuff here so toss your man some steem ;)