After watching Episode 4, the

After watching Episode 4, the only one I’ve seen to date, am impressed by your knowledge and expertise on the facts presented here. If NIST’s conclusions on what happened to WTC7 were wrong, their reasoning for what caused WTC 1 & 2 to fail would have to be flawed as well. But absent here is any argument or evidence indicating that had the fires in these buildings been extinguished by their sprinklers early on, this would have negated NIST’s central reason for why all three steel structures failed to begin with. So wondering why evidence for sprinkler impact (or their absence thereof) not being considered in these discussions. Or maybe they have, but in earlier episodes? Will check this out. Many thanks to you, to your partners here, and to your good works. Please stay the course.