I am curious as to why you think the account of Barry Jennings lends credence to the idea that the collapse of WTC 7 was a controlled demolition? Any "explosions" he heard were hours before the eventual collapse...
Yes, that's the reason that his account lends credence to the theory of some sort of controlled demolition taking place (or perhaps going wrong and then being finished later).
Jennings repeated this explanation of how he knew that the Twin Towers were both still standing when the explosion occurred, saying: When I got to the 6th floor, there was an explosion. That’s what forced us back to the 8th floor. Both buildings were still standing. Keep in mind, I told you the fire department came and ran. They came twice. Why? Because Building Tower One fell, then Tower Two fell. And then when they came back, they came back all concerned to get me the hell out of there, and they did.56 In other words, although firefighters were ready to rescue them before 10:00, the firefighters had to leave because of the collapse of the South Tower, which occurred at 9:59. Then, although firefighters returned to the site, they had to leave again at 10:28, when the North Tower collapsed. Also notable is Jennings’ statement that they were trapped “several hours.” This assertion suggests that Hess’s estimate that they were trapped for “about an hour and a half” may have been somewhat conservative. For example, if the period was closer to two hours, then, if they were rescued by 11:30AM (allowing Hess 25 minutes to talk to people and walk to the location of his 11:57 interview), then the explosion would have occurred at about 9:30. In any case, the most important point is that, whereas Giuliani had claimed that the two men were trapped because of damage caused by the collapse of the North Tower, Jennings stated that the North Tower and even the South Tower collapsed only after an explosion had caused them to become trapped. What Jennings called “an explosion” beneath him could not, therefore, have simply been some effects created in WTC 7 by the collapse of the North Tower. He and Hess were clearly describing an explosion that occurred in WTC 7 approximately an hour before the 10:28 collapse of the North Tower. Moreover, besides reporting the big explosion that knocked the landing out from under them, Jennings spoke of further explosions.
(The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7: Why the Final Official Report about 9/11 is Unscientific and False by David Griffin)
And given the best simulations that money can buy showing that all one would have to do is take out a nearly magical column to cause a progressive collapse of the building (Which "would appear" like a controlled demolition... ) as well as all the other reports and video recordings of explosions throughout the day, Jenning's testimony would have to be counted as evidence in favor of that theory. And unlike Chomsky's argument that's based on all the whistle blowers that he imagines coming forward, Jenning's testimony isn't imaginary. Or at least not as imaginary as Chomsky's """""""sheer logic""""""" and lack of caring... who cares what actually happened to Jennings? Well, I do... for one... and Jennings did. Personally, I don't find Chomsky that smart sometimes. After all, I'd imagine that he isn't... and who cares if he is?
*(Although one can "simulate"/imagine that it's not what it appears to be, as always.)