FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 
Who Did 9/11 - And Why?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> 9/11 HardCorps Specifics Investigation
  ::  Previous topic :: Next topic  
Author Message
Grumpy



Joined: 05 Sep 2007
Posts: 876
Location: NC USA

PostPosted: Thu Sep 06, 2007 3:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

peter

Be sure that I am in the process of reading posts as fast as I can. In some cases I have already had discourse with some of the posters on other venues.

I too have high standards of evidence, I hope all will reach those standards. But I also have a well calibrated BS detector, but I never just say something is BS, I explain just why and how it came to exit from the south end of a north bound male bovine, for such is the joy of logical debate, is it not???

here is a link to more info.

Grumpy Cool

_________________
Wheel yourself out in the streets and demand the truth from these dumbshits.
O dear, taken to drinking and swallowing the pain tablets together eh Grumpy? aAzzAa
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bri



Joined: 16 Jun 2006
Posts: 3220
Location: Capacious Creek

PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 8:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Grumpy wrote:
peter

Be sure that I am in the process of reading posts as fast as I can. In some cases I have already had discourse with some of the posters on other venues.

I too have high standards of evidence, I hope all will reach those standards. But I also have a well calibrated BS detector, but I never just say something is BS, I explain just why and how it came to exit from the south end of a north bound male bovine, for such is the joy of logical debate, is it not???

here is a link to more info.

Grumpy Cool


Thanks for that link. I think that it is always important for people on one "side" of an issue to research the other. Then maybe "sides" can be abolished in some kind union on understanding that of course, must not be blind.

And that's for you too Grumpy. Otherwise you are just fooling yourself. Wink Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Peter



Joined: 26 Jun 2007
Posts: 2459
Location: The Canadian shield

PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 10:59 am    Post subject: greener pastures or persona non grata Reply with quote

Grumpy Posted: Feb 2 2007, 02:44 PM Quote


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 2435
Joined: 25-August 05

Positive Feedback: 75%
Feedback Score: 35


beijingyank


QUOTE
Most scientific polls are pointing to better than 85% of the American population feel they are not being told the truth about 911.



About the same percentage think the Creation story in Genisis is a factual acount. Never underestimate the ability of the general public to be misinformed. Science is NEVER a popularity contest.


QUOTE
NIST has had 6 years and despite changing their story more than once, they still can't tell us why the buildings fell. Six years later and they are just getting around to showing their ignorance about Building 7.



NIST did an excellent investigation and explanation of the towers collapse. Just because you have not read/understood it does not change the FACT that it stands unchallenged.


QUOTE
1. Molten steel is heading the list. NIST's discovery of sulferization of the steel is confirming evidence to Dr. Jones' theory of thermite/thermate. Occam's Razor is favoring this as being the most probable cause for the "molten steel" pools that burned for a 100 days.



You have yet to show a single instance where molten STEEL was found anywhere in the WTC complex. Molten steel is still just a disinformation mantra from the know-nothing crowd. All such reports turned out to be bogus.


QUOTE
2. "Cancer Cluster" in the 911 on site people and the following medical examinations should rule out, or for, a nuclear event being the cause for the molten steel.



The cancer and other ailments are caused by the inhalation of dust, according to the medical community. Any speculation about nuclear devices is illogical and foolish. A nuclear event would have been obvious and would have immediately destroyed everything for blocks around the complex. The smallest nuclear explosion possible would have left a glass lined smoking crater and the electro-magnetic pulse would have wiped the memories of every video camera within line of site. There was no nuclear event on 9/11, this is just the speculations of an ignorant mind and a red herring.


QUOTE
4. Seismic evidence will be hotly debated.



Not by the experts(expert=someone who knows what he is talking about), they have already ruled out any explosives(which leave distinctive traces absent in all the data).


QUOTE
5. Action: NIST/FEMA must release all the data. The data must at a bare minimum be public information for the scientific community.



Already done(which you would know if you bothered to look).

Grumpy

Interesting tactic....where have I seen that before....hmmmn I wonder / Embarassed

_________________
The grand design, reflected in the face of Chaos.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Grumpy



Joined: 05 Sep 2007
Posts: 876
Location: NC USA

PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 12:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Peter

I'm Grumpy over there, I'm Grumpy on JREF, I'm Grummpy on the Christian forums and I'm Grumpy here too. Let's face it, I'm Grumpy!!!

I stand by every post I ever made. That does not mean I have never made a mistake, but if I did so I admitted my error a few posts later. If I am shown valid evidence of a mistake I have made, I will admit that as well.

Did you have a quibble with any of those answers???

Grumpy Cool

_________________
Wheel yourself out in the streets and demand the truth from these dumbshits.
O dear, taken to drinking and swallowing the pain tablets together eh Grumpy? aAzzAa
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stallion4



Joined: 26 May 2006
Posts: 692

PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 6:04 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Grumpy wrote:
"NIST did an excellent investigation and explanation of the towers collapse. Just because you have not read/understood it does not change the FACT that it stands unchallenged."

Dr. Frank Greening begs to differ...

"If I had just paid $20 million for the NIST report, I'd be asking for a refund!... The trouble with the NIST Report is that it isn’t even science because it's not capable of being verified or negated!" -Dr. Frank Greening


Grumpy wrote:
"You have yet to show a single instance where molten STEEL was found anywhere in the WTC complex. Molten steel is still just a disinformation mantra from the know-nothing crowd. All such reports turned out to be bogus."


Dr. Frank Greening explains why there was melted/molten steel at the WTC:

"There is some crucial scientific evidence for the presence of molten iron or steel in the pulverized remains of WTC 1 & 2"
"I am referring to the observation of micron-sized iron spherules that have been seen in many WTC dust samples. These spherical particles are direct physical evidence that the iron within the particle was molten at the time the particle formed."
"The formation of spherical iron particles has been well documented and researched for steel making processes... Iron spheres in the 30 micron to 1 micron range are typically seen in the dust-laden off-gases produced by molten steel and are believed to be formed by the ejection of metal droplets when the liquid metal degasses."
"...some steel appears to have melted in the WTC prior to the collapse of the buildings."
"Iron spherules and elevated levels of airborne ZINC prove there was molten iron/steel in the WTC."
"This implies that some iron or steel in the twin towers was exposed to temperatures ABOVE 1539 deg C. Such temperatures are much too high for hydrocarbon fires in the twin towers according to NIST's own studies."
"I would say that the presence of molten iron in the WTC is inconsistent with the NIST Report’s conclusion that temperatures in the towers during 9/11 were well below the melting point of iron or steel."
"NIST, in its fire simulations, tried very hard to get steel (>95 % iron) to temperatures above 1000 deg C but failed!"
"How did the fires in the rubble pile melt steel?"
"Why does the presence, I mean the FACT, of molten steel in the Twin Towers bother you so much?" (Greening's questions directed at other forum members who were denying the existence of molten steel at Ground Zero)

-Dr. Frank Greening, originally posted at Physorg.com March/April 2007 as forum member "NEU-FONZE", and as "Apollo20" at Forums.Randi.org, April 2007

Frank Greening's Bio:
http://www.911myths.com/html/dr_frank_greening_bio.html

A few more recent quotes from Dr. Greening...

"I have a personal e-mail FROM A VERY RESPECTED PROFFESOR OF ENGINEERING at an AMERICAN UNIVERSITY in which he notes that his attempts to publish his research into the collapse of WTC 1 & 2 in US and British journals has been blocked.
This means work disputing NIST's findings is nowhere to be found because it is simply being censored by over-cautious editors!" -Dr. Frank Greeing, posted at Physorg.com as forum member "NEU-FONZE", Mar 20 2007 - 9/11 Events - part 3, pg. 91

"NIST has no PROOF that fire insulation was stripped by the aircraft impacts in the critical areas ABOVE the impact zones. In fact it is highly UNLIKELY that this happened, and without the loss of thermal insulation, NIST's collapse theory falls apart.
The loss of thermal insulation idea is obviously an ad hoc hypothesis added by NIST to salvage a failed collapse theory" -Dr. Frank Greening, posted at Physorg.com as forum member "NEU-FONZE", Mar 20 2007 - 9/11 Events - part 3, pg. 92

"The truth about 9/11 is too important to declare the matter closed just because NIST have written a book or two on it.
NIST themselves call their version of the truth an HYPOTHESIS. Does that preclude the consideration of other hypotheses?
Is it the NIST apologists' plan to keep up the nay-saying until they silence any dissenting voices and declare: "CASE CLOSED!"
Well, sorry to tell you, it won't work!" -Dr. Frank Greening, posted at Physorg.com as forum member "NEU-FONZE", Mar 20 2007 - 9/11 Events - part 3, pg.102


More reports of the melted/molten steel at the WTC:

An employee of New Jersey's Task Force One Urban Search and Rescue witnessed "Fires burning and molten steel flowing in the pile of ruins still settling beneath her feet."
http://www.sas.upenn.edu/sasalum/newsltr/summer2002/k911.html

"These reports came from two men involved in the removal of the rubble: Peter Tully of Tully Construction of Flushing, N.Y., and Mark Loizeaux of Controlled Demolition, Inc. of Phoenix, Md.
Tully told AFP that he had seen pools of “literally molten steel” in the rubble.
Loizeaux confirmed this: “Yes, hot spots of molten steel in the basements,” he said, “at the bottom of the elevator shafts of the main towers, down seven levels.”
The molten steel was found “three, four, and five weeks later, when the rubble was being removed,” he said. He confirmed that molten steel was also found at WTC 7 [...]"
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/cutter_charges_brought_down_wt.html

The head of a team of scientists studying the potential health effects of 9/11, reported, "Fires are still actively burning and the smoke is very intense. In some pockets now being uncovered, they are finding molten steel."
http://www.jhsph.edu/Publications/Special/Welch.htm

A public health advisor who arrived at Ground Zero on September 12, said that "feeling the heat" and "seeing the molten steel" there reminded him of a volcano.
http://www.neha.org/9-11%20report/index-The.html

New York firefighters recalled in a documentary film, "heat so intense they encountered rivers of molten steel."
http://www.nypost.com/movies/19574.htm

According to a worker involved with the organizing of demolition, excavation and debris removal operations at ground zero, "Underground it was still so hot that molten metal dripped down the sides of the wall from Building 6."
http://www.globalsecurity.org/security/library/congress/9-11_commission/

An expert stated about World Trade Center building 7, "A combination of an uncontrolled fire and the structural damage might have been able to bring the building down, some engineers said. But that would not explain steel members in the debris pile that appear to have been PARTLY EVAPORATED in extraordinarily high temperatures" (pay-per-view).
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F10812FF3F590C7A8EDDA80994D9404482

Note that evaporation means conversion from a liquid to a gas; so the steel beams in building 7 were subjected to temperatures high enough to melt and evaporate them.
http://www.answers.com/evaporation&r=67

A reporter with rare access to the debris at ground zero "descended deep below street level to areas where underground fires still burned and steel flowed in molten streams."
http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/2002/07/77nwash.htm

The same journalist also refers to "the streams of molten metal that leaked from the hot cores and flowed down broken walls inside the foundation hole." (pages 31-32)
LINK

An engineer stated in the September 3, 2002 issue of The Structural Engineer, "They showed us many fascinating slides ranging from molten metal, which was still red hot weeks after the event."
LINK (pdf)

An Occupational Safety and Health Administration Officer at the Trade Center reported a fire truck 10 feet below the ground that was still burning two weeks after the Tower collapsed, "its metal so hot that it looked like a vat of molten steel."
http://www.thenewliberator.com/wethepeople.htm

The structural engineer responsible for the design of the WTC, described fires still burning and molten steel still running 21 days after the attacks.
http://www.seau.org/SEAUNews-2001-10.pdf

According to a member of New York Air National Guard's 109th Air Wing, who was at Ground Zero from September 22 to October 6, "One fireman told us that there was still molten steel at the heart of the towers' remains. Firemen sprayed water to cool the debris down but the heat remained intense enough at the surface to melt their boots."
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3731/is_200112/ai_n9015802

A fireman stated that there were "oven" like conditions at the trade centers six weeks after 9/11.
http://plaguepuppy.net/public_html/video%20archive/red_hot_ground_zero_low_quality.wmv

Firemen and hazardous materials experts also stated that, six weeks after 9/11, "There are pieces of steel being pulled out [from as far as six stories underground] that are still cherry red" and "the blaze is so 'far beyond a normal fire' that it is nearly impossible to draw conclusions about it based on other fires." (pay-per-view)
LINK

A NY Department of Sanitation spokeswoman said "for about two and a half months after the attacks, in addition to its regular duties, NYDS played a major role in debris removal - everything from molten steel beams to human remains...."
http://wasteage.com/mag/waste_dday_ny_sanitation/

As late as five months after the attacks, in February 2002, firefighter Joe O'Toole saw a steel beam being lifted from deep underground at Ground Zero, which, he says, "was dripping from the molten steel."
http://www.fallenbrothers.com/community/showthread.php?p=2948#post2948

Indeed, the trade center fire was "the longest-burning structural fire in history",
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn1634

even though it rained heavily on September 14, 2001
http://www.courttv.com/assault_on_america/0914_rain_ap.html

and again on September 21, 2001,
http://www.wnbc.com/news/962722/detail.html

and the fires were sprayed with high tech fire-retardands,
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn1634

and "firetrucks [sprayed] a nearly constant jet of water on" ground zero."
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/12/19/archive/main321907.shtml

Indeed, "You couldn't even begin to imagine how much water was pumped in there," said Tom Manley of the Uniformed Firefighters Association, the largest fire department union. "It was like you were creating a giant lake."
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/12/19/archive/main321907.shtml



So according to "Grumpy" all of this is simply "disinformation from a know-nothing crowd" and "All such reports turned out to be bogus".


I believe "Grumpy" just got...


_________________
"Someday a real rain will come and wash all this scum off the streets." ~Travis Bickle
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stallion4



Joined: 26 May 2006
Posts: 692

PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 7:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I forgot to mention that the LIARS at NIST deny that there were any such reports of Molten Steel at the WTC. Hmmmm I wonder why Laughing

NIST Engineer, John Gross, Denies Reports About Molten Steel at the WTC
http://911blogger.com/node/6104


VIDEO

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7180303712325092501&hl=en

_________________
"Someday a real rain will come and wash all this scum off the streets." ~Travis Bickle
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stallion4



Joined: 26 May 2006
Posts: 692

PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 7:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

NIST was funded some 20 mil for their bogus report on the WTC and they couldn't find one report of molten steel???

I have a crap laptop and no funding whatsoever and I was able to find several in just a few minutes by Googling.

When history looks back at this debate, NIST and "Gumpy" will rank right up there with those who stubbornly insisted that the world was flat and the sun revolved around the earth, even in the face of scientific evidence to the contrary.

stallion4 Cool

_________________
"Someday a real rain will come and wash all this scum off the streets." ~Travis Bickle
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stallion4



Joined: 26 May 2006
Posts: 692

PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 7:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Rats abandoning their sinking ship???

Aug. 21, 2007:
James Quintiere, Ph.D., former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division, called for an independent review of the World Trade Center Twin Tower collapse investigation. "I wish that there would be a peer review of this," he said, referring to the NIST investigation. "I think all the records that NIST has assembled should be archived. I would really like to see someone else take a look at what they've done; both structurally and from a fire point of view. ... I think the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable."

Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_alan_mil_070820_former_chief_of_nist.htm


Laughing

_________________
"Someday a real rain will come and wash all this scum off the streets." ~Travis Bickle
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rustyh



Joined: 17 Sep 2006
Posts: 489
Location: A Wonderful World

PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 7:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Stallion4.

Great work mate. Well done with those posts.

I reckon Grumpy just got grumpier.
He will come back at you Stallion, lets just wait and see what with?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Grumpy



Joined: 05 Sep 2007
Posts: 876
Location: NC USA

PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 8:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

stallion4

Yeah, I've locked horns with Neu-Fonze more than once. The simple fact is that ALL SUCH REPORTS HAVE, ON FURTHER INVESTIGATION, PROVEN TO BE FALSE.PERIOD. The ability to identify glowing red metal as "molten steel" is beyond the capacity of the human eyeball, unless retrofitted with a high tech spectrometer. Several of the "dripping" beams turned out to be GLASS dripping off of hot steel. Some of the reports were pure HEARSAY, some were reporters using hyperbole to enhance their copy. Even the little molten steel balls have explanation in chemical reactions well below the melting point of steel.

Let's take a look at the claims

Quote:
A NY Department of Sanitation spokeswoman said "for about two and a half months after the attacks, in addition to its regular duties, NYDS played a major role in debris removal - everything from molten steel beams to human remains...."
http://wasteage.com/mag/waste_dday_ny_sanitation/


I mean, really, IF IT WAS A BEAM IT COULD NOT, BY DEFINITION, BE MOLTEN. You guys can't be that stupid, can you???

Most of the quotes you've mined up are of this variety.

Quote:
As late as five months after the attacks, in February 2002, firefighter Joe O'Toole saw a steel beam being lifted from deep underground at Ground Zero, which, he says, "was dripping from the molten steel."
http://www.fallenbrothers.com/community/showthread.php?p=2948#post2948


Glowing, yes. Molten, no, or it would not be able to be lifted. And once again, the calibrated eyeballs, that can tell the chemical composition by just looking at it. IT JUST ISN'T POSSIBLE.

None of the reports of "molten steel" turned out on investigation, to be accurate. You guys have been soaking in misinformation and fantasy so long you've lost all touch with your common sense. The scientific investigation(as opposed to the walking spectrometers) found absolutely NO pools of molten steel, none.

As to the melted beams...


Quote:
An expert stated about World Trade Center building 7, "A combination of an uncontrolled fire and the structural damage might have been able to bring the building down, some engineers said. But that would not explain steel members in the debris pile that appear to have been PARTLY EVAPORATED in extraordinarily high temperatures" (pay-per-view).
http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F10812FF3F590C7A8EDDA80994D9404482

Note that evaporation means conversion from a liquid to a gas; so the steel beams in building 7 were subjected to temperatures high enough to melt and evaporate them.
http://www.answers.com/evaporation&r=67


"The "Deep Mystery" of Melted Steel

There is no indication that any of the fires in the World Trade Center buildings were hot enough to melt the steel framework. Jonathan Barnett, professor of fire protection engineering, has repeatedly reminded the public that steel--which has a melting point of 2,800 degrees Fahrenheit--may weaken and bend, but does not melt during an ordinary office fire. Yet metallurgical studies on WTC steel brought back to WPI reveal that a novel phenomenon--called a eutectic reaction--occurred at the surface, causing intergranular melting capable of turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese.

Materials science professors Ronald R. Biederman and Richard D. Sisson Jr. confirmed the presence of eutectic formations by examining steel samples under optical and scanning electron microscopes. A preliminary report was published in JOM, the journal of the Minerals, Metals & Materials Society. A more detailed analysis comprises Appendix C of the FEMA report. The New York Times called these findings "perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation." The significance of the work on a sample from Building 7 and a structural column from one of the twin towers becomes apparent only when one sees these heavy chunks of damaged metal.

A one-inch column has been reduced to half-inch thickness. Its edges--which are curled like a paper scroll--have been thinned to almost razor sharpness. Gaping holes--some larger than a silver dollar--let light shine through a formerly solid steel flange. This Swiss cheese appearance shocked all of the fire-wise professors, who expected to see distortion and bending--but not holes.

A eutectic compound is a mixture of two or more substances that melts at the lowest temperature of any mixture of its components. Blacksmiths took advantage of this property by welding over fires of sulfur-rich charcoal, which lowers the melting point of iron. In the World Trade Center fire, the presence of oxygen, sulfur and heat caused iron oxide and iron sulfide to form at the surface of structural steel members. This liquid slag corroded through intergranular channels into the body of the metal, causing severe erosion and a loss of structural integrity.

"The important questions," says Biederman, "are how much sulfur do you need, and where did it come from? The answer could be as simple--and this is scary- as acid rain."

Have environmental pollutants increased the potential for eutectic reactions? "We may have just the inherent conditions in the atmosphere so that a lot of water on a burning building will form sulfuric acid, hydrogen sulfide or hydroxides, and start the eutectic process as the steel heats up," Biederman says. He notes that the sulfur could also have come from contents of the burning buildings, such as rubber or plastics. Another possible culprit is ocean salts, such as sodium sulfate, which is known to catalyze sulfidation reactions on turbine blades of jet engines. "All of these things have to be explored," he says.

From a building-safety point of view, the critical question is: Did the eutectic mixture form before the buildings collapsed, or later, as the remains smoldered on the ground. "We have no idea," admits Sisson. "To answer that, we would need to recreate those fires in the FPE labs, and burn fresh steel of known composition for the right time period, with the right environment." He hopes to have the opportunity to collaborate on thermodynamically controlled studies, and to observe the effects of adding sulfur, copper and other elements. The most important lesson, Sisson and Biederman stress, is that fail-safe sprinkler systems are essential to prevent steel from reaching even 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit, because phase changes at the 1,300-degree mark compromise a structure's load-bearing capacity.

The FEMA report calls for further metallurgic investigations, and Barnett, Biederman and Sisson hope that WPI will obtain NIST funding and access to more samples. They are continuing their microscopic studies on the samples prepared by graduate student Jeremy Bernier and Marco Fontecchio, the 2001–02 Helen E. Stoddard Materials Science and Engineering Fellow. (Next year's Stoddard Fellow, Erin Sullivan, will take up this work as part of her graduate studies.) Publication of their results may clear up some mysteries that have confounded the scientific community."

http://www.wpi.edu/News/Transformations/2002Spring/steel.html

This eutectic reaction can produce the small molten spheres found in the dust.

Another source of sulfur is the UPSs in several parts of both towers. These large banks of lead/sulfuric acid batteries are also a possible source of the molten metal(lead) pouring out of two, there was a UPS in that corner.



So hot glowing metal, sure. Molten steel, nada.

Grumpy

Cool

_________________
Wheel yourself out in the streets and demand the truth from these dumbshits.
O dear, taken to drinking and swallowing the pain tablets together eh Grumpy? aAzzAa
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
stallion4



Joined: 26 May 2006
Posts: 692

PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 8:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

OIC

So you're calling Frank Greening, the FDNY, and all the experts who said there was molten steel at the WTC all LIARS?

But you believe NIST when they say they found no reports of the Molten Steel?

Got it.



Laughing

_________________
"Someday a real rain will come and wash all this scum off the streets." ~Travis Bickle
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Grumpy



Joined: 05 Sep 2007
Posts: 876
Location: NC USA

PostPosted: Fri Sep 07, 2007 8:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

stallion4

Quote:
NIST was funded some 20 mil for their bogus report on the WTC and they couldn't find one report of molten steel???


Actually, NIST went through a lot more of the process of investigating those reports than I did in my last post, NIST didn't find any VALID, CONFIRMED reports of melted steel, just hearsay, hyperboly and the erronious reports of amateurs, no melted steel.

I'll take their electron microscopes and calibrated spectrometers over the exageration of non-scientists any day.

Quote:
Rats abandoning their sinking ship???

Aug. 21, 2007:
James Quintiere, Ph.D., former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division, called for an independent review of the World Trade Center Twin Tower collapse investigation. "I wish that there would be a peer review of this," he said, referring to the NIST investigation. "I think all the records that NIST has assembled should be archived. I would really like to see someone else take a look at what they've done; both structurally and from a fire point of view. ... I think the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable."

Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation
http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_alan_mil_070820_former_chief_of_nist.htm


Resorting to half quotes and misdirection to make a point???

Here's the whole story.

Quote:

Although Dr. Quintiere was strongly critical of NIST's conclusions and its investigatory process, he made it clear he was not a supporter of theories that the Twin Towers were brought down by pre-planted explosives. "If you go to World Trade Center One, nine minutes before its collapse, there was a line of smoke that puffed out. This is one of the basis of the `conspiracy theories' that says the smoke puffing out all around the building is due to somebody setting off an explosive charge. Well, I think, more likely, it's one of the floors falling down."

Dr. Quintiere summarized the NIST conclusion about the cause of the collapses of the Twin Towers. "It says that the core columns, uninsulated due to the fact that the aircraft stripped off that insulation; they softened in the heat of the fire and shortened and that led to the collapse. They pulled in the external columns and it caused it to buckle. They went on further to say that there would be no collapse if the insulation remained in place."

Dr. Quintiere then presented his and his students' research that contradicts the NIST report and points to a different cause for the collapses; the application of insufficient fire-proofing insulation on the truss rods in the Twin Towers. "I suggest that there's an equally justifiable theory and that's the trusses fail as they are heated by the fire with the insulation intact. These are two different conclusions and the accountability for each is dramatically different," he said.

Dr. Quintiere's presentation at the World Fire Safety Conference echoed his earlier statement to the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Science, on October 26, 2005, during a hearing on "The Investigation of the World Trade Center Collapse: Findings, Recommendations, and Next Steps", at which he stated:

"In my opinion, the WTC investigation by NIST falls short of expectations by not definitively finding cause, by not sufficiently linking recommendations of specificity to cause, by not fully invoking all of their authority to seek facts in the investigation, and by the guidance of government lawyers to deter rather than develop fact finding.

"I have over 35 years of fire research in my experience. I worked in the fire program at NIST for 19 years, leaving as a division chief. I have been at the University of Maryland since. I am a founding member and past-Chair of the International Association for Fire Safety Science-the principal world forum for fire research. ...

"All of these have been submitted to NIST, but never acknowledged or answered. I will list some of these.

1. Why is not the design process of assigning fire protection to the WTC towers fully called out for fault? ...

2. Why were not alternative collapse hypotheses investigated and discussed as NIST had stated repeatedly that they would do? ...

3. Spoliation of a fire scene is a basis for destroying a legal case in an investigation. Most of the steel was discarded, although the key elements of the core steel were demographically labeled. A careful reading of the NIST report shows that they have no evidence that the temperatures they predict as necessary for failure are corroborated by findings of the little steel debris they have. Why hasn't NIST declared that this spoliation of the steel was a gross error?

4. NIST used computer models that they said have never been used in such an application before and are the state of the art. For this they should be commended for their skill. But the validation of these modeling results is in question. Others have computed aspects with different conclusions on the cause mechanism of the collapse. Moreover, it is common in fire investigation to compute a time-line and compare it to known events. NIST has not done that.

5. Testing by NIST has been inconclusive. Although they have done fire tests of the scale of several work stations, a replicate test of at least & [sic] of a WTC floor would have been of considerable value. Why was this not done? ...

6. The critical collapse of WTC 7 is relegated to a secondary role, as its findings will not be complete for yet another year. It was clear at the last NIST Advisory Panel meeting in September [2005] that this date may not be realistic, as NIST has not demonstrated progress here. Why has NIST dragged on this important investigation?"


The full text of Dr. Quintiere's statement to the Science Committee can be found at http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/science/hsy24133.000/hsy24133_0f.ht...

Posting only select bits of the good DRs remarks in order to leave the false impression that he is supporting a conspiracy theory is kind of a dishonest tactic, don't you think. I happen to agree somewhat with the DR's points. Far from supporting you, he is still on the side of logic and reason.

Grumpy Cool

_________________
Wheel yourself out in the streets and demand the truth from these dumbshits.
O dear, taken to drinking and swallowing the pain tablets together eh Grumpy? aAzzAa
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> 9/11 HardCorps Specifics Investigation All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next
Page 4 of 7

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Theme xand created by spleen.