The 9/11 Forum

Now that all of the Final Reports on the collapse of Buildings 1, 2 & 7 at the World Trade Center in NYC on September 11th 2001 have been issued, is it safe to say that the NIST investigation of 9/11 is really over?

I believe that NIST thinks it is; and the way NIST recently presented its "Final" Report on WTC 7 as something of a fait accompli tends to support this proposition.

But I have to wonder why NIST's questionable "Final" reports should be the end of the great 9/11 debate, .....surely not because NIST says it is so.

Perhaps, on the contrary, we should thank NIST for its numerous studies of the 9/11 catastrophe and say:

"This is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.

Is it really over?

Well for the NIST it is.

My only shock is that they only gave people 3 weeks to respond to the preliminary reports. Is that normal? I thought they would have given people more time considering it's 7 years of research we were supposedly looking at?

If anyone was expecting anything other than a fire induced collapse theory from them, then they are not living in the real world and do no understand that politics could never allow any deviation from that theory.

It was all too predictable after seeing the shenanigans being exposed with their previous reports.

I remember you stated that Politics as no place in science....and I couldn't agree with you more.

That is why we should never treat the NIST reports as science, it is tainted by politics.

Stundie:

I think we have to accept that NIST, as it is currently configured, is an entity designed to "serve and protect" its masters - the American construction industry.

NIST is simply being what it was re-created to be a few years back, a business - not a research institute - when it ceased being the NBS.

This is too bad because the old NBS (National Bureau of Standards) was something completely different: an internationally respected, world-class science-based "standards" organization that was much less constrained to serve any political masters.

However, NIST is not the only organization taken over by "big business". It's happened to our universities too.......

Simplest solution is to ask a recognized organisation to re-do and confirm the structural damage analysis done by NIST of WTC7.

I have tried to do it ... but the WTC7 structure will not collapse in my model!! OK, I just start with an intact model and then I include only one, very serious local failure, column 79 between floors 11/13 is completely removed (not just deformed, buckled) ... and nothing serious happens. The 6800 tons carried by column 79 is simply redistributed to adjacent columns where stresses increase from <30% to < 37.5% yield stress. http://heiwaco.tripod.com/nist7.htm I cannot see that a local failure in column 79 will produce any serious failures elsewhere, e.g. in adjacent columns.

As the NIST database is in electronic format it should be quite easy to verify how they managed to produce the starting, intact model, then how they input the first, initial failure (column 79?) - re-analyse - and then the other 1000's failures and 1000's re-analysises.

Each failure requires energy and it has to be calculated/added up and you have to explain where it comes from, etc, etc.

Dr. G wrote:Now that all of the Final Reports on the collapse of Buildings 1, 2 & 7 at the World Trade Center in NYC on September 11th 2001 have been issued, is it safe to say that the NIST investigation of 9/11 is really over?

I believe that NIST thinks it is; and the way NIST recently presented its "Final" Report on WTC 7 as something of a fait accompli tends to support this proposition.

But I have to wonder why NIST's questionable "Final" reports should be the end of the great 9/11 debate, .....surely not because NIST says it is so.

Perhaps, on the contrary, we should thank NIST for its numerous studies of the 9/11 catastrophe and say:

"This is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.

Dr. G wrote:Stundie:

I think we have to accept that NIST, as it is currently configured, is an entity designed to "serve and protect" its masters - the American construction industry.

NIST is simply being what it was re-created to be a few years back, a business - not a research institute - when it ceased being the NBS.

This is too bad because the old NBS (National Bureau of Standards) was something completely different: an internationally respected, world-class science-based "standards" organization that was much less constrained to serve any political masters.

However, NIST is not the only organization taken over by "big business". It's happened to our universities too.......

That was written by Dr G in 2008.

It is now 2012 and I would say we are at the end of the middle. Or just perhaps at the very beginning of the end, or...

But we've certainly established there is no middle or a possibility of any end without independent research.

Future generations were left with nothing but a void and the middle finger extended. To some, that is "good enough".

Not to me.