It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Times LDEO collapse seismogram of WTC-7, compared to the by NIST time-stamped Cianca 9/11 photo

page: 25
91
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 23 2016 @ 12:57 AM
link   
neutronflux, from my first post in this same thread :

files.abovetopsecret.com...
10 nm/s instead of 100 nm/s Collapse WTC 2S (see seismogram nr 5 in O.P.)
nr 15.


files.abovetopsecret.com...
10 nm/s instead of 100 nm/s Collapse WTC 1N 9see seismogram nr 6 in O.P.)
nr 16.


files.abovetopsecret.com...
10 nm/s Clean Collapse Seismogram WTC 7
nr 17.


files.abovetopsecret.com...
WTC 7 seismogram with short remarks
nr 18.


As you now at last, after the masking operation by NIST, can see, the maximum amplitude of all three pre-collapse events are about the same, indicating the planners didn't take any risk at WTC-7, a 47 floors high building, while the Twin Towers were 110 floors high.




posted on Dec, 23 2016 @ 01:00 AM
link   
a reply to: LaBTop

What you need to first answer to are these five factors.

One, a 900 pound TNT equivalent bomb from the 1993 WTC did not produce any measurable seismic activity at the LDEO sites.

Two, could the witnessed collapse speed occur with just the use of one bomb.

Three, no recorded audio sound of the detonation of demolitions. The cutting force of a bomb is from the creation of a pressure wave that also creates sound. Greater the pressure wave, greater the cutting force, greater the sound.

Four, please cite the scale of your claimed seismic activity. Is it above background activity and instrument noise.

Five, what type of waves created the claimed seismic activity.



posted on Dec, 23 2016 @ 01:31 AM
link   
a reply to: LaBTop

Also, it was stated the collapse of building WTC 7 was a gradual build up. You are taking the data, scaling, and wave type out of context. No proof of a single seismic spike as a result of a bomb.

Simply put, there is no seismic data from the detonation of an explosive device. This is backed by no sound of explosives. Backed by no physical evidence of steel worked on by demolitions or prepared for CD.

Finally, in the false conspiracists narrative, could the detonation of one bomb produce the witnessed collapse speed?



posted on Dec, 23 2016 @ 02:50 AM
link   
a reply to: LaBTop

If there was seismic activity caused by a bomb, there would also be corresponding atmospheric waves.



posted on Dec, 23 2016 @ 07:07 AM
link   
One -- The 1993 WTC truck bomb instigated no sufficiently above-background seismic waves, to the bedrock under the parking basement where that truck was parked near one column, since that truck stood on 4 rubber air-filled tires, and had 4 sets of suspension coils.
Said LDEO's Kim and Lerner-Lam and other seismologists at the time, and later on.

Two -- Why do you think they used one bomb only?
Review the Charles Ewing Smith WTC-7 officially released video with that deep explosion sound in it, review then also the Ashley Banfield officially released WTC-7 video with its multiple explosions sounds recorded in it, both on top of page two, here in my "WTC-7 Mysteries FINALLY solved" thread.
There are many more multiple explosion sounds videos in my page one there, by the way.
"911Eyewitness" comes to mind, filmed from a Pier on the Hudson, 1.5 km away.
I posted also the seismogram of a Texas gas pipeline explosion, it detonated in 3 stages separated within one to two seconds, and that seismogram looks eerily the same as the WTC-7 one. Just as the Pakistani atomic bomb explosion registered on seismographs in India, that I posted also in this and my "WTC-7 Mysteries FINALLY solved" thread.
A series of cutter charges going off at the same instant is not registered 34 km further north as one distinct spike, as you seem to think. For that to happen, the seismograph should have to stand inside the building's basement, and still there would be minor pre- and after spikes recorded because of the minor delay and back-shatter of the downwards traveling noise inside the 47 steel columns at a speed of 5950 m/s.

Three -- Pertinent false statement. I posted numerous videos with the sounds of the displacement charges going off that pushed the already cutter-charged cut core columns aside, which events instigated the global collapses by the shear weight of the top tower floors pushing those displaced core columns then suddenly downwards. Some of those already cut core columns at one side were already pushed slowly downwards after the pre-cutting over a period of about twenty minutes, causing the composite floors that were still firmly connected to these outer-core but also to the perimeter columns, to sink a few meters down with them and thus pulling that line of perimeter outer columns slowly over a meter inwards, before the final column-pushing charges were fired. And those are clearly to be heard in the few videos I posted already in the first pages of this thread, and the first three pages of my "WTC-7 Mysteries FINALLY solved" thread.
The expected loud sound of a cutter charge going off against a core steel column is downright disappointing for pro-official story believers, especially when they went off 300 meters high up, in a still firmly closed-off office and elevators environment, all windows on those floors still intact and all separation walls intact. Ask the professionals, I did and posted a long time ago already about it. They described it as a crackling sound.
Any leftover sound waves would have propagated in a disc shaped form, spreading-out from the intact windows, thus far above the nearby listening spectators.
That's why we hear in the 911Eyewitness video recorded 1500 meters away, from the front end of a Jersey Pier at the other side of the Hudson River, all those deep explosion sounds, but did the equipment of reporters situated closely around the Twin Towers not record these many explicit deep sounds, they were simply too near and those sounds went far "over their heads". Thermobaric cutter charges do deliver such deep explosion sounds.
Also there was a near constant deafening noise from police and firefighter cars sirens driving around. In retrospect it seems overdone to keep using those sirens so massively more than an hour after plane impacts. Was there perhaps an order given to keep using those sirens so abundantly, or is this standard procedure in New York because of possible lawsuits following driven-over bystanders?

Four -- You can easily see the background seismic activity at the 0 seconds positions in my above posted seismograms, which were by the way recorded 34 km away from Manhattan, thus loosing a lot of energy during the travel through the upper crust. And still it shows significant energy.
By the way, it's curious, that the up to a year earlier existing seismographs situated in northern Manhattan, installed after the 1993 WTC bombing, were removed, without good explanation. When these ones would have been still there, then their seismograms would have registered quite a lot more energy...
By the way, it seems you didn't had much time (3 min) to study my recent above posts, otherwise you wouldn't ask me this point four. Its answer is right in front of your eyes up there.

Five -- For that precise answer, you should have read Dr. Andre Rousseau ( a long lifetime, well-known seismologist) his Vol 34 PDF-publication from November 2012, which link I have littered through all my threads, by the way also in this one already several times. Well, here it is, again :
www.journalof911studies.com...

Do I really have to answer the rest of your remarks in those 2 later posts of yours?
I think the answers are firmly laid out above and in my opening posts.



posted on Dec, 23 2016 @ 07:17 PM
link   
a reply to: LaBTop


The biggest proof of your pseudoscience, NO recorded audio and atmospheric pressure waves from your false one big bomb. No steel worked on, cut by, nor prep for demolitions.


One, why would it mater if the van was on wheels. The seismic activity would be due to the pressure waves alone acting on the structure, ground, and foundation. Your on wheels is pseudoscience.

Two, your seismic interpretation is that. Not even backed by Conspiracist Dr. Wood. I think even debunked by Wood. There is no proof of a seismic spike due to a bomb. No physical evidence of Bombs. An out right out falsehood.

There, rumbles and bangs are not explosions. Explosives using a pressure wave to cut steel and concrete would produce a 140 db sound that is very distinct and easily isoladed using sound filtering. There is no audio of demolitions. If there was, Gauge and Jones would be rubbing everyone's nose in the evidence. That alone is testament to your false narratives.

Four, If bush planned 9/11, what does anything occurring before his presidency have to do with anything.

Five, completely ignoring the type of seismic waves. Waves that are not exclusive to collapse or demolitions. There is no seismic activity that can only be attributed to demolitions. However, no accompanying atmosphere waves that would be part of the detonation of a bomb.

Six, your dear doctor's work is debunked by Wood, and ignored by Gauge and Jones. If the work was credible, the movement would be rubber everyone's nose in it. Seems in large ignored, and not embraced by any large group.

Seven, your seismic and sound evidence is so week and toxic it didn't even get into this BS speculative article. (The molten metal made it into the article. There is even no credible proof of what the metal was.)


Title, On the Physics of High Rise Building Collapse. (Addressing WTC 1, 2, and 7 evidence) from 2016.

By, Steven Jones, Robert Korol, Anthony Szamboti and Ted Walter

www.europhysicsnews.org...

Seems your doctor is even ignored by the movement...
edit on 23-12-2016 by neutronflux because: Fixed fingers fumbles

edit on 23-12-2016 by neutronflux because: Added year to title



posted on Dec, 23 2016 @ 07:19 PM
link   
a reply to: LaBTop

Lets talk about the cutting charges. Please address where and how the cut of your false narrative was made?

Horizontal on vertical columns for example? By thermite?



posted on Dec, 23 2016 @ 09:42 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux


Six, your dear doctor's work is debunked by Wood, and ignored by Gauge and Jones. If the work was credible, the movement would be rubber everyone's nose in it. Seems in large ignored, and not embraced by any large group.


Debunked by Judy Wood, now that is a laugh.

Judy Wood was a class act in her pseudoscience that was seriously debunked many years ago, yet you still put her on a pedestal, as if this clown has some credibility.

Keep pushing the OS narratives, you know, the OS narratives of 911, that Fake properganda News pushes everyday.


Five, completely ignoring the type of seismic waves. Waves that are not exclusive to collapse or demolitions.


The charts that LaBTop presented tells you exactly what were the different sound waves are, any 10 year old can see that.
If anyone is ignoring anything you are demonstrating that yourself.

Carry on, this is quite entertaining.



posted on Dec, 23 2016 @ 10:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

Show where Gauge, Jones, or any other major groups of conspiracists push audio of the detonation of demolitions. Especially in an age were audio is easily filtered and specific frequencies isolated.


The only thing sadly comical is no proof the cited seismic records holds any wave activity exclusive to demolitions. Without supporting atmosphere waves that could be produced by a bomb whose seismic activity could be recorded 30 miles away, not referencing specific wave types, LabTop interpretation is senseless.
edit on 23-12-2016 by neutronflux because: Corrected context



posted on Dec, 23 2016 @ 10:50 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux


Show where Gauge, Jones, or any other major groups of conspiracists push audio of the detonation of demolitions.


Moving the goal post again and deflecting the real issue in the OP.


The only thing sadly comical is no proof the cited seismic records holds any wave activity exclusive to demolitions.


That is your "opinion" and you have absulutly no evidence to support your narrative.

Prove that the simic data that LaBTop presented is false, and remember your "opinion" are not the facts here.

Do you even know how to debate?



posted on Dec, 23 2016 @ 11:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

Not my opinion, it's a testament to no credible seismic activity due to CD.

The facts,

One, no physical evidence of demolitions shrapnel.

Two, no fragments of charges, blasting caps, nor remains of a detonation system.

Three, how would an elaborate system of bombs and thermite maintain its system integrity and sophisticated timing scheme through extensive fires and building damage.

Four, no steel worked on by demolitions or thermite.

Five, no evidence steel and concrete prepared for CD.

Six, no 140 db sound of detonation that would be easily filtered and isolated from audio.

Seven, no corresponding atmospheric blast waves that should accompany a bomb that could create seismic activity at LDEO 26 miles away.

Eight, no sound of explosions that corresponds to a blast that could create measurable seismic activity 26 miles away.

Nine, no calculations on the size of an explosive that could create the implied seismic spike to create recordable seismic activity 26 miles away. The 1993 WTC 900 pound TNT equivalent bombing produced no measurable seismic activity at LDEO.

Ten, no proof the seismic data was only noise from the gradual increase in seismic activity while WTC 7 was going under structural failure that lead to its collapse.

11, LDEO seismologists and other experts quite clear in their statements their is no seismic evidence of demolitions.

12, LabTops seismic data seems fictitiously zoomed in to exaggerate seismic activity.

13, Labtop not very specific on the seismic wave types.

14, there is no wave types and seismic activity that would exclusive to detonation of explosives recorded at LDEO. All captured wave types are normal to a building collapse.

15, the seismic data is so lacking the major conspiracy groups do not cite it as evidence. Dr Wood flat out states their is no seismic proof of CD.



posted on Dec, 23 2016 @ 11:36 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

Bottom line, seismic proof of CD is only LabTop's interpolation and opinion with no supporting evidence. With an overwhelming majority of seismologists and experts on the record stating there is no seismic proof of CD. Even more damaging, major personalities in the conspiracy movement do not embrace the seismic proof of CD.



posted on Dec, 24 2016 @ 10:53 PM
link   
a reply to: neutronflux


One, no physical evidence of demolitions shrapnel.


Because no one was looking for evidence of shrapnel, Fact is it doesnt mean none were there.


Two, no fragments of charges, blasting caps, nor remains of a detonation system.


Because no one was looking for blasting caps nor remains of detonation system, fact is, it doesnt mean none were in the rubble.

Fact, no one was looking for any evidence of any kind of demolition.


Three, how would an elaborate system of bombs and thermite maintain its system integrity and sophisticated timing scheme through extensive fires and building damage.


Who said it was "elaborate"? You?


Four, no steel worked on by demolitions or thermite.


Fact, this is your "opinion" not a proven fact.


Five, no evidence steel and concrete prepared for CD.


Not a proven fact. This is your "opinion".


Six, no 140 db sound of detonation that would be easily filtered and isolated from audio.


Your "opinion" just because you don't hear them doesnt mean they are not there.


Seven, no corresponding atmospheric blast waves that should accompany a bomb that could create seismic activity at LDEO 26 miles away.


Fact is, blast waves were recorded by seismic stations and that evidence has been presented to you repeatedly.


Eight, no sound of explosions that corresponds to a blast that could create measurable seismic activity 26 miles away.


False again, read the seismic charts that have been provided to you many times. These charts are not going away you know.


Nine, no calculations on the size of an explosive that could create the implied seismic spike to create recordable seismic activity 26 miles away. The 1993 WTC 900 pound TNT equivalent bombing produced no measurable seismic activity at LDEO.


I am not sure if the true calculation were done or not, if it was not done, it doesnt prove your "opinion" to the 1993 bombing seismic activity. So again you are just giving your "opinion".


Ten, no proof the seismic data was only noise from the gradual increase in seismic activity while WTC 7 was going under structural failure that lead to its collapse.


Perhaps not, however it doesnt mean there was no seismic activity going on during structural failure, your "opinion" is no proof, just because you make the claim, doesnt mean it's not in the seismic data.

If there was a coverup and plenty of circumstantial evidence supports it, then you are not privy to that information.


11, LDEO seismologists and other experts quite clear in their statements their is no seismic evidence of demolitions.


Those experts you speak about: Most are on the government payroll, or have government contracts, fact is these people are very bias in their "opinions" and are not going to rock the boat so to speak.

Fact is, many outside experts who have no ties with our government do not support our government pseudoscience, or their properganda of 911. Yet you left that out of your "opinion".


12, LabTops seismic data seems fictitiously zoomed in to exaggerate seismic activity.


Again that is your "opinion" and you have not demonstrated that LaBTop seismic data is fictitious.

"Opinions" are not the facts here.


13, Labtop not very specific on the seismic wave types.



On the contrary he did, the fact is you keep demonstrating that you have ignored it


14, there is no wave types and seismic activity that would exclusive to detonation of explosives recorded at LDEO. All captured wave types are normal to a building collapse.


Now you are being completely dishonest here. The hard cold facts are the WTC seismic data has been compared to other buildings that were professionally demolished by use of demolition and were found to be very similar. Deny this fact is not helping your argument.


15, the seismic data is so lacking the major conspiracy groups do not cite it as evidence. Dr Wood flat out states their is no seismic proof of CD.


You do not speak for the conspiracy group. Again another one of your "opinions" and as far as for the biggest hoaxer of the 911 truth movement Dr Wood was debunked many years ago as a fraud and a snake oil salesman.

The fact is, and you know this, Dr Wood has no credibility in anything regarding 911, or any movement period.


Bottom line, seismic proof of CD is only LabTop's interpolation and opinion with no supporting evidence.


The real bottom line is LaBTop does show evidence of explosive waves in the seismic data and was able to prove how NIST fudged the timing of the seismic data to fit their pseudoscience.

You have demonstrated repeatedly of ignoring the evidence in this thread, and continuing parroting the OS narratives.


With an overwhelming majority of seismologists and experts on the record stating there is no seismic proof of CD.


Your "opinion". You word usage of "overwhelming majority" is your "opinion" and sadly not a fact.


Even more damaging, major personalities in the conspiracy movement do not embrace the seismic proof of CD.


Prove it?

The fact is, the only way one can support the os narratives of 911, is to ignore all the contradiction credibal evidence.














edit on 24-12-2016 by Informer1958 because: (no reason given)

edit on 24-12-2016 by Informer1958 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 24 2016 @ 11:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

Oh gosh infomer. The not looking for evidence again. It's been ran through thread after thread. They hand searched for evidence and remains as needed at the pile. Explosives experts, engineers, law enforcement, firefighters were directing the removal of debris and studying and cataloging the entire time.

Key pieces of steel were saved.

The debris segregated and sent to lay down sites by catagory.

The smallest debris was searched by hand by stationed law enforcement working conveyor belts. The recovered remains number over 19,000 and lead to over 1000 victims being identified. The search also was to find evidence and personal effects.

The search for remains, evidence, and personal effects is well documented by video, personal accounts, news stories.

The testament to its efforts is the 19,000 remains, personal effects, and evidence relating to the highjackers recovered.

The evidence and documentation of the recover efforts has been provided over and over again in numerous ATS threads. In threads you were part of.

It's sad conspiracists act like it's the first time every time on the same arguments after 15 years, they do not do real research, and show how dogmatic conspiracists are in beliefs, and shows they are not committed to truth.



posted on Dec, 24 2016 @ 11:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

Sad conspiracists think preparing a CD is like a Hollywood movie and only takes an hour.

Any CD system is eloborate and sophisticated.

It takes engineers studying building plans and making key decisions on the right points and correct strength for CD. Making key decisions on firing order and timing.

It takes hundreds of man hours, drilling, and removal of segments of the building to ensure proper placement of charges.

Blasting caps and knots of det cord can blow off fingers from a static charge or induced current if a circuit is accidental closed. Or cause an even greater catastrophe.

It takes tens of charges and hundreds of pounds of demolitions that are hand placed.

The timing and ignition system, specially in the false narrative of using slow and inconsistent burning thermite, has to be perfectly timed.

The ignition system probably has numerous redundant components and wiring to boot.

To doubt any CD is elaborate and sophisticated, and to think a CD system would keep its required configuration and reliability to properly operate after extensive building damage and hours of wide spread fires, is shear ignorance.


And it's documented, even in the best and most perfect of conditions, CDs still go horribly wrong.


edit on 24-12-2016 by neutronflux because: Added use thermite

edit on 25-12-2016 by neutronflux because: Added last paragraph



posted on Dec, 25 2016 @ 12:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958

Please tell how P waves, S waves, and Reyleigh waves would be normally represented in a purely blasting event. How they would be similar and different from a building collapse equivalent to tons of TNT setting off?

How many different channels of seismic activity was recorded at LDEO during 9/11.

Conspiracists zooming into only one channel to the point scaling is out of context to produce a "spike" from the middle of a building collapse that slowly grew in seismic activity to total failure is pseudoscience.

The one channel should have complementary, mirrored, and bleed over to a range of seismic channels and different motion sensors.

The "spike" not reflected in different LDEO seismic channels, no proof of atmospheric waves from a pressure wave, no credible sound of detonation back those who are on record stating there is no seismic activity due to CD. The ones you call liars. And proves Labtop, if the spike was even real, has no proof the alleged seismic activity is exclusive to a bomb.
edit on 25-12-2016 by neutronflux because: Fixed finger fumbles



posted on Dec, 25 2016 @ 08:32 PM
link   
Anyone still interested in reading about the real reasons why those three towers collapsed on 9/11/2001, should start reading from the top of page 9 from Dr Rousseau's seismic WTC-publication.
That's all you need to know after all these massive seismic misconceptions posted by member neutronflux. He shows not to be able to read texts which go against his personal belief systems.
It's after all this time spend since 9/11, a well known disability shown among official story believers.

I also wonder if he even tried to read and understand what has been explained in his own link. Which I am grateful to him for providing it, I did not know about that one yet.
He clearly was only looking for the word "seismic" in his Google search, to see if there are publications by non-OS believing conspiracy theorists, that do include seismic evidence.
That word comes up one time in that publication, without further explanation.
Of course, since they are architects and engineers, not seismologists like Dr. Rousseau.

It's a compressed short explanation by the authors, of the ridiculous use of totally wrong data by Bazant et al, over the last 14 years, and the shameless leaning on those fraudulent publications by NIST during all those years.
And the use by NIST itself of fraudulent software explanations for the collapse mechanism of WTC-7 for only its first 2 seconds of global collapse. We still are not provided with the data they used for their software simulations, that denial was based solely on a political explanation by the NIST's directors. It would jeopardize "public safety" if they published those data, they say. This is about the clearest form of scientific dishonesty by NIST they could come up with.

While the intention of NIST its reporting was to restore public safety and confidence in high rise buildings, in the very first place.
That was the main reason NIST got that contract for, to investigate the mechanisms of those three WTC collapses. So measures could be taken to prevent future steel building global collapses.

edit on 25/12/16 by LaBTop because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 25 2016 @ 09:26 PM
link   
LOTS and LOTS of videos about WTC explosions on page 2 of the "WTC-7 Mysteries FINALLY Solved" thread, posted by me, which neutronflux seemed to have missed completely, so here it is :
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Damn.!
_BoneZ_ also gave up. I understand, its tough to keep repeating all that logic against illogical people who have too many family members in a strangely politically motivated, too aggressive military system, or are part of it :

_BoneZ_ : Gone. Away from the endless dump of hoaxes. Tabloid garbage. And political trolling.

This ATS 9/11 forum is slowly loosing its core experts.
Leaving this forum, so it will get overrun by "the silent majority", who are notorious for making too many bad choices, and who will fill up this once great place with their special form of twisted reality.
What a pity.

edit on 25/12/16 by LaBTop because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 25 2016 @ 10:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: LaBTop
That's all you need to know after all these massive seismic misconceptions posted by member neutronflux. He shows not to be able to read texts which go against his personal belief systems.
It's after all this time spend since 9/11, a well known disability shown among official story believers.



The first and foremost items you need to address to prove your case.


Please tell how P waves, S waves, and Reyleigh waves would be normally represented in a purely blasting event. How they would be similar and different from a building collapse equivalent to tons of TNT setting off?

How many different channels of seismic activity was recorded at LDEO during 9/11.

Conspiracists zooming into only one channel to the point scaling is out of context to produce a "spike" from the middle of a building collapse that slowly grew in seismic activity to total failure is pseudoscience.

The one channel should have complementary, mirrored, and bleed over to a range of seismic channels and different motion sensors.

The "spike" not reflected in different LDEO seismic channels, no proof of atmospheric waves from a pressure wave, no credible sound of detonation back those who are on record stating there is no seismic activity due to CD. The ones you call liars. And proves Labtop, if the spike was even real, has no proof the alleged seismic activity is exclusive to a bomb.

Why the major players Richard Gauge and Steven Jones take no stakes in using seismic evidence. Seems like Jones whould want to included and cite your doctors work in his published works on WTC CD?

Or why DR. Wood totally dismisses seismic activity as proof of CD.

edit on 25-12-2016 by neutronflux because: Fixed formatting



posted on Dec, 25 2016 @ 11:03 PM
link   
Thoughts from a Former 14 year long NIST Employee :
www.ae911truth.org...


Thoughts from a Former NIST Employee.

I was a member of the NIST technical staff during the period 1997-2011. I initially joined the High Performance Systems and Services Division and later became a member of what was, at the time, the Mathematical and Computational Sciences Division of the Information Technology Laboratory. My fellow NIST employees were among the finest and most intelligent people with whom I have ever worked.
I did not contribute to the NIST WTC investigation or reports. But in August of this year, I began to read some of those reports. As I then watched several documentaries challenging the findings of the NIST investigation, I quickly became furious. First, I was furious with myself.
How could I have worked at NIST all those years and not have noticed this before? Second, I was furious with NIST. The NIST I knew was intellectually open, non-defensive, and willing to consider competing explanations. The more I investigated, the more apparent it became that NIST had reached a predetermined conclusion by ignoring, dismissing, and denying the evidence.
Among the most egregious examples is the explanation for the collapse of WTC 7 as an elaborate sequence of unlikely events culminating in the almost symmetrical total collapse of a steel-frame building into its own footprint at free-fall acceleration.
I could list all the reasons why the NIST WTC reports don't add up, but others have already done so in extensive detail and there is little that I could add.
What I can do, however, is share some thoughts based on common sense and experience from my fourteen years at NIST.
First, if NIST truly believes in the veracity of its WTC investigation, then it should openly share all evidence, data, models, computations, and other relevant information unless specific and compelling reasons are otherwise provided. For example, would the release
of all files and calculations associated with the ANSYS collapse initiation model jeopardize public safety to an extent that outweighs the competing need for accountability?
Second, in its reports, NIST makes a great show of details leading to collapse initiation and then stops short just when it becomes interesting.
The remainder of the explanation is a perfunctory statement that total collapse is inevitable and obvious.
It is easy to see through this tactic as avoidance of inconvenient evidence. In response to any challenges, NIST has provided curt explanations from its Public Affairs Office.
There were many contributors to the NIST WTC investigation: Why not let them openly answer questions in their own voice with the depth of knowledge and level of detail that follows from the nuts and bolts of their research?
Lastly, awareness is growing of the disconnect between the NIST WTC reports and logical reasoning.
The level of interest in the "15 years later" article is a good example.
Due to the nature of communication in today's world, that awareness may increase approximately exponentially. Why not NIST blow the whistle on itself now while there is still time?
Tr u t h i s w h e r e o u r h e a l i n g l i e s .

Peter Michael Ketcham, USA



new topics

top topics



 
91
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join