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.
Originally posted by aelphaeis_mangarae
Clearly the reason they won't debate any of us is they know they are wrong.
Originally posted by Slap Nuts
1. If you wrote a 20,000 page report... Wouldn't you jump at the chance to defend and answer questions regarding said report?
Originally posted by St Udio
? are you suggesting that NIST should have to panel an ongoing debate team
& periodically have open ended Q&As about the next theory that gains public
attention.
The budget for this extra layer of information/entertainment would have to
be passed along to the taxpayers.
Originally posted by Slap Nuts
[I am suggesting that ONE Q&A Session with non-government officials or ONE debate IN FIVE YEARS is not a lot to ask for.
The report concludes with a list of 30 recommendations for action in the areas of increased structural integrity, enhanced fire endurance of structures, new methods for fire resistant design of structures, enhanced active fire protection, improved building evacuation, improved emergency response, improved procedures and practices, and education and training. link
Originally posted by MrPenny
... It is a shame the report can't be debated or publicly questioned.
Originally posted by Slap Nuts
4) So now we live under a FASCIST regime and it is OK?
Where is the f****** outrage?
Originally posted by HowardRoark
I'll tell you what, Why don't you start the debate right here. Please provide information of all of the strucutral engineers that support the demo theory.
When you have done that, then maybe NIST will listen.
Originally posted by HowardRoark
Structural engineering is a highly developed field. Structural engineers all over the world study buildings. They also study structural failures to learn from past mistakes. What does a mechanical engineer who specialized in moiré interferometry know about designing a building?
Originally posted by HowardRoark
How come no structural engineers have come forth stating that they believe that the collapses were the results of a controlled demo?
Originally posted by Slap Nuts
Originally posted by HowardRoark
How come no structural engineers have come forth stating that they believe that the collapses were the results of a controlled demo?
You are taking this off topic...
Why won't the NIST come forth and discuss their findings in a public forum?
Originally posted by imbalanced
Its obvious that the data is BS...(at least I think)
Originally posted by vor75
In any event, is there some documentation that NIST has refused some sort of a formal request?
[edit on 6-7-2006 by vor75]