It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

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

# Basic NIST errors... can they be that stupid?

page: 1
1
share:

posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 04:14 AM
This thread spawned from a post in another thread made by member Disclosed. He's quoting the NIST report in response to ULTIMA1.

Originally posted by Disclosed

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
3. Reports state the majority of the fuel was burned off OUTSIDE the buildings. What was left burned off quickly.

Might check your numbers again, ULTIMA1.
example:
wtc.nist.gov...
Page 85-86.
Total outside tower:10,600 lbs
WTC 2 floor 77: 1,300 lbs
WTC 2 floor 78: 6,200 lbs
WTC 2 floor 79: 11,400 lbs
WTC 2 floor 80: 6,000 lbs
WTC 2 floor 81: 14,400 lbs
WTC 2 floor 82: 10,600 lbs
WTC 2 floor 83: 1,500 lbs
WTC 2 floor 84: 200 lbs
Total fuel weight: 62,000 lbs
Since when is 10,600lbs of fuel a majority over 62,000 lbs?

Here's an exercise. Sum the figures given by NIST, for the quantity of jet fuel that was spread over the floors. What answer do you get? 62,200 pounds... Where does the extra 200 pounds of fuel come from?

How can NIST make such a basic arithmetic error? How can NIST figures be quoted to an accuracy of 200/62000 = 0.3226% ?

I guess you want more, right? Go to the same table and sum the figures that NIST gives for the distribution of airplane wreckage across the floors. I bet your total won't match the total that NIST gives. Try it and see.

What faith can we place in the NIST report, given that there are basic addition errors present in a table with two summed columns of numbers?

posted on Mar, 23 2008 @ 05:12 AM
Simply, none.

Maybe their excuse is some twit at the typing office had a finger removed or whatever.

but wierd nonetheless. I agree we can't put much convidence in this paper, atleast until we get a real independant report about 9/11...

NIST report screams tampering..

1