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 dariousgAs you have stated, it is okay for us to question. You see, the biggest complaint that many have is that they 'estimated' and used the 'available' evidence. The problem is, the STEEL should have been available. That steel should NOT have been moved anywhere other than a massive holding area for complete and thorough testing.
It should never have been destroyed. It's evidence that could have provided MUCH of the data that NIST had to estimate.
It's a tough situation to be in. I'm pretty sick of the arguing. Problem is, we want an independent investigation but we will never be able to investigate the evidence because it was removed and dispearsed and no longer available.
It's actions like that which I find extremely suspicious. Sorry. Did NIST have anything to do with that? Nope. Not blaming them. Just supporting the argument that they GUESSED. Plain and simple.
Can we do better? Sorry, most of us don't have the resources available to us. Nor the time. It simply comes back down to "Trust us, we are your government. We would NOT lie to you." Then they cough and put in, "well, about this." Clear their throats.
You see? Certain elements of this government have been shown to have lied over and over. Why should we then all of a sudden trust them on their 'estimates'?
Originally posted by PplVSNWO
I have not submitted a FOIA request for any information pertaining to the World Trad Center complex.
However, just becuase you are not aware of any denied requests for the information does not mean there weren't requests.
Why else would we have obtained blueprints via whistleblower?
I plan to submit comments to NIST soon.
Originally posted by exponent
Yes, how exactly are you not getting this.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
The really sad thing is you are not getting the point that fire has never brought down a steel buidling before,
but we do have evidence that soemthing else might have brought it down.
Like the testinf that FEMA did
and the fact of the molten metals and stelel in the basement and the debris pile.
Originally posted by exponent
this is because the people who build skyscrapers are intelligent and build them to resist fire for as long as is feasible.
FEMAs tests don't support any sort of conspiracy theory, they show that normal fire temperatures existed.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
So your saying the people that built building 7 were unintelligent and did not build it to resist fire?
Who is talking conspiracy? I am talking facts and evidence that FEMA testing discovered material on the steel that showed higher then normal temperatures.
Do some reserch for a change, you might learn something.
Originally posted by exponent which is why NIST are making recommendations to change them.
Higher than average,
Thanks for the advice, can you suggest some reading I should do?
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Funny, how can NIST make recommendations about building 7 when they did not do any proper investigation or testing?
So what casued the higher temps?
Sure i have a lot of information, pages full and some CDs where would you like to start?
Originally posted by exponent
They seem to think they did, and they are better qualified than you to say so.
Perhaps you can show me your research on what caused the east penthouse of the building to fail first.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Well i do know the building collapsed in on the middle when there was supposed to be so much damage on 1 side , it should have fell to that side we have engeeners and domolition experts who state buidling 7 was a demolition.
Originally posted by Pilgrum
The building did finally fall with a bias toward the damaged side leaving its pile of rubble across the street into the main WTC area,
Originally posted by ULTIMA1Thats funny if you watch all the videos it shows the building collapsing starting with the center of the buidling bowing in and the building falling in on itslef.
Originally posted by exponent
But neither was NIST, so you should at least be able to produce a document as rigorous as theirs.
Originally posted by exponent
We shouldn't, none of the NIST reports have lied to you, and in fact many many non governmental people were involved with both NIST reports.
Originally posted by exponent
Are you saying that the absolute start of the WTC7 collapse occurs in the "centre of the building" and that all videos show this?
Originally posted by tezzajw
Along with ommissions, such as verifiable data from the steel and verifiable data from the internal fires, there are also grammatical errors and typographical errors.
This is not a rigorous document.
The document doesn't lie, it can't, as NIST don't use any definitive words. There's always a deliberate grey area that can be achieved, when the use of words like 'probable' and 'likely' are inserted into concluding statements.
There is nothing authorative or definitive in this report.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Not the start, the start is the top penthouse. But the main collapse of the buidling is from the middle and the building collpases in on itself.
Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Not the start, the start is the top penthouse. But the main collapse of the buidling is from the middle and the building collpases in on itself.
NOT to the side that was damaged.