Can the NIST report withstand a peer review?

No, I doubt very much that the NIST fraud can withstand peer review. After all, it is a political document that advances political goals--deception being the primary goal.

the question should be why do they REFUSE peer review if there is nothing to hide???

"the phenomenon that we saw on 9/11 that brought this particular building down was really thermal expansion, which occurs at lower temperatures."

maybe the official claim that warm steel somehow removed, BEFORE 1.74 seconds, 105 vertical feet of continuous load bearing support columns, 8 floors of truss assemblies with carrier beams, lateral, diagonal, and cross bracing throughout the structure, tens of thousands of bolts and welds, interior partitions, utilities, office contents.....all GONE, either all at once, or the very least, globally and unified AHEAD of the collapse wave for ZERO resistance in the first 1.3 of the 6.5 second collapse of WTC7...as found by the 2005 NIST...

NCSTAR 1A 3.6] "This free fall drop continues for approximately 8 stories, the distance traveled between t=1.75s and t=4.0s...constant, downward acceleration during this time interval. This acceleration was *9.8m/s^2*, equivalent to the acceleration of gravity."

NICSTAR 1A 4.3.4] Global Collapse..."The entire building above the buckled column region moved downward in a single unit, as observed, completing the global collapse"

NCSTAR1A p.39/130
"the damage from the debris from WTC 1 had little effect on initiating the collapse of WTC 7."

I have just been reading an article on this at:

www.globalresearch.ca... 384835

They have done their own work on the collapse of Building 7 and have come to some interesting conclusions.
There areseveral links to pages which give more depth to their findings, such as one:

www.consensus911.org...

speaking about the computer simulations which NIST have done.

I think it may be "enlightening" for those who still hold to the OS.

I think the corrupt nature of the NIST report can be seen by way of the politically incestuous relationships between the men involved. Mr. Bement was appointed by Bush just a month or 2 before the event as head of NIST.

Mr. Bement's boss was Mr. Evans, and Karen Hughes described the relationship between Evans and Bush to be "like brothers".

I am not qualified to just the technical aspects of the report, but according to what I read from people who are qualified to judge that report, it offers nothing but pseudo-science.

No surprise, as the political incest seems obvious. The purpose of the NIST report was to protect the guilty parties and fool the public.

a reply to: Salander

it offers nothing but pseudo-science.

what can one expect when you have an initial 2005 NIST not finding any scientific reason for collapse within the parameters they were given to investigate, [fire and impact damage], and then you have 'others', mess around in the kitchen after the investigation ended, muddling up the soup.....

then stalling for three years to proclaim brand new never before seen science they refuse to prove through science.

and then we have a new Director installed before the NIST reports were finalized.....NIST Director William Jeffrey.

Jeffrey, 45, was nominated by President Bush on May 25, 2005, to succeed Arden Bement, who was appointed director of the National Science Foundation in November of last year. NIST Deputy Director Hratch Semerjian has served as acting director in the interim.

Jeffrey has been involved in federal science and technology programs and policy since 1988. Previous to his appointment as director of NIST he served as senior director for homeland and national security and the assistant director for space and aeronautics at the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) within the Executive Office of the President. Prior to that he was the deputy director for the Advanced Technology Office and chief scientist for the Tactical Technology Office with the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). While at DARPA, Jeffrey developed research programs in communications, computer network security, novel sensor development and space operations.

Prior to joining DARPA, Jeffrey was the assistant deputy for technology at the Defense Airborne Reconnaissance Office, where he supervised sensor development for the Predator and Global Hawk Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and the development of common standards that allow for cross-service and cross-agency transfer of imagery and intelligence products. Jeffrey also spent several years working at the Institute for Defense Analyses performing technical analyses in support of the Department of Defense.

...gee, seems this guy came in real handy for the WTC investigation with his DARPA connections and knowledge of novel sensor development and space operations.....

a reply to: hgfbob

Yes, it is amazing how thoroughly they permeate the system, completely control it. A government within a government sort of thing.

a reply to: Salander

exactly....there is no Republican, there is no Democrat, doesn't matter who is there, the agenda stays the same.

originally posted by: hooper
reply to post by mayabong

 

Is your evidence of explosives "there was a lot of dust"? This is why the NIST, and not you, was engaged to do the report.

Ever seen a rock slide? How about a forest fire? Sandstorm?

So, you want us to believe a gravitational collapse created the dust clouds?
The hell with peer review, let's see if NIST survives the charges of "Dry Labbing."
Say "goodbye" to those $1000 designer ties Newman. Say "hello" to Mr. Trapdoor.

a reply to: psikeyhackr Check mate. Nice post.

If the official claims could stand a peer review, they would have done so.

too bad they can't without showing the LIARS they are.

but how can one prove a BRAND NEW physics phenomenon occurring as the 2008 NIST hypothesis crew CLAIMS, live at their own webcast tech briefing....

"the phenomenon that we saw on 9/11 that brought this particular building down was really thermal expansion, which occurs at lower temperatures."

Shyam Sunder at NIST technical briefing


so, we have ALL taught science saying that mass CONSTANTLY accelerating equal to g. can do NO work to assist in the collapse...meaning the collapse is not causing the collapse...it can't because NONE of the gravitational energy was available to destroy the supporting structures, ALL converted to MOTION!


I guess THIS is where the NEW physics comes in by COMPLETELY removing resistance to ALLOW the global unified CONSTANT acceleration EQUAL to g. found by the earlier initial 2005 NIST scientific investigation...

NCSTAR 1A 3.6] "This free fall drop continues for approximately 8 stories, the distance traveled between t=1.75s and t=4.0s...constant, downward acceleration during this time interval. This acceleration was *9.8m/s^2*, equivalent to the acceleration of gravity."

NICSTAR 1A 4.3.4] Global Collapse..."The entire building above the buckled column region moved downward in a single unit, as observed, completing the global collapse"

NCSTAR1A p.39/130
"the damage from the debris from WTC 1 had little effect on initiating the collapse of WTC 7."

what the 2008 NIST hypothesis crew says is this NEW phenomenon of science REMOVED completely structural mass to ALLOW the global unified constant acceleration....including....105 vertical feet of LOAD BEARING continuous vertical support....
8 floors of truss assemblies with carrier beams...
lateral, cross, and diagonal bracing throughout...
tens of thousands of bolts and welds...
Interior partitions...
office contents...
utilities....

all must DISAPPEAR before the global event of acceleration equal to g. that occurred from 1.75 seconds to 4.0s.

so EVERY video we see of the collapse, when the kink forms, there is NOTHING for 105 vertical feet.

from fire we can't see at the windows.

NCSTAR1A-3.2]"It is likely that much of the burning took place beyond the views of the windows"

WOW!!!....that is some kind a new science!!!!!!

wonder why they refuse peer review of this new science through science?????

"NIST is withholding 68,246 files. These records are currently exempt from disclosure. All input and results files of the ANSYS 16 story and the LS-DYNA 47-story global collapse model that were used to simulate sequential structural failures leading to collapse."

originally posted by: soundstyle
If the official claims could stand a peer review, they would have done so.

too bad they can't without showing the LIARS they are.

but how can one prove a BRAND NEW physics phenomenon occurring as the 2008 NIST hypothesis crew CLAIMS, live at their own webcast tech briefing....

"the phenomenon that we saw on 9/11 that brought this particular building down was really thermal expansion, which occurs at lower temperatures."

Shyam Sunder at NIST technical briefing


so, we have ALL taught science saying that mass CONSTANTLY accelerating equal to g. can do NO work to assist in the collapse...meaning the collapse is not causing the collapse...it can't because NONE of the gravitational energy was available to destroy the supporting structures, ALL converted to MOTION!


I guess THIS is where the NEW physics comes in by COMPLETELY removing resistance to ALLOW the global unified CONSTANT acceleration EQUAL to g. found by the earlier initial 2005 NIST scientific investigation...

NCSTAR 1A 3.6] "This free fall drop continues for approximately 8 stories, the distance traveled between t=1.75s and t=4.0s...constant, downward acceleration during this time interval. This acceleration was *9.8m/s^2*, equivalent to the acceleration of gravity."

NICSTAR 1A 4.3.4] Global Collapse..."The entire building above the buckled column region moved downward in a single unit, as observed, completing the global collapse"

NCSTAR1A p.39/130
"the damage from the debris from WTC 1 had little effect on initiating the collapse of WTC 7."

what the 2008 NIST hypothesis crew says is this NEW phenomenon of science REMOVED completely structural mass to ALLOW the global unified constant acceleration....including....105 vertical feet of LOAD BEARING continuous vertical support....
8 floors of truss assemblies with carrier beams...
lateral, cross, and diagonal bracing throughout...
tens of thousands of bolts and welds...
Interior partitions...
office contents...
utilities....

all must DISAPPEAR before the global event of acceleration equal to g. that occurred from 1.75 seconds to 4.0s.

so EVERY video we see of the collapse, when the kink forms, there is NOTHING for 105 vertical feet.

from fire we can't see at the windows.

NCSTAR1A-3.2]"It is likely that much of the burning took place beyond the views of the windows"

WOW!!!....that is some kind a new science!!!!!!

wonder why they refuse peer review of this new science through science?????

"NIST is withholding 68,246 files. These records are currently exempt from disclosure. All input and results files of the ANSYS 16 story and the LS-DYNA 47-story global collapse model that were used to simulate sequential structural failures leading to collapse."

Ok. Then lay it all out. How did it happen? Who did it? Why did they do it? The problem with the alternative to the official is that it starts small but very quickly grows exponentially to include thousands of participants in a major collusion. It's far more unlikely than what is in the official story. Who? Why? And how?

a reply to: scottyirnbru

Ok. Then lay it all out. How did it happen? Who did it? Why did they do it? The problem with the alternative to the official is that it starts small but very quickly grows exponentially to include thousands of participants in a major collusion. It's far more unlikely than what is in the official story.

there is NO alternative....there is the OFFICIAL story pushers, YOU, proving the official claims pushed.....simple isn't it!


the pathetic question you ask will be found out once the FINGER-POINTING and DEAL-MAKING commences.

and is irrelevant to the official claims pushed.

the 2005 NIST found NO SCIENTIFIC REASON for collapse x3......after STALLING for three YEARS, the 2008 NIST hypothesis crew is ON their OWN webcast video TWO months BEFORE the final WTC7 report came out TRYING to BULL# their claims NEW physics to the structural community that occurred ONLY on 9-11.

new science they reuse to prove through science....

"the phenomenon that we saw on 9/11 that brought this particular building down was really thermal expansion, which occurs at lower temperatures."

and the refusal to prove this ....new physics where LOW TEMP removed resistance COMPLETELY for 105 vertical feet

"NIST is withholding 68,246 files. These records are currently exempt from disclosure. All input and results files of the ANSYS 16 story and the LS-DYNA 47-story global collapse model that were used to simulate sequential structural failures leading to collapse."

and a note from the PREZ of BUSH saying they don't have to.

originally posted by: lotsoftime
a reply to: scottyirnbru

Ok. Then lay it all out. How did it happen? Who did it? Why did they do it? The problem with the alternative to the official is that it starts small but very quickly grows exponentially to include thousands of participants in a major collusion. It's far more unlikely than what is in the official story.

there is NO alternative....there is the OFFICIAL story pushers, YOU, proving the official claims pushed.....simple isn't it!


the pathetic question you ask will be found out once the FINGER-POINTING and DEAL-MAKING commences.

and is irrelevant to the official claims pushed.

the 2005 NIST found NO SCIENTIFIC REASON for collapse x3......after STALLING for three YEARS, the 2008 NIST hypothesis crew is ON their OWN webcast video TWO months BEFORE the final WTC7 report came out TRYING to BULL# their claims NEW physics to the structural community that occurred ONLY on 9-11.

new science they reuse to prove through science....

"the phenomenon that we saw on 9/11 that brought this particular building down was really thermal expansion, which occurs at lower temperatures."

and the refusal to prove this ....new physics where LOW TEMP removed resistance COMPLETELY for 105 vertical feet

"NIST is withholding 68,246 files. These records are currently exempt from disclosure. All input and results files of the ANSYS 16 story and the LS-DYNA 47-story global collapse model that were used to simulate sequential structural failures leading to collapse."

and a note from the PREZ of BUSH saying they don't have to.

Oooh. Lots of bolded words. No suggestions to who or how or why though.

The problem that you have set up answers itself. They posted, in your hypothesis, a flawed report that invented new physics. The report has been out for years yet I've not seen a large scale rebuttal by professional bodies of civil engineers in any country. A few dissenting voices are hardly the ringing endorsement of an alternative. If the doubters really believe an alternative why don't all these different factions combine and sponsor a new independent review? They won't because being proved wrong removes their source of income. It's easier to shout 'conspiracy' from the side line than actually do something about it.

2 of you maybe only one but don't you both know that Obama has said: anyone who challenges the official version of 9 /11, will be branded as a terrorist

originally posted by: Nochzwei
2 of you maybe only one but don't you both know that Obama has said: anyone who challenges the official version of 9 /11, will be branded as a terrorist

and this is Nazi Germany????

and besides....Presenting a claim within a scientific context by using NOTHING to validate the presented claim, is called BULL#......no matter who says it.

proving the official claim leaves NO room for an alternative.
bullying them through abusive tactics warrants discussions as to why....leaving NO room for the official claims.

enter...'bring back the McCarthy era'....Google that if your too young to remember.

a reply to: scottyirnbru

Oooh. Lots of bolded words. No suggestions to who or how or why though.

which are scientifically unnecessary for what occurred on 9-11.

the "who, how and why" will be brought out once this gets back in the limelight......doesn't effect the actual science one iota.

in your hypothesis

I have no "hypothesis'....but you push one as truth within a scientific context WITHOUT any validation through science.

The report has been out for years yet I've not seen a large scale rebuttal by professional bodies of civil engineers in any country.

ever since the OFFICIAL CLAIM a new science phenomenon fell WTC 7, the DEMAND to prove against NIST has been relentless.....to the point they outright REFUSE to respond.....only providing refusal to PROVE email.

I received one when I asked....

do I really need to post that here again?

They won't because being proved wrong removes their source of income

oh, ya mean like a high end Architect or Engineer going around his/her office saying "9-11 was an inside job"?
your 100% right....and why is that????....oh yea, the CONSTRAINT media bombardment where 'asking questions and demanding the answers' is equated to the likes of 'LocNess, BigFoot, UFO's, Area 51'..'Terrorism'.....shall I go on....
...never discussed on the actual merits of the official claims pushed.

most Americans still don't know there is a WTC7, a 47 story that constantly accelerated for 105 vertical feet at a rate unseen in ANY natural building collapse, other than...'controlled descent.'

It's easier to shout 'conspiracy' from the side line than actually do something about it.

then what are ya worried about.....this is just a nonsense "conspiracy" site, so no one should pay any attention anyways...

originally posted by: lotsoftime
a reply to: scottyirnbru

Oooh. Lots of bolded words. No suggestions to who or how or why though.

which are scientifically unnecessary for what occurred on 9-11.

the "who, how and why" will be brought out once this gets back in the limelight......doesn't effect the actual science one iota.

in your hypothesis

I have no "hypothesis'....but you push one as truth within a scientific context WITHOUT any validation through science.

The report has been out for years yet I've not seen a large scale rebuttal by professional bodies of civil engineers in any country.

ever since the OFFICIAL CLAIM a new science phenomenon fell WTC 7, the DEMAND to prove against NIST has been relentless.....to the point they outright REFUSE to respond.....only providing refusal to PROVE email.

I received one when I asked....

do I really need to post that here again?

They won't because being proved wrong removes their source of income

oh, ya mean like a high end Architect or Engineer going around his/her office saying "9-11 was an inside job"?
your 100% right....and why is that????....oh yea, the CONSTRAINT media bombardment where 'asking questions and demanding the answers' is equated to the likes of 'LocNess, BigFoot, UFO's, Area 51'..'Terrorism'.....shall I go on....
...never discussed on the actual merits of the official claims pushed.

most Americans still don't know there is a WTC7, a 47 story that constantly accelerated for 105 vertical feet at a rate unseen in ANY natural building collapse, other than...'controlled descent.'

It's easier to shout 'conspiracy' from the side line than actually do something about it.

then what are ya worried about.....this is just a nonsense "conspiracy" site, so no one should pay any attention anyways...

Ok, not your hypothesis then. The problem that I have, and I'm sure many others, is that the alternative fails to stand up to the slightest bit of scrutiny. There is a thread on the front of the 9/11 forum which states there were explosives built into the structure, another mentions the NWO, various other posts at times blame Israel, Arabs, Bush, Europeans, a ufo, mini basement nukes, holograms, and much more. You say the who, how and why will be solved later, I say suggest them now. If it was an inside job how many people do you reckon needed to be involved to demolish two of the largest buildings in the world, plus a number of other buildings around it? Why? I see insurance mentioned as a reason, these insurance companies that do anything to avoid paying out when I spill paint in the house are ok with handing over billions for this despite all your evidence to the contrary? Maybe they did it to start a war, but wait, the lied to start a war in Iraq so it doesn't make much sense that way. Hmmf. It doesn't stand up to even the slightest bit of scrutiny.

MOD Edit

originally posted by: scottyirnbru

originally posted by: soundstyle
If the official claims could stand a peer review, they would have done so.

too bad they can't without showing the LIARS they are.

but how can one prove a BRAND NEW physics phenomenon occurring as the 2008 NIST hypothesis crew CLAIMS, live at their own webcast tech briefing....

"the phenomenon that we saw on 9/11 that brought this particular building down was really thermal expansion, which occurs at lower temperatures."

Shyam Sunder at NIST technical briefing


so, we have ALL taught science saying that mass CONSTANTLY accelerating equal to g. can do NO work to assist in the collapse...meaning the collapse is not causing the collapse...it can't because NONE of the gravitational energy was available to destroy the supporting structures, ALL converted to MOTION!


I guess THIS is where the NEW physics comes in by COMPLETELY removing resistance to ALLOW the global unified CONSTANT acceleration EQUAL to g. found by the earlier initial 2005 NIST scientific investigation...

NCSTAR 1A 3.6] "This free fall drop continues for approximately 8 stories, the distance traveled between t=1.75s and t=4.0s...constant, downward acceleration during this time interval. This acceleration was *9.8m/s^2*, equivalent to the acceleration of gravity."

NICSTAR 1A 4.3.4] Global Collapse..."The entire building above the buckled column region moved downward in a single unit, as observed, completing the global collapse"

NCSTAR1A p.39/130
"the damage from the debris from WTC 1 had little effect on initiating the collapse of WTC 7."

what the 2008 NIST hypothesis crew says is this NEW phenomenon of science REMOVED completely structural mass to ALLOW the global unified constant acceleration....including....105 vertical feet of LOAD BEARING continuous vertical support....
8 floors of truss assemblies with carrier beams...
lateral, cross, and diagonal bracing throughout...
tens of thousands of bolts and welds...
Interior partitions...
office contents...
utilities....

all must DISAPPEAR before the global event of acceleration equal to g. that occurred from 1.75 seconds to 4.0s.

so EVERY video we see of the collapse, when the kink forms, there is NOTHING for 105 vertical feet.

from fire we can't see at the windows.

NCSTAR1A-3.2]"It is likely that much of the burning took place beyond the views of the windows"

WOW!!!....that is some kind a new science!!!!!!

wonder why they refuse peer review of this new science through science?????

"NIST is withholding 68,246 files. These records are currently exempt from disclosure. All input and results files of the ANSYS 16 story and the LS-DYNA 47-story global collapse model that were used to simulate sequential structural failures leading to collapse."

Ok. Then lay it all out. How did it happen? Who did it? Why did they do it? The problem with the alternative to the official is that it starts small but very quickly grows exponentially to include thousands of participants in a major collusion. It's far more unlikely than what is in the official story. Who? Why? And how?

Is it possible for a human to understand that he has been fooled, but still not understand the details of how, why and who did it?

a reply to: Salander

Is it possible for a human to understand that he has been fooled, but still not understand the details of how, why and who did it?

Yes by believing in things like
Loose Change
ae911
pilots911

The why is money.
Each one of those asks you for money.