Can the NIST report withstand a peer review?

originally posted by: Salander

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?

Lol. Dark Angels?

originally posted by: samkent
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.

Each one of them asks you for money?

That's nothing--the government actually TAKES money from me, every year.

But I still fail to see your point, unless you're claiming that believing the likes of Bush, Cheney & Rummy is a rational act?

originally posted by: hgfbob
the question should be why do they REFUSE peer review if there is nothing to hide???

They're not refusing anything.

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...

That's not what they say at all. If you believe this, then you are in error, or are using cherry picked portions of statements and/or reports to bolster your statement.

The collapse started with the EP. This was caused by core columns buckling. This undeniable.

Therefore, the removal of vertical support, due to buckling, started there, and ended during the first 1.75 seconds of global collapse. That is what happened. That is what NIST says.

Any misrepresentation through cherry picking proves the fragility of your statement/beliefs.

The collapse started and finished with human intervention by way of controlled demolition.

originally posted by: Salander
The collapse started and finished with human intervention by way of controlled demolition.

Yep.

It was CDed by flying jets into them.

Peer review does not necessarily mean a monolithic view by an organization. Peer review can mean what the name implies, a review by a credible expert as well. Peer review does not mean the review has to be issued by an organization. If someone is a well-regarded expert in a field, they too can test, attempt to replicate, etc a hypothesis or idea.