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: bloodymarvelous
For anyone who thinks NIST's report is "peer reviewed"...... you need to have a look at this.
First, many are not aware of this, but NIST's WTC 7 report has itself been independently peer reviewed by and published in the Journal of Structural Engineering, the ASCE's flagship publication and one of the oldest and most prestigious peer reviewed engineering journals in the world
Yea, I wish they had released all the data as well, but they didn't.
originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: D8Tee
No one has seen NIST models?
'jeapardise public safety'. When pushed, they go on to suggest that the data could be used by potential terrorists to programme their own computer and use that to discover how to bring down other steelframe highrise buildings.
www.metabunk.org...
Public safety?
I am calling it BS.
I believe NIST models cannot stand up to their Report. That is why it is a secrete. I believe someone has their foot on NIST throat.
originally posted by: D8Tee
originally posted by: bloodymarvelous
For anyone who thinks NIST's report is "peer reviewed"...... you need to have a look at this.
You could have a look at this.
First, many are not aware of this, but NIST's WTC 7 report has itself been independently peer reviewed by and published in the Journal of Structural Engineering, the ASCE's flagship publication and one of the oldest and most prestigious peer reviewed engineering journals in the world
Link
First, many are not aware of this, but NIST's WTC 7 report has itself been independently peer reviewed by and published in the Journal of Structural Engineering, the ASCE's flagship publication and one of the oldest and most prestigious peer reviewed engineering journals in the world: cedb.asce.org...
originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: bloodymarvelous
Yet, there are people saying it's all been Peer Reviewed, and is accepted by all scientists all over the world.
How can anyone only Peer review part of science, when parts of it is not accessible, because it is under National security and is top secret?
What part of this so call science would be a national security risk?
I looked all over the site, and I could not find any mention of peer review at all. Not every periodical about a technical field has peer review.
If they weren't sabotaged then the national security issue would be .....um.... well.......... a little help here? Can anyone think of a way national security could possibly be impacted, even in the slightest?
originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: cardinalfan0596
I said that there are a lot of misinformed individuals out there, primarily those that listen to groups with "4 911 truth" in the name
And what about the people that don't listen to the group with "4 911 Truth, are they all misinformed as well?
Do you believe that credible firmen that went on historic record as eyewitness said they saw and heard explosions in the WTC?
Or do you believe in the NIST report?
I have yet to speak to a fireman that was actually there that thinks there were planted explosives.
originally posted by: samkent
a reply to: cardinalfan0596
I have yet to speak to a fireman that was actually there that thinks there were planted explosives.
So they paid off every NYFD person too?
What about the cops? They were there too?
I want my cut too!
originally posted by: face23785
They actually don't understand that the initial explosion would've had to happen before the building started collapsing, therefore the sound of the explosion would've had to reach the camera before the sound of the building collapsing.
This simple concept is too complicated for them to understand. If they can't understand something that simple, it's useless to try to argue with them.
originally posted by: face23785
It's funny when you mention why you can't hear explosions on any of the videos, I actually had a member on here tell me that the reason you can't hear the explosions is the sound of the building falling is too loud. They actually don't understand that the initial explosion would've had to happen before the building started collapsing, therefore the sound of the explosion would've had to reach the camera before the sound of the building collapsing.
This simple concept is too complicated for them to understand. If they can't understand something that simple, it's useless to try to argue with them.
originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: Nothin
I consider myself someone who has at least a gradeschool level education and understands that a building falling after explosives were set off can't possibly make it impossible to hear said explosives going off because the building wasn't falling yet when said explosives went off.
originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: Nothin
The topic of the thread isn't what we each consider ourselves, which is what you asked me. I responded to your off-topic question, don't put that on me.
My first post on this page may not have been a direct response to something in the OP, but it was addressing something in the discussion his/her post initiated, being why debunkers do what they do. I don't consider myself dedicated enough to call myself a debunker. There are others in this thread who get much more into the weeds than I do. I just point out painfully obvious stuff like the fact that a building collapsing after an explosion can't drown out the sound of said explosion that happened before the building started collapsing. And some truthers still argue with me. Perhaps that's why debunkers insult truthers? This is a simple fact of the laws of physics and some of them still can't grasp it, yet they're spouting off their baseless theories as if they're informed enough to even be posting on the subject. It's like working with the mentally ill. It's a noble thing, but it's only for people with an extraordinary amount of patience.
Edit: And for the record, not all the debunkers in here have been hurling insults. I commend them for the monumental amount of self discipline it must take to stick strictly to the issues while dealing with page after page of the kind of ignorance on display in these threads.