• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

29 Structural & Civil Engineers Cite Evidence for Controlled Explosive Demolition

The authors are included in the list of qualified people.
T.A.M. said all the on the list "OPENLY support the official account of 9/11"
That is not true.

You never answered me: why aren't the engineering organizations of the world not shouting fraud from every rooftop?
No assumption can be made as to why.

Your transparent debate tactics are the worst pile of crap I have ever read.
I pointed out a blatantly false statement.

If you did ANY research, you would know EXACTLY what Quintiere's issue is with the NIST, and how it in no way, shape, or form validates your opinion.
He does not endorse the NIST report and thinks there should be an independent investigation.

ETA: His reasons may be different but like Richard Gage and 28 other structural and civil engineers, he is calling for an independent investigation.
The implicit implication is: He does not trust NIST.
 
Last edited:
T.A.M. said all the on the list "OPENLY support the official account of 9/11"
That is not true.

No assumption can be made as to why.

I pointed out a blatantly false statement.

He does not endorse the NIST report and thinks there should be an independent investigation.


Why do you lie to people who know much more than you do? Quintiere is a serious researcher. His problem with NIST is that he feels that the loss of fireproofing made no difference. His contention that the buildings would have come down anyway is worse for the conspiracy nuts. He has no use for the nonsense about explosives in the towers.
 
Source?

On the contrary, there is an ever growing number of building professionals who don't believe the conclusions of the NIST report.

[FONT=&quot]“I think the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable,” explained Dr. Quintiere. “Let's look at real alternatives that might have been the cause of the collapse of the World Trade Towers and how that relates to the official cause and what's the significance of one cause versus another.”[/FONT]


Stop the nonsense. There was an entire thread devoted to this topic.
 
Why do you lie to people who know much more than you do?
Why do you make patently false statements?
[FONT=&quot]James Quintiere, Ph.D., former Chief of the Fire Science Division of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), has called for an independent review of NIST’s investigation into the collapses of the World Trade Center Towers on 9/11.

[/FONT]
Quintiere is a serious researcher. His problem with NIST is that he feels that the loss of fireproofing made no difference.
He had a lot of problems with the NIST report:
"[FONT=&quot]I have not seen a timeline placed in the NIST report."
"[/FONT][FONT=&quot]I think it’s the legal structure that cloaks the Commerce Department and therefore NIST. And so, instead of lawyers as if they were acting on a civil case trying to get depositions and information subpoenaed, those lawyers did the opposite and blocked everything."[/FONT]
"[FONT=&quot]I spent many hours writing things, and it would bore people if I regurgitated all of that here, I never received one formal reply.” [/FONT]

His contention that the buildings would have come down anyway is worse for the conspiracy nuts.
OBL and 19 hijackers is a conspiracy. You are a conspiracy nut if you believe OBL and 19 hijackers did it.
 
Stop the nonsense. There was an entire thread devoted to this topic.
The nonsense is T.A.M.'s claim that all the people on the long list he posted, openly supported the NIST Final reports on the Trade Towers and WTC 7.
 
Last edited:
Get serious. That reads like propaganda.
No one would put that much 'stuff' in a first reply to everyone who writes in. It is unverifiable and unbelievable.
A statement with a link please.

Your post is unverifiable and unbelievable.
 
Thank you! You finally said something I can agree with. OBL was behind the 9/11 conspiracy.

Aw, hell. I thought you had a moment of lucidity there.
Actually, I don't know if OBL was involved or not. Neither do you.

The point is; OBL and 19 hijackers is a conspiracy theory and the term 'conspiracy nut' is propaganda.
 
Again with the Quintiere nonsense?
He called for an independent review of the NIST report. He does not endorse the final NIST report as T.A.M. had claimed.

So far, no one has posted a statement of a qualified person who endorses the NIST Final reports other than the authors.
 
So far, no one has posted a statement of a qualified person who endorses the NIST Final reports other than the authors.

ICC genius.

Lewis said:
The International Code Council (ICC) had a number of building code change proposals from various parties, after Sep 11 incident, to prevent similar occurrences. The ICC appointed an Ad Hoc committee on Terrorism Resistant Buildings to review the NIST study and evaluate its 30 recommendations for potential modifications to the ICC's model codes to achieve a deliberate, measured response to the lessons learned. The International Building Codes has been modified as a result of the committee's efforts to require, an additional stair in all high rise buildings over and above the minimum required number of exits. A second post-WTC achievement is a committee proposal that requires the marking of stairwells and exit paths with photoluminescent markings to help guide evacuees down multiple stairs runs in potentially limited lighting. The ICC is also considering a number of related proposals affecting high-rise and super high-rise building fire and life safety.
 
So far, no one has posted a statement of a qualified person who endorses the NIST Final reports other than the authors.
Such a stupid statement but I'll entertain it one last time before I got to bed. In chriohpher7 fashion, with big letters.

Banerjee said:
In the recent past, there have been a number of studies toward predicting the thermal and structural behavior of components subjected to elevated temperature due to an exposure to fire. Numerical modeling has been applied quite extensively toward this end. An accurate numerical model requires the use of appropriate thermophysical properties of the materials such as steels, concretes etc. Recent investigations into the collapse of World Trade Center building 7 showed that thermal expansion played an important role in the generation of stresses at elevated temperatures in components that are restrained structurally [Structural fire response and probable collapse sequence of World Trade Center Building 7, NIST NCSTR 1-9, November 2008]. In this article, relative thermal elongations of structural steels are computed using an approach similar to the one proposed by Andres et al. [Scr Mater 39:791, 1998] but with a novel method of computing volume phase fractions using a thermodynamic database in conjunction with Thermo-Calc [Thermo-Calc Software (2009) http://www.thermocalc.com, Stockholm Technology Park, Björnnäsvägen 21, SE-113 47 Stockholm, Sweden], a software that performs standard equilibrium calculations and calculation of thermodynamic quantities based on thermodynamic databases. Thermal expansion coefficient values were computed for a steel of eutectoid composition and an ASTM A572 Grade 50 steel. While the volume fractions of phases for A572 steel were computed using the thermodynamic approach, those for the eutectoid steel were computed using an approach similar to the one proposed in reference [Scr Mater 39:791, 1998]. The computed values of relative thermal elongation were compared with the values obtained from Eurocode. While the match was reasonable for the most part, there are significant differences in the values obtained during the phase transformation range (967-1,086 K for ASTM A572 Grade 50 steel). Also, the computed values were compared against those recommended during the NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) World Trade Center failure investigation. Reasonable agreement was achieved in the temperature range between room temperature and 600 °C
 
www.scopus.com/home.url You're gonna have to branch out of ae911 truth. Do you just go there because you have male pattern baldness like Gage?
Interesting that the changes involve egress and not the perils of thermal expansion.
Makes sense. Their job is to save lives.
How is this an endorsement of the report?
They changed the codes on based on the report. Am I posting to a child?
 
Such a stupid statement but I'll entertain it one last time before I got to bed. In chriohpher7 fashion, with big letters.
Source?

They verified that NIST had calculated the expansion correctly.

That is not an endorsement of the report.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom