LMAO!
Right, steel recuces to paper thin and has "gaping holes" and we won't check for anything at all, sound completly logical to me.
First of all, why are you saying this? NIST did indeed mention the corroded steel in NCSTAR 1-3C, and also pointed at Vander Voort's 2003 presentation of his portion of the Worcester Polytechnic team's findings. If you want to split hairs, it's true that
NIST didn't investigate the steel, but it was well aware that the WPI group did, and they deliberately included mention of their findings in the Towers report. The knowledge is not lacking, and the questions behind how the corrosion occurred was hardly ignored. It was handled by the WPI group, and NIST clearly knew about this.
And as I've pointed out multiple times over
in this very thread, the Worcester group was the one who picked up the task of studying the corrosion. I've given the researchers names - Barnett, Biederman, Sisson, Sullivan, Vander Voort, and outside of WPI, Banovich, Gayle, Foecke, etc. That's more than enough information for someone to track down the various writeups they've published regarding the sulfidation corrosion on the WTC steel, and
it's known about by NIST. Again,
they relied on those groups findings for the information they put in the Towers report.
You truthers can
not keep spinning things to make it appear as though the corrosion went unstudied. As we here have been trying to bang into your heads for years now, it's well studied, it's well categorized, and it's specifically because of the temperature ranges indicated by those studies as well as the microstructures left behind and noted by the WPI group that we know how the corrosion occurred. It was a sulfidation attack that took on the order of hours to days, and occurred at temperatures well below the reaction temp of thermate.
This is known. Do a lookup on any of those search terms above and read their work. But please stop trying to make it out as though the erosion was unstudied. That's plain wrong.
