Popular Mechanics: 500,000 scholars?

[DGM]

All of it, most notably, the steel.

Do you have a link to the inventory they had available to them and disregarded? To the best of my knowledge most was recycled long before they started their report.

 

[funk de fino]

All of it, most notably, the steel.

This is false. Give us a list of the evidence they did not use that was available to them.

 

[WildCat]

All of it, most notably, the steel.

What would you do with the steel Red?

 

[DGM]

All of it, most notably, the steel.

Red, really, this is close to your "Larry made out like a bandit".

 

[RedIbis]

Red, really, this is close to your "Larry made out like a bandit".

Indeed. An accuracy on both accounts that you simply cannot reconcile with your faith in the official story.

 

[DGM]

Indeed. An accuracy on both accounts that you simply cannot reconcile with your faith in the official story.

Run away................Run away.....................


Red, Really?????????????????????

 

[beachnut]

You're either asking this question out of petulance or ignorance, neither looks good for you.

Fire caused WTC7 to collapse, it was proved on 911. NIST studied WTC7. Don't need NIST to understand fires not fought destroyed WTC7. You continue quibbling out of ignorance with no goal, no claim, no rational conclusion. Over 9 years and you don't seem to have a clue what happen on 911. It does not matter if NIST is right, you are still unable to present evidence to support the moronic claims of 911 truth, a movement based on delusions, paranoid conspiracy theories, and idiotic lies. Happy New Year, in the 10^th year of 911 truth failure.

To refute fire destoryed WTC7, you have to come up with the evidence to support a claim to contrary. That will never happen.

 

[jaydeehess]

All of it, most notably, the steel.

Fact is that in order to use the physical evidence of the steel one would have to be able to identify where the beams, trusses and columns were. The steel in WTC 7 was not marked with identifiers and thus this would have proved all but impossible. If you wanted to identify the specific girder that was 'walked' off its seats you would have to first fnd all the identical girders and test each one individually to see it there were evidence of this.

 

[RedIbis]

Fact is that in order to use the physical evidence of the steel one would have to be able to identify where the beams, trusses and columns were. The steel in WTC 7 was not marked with identifiers and thus this would have proved all but impossible. If you wanted to identify the specific girder that was 'walked' off its seats you would have to first fnd all the identical girders and test each one individually to see it there were evidence of this.

Nearly impossible? Most of it was heaped up at 250 Greenwich St. And again, WPI had access to WTC 7 steel, why didn't NIST?

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Answered a long time ago, RedIbis...

Why didn't the investigators look at actual steel samples from WTC 7?

Steel samples were removed from the site before the NIST investigation began. In the immediate aftermath of Sept. 11, debris was removed rapidly from the site to aid in recovery efforts and facilitate emergency responders' efforts to work around the site. Once it was removed from the scene, the steel from WTC 7 could not be clearly identified. Unlike the pieces of steel from WTC 1 and WTC 2, which were painted red and contained distinguishing markings, WTC 7 steel did not contain such identifying characteristics.

Questions and Answers about the NIST WTC 7 Investigation (Updated 09/17/2010)

 

[jaydeehess]

Thank you Cl1mh, I would have assumed, incorrectly it appears, that RedIbis had seen that already.

RedI wishes for NIST to have studied the beams that expanded and the girder that they walked off its seat and col 79. In reality he must know that this was not possible once the rubble had been moved. Is this where the conspiracy is then? The immediate clean up of the rubble?

RedI assumes that the entire scene would have been locked down in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 just as we see done on "CSI" where the forensic investigators have the scene secured and off limits to all until they are finished. In reality there was the off chance that people would be pulled alive from the rubble, there was the problem of getting the city up and running again(roads, electrical distribution, communications cableing, water) that all required that the rubble be cleared asap. Then there was the problem of the underground fires which could only be addressed if the top burden of rubble was taken away.

Once the rubble was removed there was no way of positively identifying WTC 7 steel from some other WTC structures and worse, it was nigh on impossible to positively identify where in WTC 7 a steel member had been.

 

[jaydeehess]

So, now allow me to introduce my own murder analogy........

A man is shot. There are dozens of people in the immediate vicinity. Many see the man go down but no one sees the shooter. People run, they scatter, its chaos for a good 10 minutes until police get the scene under control completely locked down .

Its a through and through, the bullet is never found ( perhaps he was standing on a bridge and the bullet is now somewhere on the river bed). The police know from the wound that the man was shot but they do not know the caliber. A forensics expert/pathologist examines the body and determines that it was most likely a .45 cal. based on the size and trajectory of the wound.
Again the police can investigate and round up every .45 cal in the city and in no way be able to determine which fired the fatal shot.

IF the police had been on the scene and immediately been able to lock down the immediate area(within 500 feet) and search every person, nook and crany they may at that time been able to find a .45 cal weapon that had been very recently fired and now be able to say that it was probably the murder weapon.

 

[Oystein]

Nearly impossible? Most of it was heaped up at 250 Greenwich St. And again, WPI had access to WTC 7 steel, why didn't NIST?

IIRC, the specimen that the WPI team looked at was only "probably" from WTC7, and its previous location within the structure unknown. Whatever analysis the could have done on that piece, it would not have helped much with the task of identifying how collapse was initiated or propagated.

 

[RedIbis]

IIRC, the specimen that the WPI team looked at was only "probably" from WTC7, and its previous location within the structure unknown. Whatever analysis the could have done on that piece, it would not have helped much with the task of identifying how collapse was initiated or propagated.

I wasn't suggesting that the specific piece that WPI studied would be helpful in studying the collapse mechanism. I'm merely pointing out that WPI got access to WTC 7 steel and didn't have any problem identifying it.

Show me where WPI qualifies that the steel was "probably" from WTC 7. I think you're hoping that's the case.

 

[DGM]

I wasn't suggesting that the specific piece that WPI studied would be helpful in studying the collapse mechanism. I'm merely pointing out that WPI got access to WTC 7 steel and didn't have any problem identifying it.

Show me where WPI qualifies that the steel was "probably" from WTC 7. I think you're hoping that's the case.

Are you arguing that NIST should have been able to identify the location of steel in WTC7 despite the fact they claim it had no identifying markings?

 

[Oystein]

I wasn't suggesting that the specific piece that WPI studied would be helpful in studying the collapse mechanism. I'm merely pointing out that WPI got access to WTC 7 steel and didn't have any problem identifying it.

Show me where WPI qualifies that the steel was "probably" from WTC 7. I think you're hoping that's the case.

I think we are talking about Appendix C of the FEMA report. This appendix was authored by Barnett, Biederman and Sisson. Right?

Let me quote from page 1:

C.1 Introduction
Two structural steel members ... The first appeared to be from WTC 7...

C.2 Sampel 1 (From WTC 7)
...
Although the exact location of this beam in the building was not known...

So what, exactly, do you mean by "identifying it"? Can't be the location. They identified it as A36 structural steel, apparently from WTC 7, location unknown. Got more?

 

[RedIbis]

I think we are talking about Appendix C of the FEMA report. This appendix was authored by Barnett, Biederman and Sisson. Right?

No. Like I said in my post, we are talking about the WPI study.

 

[Oystein]

No. Like I said in my post, we are talking about the WPI study.

Got a title, or link?

 

[RedIbis]

Are you arguing that NIST should have been able to identify the location of steel in WTC7 despite the fact they claim it had no identifying markings?

Sure, for the record, I call bs on NIST's claim that it had no ability to access WTC 7 steel when others were able to. That's my opinion.

NIST"s "explanation" sounds a hell of a lot like a bad excuse.

 

[DGM]

No. Like I said in my post, we are talking about the WPI study.

Do you have a link handy for that study? If not, a friends son is a grad student there and most likely can get me a copy.