NIST engineer John Gross interview

[gumboot]

Are you kidding ur selves? you are trying say that since there is a explanation for the lead up to the collapse, there is no need to address how building would fall? Just because you are given one explanition by someone that is quiet possible, doesnt mean you are to ingnore all the other factors like how building would react due to method of collapse. That doesnt make any sense espically with somthing that is so important.

There's a lot of summary of flawed CT logic right here.

I'll work backwards.

CTers think the collapse sequence of the towers is really important. It isn't. Only CTers think it is, and I suspect the primary reason they claim it's so important is because they know NIST didn't study it. It's the ONLY thing they can find to attack about the NIST report.

What CAUSED the collapse is important. What happened once it began collapsing is not important at all. NO ONE cares except CTers.

The reason is because CTers do not understand very basic fundamental aspects of physics.

This can be seen in the two car-crash analogies given here.

The CT one talks about a sparking incident (blown tyre), that via a continual string of events leads to an accident. Obviously in this scenario, you study those events, because throughout there are factors that can make an enormous difference to the outcome (for instance, did the driver try to correct? Did they brake? Etc.)

But in any sort of accident/investigation there is a critical "no return" point at which the outcome of the event becomes inevitable. In the example of the truck collision it was the moment at which the two vehicles hit each other.

The circumstances of each event greatly affect this point of no return. In the Columbia Disaster example, the critical point of no return was actually the shuttle's launch, because once that tile was dislodged, there was no way to detect it and no way to repair it.

Hence all of the investigation went into determining how the tile was dislodged.

With the WTC collapses, the moment of no return is when the exterior columns fail. Physics is not a flexible subject. Numbers are cold and calculating (no pun intended) and precise. If the force contained in the collapsing building exceeds the stopping power of the intact floors, the building will collapse. Simple as that. There is no need to STUDY the collapse sequence, because it is inevitable.

CTers can't accept that, because they look at the visual imagery, instead of applying the physics formulas that are relevant.

-Gumboot

 

[gumboot]

It does sound like something a bunch of highschool students would think of...

"Ok guys, rather than go in their all guns ablazing, lets pretend to be nice at first, then go to it.".

TAM

But like all highschool boys, despite their intentions to hold back, they blow their load way too early, and their long anticipated performance ends in a quiet and embarassing fizzle, leaving everyone disappointed and unsatisfied.

-Gumboot

 

[twinstead]

But like all highschool boys, despite their intentions to hold back, they blow their load way too early, and their long anticipated performance ends in a quiet and embarassing fizzle, leaving everyone disappointed and unsatisfied.

Yikes

 

[brodski]

Anyone who types "ur" doesn't deserve to be taken seriously. That's my opinion on the matter.

What's wrong with Ur^WP? Why do you hate America Mesopotamia?

 

[einsteen]

CTers think the collapse sequence of the towers is really important. It isn't. Only CTers think it is, and I suspect the primary reason they claim it's so important is because they know NIST didn't study it. It's the ONLY thing they can find to attack about the NIST report.

If you are a supporter of the OCT then wtc1 would not collapse if the distance between floor 96 and floor 97 was not 3.8 meter but 1 meter.
I know why NIST doesn't study global collapse because they will find that the kinetic energy is transformed in strain energy. This is what Dr. Greening told at physorg.

NISTs reports are perfect but it is easy to be perfect if you are incomplete. There is no peer reviewed global collapse paper.

 

[WildCat]

NISTs reports are perfect but it is easy to be perfect if you are incomplete. There is no peer reviewed global collapse paper.

Still sticking your fingers in your ears going "lalalalalala I can't hear you" Einsteen?

 

[einsteen]

 

[Anti-sophist]

NISTs reports are perfect but it is easy to be perfect if you are incomplete. There is no peer reviewed global collapse paper.

Actually, there are. Just not from NIST. That makes sense though since there's very little to be learned from studying the global collapse as opposed to iniation..

 

[eeyore1954]

If you are a supporter of the OCT then wtc1 would not collapse if the distance between floor 96 and floor 97 was not 3.8 meter but 1 meter.
I know why NIST doesn't study global collapse because they will find that the kinetic energy is transformed in strain energy. This is what Dr. Greening told at physorg.

NISTs reports are perfect but it is easy to be perfect if you are incomplete. There is no peer reviewed global collapse paper.

So why doesn't the truth movement find a qualified scientist or group of scientists (highly unlikely to find that) to do a paper on why the collapse wouldn't have been inevitible once the collapse started and then subject it to review from other qualified people in the appropriate disciplines.
I think I know why.

 

[stateofgrace]

If you are a supporter of the OCT then ...............

Ok Einstein I have got a partitucur issue with being labeled this and maybe you can explain a few things to me. You have just called me an Official Conspiracy theorist, is this correct? Or in other words you belief I will only believe something that is spoon feed to my from official Government sources that have concocted this massive conspiracy to hid behind. You believe that the USG has made everything up about 911, it is one giant fairy tale to cover their wrong doings and that I am just so gullible I take it all in. Whereby you are a smart guy, a keen, cool clever guy that see through this dastardly plot and hence this gives you the right to call me and anybody else that does not believe you Official Conspiracy Theorists`.So here is what I believe happened, once you have read it please present what you believe happened.

This being that Arabic terrorists hijacked four planes on Sept 11th 2001 and flew two of them into the World Trade Centre Towers. The Towers suffered massive structural damage and due to their design the follow on fires collapsed. Another one, Flight 77 was also hijacked it was flown at high speed into the Pentagon. A forth plane was hijacked but the passengers onboard fought back and the plane crashed on route to its intended target. WTC 7 was one of many buildings that were damaged as the Towers collapsed. This damage along with the subsequent fires caused it to collapse. At the Moment NIST are finalizing their report into it and hopefully it will be released shortly.

This is what many, many people from across the entire planet believe happened. This story was painfully put together by many independent investigators that were involved in looking at this dreadful event. They interviewed literally thousands of eyewitnesses. Top scientists, engineers and academics put it all together,with full public consultation and accountability and in minute detail for us. They produced countless reports that were presented to the entire scientific and engineering community. They accepted it as fact; they in effect fully endorsed it. To go further testimony from those involved in planning 911 was presented at the most important trial this century. This along with countless other exhibits was accepted in a United States Court of Law as fact.

There is not a single Institute of Professional Engineers from any description from anywhere on the planet that as openly spoken out against any of the findings of NIST. Not a single one from anywhere, Russia, Europe, etc. Not a single scientific Journal will touch any alternative theory because not one of them has been peer reviewed, other than by their loony mates.

So Einstein. Here is your chance, your moment. Tell me the unofficial conspiracy theory. Tell what happened on 911. Don’t give me the I’m only asking questions`. You are not; you have called the official story a conspiracy.

So in your own words, what happened on 911?

Just a summary please.

 

[The Almond]

If you are a supporter of the OCT then wtc1 would not collapse if the distance between floor 96 and floor 97 was not 3.8 meter but 1 meter.

Why in the world would anyone make calculations based on that assumption? What buildings have floor distances of 1 meter?

I know why NIST doesn't study global collapse because they will find that the kinetic energy is transformed in strain energy. This is what Dr. Greening told at physorg.

This is truly an ignorant statement. NIST didn't study the global collapse because the National Construction Safety Team Act (NCSTA) did not instruct NIST to study it. Rather, the congress wanted NIST to determine what lead up to the collapse initiation event. Working from that, they could determine what design steps and procedures would prevent collapse initiation.
If you honestly think something can be learned from studying collapse progression, please write your thoughtful, well-expressed letter to congress and the National Science Foundation and apply for a grant or a large federal subsidy.

NISTs reports are perfect but it is easy to be perfect if you are incomplete.

That's two false statements in one sentence. No, the NIST NCSTAR is not perfect. No scientific research is perfect. Assumptions are always made, one set of equations are always chosen over another, and all this is done based on time and funding constraints.
It is true, however, that the conspiracy community has failed to come up with any valid criticisms of the NIST NCSTAR. They lack the scientific background, logical reasoning skills and patience to consider the report in its entirety.
Second, the NCSTAR is complete, having accomplished all of the goals congress set forth. And in the numerous public forums, technical presentations and scientific colloquial forums that NIST has held, none of the participants have ever said that the report itself is incomplete.

There is no peer reviewed global collapse paper.

What would be required in a global collapse study? Well, that depends on the method you choose to use.
1) Computer modeling:
This method would require the development of a dynamic computer simulation that would take into account all of the major structural members during the collapse. I count at least 8 degrees of freedom for each member including X, Y, Z translation, rotation about major axes, rotation off major axes, structural reaction, thermal reaction and gravity (Newtonian) reaction. That means modeling 800 elements would require 6400 variables solved simultaneously for each frame of the reaction.

Suffice it to say, such a computer program does not exist. That means you would need to hire the world's best computer scientists. Nevermind that many of them work for the government, NOAA, NIST, Sandia, DOD, NSA etc; since they're all shills for the government, you'll have to hire private contractors. Oh, IBM and Microsoft are out too. Anyway, in addition, you'll need to hire structural, mechanical, materials and fire engineers to provide real-world data and verification of the model. So, a team of 100 or more of the world's best scientists will have to leave their high-paying jobs to come work on this project for a few years, develop software that doesn't exist and test it on real world applications.

How much do you think all that would cost?

2) Real world modeling

You have basically the same problem with the computer simulation, except now you're trying to build a scale model of the WTC. Taking it at 1/20th scale would mean that you will build a structure that is 68 feet tall, 10.5 feet square at the base. It has to be made out of normal weight concrete, steel, lightweight concrete, office furniture, and have working plumbing, electricity and air conditioning. Mechanical engineers and electrical engineers would have to spend years precision modeling the electrical and mechanical subsystems so that everything worked at 1/20th the scale just as it did in the WTC towers. Welders would take months to apply bracket and moment connections to the steel along the 1.5 foot long steel beams. Then, of course, you have to ask how many models you're going to make...

How much do you think it would cost to do that? How long would it take?

And what would we learn from it? How would that make buildings any safer?

 

[GMotives]

Ok first I will start with why it is important to study the way WTC should collapse using official report as the foundation. Why is this so important you may ask? Well for one alot of assumptions where already made in official report. For starters the government couldn’t know the exact temperature in WTC. Yes there was jet fuel, but how could one really tell how much jet fuel would have been left after the impact? When most of the jet fuel was probably absorbed in the blast (which can be seen during impact). So that means government had to make assumptions. Whole report is based on assumptions that there was enough jet fuel and fires to weaken the steel. How can anyone truly know the fires where in right location and where exactly hot enough? You cant know that, you just have to take their word for it (which is based on assumptions).

Now I’m not going to pretend I know exact temperatures because that would be making assumptions. If there was a chance that these assumptions where wrong then the official story could also be wrong am I correct? So if there is so much questions in the air regarding 9/11 event, why not create model to show how official story pre collapse would in fact show how the building would fall in way they did? They used a simulated model of plane going into trade centers to show how support beams and plane where affected. Which still couldn’t explain why the engine was found on streets and etc, but I want get into that atm, I will control myself. A computer simulated model of the building collapse due structure failure from fire is quite possible. This would help to squash peoples doubts about the official story. A simulated model is very possible, hell if I can do simulated models in 3ds max, I’m very confident expert in the field could achieve realistic result. I really don’t understand why you don’t think the WTC’s behavior during collapse isn’t important? The way the WTC’s collapses proves whether or not the official story is correct (which as I was saying earlier had to be based on some assumptions).

Now to the molten metal subject… Some of you claim that it was iron found dripping and in a red hot state. Yes I will agree that it is possible that it was iron (but that is assumption on your part). So I guess it is your word against the people who where actually there on the day. Anyway even if it was iron that is irrelevant, it still doesn’t explain 1000+ degrees temperatures months after 9/11. There is maps provide by Nasa I believe that proves the temperature claims, so this is a fact (no assumptions what so ever). Also other reports that collaborate with this like the dripping metals, witness accounts, boots melting and etc. So the high temperature where definitely there? I am I correct?

Now how can you not think that these kinds of temperatures weeks after are not unusual? You like to use the thermite argument as your defense, but that is still not addressing the issue we present to you. How can rubble fire that deep down, with no accelerants like jet fuel and etc cause these high temperatures? Please don’t tell me that there was jet fuel left weeks after because that is most stupid thing I have ever heard. The lack of oxygen that fires need to fuel high temperatures is another factor, especially since it was deep in rubble. Also the fact that sites where being hosed down still didn’t stop the high temperatures is another strange factor. There is nothing in official report collapse scenario that can account for rubble fires causing those extreme temperatures, it goes against science. As you so boldly claim you follow unlike CTers. The lack of coverage on the government’s part, witness reports and maps alone is sign something else had to have caused those temperatures.

Also you guys always seem to forget to dispute all of these in videos below.. Now don’t bring up some stupid laser beam ***** as an escape goat to answering what we are asking of you. That just proves you don’t have answer. I’m willing to bet $1000 you want be able to explain the videos below. Hell you probably haven’t even seen them before and want even give them chance…


Drug trade and 9/11 links
video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=8797525979024486145&q=narcotics+de tective


Not related 9/11 but good example drug trade in america
video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=8615500044492220653&q=The+MENA+Con nection


press the truth
video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=5589099104255077250&q=press+the+tr uth


9/11 mysteries
video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6708190071483512003&hl=en

AMERICA: Freedom To Fascism <--- not about 911 but suppose this bull **** too?
video.google.com.au/videoplay?docid=-4312730277175242198&q=Aaron+Russo

 

[Firestone]

I’m willing to bet $1000 you want be able to explain the videos below. Hell you probably haven’t even seen them before and want even give them chance…

9/11 mysteries
video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6708190071483512003&hl=en

Here with my $1000 !!!

"Screw 9/11 Mysteries - Clunkity Clunk Edition" is now available for viewing.

BitTorrent - High Quality
http://thepiratebay.org/tor/3597525/scrw911mystrs_full.avi

Google Video - Stream

Google Video This video is not hosted by the ISF, the ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6243624912447824934

I recommend viewing from Google Video and setting the size to "Fit To Window". Text is hard to read due to Google Resize.

Coming Soon:
911mysteriesguide.com

Thanks for waiting guys.

And on a serious note, here you can read about the underground fires at GZ.

 

[A W Smith]

Theres a coal mine fire thats been burning in Centralia PA that started burning 10 years before the trade center was even built and it still burns today.

 

[GMotives]

Once again you choose subject on what happened on the specific day of 9/11 like towers collapsing and etc.. Im talking about governments ties to alkida, ISI, drug trade and etc. care to explain it all? I have never seen skeptic onces try to debunk these. You just twist words and turn it back to only thing you know about offical reports and screw loose change which been debunked also.

 

[kookbreaker]

Once again you choose subject on what happened on the specific day of 9/11 like towers collapsing and etc..

Well, geem here we are in a thread about an interview with NIST, and we are discussing the collapse. Whoddathunkit!

Im talking about governments ties to alkida, ISI, drug trade and etc. care to explain it all?

Why? So you can move the goalposts AGAIN?

I have never seen skeptic onces try to debunk these.

Its not our fault you don't get out or read enough.

You just twist words and turn it back to only thing you know about offical reports and screw loose change which been debunked also.

WHen the heck was SLC debunked? You lie like a rug.

 

[Anti-sophist]

alkida

Seriously?

 

[GMotives]

Theres a coal mine fire thats been burning in Centralia PA hat started burning 10 years before the trade center was even built and it still burns today.

Haha did i just hear that? Gee that was a great example you got there.. You should really think about what you just said.. mmm what is coal used for again? I suppose there was coal at world trade centres is that it? suppose it caused 1000+ degree temperatures? and molten metal?

 

[GMotives]

Well, geem here we are in a thread about an interview with NIST, and we are discussing the collapse. Whoddathunkit!



Why? So you can move the goalposts AGAIN?



Its not our fault you don't get out or read enough.



WHen the heck was SLC debunked? You lie like a rug.

Ok since i dont read much care to share where it has been debunked?

Also you must not read much ethier cause SLC has been debunked..

Any woo im off to bed ill reply to yous later..

 

[WildCat]

Ok first I will start with why it is important to study the way WTC should collapse using official report as the foundation. Why is this so important you may ask? Well for one alot of assumptions where already made in official report. For starters the government couldn’t know the exact temperature in WTC. Yes there was jet fuel, but how could one really tell how much jet fuel would have been left after the impact? When most of the jet fuel was probably absorbed in the blast (which can be seen during impact).

No, it is possible to reasonably estimate the amount of fuel burned off inside the building and in the fireball outside the building. The space inside was limited, therefore the oxygen supply was limited. The jet fuel fires could only burn until the oxygen in the building was used up, and since the area is known the amount of oxygen is also known. The oxygen supply was, of course, refreshed by the holes the aircraft made, but we're talking about the initial fuel burn here. Likewise, the amound burned outside the building can be estimated by the size of the fireball. NIST addresses this in NIST NCSTAR 1-5, page 9:

The timing and appearance of the fireballs indicated that they were ignited inside the building. A calculation based on the oxygen contained within the building on the floors into which the fuel tanks entered indicated that up to 15 percent of the available jet fuel could have burned inside the building in this immediate event. These fires quickly depleted the available oxygen. The resulting pressure wave forced large amounts of unburned fuel through openings either created by direct impact of the aircraft and/or debris or windows blown out as a result of the overpressure generated inside the building by the fire itself. The presumably atomized fuel burned when it mixed with air outside of the building. The largest fireball formed on the north face, suggesting that the largest amount of jet fuel was blown backwards through the opening created by the aircraft entry. If roughly another 15 percent to 20 percent of the jet fuel burned outside the building as in WTC 2 (Section 2.4.1), then about two thirds of the jet fuel remained inside the building to burn later or just flow away from the fire zones.

So a reasonable estimate can be made, and only 1/3 of the fuel was able to burn in the immediate impact and fireball - leaving 2/3 to burn later.

So that means government had to make assumptions. Whole report is based on assumptions that there was enough jet fuel and fires to weaken the steel. How can anyone truly know the fires where in right location and where exactly hot enough? You cant know that, you just have to take their word for it (which is based on assumptions).

The assumptions are based on solid science, as I have shown - not simply pulled out of thin air.

Now I’m not going to pretend I know exact temperatures because that would be making assumptions. If there was a chance that these assumptions where wrong then the official story could also be wrong am I correct? So if there is so much questions in the air regarding 9/11 event, why not create model to show how official story pre collapse would in fact show how the building would fall in way they did? They used a simulated model of plane going into trade centers to show how support beams and plane where affected. Which still couldn’t explain why the engine was found on streets and etc, but I want get into that atm, I will control myself.

And you're going to model this based on what assumptions? You do realize that any model is based on assumptions, don't you?

A computer simulated model of the building collapse due structure failure from fire is quite possible. This would help to squash peoples doubts about the official story. A simulated model is very possible, hell if I can do simulated models in 3ds max, I’m very confident expert in the field could achieve realistic result. I really don’t understand why you don’t think the WTC’s behavior during collapse isn’t important? The way the WTC’s collapses proves whether or not the official story is correct (which as I was saying earlier had to be based on some assumptions).

You are greatly underestimating the difficulty involved in such a computer simulation - there are thousands of variables you must acount for. No computer program exists to do such modeling, and there is nothing to gain from doing it if you could.

Now to the molten metal subject… Some of you claim that it was iron found dripping and in a red hot state. Yes I will agree that it is possible that it was iron (but that is assumption on your part). So I guess it is your word against the people who where actually there on the day.

Most people think it was likely aluminum, and since no one there tested it for steel how is it "your word against theirs"?

Anyway even if it was iron that is irrelevant, it still doesn’t explain 1000+ degrees temperatures months after 9/11. There is maps provide by Nasa I believe that proves the temperature claims, so this is a fact (no assumptions what so ever). Also other reports that collaborate with this like the dripping metals, witness accounts, boots melting and etc. So the high temperature where definitely there? I am I correct?

The fires were still burning! There was more than enough fuel (office furiture, paper, carpet, etc etc) present in the buildings to keep the fires burning for months. There is no way to keep thermite burning for this long! It burns off in a matter of seconds, and cannot be slowed down. If you rule out a standard fire being responsible (despite the overwhelming evidence), you'll have quite a job finding another explanation!

Now how can you not think that these kinds of temperatures weeks after are not unusual? You like to use the thermite argument as your defense, but that is still not addressing the issue we present to you. How can rubble fire that deep down, with no accelerants like jet fuel and etc cause these high temperatures? Please don’t tell me that there was jet fuel left weeks after because that is most stupid thing I have ever heard. The lack of oxygen that fires need to fuel high temperatures is another factor, especially since it was deep in rubble. Also the fact that sites where being hosed down still didn’t stop the high temperatures is another strange factor. There is nothing in official report collapse scenario that can account for rubble fires causing those extreme temperatures, it goes against science. As you so boldly claim you follow unlike CTers. The lack of coverage on the government’s part, witness reports and maps alone is sign something else had to have caused those temperatures.

Just because you're too ignorant to understand it doesn't mean it isn't so. There was tons upon tons of available fuel for the fires, and fire is hot if you've ever noticed. You reject the obvious source of the fires, and seek the impossible.

Also you guys always seem to forget to dispute all of these in videos below.. Now don’t bring up some stupid laser beam ***** as an escape goat to answering what we are asking of you. That just proves you don’t have answer. I’m willing to bet $1000 you want be able to explain the videos below. Hell you probably haven’t even seen them before and want even give them chance…

The drug ones are irrelevant, the others have been debunked here a hundred times brfore. You have nothing new here.