LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
What did they get wrong, as far as a conclusion?
Total Building Collapse from a Single Column Failure
- Thread starter JSanderO
- Start date
-
- Tags
- wtc collapse wtc7
What did they get wrong, as far as a conclusion?
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
What other initiating factor could have been concluded, assuming they corrected what you consider as omissions and errors?
They said that the girder could be pushed 6.25". That is wrong.
Their implication that the girder would fail even at that supposed point is also wrong when the correct elements are accounted for.
NoahFence
Banned
Wrong.
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
assuming you are correct, so what?
We'll see.
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
What other initiating factor could they conclude?
NoahFence
Banned
No we won't, and you know it.
NIST isn't going to change anything - they don't need to.
You're not going to produce anything - you don't have the ability.
Nothing will change.
Let's deal with the implications once NIST have corrected their report rather than just saying "so what" to everything.
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
So why bother them to correct it, if the result is some other beam, girder, column, or connection failing? Why should they even correct it? Can't you answer how important it is for them to correct it?
Last edited:
Very presumptuous.
They already have. You're just not paying attention.
You have no idea what abilities I do or do not have. You like to give an impression that would favour your argument without actually producing anything of substance to back that up though.
We'll see.
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
Yet the CTBUH also states that floor failure led to collapse. So where's your beef? Why commit tens of thousands of dollars to correct details of a most probable scenario?
Last edited:
So you agree with NIST or with the CTBUH?
You really need to decide.
NoahFence
Banned
And accurate
They changed their conclusion? Link? Citation?
If any of you people had the ability you would have done it already. Seriously. What the hell are you wating for??!?
We already have.
I think that NIST should be given reasonable time to change their report, but that an analysis should be independently carried out. Up until recently NIST had never even mentioned the stiffener plates that they were asked about in 2008. Now they have.
So far you have offered zero engineering reason why anyone should listen to your made up claims based on zero engineering knowledge.
Are there any valid engineering reasons NIST has done the things you claim they have done? I can think of few reasons, engineering reason, engineering practices which explain why you are in ignorance of why NIST did it, NIST's way, and why you are left in ignorance of why. Have you ever done engineering design work? Have you ever worked as an engineer? Might be why you fail to present your work to make your points, and explain the cause you can't express.
What engineering reasons would NIST have for their actions, which you have made up a pointless effort to fight? Name some. Sort of like we can ignore the lift due to the earth's rotation in the EOM for flight except for speeds over MACH 3. Engineering and science, love it, and why is 911 truth void of all science, reason and logic - Gage is the anti-logic, anti-science, anti-reason candidate for 911 truth lies and fantasy.
With 0.1 percent of all engineers supporting your claims (who knows what those are), you are sunk - 13 year of woo, not much hope except for Gage, will he peak out at 500k, or make the 600k mark and get new suits at the expense of fools.
Why can't 911 truth find reality based engineers? Gage could hire one, but that would end 911 truth claims for Gage. Oh man
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
What organization, besides AE911T is demanding such changes?
Not the ASCE, not CTBUH, is there any other besides the conspiracy centered AE911T?
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
The CBTUH agrees with NIST. They do suggest a rewording of the conclusion based on the work NIST itself did and to bring it in line with the recommendations NIST made.
Oh, and you did not answer the question posed.
Last edited:
I only talk for myself. That NIST need to have the truth demanded from them rather than offering it up themselves is the problem, not some perceived lack of demand for accountability externally.
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
Ok, so NIST makes a change and some other beam, girder, column or connection is at fault. What then; Why don't you answer how important the difference in outcome is?