15-08-2013, 03:34 PM
Lauren Johnson Wrote:Your explanations of why the three buildings come down diverge from NIST's explanations. NIST had a large budget and lots of engineers to come up with its story. Why isn't NIST as smart as you are?
I assume the question is directed at me. But Tony and Albert can take a crack at this because neither of their expanations match NIST.
The total smarts and resources of NIST far exceed what I have. Not even close.
However what I present is not MY work... but I am expressing a set of ideas that many people have contributed to and I actually very little. I just happen to agree with the points I use and take the time to present them in discussions such as these.
I do think a more formal presentation should be made to NIST for comment. Lots of math and gifs and diagrams and so forth... including a critique of the NIST reports. That's not something I could do but I would be willing to add what I can, drawings and so forth. I have no intention of publishing or being a leader of any sort of movement. I am not smart enough and don't want to. This is for someone else. Tony publishes, Tom has a web site and there is the 911 FreeForum which I am sure NIST must read... why wouldn't they?
NIST appears to me to be in a position to not respond and has the power to dominate and control at least the mainstream. They have the evidence too... that is whatever is left of it. That alone puts detractors at a huge disadvantage. Playing field is hardly level.
As I have suggested, I think NIST's reports provided cover for all manner of incompetence, professional misconduct, corruption and so forth. Like the Pinto gas tanks.... People died BECAUSE of accidents AND because the gas tank design was defective. The tank defect was not the sole cause of death and so Ford tried to argue they were no liable. They were found to be ALSO liable. And so it might be with the WTC buildings. Anyway that is my guess to explain why NIST came up with the explanations they did. CTer will say because they covered up for CD... and that would be another explanation of their behavior.
My sense is that most observers in the end think even if it was defects... we were still attacked and the attacks caused the collapse... The question of whether it was AQ or PNAC is a political one and not a technical one about how the towers fell as they did.