--- Robin 

> It isn't necessary for the scientists to lie. Just
tell them to find "the  scientific explanation" for
the collapse of the building (as if it weren't already
known), and they will happily trot off and create lots
of lovely models to explain it. IOW they inadvertently
work within the framework that they are given. 

That is so true.

Last year, the NIST final report on WTC7 was already
long overdue, and they solicited proposals for someone
with real expertise. The grant went to ARA in New
Mexico, and here is the solicitation that went out
NIST regarding the collapse of Building 7:

“Create detailed floor analyses to determine likely
modes of failure for **Floors 8 to 46 due** to
failure of one or more supporting columns (at one or
more locations) at the World Trade Center
Building Seven.”

IOW - the NIST is asking whoever accepts the
contract to put blinders on and ++only++ consider
floors 8 to 46. The explosions, of course, were below

That solicitation says it all, folks.

Why do hundreds of working architects and engineers
feel that NIST has failed us badly on this ?

The answer is on their own website (if they have not
yet removed it):


Reply via email to