--- 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 from 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. 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): http://wtc.nist.gov/media/AE911Truth-NIST-Written-Submission12-18-07.pdf
