 |
|
Add to My Group
|
August 21, 2007 at 14:25:22
by Alan Miller Page 1 of 3 page(s) |
|
|
James Quintiere, Ph.D., former Chief of the Fire Science Division of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), has called for an independent review of NIST’s investigation into the collapses of the World Trade Center Towers on 9/11. “I think the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable,” explained Dr. Quintiere. “Let's look at real alternatives that might have been the cause of the collapse of the World Trade Towers and how that relates to the official cause and what's the significance of one cause versus another.”
James Quintiere, Ph.D.
Dr. Quintiere made his plea during his presentation, “Questions on the WTC Investigations” at the 2007 World Fire Safety Conference. “I wish that there would be a peer review of this,” he said, referring to the NIST investigation. “I think all the records that NIST has assembled should be archived. I would really like to see someone else take a look at what they’ve done; both structurally and from a fire point of view.”
Dr. Quintiere, one of the world’s leading fire science researchers and safety engineers, also encouraged his audience of fellow researchers and engineers to scientifically re-examine the WTC collapses. “I hope to convince you to perhaps become 'Conspiracy Theorists', but in a proper way,” he said.
In his hour-long presentation, Dr. Quintiere discussed many elements of NIST’s investigation that he found problematic. He emphasized, “In every investigation I’ve taken part in, the key has been to establish a timeline. And the timeline is established by witness accounts, by information from alarm systems, by any video that you might have of the event, and then by calculations. And you try to put all of this together. And if your calculations are consistent with some of these hard facts, then perhaps you can have some comfort in the results of your calculations. I have not seen a timeline placed in the NIST report.”
Dr. Quintiere also expressed his frustration at NIST’s failure to provide a report on the third skyscraper that collapsed on 9/11, World Trade Center Building 7. “And that building was not hit by anything,” noted Dr. Quintiere. “It’s more important to take a look at that. Maybe there was damage by the debris falling down that played a significant role. But other than that you had fires burning a long time without fire department intervention. And firefighters were in that building. I have yet to see any kind of story about what they saw. What was burning? Were photographs taken? Nothing!”
World Trade Center Building 7 was 610 feet tall, 47 stories, and would have been the tallest building in 33 states. Although it was not hit by an airplane on 9/11, it completely collapsed into a pile of rubble in less than 8 seconds at 5:20 p.m. on 9/11. In the 6 years since 9/11, NIST has failed to provide any explanation for the collapse. In addition to NIST’s failure to provide an explanation, absolutely no mention of Building 7’s collapse appears in the 9/11 Commission's "full and complete account of the circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks." [To watch a video of the collapse, click here http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/WTC7_Collapse.wmv ]
Dr. Quintiere said he originally “had high hopes” that NIST would do a good job with the investigation. “They’re the central government lab for fire. There are good people there and they can do a good job. But what I also thought they would do is to enlist the service of the ATF [Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives], which has an investigation force and a laboratory of their own for fire. And I thought they would put people out on the street and get gumshoe-type information. What prevented all of this? I think it’s the legal structure that cloaks the Commerce Department and therefore NIST. And so, instead of lawyers as if they were acting on a civil case trying to get depositions and information subpoenaed, those lawyers did the opposite and blocked everything.”
In his presentation, Dr. Quintiere also criticized NIST’s repeated failures to formally respond to serious questions raised about its conclusions regarding the WTC building collapses and the process it employed to arrive at those conclusions. “I sat through all of the NIST hearings. I went to all of their advisory board meetings, as an observer. I made comments at all.”
Responding to a comment from a NIST representative in the audience, Dr. Quintiere said, “I found that throughout your whole investigation it was very difficult to get a clear answer. And when anyone went to your advisory panel meetings or hearings, where they were given five minutes to make a statement; they could never ask any questions. And with all the commentary that I put in, and I spent many hours writing things, and it would bore people if I regurgitated all of that here, I never received one formal reply.”
Although Dr. Quintiere was strongly critical of NIST’s conclusions and its investigatory process, he made it clear he was not a supporter of theories that the Twin Towers were brought down by pre-planted explosives. “If you go to World Trade Center One, nine minutes before its collapse, there was a line of smoke that puffed out. This is one of the basis of the ‘conspiracy theories’ that says the smoke puffing out all around the building is due to somebody setting off an explosive charge. Well, I think, more likely, it’s one of the floors falling down.”
Dr. Quintiere summarized the NIST conclusion about the cause of the collapses of the Twin Towers. “It says that the core columns, uninsulated due to the fact that the aircraft stripped off that insulation; they softened in the heat of the fire and shortened and that led to the collapse. They pulled in the external columns and it caused it to buckle. They went on further to say that there would be no collapse if the insulation remained in place.”
Dr. Quintiere then presented his and his students’ research that contradicts the NIST report and points to a different cause for the collapses; the application of insufficient fire-proofing insulation on the truss rods in the Twin Towers. “I suggest that there’s an equally justifiable theory and that’s the trusses fail as they are heated by the fire with the insulation intact. These are two different conclusions and the accountability for each is dramatically different,” he said.
Dr. Quintiere’s presentation at the World Fire Safety Conference echoed his earlier statement to the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Science, on October 26, 2005, during a hearing on “The Investigation of the World Trade Center Collapse: Findings, Recommendations, and Next Steps”, at which he stated:
“In my opinion, the WTC investigation by NIST falls short of expectations by not definitively finding cause, by not sufficiently linking recommendations of specificity to cause, by not fully invoking all of their authority to seek facts in the investigation, and by the guidance of government lawyers to deter rather than develop fact finding.
http://www.PatriotsQuestion911.com
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
 Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
 View Authors' Articles |
|
|
|
|
| 7 comments |
|
A New Investigation Is What We Need!
One look at this photo tells us the government's version of events is false. Popular trial lawyer Jerry Leaphart is representing several people, including Drs Judy Wood & Morgan Reynolds in their quest for 9/11 Truth. Mr Leaphart, with his full knowledge of legal proceedings, says government officials are taking Dr Wood's WTC directed energy weapon research seriously. Full info on legal proceeding here. People should expect Dr Reynolds' TV-Fakery / No Plane Crash theory to become more popular as well. The Bush administration is falling apart. This is the time to push for a REAL investigation. by CB Brooklyn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 465 comments [18 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Tuesday, Aug 21, 2007 at 8:50:32 PM  (0+)
|
|
NIST Did Not Analyze the "Collapses"
NIST formally responded to Dr Judy Wood's Request for Correction on July 27, 2007. (Here's the reply, archived on the Dept of Commerce website in PDF format.) As you can see, NIST admitted twice in their letter that they only analyzed "collapse initiation", and not the "collapses" themselves. They also do not deny that Applied Research Associates is a manufacturer of directed energy weapons. They simple say there is "no factual evidence to support this claim". Jerry Leaphart says this is a sign to submit evidence! Listen to Leaphart's recent interviews (linked here) where he explains that many government officials are as concerned about the future of the country as we are, and that they want to help. Leaphart plans to file an appeal. by CB Brooklyn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 465 comments [18 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Tuesday, Aug 21, 2007 at 9:07:12 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: clarification...
Applied Research Associates (ARA) was contracted by the government for the NIST Report. But Leaphart claims they have a conflict of interest: Not only is ARA a manufacturer of directed energy weapon technology, by CB Brooklyn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 465 comments [18 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Tuesday, Aug 21, 2007 at 9:17:25 PM (0+)
|
|
Frivolous Claims and Molten Metal
Jerry Leaphart has said in recent interviews (linked in my comments above) that whenever a frivolous claim is filed with a government agency or a court, the response will indicate it as frivolous. But Leaphart notes that NIST's response to Dr Wood's Request for Correction on directed energy weapon evidence says no such thing. Leaphart, being an attorney, is obviously fully knowledgeable in this area. Another issue is the "story" of molten metal in the ruins at Ground Zero. If a new WTC investigation is called for, we should all be aware that the molten metal story is a hoax designed to distract us from molecular dissociation. If molten metal existed at Ground Zero, there would have been multiple steam explosions every time the fire department sprayed water. With all the rain the week following 9/11, the whole Ground Zero area would have been one humongous steam explosion. Since water contacting molten metal causes a steam explosion, the fire department would never spray water anywhere near molten metal since it is a fire hazard. The molten metal evidence has been analyzed and put together here, and we see it's fabricated. One of the scientists who promotes molten metal is Steven Jones. But, for some reason, Jones did not even mention molten metal in his Request for Correction to NIST. I wonder why that is? Dr Wood mentioned directed energy weapons in her RFC, so why didn't Dr Jones mention molten metal? In addition to not mentioning molten metal, Jones also failed to mention thermite/thermate. Perhaps Jones doesn't want NIST to dismiss his RFC as frivolous??? by CB Brooklyn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 465 comments [18 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Tuesday, Aug 21, 2007 at 10:42:26 PM (0+)
|
|
Steel Resolve
'9/11 truth’s concern about the fate of the Towers -- is not a community. It is not a collective. It is not even a coherent stereotype. Or a measurable demographic. Its true numbers have not even begun to be counted -- for it represents not just the few who have written about the subject, hold any particular point of view, lean in the direction of this or that. It is time to discover whether the steel was compromised. Tasked beyond its endurance. Merely the human factor had failed us. An important, vital thing to know... is it not? Fail to take this simple step... we become vulnerable to direct and indirect manipulation without limit, in ways we can scarcely imagine and would never tolerate. I will not mince words here. Some of those factors might not have progressive and easy countermeasures. Some even insurmountable. But the people of New York, these United States need to know -- for sure -- the precise shape and form of threat we faced on September 11th. To preserve and defend our own sanity, direction and purpose. The 'wrong' tower fell first. by HocusLocus (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1 comments) on Wednesday, Aug 22, 2007 at 5:52:59 AM (0+)
|
|
U.S. District Court, Southern New York, Unseals 9/11 Case
The following is a quote from Dr Reynolds' site, nomoregames.net. [Go to the site for the unsealed case PDF.] ================================ Reynolds Makes a Federal Case of 9/11 — Morgan Reynolds "Last month the U.S. District Court, Southern New York, unsealed a 9/11 case filed by Dr. Morgan Reynolds, thereby making the case public. Reynolds is suing on behalf of the United States of America after the U. S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York who represents "the government" declined to intervene in the case. The suit, a so-called qui tam case, alleges that the 9/11 contractors NIST hired to investigate destruction of the WTC Towers on 9/11 defrauded the U.S. government of substantial money by rendering bogus, impossible physical analysis and animations about how two hollow aluminum aircraft (allegedly Boeing 767s) flew into a steel/concrete tower and disappeared. Yet it can be easily demonstrated, after a great deal of hard work by dedicated 9/11 researchers, that no planes hit the towers. The office of Reynolds' attorney, Jerry V. Leaphart of Connecticut, is now serving the defendants in the suit, including Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), Applied Research Associates (ARA), Boeing, American Airlines, United Airlines and Silverstein Properties. I will post new information on the case as developments warrant." by CB Brooklyn (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 465 comments [18 recommended, 1 rejected]) on Wednesday, Aug 22, 2007 at 12:16:22 PM (0+)
|
|
A deeper NIST cover up
A guy who claims to be a skeptic and sites the ommission by the 9-11 Commission of the building #7 collapse then dismisses the huge number of witnesses who heard explosions as the sounds of floors collapsing and then blames insullation rubbing off will be worse than before. The insullation is long gone. It can't be studied. Its not only the explosions. Its a lot more. Get real. by Steve Miller (0 articles, 3 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 6 comments) on Thursday, Aug 23, 2007 at 11:19:46 AM (0+)
|
Want to post your own comment on this Article? 
|
||||
|
||||||||||||||
Must Read (0) 
Well Said (0) 
News (0) 
Touching (0) 
Funny (0) 
Supported (0) 
Interesting (0) 
Inspiring (0) 
Valuable (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tell a Friend:
|
Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews |
