Send a Tweet
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 7 Share on Twitter Printer Friendly Page More Sharing
General News   

8 House Members View Draft Bill on Independent Science/Tech Probe of WTC 1, 2, 7 Collapses

By       (Page 6 of 25 pages) Become a premium member to see this article and all articles as one long page. (View How Many People Read This)   11 comments
Author 3854
Message Barbara Ellis


            They were also scored on already known and obvious omissions (foreknowledge of collapse, silent demolition compounds such as thermate)

However, the major attack was on their sole reliance on computer tests that were rigged to imitate “the highest temperatures [of fires] and the most amount of structural damage” and trying to hide that fact. The last straw was NIST’s refusal  to provide peers with the models and data. The first rule in any scientific or technological project is that experiments must be replicable anywhere in the world to be accepted as credible [45]

A separate and equally scathing verdict from a chemist encapsulated the objections:


The 9/11 Commission told us that the attacks on September 11th succeeded ultimately because of a “failure of imagination.” NIST will never be accused of that kind of failure, as its new WTC 7 report is nothing but imaginary tripe.

This new story contradicts the previous major claims by NIST, ignores the most important of the existing evidence, produces no scientific test results to support itself, and is so obviously false on its face that not even a fictional character from another planet would believe it.

Fires that could only last 2 to 30 minutes lasted 4 hours (what was burning?). Imaginary temperatures that, according to NIST would have easily weakened the same steel in the towers, left beams fully rigid so that they could push one girder a full 2.2 inches, somehow breaking numerous bolts and studs in unison, as well as buckling the girder, before the beams themselves were affected in any way. Suddenly, this one-girder failure caused numerous floors to collapse, one hair-trigger “switch” column to buckle, and the whole building to fall in a total of 8 seconds. [46]


It was plain to outside peers that NIST once again had fitted results around White House policy concerning 9/11. A major overhaul of the entire study was strongly recommended before publication. Compliance is unlikely because that would mean scrapping the report.

In short, any accurate, objective, and definitive investigation about the collapses will require a truly independent investigation by other experts in science and technology who will be far removed from the influence of FEMA, NIST—and the White House.



New Probe Is Demanded

A new investigation about the collapse causes is not only needed, but wanted by a growing national and international chorus of bellicose peers as well as public figures all demanding a new  one.

NIST’s chief of Fire Science Division, Jamers Quintiere, Ph.D., resigned over the research quality for the 2005 report and joined 1,550 peers calling for a second “real” investigation. They ranged from the military, intelligence agencies and pilots to scientists, engineers, architects, scholars as well as first-responders and 9/11 victims’ families. Some 280 architects and engineers from that group and more than 2,000 affiliates and university majors also are now petitioning Congress for a scientific and technical investigation about the collapses. [47]

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6  |  7  |  8  |  9  |  10  |  11  |  12  |  13  |  14  |  15  |  16  |  17  |  18  |  19  |  20  |  21  |  22  |  23  |  24  |  25


Valuable 4   Must Read 3   Interesting 2  
Rate It | View Ratings

Barbara Ellis Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Dr. Ellis is the principal of Ellis & Associates, LLC, a writers group in Portland OR, a nominee for a Pulitzer Prize in history in 2004 (The Moving Appeal), and a former journalism professor at Louisiana's McNeese State University and Oregon State (more...)
Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEdNews Newsletter
   (Opens new browser window)

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

8 House Members View Draft Bill on Independent Science/Tech Probe of WTC 1, 2, 7 Collapses

Solar Desalination: Surviving Water's Coming Armageddon

Shakespeare Didn't Need College Algebra

Hit Those Democratic Betrayers on HR 2206 Where They Live

To View Comments or Join the Conversation: