Christophera
Evidence & Reason Rule
Why would NIST try to forensically analyse collapse without the building plans? NO where in their product does it say they had plans.
Yes, incredible that they would attempt such. Then they hired Bazant et al to try and explain "collapse" because they could not make the numbers work.
In the final revision, June 21, 2007, "concrete ... core walls" are mentioned. That revision is no longer available at northewestern U. Why would that be? I feel it is because Bazant was trying to prevent a historical shaming by allowing a deception regarding the structural designs of the Twins to control their analysis.
Here is the text of the revision.
http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11bazant.et.al_6.21.7.html
Consider the NIST disclaimer. It states they did their analysis from "anecdotal evidence", but does not mention plans.
Why would NY state courts let guiliani steal the NYC building plans when NIST needed them for engineering analysis? They ignored federal and state freedom of information laws.
Indeed, why would a state court allow the plans for public buildings that supposedly collapsed killing thousands of innocent people be taken from public offices????? That in itself is a crime.
Why would thousands of tons of steel(evidence) go to India and China when the US steel industry needs the steel?
Such a fact shows how important it was to NOT have Americans witnessing the damage to the steel. Or, thermite leaves a very specific amorphous surface. Much like taking a slab of paraffin and dipping it in molten wax. Rounded, non linear.
Last edited: