Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of 9/11

[creativedreams]

Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

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 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.”

Why were not alternative collapse hypotheses investigated and discussed as NIST had stated repeatedly that they would do? ...


Spoliation of a fire scene is a basis for destroying a legal case in an investigation. Most of the steel was discarded, although the key elements of the core steel were demographically labeled. A careful reading of the NIST report shows that they have no evidence that the temperatures they predict as necessary for failure are corroborated by findings of the little steel debris they have. Why hasn't NIST declared that this spoliation of the steel was a gross error?

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.
OpEdNews - Page 2 of Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

 

[Gamolon]

Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

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 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.”

Why were not alternative collapse hypotheses investigated and discussed as NIST had stated repeatedly that they would do? ...


Spoliation of a fire scene is a basis for destroying a legal case in an investigation. Most of the steel was discarded, although the key elements of the core steel were demographically labeled. A careful reading of the NIST report shows that they have no evidence that the temperatures they predict as necessary for failure are corroborated by findings of the little steel debris they have. Why hasn't NIST declared that this spoliation of the steel was a gross error?

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.
OpEdNews - Page 2 of Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

What does he think caused the collapase of the towers?

 

[eots]

he thinks he does not know with certainty..he is a scientist and researcher who likes to deal in facts and anyone who does not realise the boldness and even danger of his denouncement of the report and his call for his peers to become conspiracy theorist is not being realistic...he does not say it was controlled demolition his only comment on that is he believes the squibs are most likely from falling floors and nothing more the fact he finds the findings inconclusive questionable and not supported with evidence and efforts to find facts were actively deterred should be enough to warrant a proper independent investigation as he has called for..put yourself in this mans shoes and think of the courage it took and read between the lines a little...its a cover-up..to say of what precisely requires an independent investigation with full authority. subpoena power .. testimony under oath release of all requested evidence

 

[creativedreams]

Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

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 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.”

Why were not alternative collapse hypotheses investigated and discussed as NIST had stated repeatedly that they would do? ...


Spoliation of a fire scene is a basis for destroying a legal case in an investigation. Most of the steel was discarded, although the key elements of the core steel were demographically labeled. A careful reading of the NIST report shows that they have no evidence that the temperatures they predict as necessary for failure are corroborated by findings of the little steel debris they have. Why hasn't NIST declared that this spoliation of the steel was a gross error?

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.
OpEdNews - Page 2 of Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

What does he think caused the collapase of the towers?

Good question? It appears he has a pretty good idea what didn't cause the collapse...

Military Leader's with Disturbing 9/11 Statements:
Military and Political Leaders in USA and Worldwide with disturbing 9/11 statements

This guy explains the debunking strategy going on


Joel M. Skousen – Former U.S. Marine Corps fighter pilot. Commercial pilot. Aircraft flown: McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom, Douglas A-4 Skyhawk, Grumman F-9 Cougar, North American T-2C Buckeye, various civilian planes. Member, Experimental Aircraft Association. Member, Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association. Former Chairman of the Conservative National Committee in Washington DC and Executive Editor of Conservative Digest.

Essay Debunking the Debunkers 2/14/05: "For over a decade now, the PTB [Powers That Be] have used an odd vehicle to do their debunking on a variety of issues - Popular Mechanics Magazine (a Hearst publication). I suppose they are targeting the back-yard mechanic and auto-enthusiast crowd, who are often prone to accepting conspiracy facts and theories.

In the March 2005 issue, PM magazine singled out 16 issues or claims of the 9/11 skeptics that point to government collusion and systematically attempted to debunk each one. Of the 16, most missed the mark and almost half were straw men arguments - either ridiculous arguments that few conspiracists believed or restatements of the arguments that were highly distorted so as to make them look weaker than they really were. ...

I am one of those who claim there are factual arguments pointing to conspiracy, and that truth is not served by taking cheap shots at those who see gaping flaws in the government story ...

There is significant evidence that the aircraft impacts did not cause the collapse [of the Twin Towers] ...

The issues of the penetration hole [at the Pentagon] and the lack of large pieces of debris simply do not jive with the official story, but they are explainable if you include the parking lot video evidence that shows a huge white explosion at impact. This cannot happen with an aircraft laden only with fuel. It can only happen in the presence of high explosives."



Puts in a statement about controlled press too

Commander Dennis Henry, U.S. Navy Reserve (ret), BS CE, PE – Retired from U.S. Navy Reserve, Civil Engineering Corps after 20 years of service. Retired Licensed Professional Engineer, State of Missouri. 34 years of service as a City Engineer, designing bridges, roadways, storm, sanitary sewers, and traffic signals.

"Being a civil engineer and understanding the laws of physics, I know that a building cannot fall at free fall speed without the floors already falling also giving no resistance. I wish our Congressmen were as smart, and also showed some backbone and got a truly independent investigation going. Also, this 911 truth movement has shown to me that our press is as every bit controlled and spits out as much propaganda as I thought Pravda did for the old Soviet Union. My eyes have been awakened to many things, and I have come to learn that we do not live in as free a country as I thought we did, and with the passage of the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, it has become even less so."

 

[Fizz]

he wants a new investigation.

good!!!

thats not proof of an inside job.

 

[Gamolon]

Good question? It appears he has a pretty good idea what didn't cause the collapse...

Mr. Quintiere wrote in his very own paper that he doesn't think the columns failing are what caused the collapse.

He says, based on the evidence and studies he has seen, that the cause of the collapses were due to the FIRES causing the FLOOR TRUSSES to fail. The METAL floor trusses. Metal that certain people say couldn't be affected by office fires.

 

[eots]

Good question? It appears he has a pretty good idea what didn't cause the collapse...

Mr. Quintiere wrote in his very own paper that he doesn't think the columns failing are what caused the collapse.

He says, based on the evidence and studies he has seen, that the cause of the collapses were due to the FIRES causing the FLOOR TRUSSES to fail. The METAL floor trusses. Metal that certain people say couldn't be affected by office fires.

that's no true at all he presents briefly the suggestion that is yet another equally plausible theory then goes on to encourage his peers to be conspiracy theorist calls their findings questionable saying the should be archived for peer review then goes on to denounce the integrity of the entire process saying it was not fact driven ,,that investigations were blocked

 

[Gamolon]

Good question? It appears he has a pretty good idea what didn't cause the collapse...

Mr. Quintiere wrote in his very own paper that he doesn't think the columns failing are what caused the collapse.

He says, based on the evidence and studies he has seen, that the cause of the collapses were due to the FIRES causing the FLOOR TRUSSES to fail. The METAL floor trusses. Metal that certain people say couldn't be affected by office fires.

that's no true at all he presents briefly the suggestion that is yet another equally plausible theory then goes on to encourage his peers to be conspiracy theorist calls their findings questionable saying the should be archived for peer review then goes on to denounce the integrity of the entire process saying it was not fact driven ,,that investigations were blocked

WRONG! He doesn't "briefly suggest" anything. It's the conclusion at the end of his written paper. He is questioning the findings and evidence that NIST uses to come to the conclusion that the columns are what failed. Are you suggesting that he, in a round about way, is suggesting the people become conspiracy theorists because he thinks thermite and explosives is another plausible cause?

3. Conclusions
I contend that the NIST analysis used a fuel load that was too low and
their fire durations are consequently too short. Only these short fires could
then heat the bare core columns as NIST reports. The fires were too short
to heat the insulated trusses to failure. The NIST analysis has flaws, is
incomplete, and has led to an unsupported conclusion on the cause of the
collapse. An alternative hypothesis with the insulated trusses at the root cause
appears to have more support. Heat transfer analyses, a scale model, and
the UL furnace tests all indicate that the steel trusses can attain temperatures
corresponding to failure based on structural analyses. This hypothesis puts
the blame on the insufficiency of the truss insulation. Something NIST says
was not an issue. The two different hypotheses lead to very different consequences with
respect to recommendations and remedial action. I think the evidence is
strong enough to take a harder look at the current conclusions. I would
recommend that all records of the investigation be archived, that the NIST
study be subject to a peer review, and that consideration be given to reopening
this investigation to assure no lost fire safety issues.

You lose again eots. So yes, what I posted WAS true.

 

[eots]

Mr. Quintiere wrote in his very own paper that he doesn't think the columns failing are what caused the collapse.

He says, based on the evidence and studies he has seen, that the cause of the collapses were due to the FIRES causing the FLOOR TRUSSES to fail. The METAL floor trusses. Metal that certain people say couldn't be affected by office fires.

that's no true at all he presents briefly the suggestion that is yet another equally plausible theory then goes on to encourage his peers to be conspiracy theorist calls their findings questionable saying the should be archived for peer review then goes on to denounce the integrity of the entire process saying it was not fact driven ,,that investigations were blocked

WRONG! He doesn't "briefly suggest" anything. It's the conclusion at the end of his written paper. He is questioning the findings and evidence that NIST uses to come to the conclusion that the columns are what failed. Are you suggesting that he, in a round about way, is suggesting the people become conspiracy theorists because he thinks thermite and explosives is another plausible cause?

3. Conclusions
I contend that the NIST analysis used a fuel load that was too low and
their fire durations are consequently too short. Only these short fires could
then heat the bare core columns as NIST reports. The fires were too short
to heat the insulated trusses to failure. The NIST analysis has flaws, is
incomplete, and has led to an unsupported conclusion on the cause of the
collapse. An alternative hypothesis with the insulated trusses at the root cause
appears to have more support. Heat transfer analyses, a scale model, and
the UL furnace tests all indicate that the steel trusses can attain temperatures
corresponding to failure based on structural analyses. This hypothesis puts
the blame on the insufficiency of the truss insulation. Something NIST says
was not an issue. The two different hypotheses lead to very different consequences with
respect to recommendations and remedial action. I think the evidence is
strong enough to take a harder look at the current conclusions. I would
recommend that all records of the investigation be archived, that the NIST
study be subject to a peer review, and that consideration be given to reopening
this investigation to assure no lost fire safety issues.

You lose again eots. So yes, what I posted WAS true.

“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.


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.”


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 spent many hours writing things, and it would bore people if I regurgitated all of that here, I never received one formal reply.”

the guidance of government lawyers to deter rather than develop fact finding.

Why were not alternative collapse hypotheses investigated and discussed as NIST had stated repeatedly that they would do?




although the key elements of the core steel were demographically labeled. A careful reading of the NIST report shows that they have no evidence that the temperatures they predict as necessary for failure


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



OpEdNews - Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

 

[Gamolon]

that's no true at all he presents briefly the suggestion that is yet another equally plausible theory then goes on to encourage his peers to be conspiracy theorist calls their findings questionable saying the should be archived for peer review then goes on to denounce the integrity of the entire process saying it was not fact driven ,,that investigations were blocked

WRONG! He doesn't "briefly suggest" anything. It's the conclusion at the end of his written paper. He is questioning the findings and evidence that NIST uses to come to the conclusion that the columns are what failed. Are you suggesting that he, in a round about way, is suggesting the people become conspiracy theorists because he thinks thermite and explosives is another plausible cause?

3. Conclusions
I contend that the NIST analysis used a fuel load that was too low and
their fire durations are consequently too short. Only these short fires could
then heat the bare core columns as NIST reports. The fires were too short
to heat the insulated trusses to failure. The NIST analysis has flaws, is
incomplete, and has led to an unsupported conclusion on the cause of the
collapse. An alternative hypothesis with the insulated trusses at the root cause
appears to have more support. Heat transfer analyses, a scale model, and
the UL furnace tests all indicate that the steel trusses can attain temperatures
corresponding to failure based on structural analyses. This hypothesis puts
the blame on the insufficiency of the truss insulation. Something NIST says
was not an issue. The two different hypotheses lead to very different consequences with
respect to recommendations and remedial action. I think the evidence is
strong enough to take a harder look at the current conclusions. I would
recommend that all records of the investigation be archived, that the NIST
study be subject to a peer review, and that consideration be given to reopening
this investigation to assure no lost fire safety issues.

You lose again eots. So yes, what I posted WAS true.

“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.


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.”


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 spent many hours writing things, and it would bore people if I regurgitated all of that here, I never received one formal reply.”

the guidance of government lawyers to deter rather than develop fact finding.

Why were not alternative collapse hypotheses investigated and discussed as NIST had stated repeatedly that they would do?




although the key elements of the core steel were demographically labeled. A careful reading of the NIST report shows that they have no evidence that the temperatures they predict as necessary for failure


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



OpEdNews - Article: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation

Right. He believes the evidence points to the trusses failing, not the columns. What don;t you get/

Why don't don't you write him and ask if he believes in other theories or not. That would put an end to this discussion.

 

[eots]

with an investigation that is blocked.. requested evidence withheld.. with fact finding deterred his support of controlled demolition is not the issue ..the need for an re-investigation without these obstacles is the issue...

 

[Gamolon]

with an investigation that is blocked.. requested evidence withheld.. with fact finding deterred his support of controlled demolition is not the issue ..the need for an re-investigation without these obstacles is the issue...

I get it now. If the "fact finding" wasn't deterred, he would have found evidence of a controlled demolition right?

 

[eots]

wherever the truth leads us..