the NIST report

[rman]

in reference to
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x66589


NIST had gotten $20 million to spend on this.

The NIST report tries to make 2 main points:
1. the plane crashes caused fires, weakening of the steel, leading to collapse initiation
2. once collapse has been initiated it becomes "global collapse"

1st point takes up the entire 300 page report.

2nd point is put forth as an assertion, even though "global collapse" has never occurred in the past.

"a mountain of distracting detail"
NIST used finite element analysis to model the planes down to the individual turbine blades of the engines, individual seats and every single strut in the wings.

Almost all of the report deals with highly detailed simulations of the plane crashes. The explanation of the actual collapse initiation mechanism is only 1.5 pages short and is very vague, completely lacking the great attention to detail found in the rest of the report.

The NIST collapse initiation mechanism is the opposite of that of FEMA. FEMA concludes that the connections of the floor trusses to the core and the perimeter wall failed, causing the floors to drop. NIST concludes that the connections of the floor trusses were so strong that the 'sagging' floors locally pulled the perimeter columns inward, causing buckling and falling apart of the outer walls and the core.


"If only they would apply some their millions of dollars to trying to model why these buildings exploded when they came down, i think that would be a much more appropriate use of public resources".
-- Jim Hoffman


Building A Better Mirage: NIST's Cover-Up Of The Crime Of The Century (911)
Guns & Butter on KPFA
With Software Engineer and Research Scientist, Jim Hoffman. Analysis and deconstruction of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) draft government report on the physical evidence regarding the collapses of the World Trade Center twin towers on September 11, 2001. Originally broadcast on September 28, 2005.
http://www.gunsandbutter.net/archives.php?page=1
http://www.gunsandbutter.net/archives.php?si=112 (mp3)

[LARED]

1. For those of you that want to read Mr. Hoffman's

entire work of sophistry on the subject see here

http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/nist/#introduction

[AlienSpaceBat]

2. Fortunately, we don't have to leave this forum

to see your corpus of sophistry and nay-saying ....:boring:

[LARED]

4. Don't you feel blessed? (n/t)

[AlienSpaceBat]

3. A smokescreen

The report hides in plain view the crucial point that its key conclusions, collapse initiation and collapse progression, are mere assertions based on nothing more than bogus and slipshod modelling.

They are relying on the overwhelming mass of detail produced in the report generally to carry the reader through, by creating an impression that all of their work must involve the same amount of evidence and analysis. In the case of the two points that *really* matter, they have nothing to back up what they say.