The NIST 9-11 Report on the WTC Collapse

[daws101]

I can tell you why we have opposing views without looking at the NIST report.

Go back to your first opening post. It is full of incorrect assumptions and claims. Let's start with this.


The paragraph above is full of garbage. It was not only "intense heat" that caused the collapse of the twin towers. It was a combination of the plane impact damage AND the resultant fires. You just don't get. The plane impacts weakened the structure and the fires finished them off.

Here is NIST's exlpanation:


I will go no further until you correct your understanding of what actually happened and quit cherry picking bullshit as you see fit to support your bogus beliefs.

Whose cherry picking? NIST agreed the towers withstood the plane impacts, and that it was the fires that caused the collapses.

You must be blind or deliberately trying to troll here. Here is the synopsis of NIST's finding from their own webpage:


Do you see how they say the towers COLLAPSED from the combination of the damage caused by the plane impact AND the fires? I even highlighted/enlarged the "and" between the two reasons. Yes thay resisted the impact. But the impact weakened the structure as a whole. Now apply the fire to the already weakened structure, something they didn't do calculations or testing for (as admitted by Leslie Robertson). The towers collapsed due to both.

Any further claims that it was "just fire" is a lie and you are just trolling.


I did. Read my statement above.


Do you have a reading comprehension problem or did you purposely leave out the AND right in front of the (2)?! It's not "the impacts OR the fire. It was the combination of both.

Now I have asked you numerous times to move onto the subject of any NIST testing regarding this, that solidifies your belief in them, but you seem to be avoiding doing so, why is this?

I refuse to move on because you don't understand what happened. How is this good for the debate? You made statements like the one above that are 100% false. I even provided the quote from NIST themselves that says it was the combination of the fire and impact damage, but you completely ignore that. Why move on when you base you arguments on false evidence?

We already hashed over one of the strikes I have against them and their integrity.
To summarize, you assume that 22,046 lbs of aluminum as opposed to 200,000 tons of steel was what was up to 70 feet deep in the wreckage piles, and was most likely what was reported as being molten/melted "flowing like little rivers" etc....

So on to the testing regarding the fires/fuel load estimates, and the metallurgical studies, so we can discuss how those fared.

Your problem is that you have no verifiable proof that it was molten steel. I don't give a shit how many supposed "experts" you think you have. You can't tell the difference between molten steel and molten aluminum by sight alone. That is the crux of your whole argument and what you are basing temperatures on. You have no verifiable tests as to how how hot the the temperatures were inside the debris pile. That is a fact.

1. I have shown you proof as to why they fireproof structural steel. Especially in restrained structures.
2. I have provided proof that molten steel can look like molten aluminum.
3. You don't understand conduction.
4. You want to compare the process of how a fire can draw oxygen to itself to how water and pyrocool seep downward due to gravity.
5. You want to claim that the twin towers collapsed in 9 and 11 seconds which is easily refuted with videos.
6. you want to claim that there was no resistance in the twin towers yet I can see perimeter panels falling AHEAD of the collapse front of the building proper.

Yet you want to move past all this to see why we have different views?

It's right there in front of you. You have different views because your base evidence is totally incorrect.

bump!

 

[eots]

the NIST report is a joke

 

[daws101]

the NIST report is a joke

another scathing retort by eots .

 

[Gamolon]

Hey "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" right? So this thread is about this extraordinary evidence that you OCT believers say exist, so where is it all?
In the NIST reports? Well this is your chance to post why you believe their guesses, assumptions and theory is so dead on accurate.
Tell me about the fire and fuel load testing, and the metallurgical studies that have you so convinced..

On a side note Mr. Jones. Show us YOUR side's evidence? Where is a white paper that explains how, with calculations and models, the buildings were brought down by controlled demolitions? You seem to think that proving NIST wrong proves controlled demolition. 11 years of total failure.

Maybe you should ask Richard Gage to sink some of his $80,000 salary that he's suck up from his adoring fans into an actual study. How about that? Maybe he should do that instead of traveling the world expressing his unfounded beliefs.

Is that why you have to hang your hat on false claims and assumptions? You can't even defend the garbage in your original post. That's why you want to "move on"...

 

[daws101]

Hey "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" right? So this thread is about this extraordinary evidence that you OCT believers say exist, so where is it all?
In the NIST reports? Well this is your chance to post why you believe their guesses, assumptions and theory is so dead on accurate.
Tell me about the fire and fuel load testing, and the metallurgical studies that have you so convinced..

On a side note Mr. Jones. Show us YOUR side's evidence? Where is a white paper that explains how, with calculations and models, the buildings were brought down by controlled demolitions? You seem to think that proving NIST wrong proves controlled demolition. 11 years of total failure.

Maybe you should ask Richard Gage to sink some of his $80,000 salary that he's suck up from his adoring fans into an actual study. How about that? Maybe he should do that instead of traveling the world expressing his unfounded beliefs.

Is that why you have to hang your hat on false claims and assumptions? You can't even defend the garbage in your original post. That's why you want to "move on"...

 

[Mr. Jones]

Can you find sources that were at GZ that adamantly deny the existence of any molten steel or metal materials?

Why, if you're so cocksure about there being molten steel, do you keep using the term "molten metal/s"?

That means there was possibly other metals. Hence, some of your "expert" witnesses saying "molten metal" and not "molten steel".

I guarantee you that if I had these witnesses on the stand, I would easily show their visual testimony as being incorrect because they wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the two photos I keep posting.

That's a fact.

That blows your whole "melted steel" temperatures out of the water which is why you cling to it like a truther life preserver.

I at times say "molten metals" because it gets to the point where it doesn't even matter anymore what the metal was, the fact is that NO molten metal should have survived
for as long as it was reported, and no fires should have been expected to last as long as they did.
I have shown you that the likelihood of it being aluminum is extremely unlikely, even using one of your own "debunking" sites figures, and the placement of aluminum throughout the buildings in relation to where the molted "metals" and fires were reported etc...
I have shown you that indeed there were numerous eyewitness reports and confirmations including Robertson and other credible people..

I see you can't answer the question, nor do you have anything rational to say regarding the other questions I asked you.
Fact is, you can't deny that numerous reports including eyewitnesses like Robertson claimed he saw it, and claimed it was "melted steel flowing like a little river"
and you have no rational or convincing explanation as to why the NIST blatantly ignored this.
All you can do is try to spin it in the most absurd way possible, and you fail to produce any viable defense in favor of NIST, and their disregard of this widely seen, and reported phenomena, that included huge efforts to put out oxygen starved fires that lasted for 100 days.
This isn't about proving each other wrong, it is just an attempt to help us try to understand why we have our positions regarding what was said about the 9-11 attacks and the subsequent NIST investigation and their assumptions, and theory.

I have been trying to get you to proceed on and get to other parts of the NIST investigation and report, but you want to continue to defend something that has been talked about at great length, and the conclusions and points have been made regarding our position on the matter.
I think NIST fucked up regarding the molten steel by ignoring overwhelming evidence, and you give them a pass and think it was right for them to do so...end of story.
Now what else in the report/testing do you have that overwhelmingly convinces you
to not even question their accuracy?

 

[Mr. Jones]

Your problem is that you have no verifiable proof that it was molten steel. I don't give a shit how many supposed "experts" you think you have. You can't tell the difference between molten steel and molten aluminum by sight alone. That is the crux of your whole argument and what you are basing temperatures on. You have no verifiable tests as to how how hot the the temperatures were inside the debris pile. That is a fact.

1. I have shown you proof as to why they fireproof structural steel. Especially in restrained structures.
2. I have provided proof that molten steel can look like molten aluminum.
3. You don't understand conduction
4. You want to compare the process of how a fire can draw oxygen to itself to how water and pyrocool seep downward due to gravity.
5. You want to claim that the twin towers collapsed in 9 and 11 seconds which is easily refuted with videos.
6. you want to claim that there was no resistance in the twin towers yet I can see perimeter panels falling AHEAD of the collapse front of the building proper.

Yet you want to move past all this to see why we have different views?

It's right their in front of you. You have different views because your base evidence is totally incorrect.

Like many here you have repeatedly and factually (and remarkably patiently) refuted the underlying "facts" the CT - in this case Mr. Jones - uses to support his particular CT.
As I do not believe Jones is either stupid or ignorant there are only two explanations for his staunch refusal to abandon or at least modify his CT ... either coercion or willful obstinance.
The only question left is why Jones acts in such an irrational way which only Jones or his shrink can answer.

If Mr. Jones and others start to correct all the little incorrect beliefs from the start, it gets rid of the end conclusion.

In this thread all we have accomplished so far is to point out what we personally deem is important or not, and we've only discussed the reports of molten steel, and our views on it. I showed you why many people including many experts in their fields started to doubt NIST's integrity, and that I agree with them.
I am ready to move on to other parts of the NIST report and testing so we can discuss
where else we disagree, or maybe even find some points that we do agree with that we didn't know we agreed on...

I don't know why you are getting bent outta shape over the molten steel, I'm sure it is only one of many parts that other experts questioned anyway.

What else did NIST have to say?

 

[Mr. Jones]

Your problem is that you have no verifiable proof that it was molten steel. I don't give a shit how many supposed "experts" you think you have. You can't tell the difference between molten steel and molten aluminum by sight alone. That is the crux of your whole argument and what you are basing temperatures on. You have no verifiable tests as to how how hot the the temperatures were inside the debris pile. That is a fact.

1. I have shown you proof as to why they fireproof structural steel. Especially in restrained structures.
2. I have provided proof that molten steel can look like molten aluminum.
3. You don't understand conduction
4. You want to compare the process of how a fire can draw oxygen to itself to how water and pyrocool seep downward due to gravity.
5. You want to claim that the twin towers collapsed in 9 and 11 seconds which is easily refuted with videos.
6. you want to claim that there was no resistance in the twin towers yet I can see perimeter panels falling AHEAD of the collapse front of the building proper.

Yet you want to move past all this to see why we have different views?

It's right their in front of you. You have different views because your base evidence is totally incorrect.

Like many here you have repeatedly and factually (and remarkably patiently) refuted the underlying "facts" the CT - in this case Mr. Jones - uses to support his particular CT.
As I do not believe Jones is either stupid or ignorant there are only two explanations for his staunch refusal to abandon or at least modify his CT ... either coercion or willful obstinance.
The only question left is why Jones acts in such an irrational way which only Jones or his shrink can answer.

If Mr. Jones and others start to correct all the little incorrect beliefs from the start, it gets rid of the end conclusion.

That's funny because I think you have incorrect beliefs from the start, but you have signed on to a thread that I made clear was about what in the NIST report/s convinces us that it is accurate or not.
If you do not want to proceed because you and others want to sidetrack it by bringing up other shit, then go and post on another thread. It seems that you are afraid of continuing and keeping with the threads intention and afraid to bring any other things relating to the NIST report up.
I say the NIST report is flawed, and I will show you where and why I think its flawed. Your task in this thread is to show where and why you think it's not.
If you refuse to proceed I can only assume that it is because you are afraid the weakness of what you believe in will be exposed, like the previous point I made.

The primary stated objective of the NIST investigation was to determine the cause of the WTC collapse, and NIST should have conducted a forensic examination of the full spectrum of evidence. I showed you just one instance where many experts feel they didn't, and you want to cut and run already? Aw...because I have different views then you do and can show you specifically where and why I do?
What a fucking crybaby! Wow I gave you too much credit and over estimated your tenacity.

 

[Mr. Jones]

Hey "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" right? So this thread is about this extraordinary evidence that you OCT believers say exist, so where is it all?
In the NIST reports? Well this is your chance to post why you believe their guesses, assumptions and theory is so dead on accurate.
Tell me about the fire and fuel load testing, and the metallurgical studies that have you so convinced..

On a side note Mr. Jones. Show us YOUR side's evidence? Where is a white paper that explains how, with calculations and models, the buildings were brought down by controlled demolitions? You seem to think that proving NIST wrong proves controlled demolition. 11 years of total failure.

Maybe you should ask Richard Gage to sink some of his $80,000 salary that he's suck up from his adoring fans into an actual study. How about that? Maybe he should do that instead of traveling the world expressing his unfounded beliefs.

Is that why you have to hang your hat on false claims and assumptions? You can't even defend the garbage in your original post. That's why you want to "move on"...

What's the matter don't you have anything you can hang your hat on and point to in the NIST reports investigation that solidifies your position?
Cmon, stop being a pussy and let's talk about the rest of their investigation. You all adamantly defend the OCT, so explain to me why?
We've only just started and the molten steel is only one instance I can show YOU where experts and regular folks like me disagree with NIST.

I want to move on because it's obvious we wont change our minds regarding the molten steel reports and the subsequent ignoring of it by NIST, but there are other opportunities in the investigation including testing etc that we can explore.
This isn't about anyone claiming a "victory" as I said, this thread is about helping us understand why we either believe the NIST is accurate or not.

So you have nothing else to declare regarding NIST? There's 10,000 pages of it, I'm sure you could try to find something to talk about?
I tend to side with other experts who publicly refuted their tactics, and their findings. Molten steel is only one of many.
The NIST

 

[Mr. Jones]

the NIST report is a joke

But they don't think so, so I started this thread as an opportunity for all of us to point out it isn't or is and now they just want to run away. I ready to take on what they have to say and show me and they make excuses and want to duck out like sissy's. Shit man, I would have thought they would be eager to point out the NIST's accuracy and really show us how wrong we are!

Fact is this is the kind of behavior we should expect from these people, all talk and no balls.
They believe in something they can't even defend when confronted on it. Fucking pussies.
I guess you're right the NIST report is a fucking joke, but these boneheads will disagree with us, but run away when they have to try to explain why they even disagree!

42 volumes of supporting documentation, 10,000 pages and not a single one of these defenders of the OCT can muster a single post about them......

 

[SAYIT]

Hey "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" right? So this thread is about this extraordinary evidence that you OCT believers say exist, so where is it all?
In the NIST reports? Well this is your chance to post why you believe their guesses, assumptions and theory is so dead on accurate.
Tell me about the fire and fuel load testing, and the metallurgical studies that have you so convinced..

On a side note Mr. Jones. Show us YOUR side's evidence? Where is a white paper that explains how, with calculations and models, the buildings were brought down by controlled demolitions? You seem to think that proving NIST wrong proves controlled demolition. 11 years of total failure.

Maybe you should ask Richard Gage to sink some of his $80,000 salary that he's suck up from his adoring fans into an actual study. How about that? Maybe he should do that instead of traveling the world expressing his unfounded beliefs.

Is that why you have to hang your hat on false claims and assumptions? You can't even defend the garbage in your original post. That's why you want to "move on"...

What's the matter don't you have anything you can hang your hat on and point to in the NIST reports investigation that solidifies your position?
Cmon, stop being a pussy and let's talk about the rest of their investigation. You all adamantly defend the OCT, so explain to me why?
We've only just started and the molten steel is only one instance I can show YOU where experts and regular folks like me disagree with NIST.

I want to move on because it's obvious we wont change our minds regarding the molten steel reports and the subsequent ignoring of it by NIST, but there are other opportunities in the investigation including testing etc that we can explore.
This isn't about anyone claiming a "victory" as I said, this thread is about helping us understand why we either believe the NIST is accurate or not.

So you have nothing else to declare regarding NIST? There's 10,000 pages of it, I'm sure you could try to find something to talk about?
I tend to side with other experts who publicly refuted their tactics, and their findings. Molten steel is only one of many.
The NIST

Not so fast, Princess.
It was you who brought "molten steel" into this discussion and have not only failed to prove it existed but failed to admit no one really knows what those molten mats were. There is no point moving beyond this point until you do so.

 

[SAYIT]

the NIST report is a joke

But they don't think so, so I started this thread as an opportunity for all of us to point out it isn't or is and now they just want to run away. I ready to take on what they have to say and show me and they make excuses and want to duck out like sissy's. Shit man, I would have thought they would be eager to point out the NIST's accuracy and really show us how wrong we are!

Fact is this is the kind of behavior we should expect from these people, all talk and no balls.
They believe in something they can't even defend when confronted on it. Fucking pussies.
I guess you're right the NIST report is a fucking joke, but these boneheads will disagree with us, but run away when they have to try to explain why they even disagree!

42 volumes of supporting documentation, 10,000 pages and not a single one of these defenders of the OCT can muster a single post about them......

What a pompous jackass! Either you don't realize you've had your ass handed to you (again) or you're whistling past the graveyard. What has been irrefutably established is that without assumptions, suppositions, half-truths, pseudoscience and outright fabrications you and your CT Movement have nothing. Whatever shortcomings the NIST report may have pale when compared to the gapping holes in your CTs. You couldn't even get out of the starting block with your "molten steel" BS and given the way you cling to it you must consider it critical to your conclusions. It seems to me if you can not be honest in this discussion there is little point to it.

 

[Mr. Jones]

On a side note Mr. Jones. Show us YOUR side's evidence? Where is a white paper that explains how, with calculations and models, the buildings were brought down by controlled demolitions? You seem to think that proving NIST wrong proves controlled demolition. 11 years of total failure.

Maybe you should ask Richard Gage to sink some of his $80,000 salary that he's suck up from his adoring fans into an actual study. How about that? Maybe he should do that instead of traveling the world expressing his unfounded beliefs.

Is that why you have to hang your hat on false claims and assumptions? You can't even defend the garbage in your original post. That's why you want to "move on"...

What's the matter don't you have anything you can hang your hat on and point to in the NIST reports investigation that solidifies your position?
Cmon, stop being a pussy and let's talk about the rest of their investigation. You all adamantly defend the OCT, so explain to me why?
We've only just started and the molten steel is only one instance I can show YOU where experts and regular folks like me disagree with NIST.

I want to move on because it's obvious we wont change our minds regarding the molten steel reports and the subsequent ignoring of it by NIST, but there are other opportunities in the investigation including testing etc that we can explore.
This isn't about anyone claiming a "victory" as I said, this thread is about helping us understand why we either believe the NIST is accurate or not.

So you have nothing else to declare regarding NIST? There's 10,000 pages of it, I'm sure you could try to find something to talk about?
I tend to side with other experts who publicly refuted their tactics, and their findings. Molten steel is only one of many.
The NIST

Not so fast, Princess.
It was you who brought "molten steel" into this discussion and have not only failed to prove it existed but failed to admit no one really knows what those molten mats were. There is no point moving beyond this point until you do so.

BS, it can't be helped if you chose to ignore the pages of information that included many eyewitnesses and confirmations, and all the info that showed you your reasoning is wrong.You certainly haven't proved I am wrong for pointing out why I question NIST's integrity, especially by ignoring all that was posted.
You of all people have no place in a discussion regarding the NIST report, as you have shown one of the highest levels of willful ignorance on the USMB in years.
You want to tackle and answer the questions I posted above be my guest. Let's start with what you have as far as any supporting documentation regarding the fires, fuel loads, and studies on the steel itself.
I don't expect you to post anything because you have shown that you know nothing and are only here as a lame cheerleader defending a CT by hiding behind others.

 

[SAYIT]

What's the matter don't you have anything you can hang your hat on and point to in the NIST reports investigation that solidifies your position?
Cmon, stop being a pussy and let's talk about the rest of their investigation. You all adamantly defend the OCT, so explain to me why?
We've only just started and the molten steel is only one instance I can show YOU where experts and regular folks like me disagree with NIST.

I want to move on because it's obvious we wont change our minds regarding the molten steel reports and the subsequent ignoring of it by NIST, but there are other opportunities in the investigation including testing etc that we can explore.
This isn't about anyone claiming a "victory" as I said, this thread is about helping us understand why we either believe the NIST is accurate or not.

So you have nothing else to declare regarding NIST? There's 10,000 pages of it, I'm sure you could try to find something to talk about?
I tend to side with other experts who publicly refuted their tactics, and their findings. Molten steel is only one of many.
The NIST

Not so fast, Princess.
It was you who brought "molten steel" into this discussion and have not only failed to prove it existed but failed to admit no one really knows what those molten mats were. There is no point moving beyond this point until you do so.

BS, it can't be helped if you chose to ignore the pages of information that included many eyewitnesses and confirmations, and all the info that showed you your reasoning is wrong.You certainly haven't proved I am wrong for pointing out why I question NIST's integrity, especially by ignoring all that was posted.
You of all people have no place in a discussion regarding the NIST report, as you have shown one of the highest levels of willful ignorance on the USMB in years.
You want to tackle and answer the questions I posted above be my guest. Let's start with what you have as far as any supporting documentation regarding the fires, fuel loads, and studies on the steel itself.
I don't expect you to post anything because you have shown that you know nothing and are only here as a lame cheerleader defending a CT by hiding behind others.

Like you I am neither a physicist nor an engineer, Princess, but unlike you I don't pretend to be and from what I've seen of your proof you need to get back to the drawing board.

 

[eots]

On a side note Mr. Jones. Show us YOUR side's evidence? Where is a white paper that explains how, with calculations and models, the buildings were brought down by controlled demolitions? You seem to think that proving NIST wrong proves controlled demolition. 11 years of total failure.

Maybe you should ask Richard Gage to sink some of his $80,000 salary that he's suck up from his adoring fans into an actual study. How about that? Maybe he should do that instead of traveling the world expressing his unfounded beliefs.

Is that why you have to hang your hat on false claims and assumptions? You can't even defend the garbage in your original post. That's why you want to "move on"...

What's the matter don't you have anything you can hang your hat on and point to in the NIST reports investigation that solidifies your position?
Cmon, stop being a pussy and let's talk about the rest of their investigation. You all adamantly defend the OCT, so explain to me why?
We've only just started and the molten steel is only one instance I can show YOU where experts and regular folks like me disagree with NIST.

I want to move on because it's obvious we wont change our minds regarding the molten steel reports and the subsequent ignoring of it by NIST, but there are other opportunities in the investigation including testing etc that we can explore.
This isn't about anyone claiming a "victory" as I said, this thread is about helping us understand why we either believe the NIST is accurate or not.

So you have nothing else to declare regarding NIST? There's 10,000 pages of it, I'm sure you could try to find something to talk about?
I tend to side with other experts who publicly refuted their tactics, and their findings. Molten steel is only one of many.
The NIST

Not so fast, Princess.
It was you who brought "molten steel" into this discussion and have not only failed to prove it existed but failed to admit no one really knows what those molten mats were. There is no point moving beyond this point until you do so.

Just another failing of NIST and another example of eyewitness testimony disregarded

from your hero Mr gross

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HVFwkAMd2-k]9//11 NIST denies evidence of molten steel at the WTC Site (compilation) - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Mr. Jones]

the NIST report is a joke

But they don't think so, so I started this thread as an opportunity for all of us to point out it isn't or is and now they just want to run away. I ready to take on what they have to say and show me and they make excuses and want to duck out like sissy's. Shit man, I would have thought they would be eager to point out the NIST's accuracy and really show us how wrong we are!

Fact is this is the kind of behavior we should expect from these people, all talk and no balls.
They believe in something they can't even defend when confronted on it. Fucking pussies.
I guess you're right the NIST report is a fucking joke, but these boneheads will disagree with us, but run away when they have to try to explain why they even disagree!

42 volumes of supporting documentation, 10,000 pages and not a single one of these defenders of the OCT can muster a single post about them......

What a pompous jackass! Either you don't realize you've had your ass handed to you (again) or you're whistling past the graveyard. What has been irrefutably established is that without assumptions, suppositions, half-truths, pseudoscience and outright fabrications you and your CT Movement have nothing. Whatever shortcomings the NIST report may have pale when compared to the gapping holes in your CTs. You couldn't even get out of the starting block with your "molten steel" BS and given the way you cling to it you must consider it critical to your conclusions. It seems to me if you can not be honest in this discussion there is little point to it.

You have not shown anywhere that which you claim asshole.
I have shown the many numerous reports and shown how highly unlikely it is for YOU NIST and others to ASSUME it could have been aluminum
I have shown that you are a liar and your BS CT site is wrong, using their own numbers. I have shown that you lied regarding Robertson on video saying he saw the molten steel.

My objective is to show where and why I have no faith in the NIST report, and IMO they lack integrity. The task of others is to show where and why they think they do have integrity, and you have not done anything close to that.
You never answer any of the questions I ask in this thread, and somehow you think you have contributed anything? You like to skip much of what is posted.
Get a fucking life asshole.

 

[Mr. Jones]

What's the matter don't you have anything you can hang your hat on and point to in the NIST reports investigation that solidifies your position?
Cmon, stop being a pussy and let's talk about the rest of their investigation. You all adamantly defend the OCT, so explain to me why?
We've only just started and the molten steel is only one instance I can show YOU where experts and regular folks like me disagree with NIST.

I want to move on because it's obvious we wont change our minds regarding the molten steel reports and the subsequent ignoring of it by NIST, but there are other opportunities in the investigation including testing etc that we can explore.
This isn't about anyone claiming a "victory" as I said, this thread is about helping us understand why we either believe the NIST is accurate or not.

So you have nothing else to declare regarding NIST? There's 10,000 pages of it, I'm sure you could try to find something to talk about?
I tend to side with other experts who publicly refuted their tactics, and their findings. Molten steel is only one of many.
The NIST

Not so fast, Princess.
It was you who brought "molten steel" into this discussion and have not only failed to prove it existed but failed to admit no one really knows what those molten mats were. There is no point moving beyond this point until you do so.

Just another failing of NIST and another example of eyewitness testimony disregarded

from your hero Mr gross

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HVFwkAMd2-k]9//11 NIST denies evidence of molten steel at the WTC Site (compilation) - YouTube[/ame]

This is my point, but these other people expect me to ignore this just like they do.
Not a single one of them can answer any of the points I made, and are afraid to move on.

 

[SAYIT]

What's the matter don't you have anything you can hang your hat on and point to in the NIST reports investigation that solidifies your position?
Cmon, stop being a pussy and let's talk about the rest of their investigation. You all adamantly defend the OCT, so explain to me why?
We've only just started and the molten steel is only one instance I can show YOU where experts and regular folks like me disagree with NIST.

I want to move on because it's obvious we wont change our minds regarding the molten steel reports and the subsequent ignoring of it by NIST, but there are other opportunities in the investigation including testing etc that we can explore.
This isn't about anyone claiming a "victory" as I said, this thread is about helping us understand why we either believe the NIST is accurate or not.

So you have nothing else to declare regarding NIST? There's 10,000 pages of it, I'm sure you could try to find something to talk about?
I tend to side with other experts who publicly refuted their tactics, and their findings. Molten steel is only one of many.
The NIST

Not so fast, Princess.
It was you who brought "molten steel" into this discussion and have not only failed to prove it existed but failed to admit no one really knows what those molten mats were. There is no point moving beyond this point until you do so.

Just another failing of NIST and another example of eyewitness testimony disregarded

from your hero Mr gross

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HVFwkAMd2-k]9//11 NIST denies evidence of molten steel at the WTC Site (compilation) - YouTube[/ame]

The problem here is you dump Youtube after Youtube here and when I open them I find they don't support your claims. Either you don't watch them or you hope nobody else will. You claimed the cop in your last Youtube supported your previous Youtubes but, in fact, he did the opposite. Youtube interviews from Nazi sites like AFP are readily available but only Nazi types bother with them. You're busted again.

 

[SAYIT]

But they don't think so, so I started this thread as an opportunity for all of us to point out it isn't or is and now they just want to run away. I ready to take on what they have to say and show me and they make excuses and want to duck out like sissy's. Shit man, I would have thought they would be eager to point out the NIST's accuracy and really show us how wrong we are!

Fact is this is the kind of behavior we should expect from these people, all talk and no balls.
They believe in something they can't even defend when confronted on it. Fucking pussies.
I guess you're right the NIST report is a fucking joke, but these boneheads will disagree with us, but run away when they have to try to explain why they even disagree!

42 volumes of supporting documentation, 10,000 pages and not a single one of these defenders of the OCT can muster a single post about them......

What a pompous jackass! Either you don't realize you've had your ass handed to you (again) or you're whistling past the graveyard. What has been irrefutably established is that without assumptions, suppositions, half-truths, pseudoscience and outright fabrications you and your CT Movement have nothing. Whatever shortcomings the NIST report may have pale when compared to the gapping holes in your CTs. You couldn't even get out of the starting block with your "molten steel" BS and given the way you cling to it you must consider it critical to your conclusions. It seems to me if you can not be honest in this discussion there is little point to it.

You have not shown anywhere that which you claim asshole.
I have shown the many numerous reports and shown how highly unlikely it is for YOU NIST and others to ASSUME it could have been aluminum
I have shown that you are a liar and your BS CT site is wrong, using their own numbers. I have shown that you lied regarding Robertson on video saying he saw the molten steel.

You've done nothing of the sort, Princess, but you have gotten your pathetic ass kicked daily. You have not proven what that molten material was and neither has anyone else.

 

[eots]

Not so fast, Princess.
It was you who brought "molten steel" into this discussion and have not only failed to prove it existed but failed to admit no one really knows what those molten mats were. There is no point moving beyond this point until you do so.

Just another failing of NIST and another example of eyewitness testimony disregarded

from your hero Mr gross

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HVFwkAMd2-k]9//11 NIST denies evidence of molten steel at the WTC Site (compilation) - YouTube[/ame]

The problem here is you dump Youtube after Youtube here and when I open them I find they don't support your claims. Either you don't watch them or you hope nobody else will. You claimed the cop in your last Youtube supported your previous Youtubes but, in fact, he did the opposite. Youtube interviews from Nazi sites like AFP are readily available but only Nazi types bother with them. You're busted again.

Nazis sites...lol...you wreak of desperation