Reply #120: It speaks to the specific point I was making

[AlienSpaceBat]

NISTs conclusion was challenged as their methodology was faulty.

I use the Arup report to point out not Arup's view on the collapse, but their challenge to the way NIST came to a conclusion.

You have been saying over and over that 1000s of engineers, and the 'engineering community' agree with NIST.

Here is one of the world's largest structural engineers disagreeing with a NIST conclusion, and how they arrived at it.

I am sure you can give many examples of your engineers specifically congratulating NIST on a job well done, and an itemised agreement with all of their conclusions. (or perhaps not ...)

The 1000s of other engineers that currently aren't saying anything about this don't count as agreeing with NIST, their conclusions, or their methods ...