Reply #121: Isn't this how science works, though?

[hack89]

someone produces a study and puts it out for review. Other scientist contribute comments and conduct their own studies. When differences are found than they are reconciled and a new hypothesis is formed. And the process continues until the vast majority involved feel they have the final answer.

At the end of the day there will be two and not one study that states that the WTC collapses were caused by fires. You can quibble whether arcane technical disagreements over precisely how they collapsed reflects poorly on NIST (I don't) but I see this as another affirmation that NIST's initial assumption that it was fire was correct.

Did you also noticed all the praise Arup heaped on NIST and their study - it clearly left me with the opinion that they felt it was good science.