Reply #138: I don't think it is ...

[AlienSpaceBat]

I am also willing to give and take re the NIST report. As I said above, it's huge and the great majority of it is unobjectionable.

I have tried to look at the comments. What I get is

Service Unavailable - DNS failure

The server is temporarily unable to service your request. Please try again later.

Reference #11.cbc14752.1136060413.6bb88bc

Looks like big brother is monitoring my IP address ! :) :yoiks:

The point is, though, that on this one germane issue, NIST didn't prove their case.

They produced no evidence of the collapse mechanism, but showed what they deduced happened by means of their software model. I've gone on at length about how they pushed this beyond its reasonable limits in order to show a collapse.

Remember - their systems showed the towers would not collapse when they put in the best estimates of relevant data.

What Arup say on this is that the model can't be right - If the circumstances were as NIST say, their calculations would have been dwarfed by a factor that NIST didn't even consider ...! This is not an endorsement of the NIST collapse hypothesis ! Its a statement that if NISTs model was anywhere near reality a collapse would have happened for a different reason.

The data to recalculate this, and the vital details of the model, are not being disclosed by NIST. Neither have they produced visualisations of the process, or allowed anyone else to have a go at doing so ...

These are the reasons why this element of the report is not in any way conclusive of the collapse mechanism. That, of course, doesn't mean in itself that the towers were demolished.

It does mean though, that the NIST collapse analysis is not anywhere near to an authoritative case.