You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #116: For WTC2, NIST claims they could not get the plans from the PA [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
DoYouEverWonder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-28-06 07:56 AM
Response to Reply #113
116. For WTC2, NIST claims they could not get the plans from the PA
Edited on Mon Aug-28-06 07:56 AM by DoYouEverWonder
for any of the floors in the impact zone except for the 78th floor. They based all of their modeling on that one floor. Supposedly they used anecdotal evidence to adjust for some of the differences between floors, but it appears they missed some major differences.

Surprisingly, the man who was one of the lead investigators complained that he could not get access to a lot of the documents, building plans, pictures and videos that he would have liked to have seen. Makes it difficult to do much of an investigation when you've got one arm tied behind your back.


Testimony of Dr. Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl

Professor - Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
University of California, Berkeley

March 6, 2002 Hearing on “Learning from 9/11: Understanding the Collapse of the World Trade Center”


The main impediments to my work were and still are:

1. Not having a copy of the engineering drawings and design and construction documents.

2. Not having copies of the photographs and videotapes that various agencies might have taken during and immediately after the collapse.

http://www.house.gov/science/full02/mar06/astaneh.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -WTC during construction DoYouEverWonder  Aug-18-06 05:52 PM   #0 
  - Top view during destruction  Sinti   Aug-18-06 06:16 PM   #1 
  - Just one correction...  Carefulplease   Aug-18-06 11:50 PM   #2 
  - My mistake - It was the cranes not the building itself  DoYouEverWonder   Aug-20-06 05:02 PM   #7 
  - And yet  dailykoff   Aug-20-06 11:54 AM   #3 
  - No ... we hold firm to the idea  hack89   Aug-20-06 02:32 PM   #4 
     - It would have taken 18+ well-aimed planes  dailykoff   Aug-22-06 12:14 AM   #9 
     - Why do you continue to misrepresent safety factors?  AZCat   Aug-22-06 12:38 AM   #10 
        - Stick to your plumbing  dailykoff   Aug-22-06 12:41 AM   #11 
           - Luckily...  AZCat   Aug-22-06 12:46 AM   #12 
     - Which colums?  DoYouEverWonder   Aug-22-06 07:22 AM   #13 
        - Both.  dailykoff   Aug-22-06 11:51 AM   #14 
           - What calculation do you use? n/t  Carefulplease   Aug-22-06 01:34 PM   #15 
              - 2 core and 10 perimeter columns per plane. (n/t)  dailykoff   Aug-22-06 05:56 PM   #16 
                 - Your model is lacking.  AZCat   Aug-22-06 06:38 PM   #17 
                    - Please feel free to present  DoYouEverWonder   Aug-22-06 06:42 PM   #18 
                    - Someone else's data?  AZCat   Aug-22-06 06:45 PM   #19 
                       - What do your experts say  DoYouEverWonder   Aug-22-06 07:04 PM   #20 
                          - I think we have a confusing provenance here.  AZCat   Aug-22-06 07:10 PM   #21 
                             - I was referring to dailykoff  DoYouEverWonder   Aug-22-06 07:22 PM   #22 
                                - Ah - clarity ensues.  AZCat   Aug-22-06 08:00 PM   #24 
                                   - No.  dailykoff   Aug-22-06 08:22 PM   #26 
                                   - Whoops - you're right.  AZCat   Aug-22-06 08:27 PM   #27 
                                      - Thanks.  dailykoff   Aug-22-06 09:53 PM   #29 
                                         - You mean other than your fallacious assumption of linearity?  AZCat   Aug-23-06 01:43 AM   #31 
                                            - I mean something specific. (n/t)  dailykoff   Aug-23-06 01:47 AM   #32 
                                               - That IS something specific. n/t  AZCat   Aug-23-06 01:53 AM   #33 
                                               - Well, your objection is quite specific and to the point...  Carefulplease   Aug-23-06 01:59 AM   #35 
                                               - I thought it was...  AZCat   Aug-23-06 09:13 PM   #59 
                                   - I don't care what you assume  DoYouEverWonder   Aug-23-06 05:55 PM   #48 
                                      - The trouble is unstated assumptions...  Carefulplease   Aug-23-06 08:02 PM   #51 
                                         - I was just using the picture for a reference point  DoYouEverWonder   Aug-24-06 07:00 PM   #65 
                    - Lacking what?  dailykoff   Aug-22-06 08:20 PM   #25 
                       - For a start, it's lacking any basis for the numbers you are using.  Make7   Aug-23-06 03:19 AM   #42 
                          - The relevant figures are columns per floor  dailykoff   Aug-23-06 06:25 AM   #43 
                             - Why don't you just provide your source and method for your numbers?  Make7   Aug-23-06 08:21 AM   #44 
                             - So where's your link?  dailykoff   Aug-23-06 12:11 PM   #45 
                                - You haven't downloaded the FEMA WTC Building Performance Study?  Make7   Aug-23-06 05:42 PM   #47 
                                   - I can always count on you  dailykoff   Aug-23-06 08:29 PM   #52 
                                      - That does not explain how you arrived at your numbers.  Make7   Aug-23-06 09:31 PM   #60 
                                         - Use the highest FEMA figures and you get 5-6 planes.  dailykoff   Aug-26-06 10:51 AM   #78 
                                            - That doesn't explain how you arrived at 18 to 20 planes before.  Make7   Aug-26-06 01:17 PM   #79 
                                               - I gave you the figures. If you can't do the calculation  dailykoff   Aug-26-06 01:29 PM   #80 
                                                  - It is a simple request. Please show the reasoning behind your calculations  Make7   Aug-26-06 02:34 PM   #81 
                                                  - It's a simple calculation  dailykoff   Aug-26-06 02:40 PM   #82 
                                                  - And I'm asking you to show you how you did that simple calculation.  Make7   Aug-26-06 02:57 PM   #83 
                                                  - With a calculator.  dailykoff   Aug-26-06 03:07 PM   #84 
                                                  - Hey! I've got one of those too!  Make7   Aug-26-06 03:44 PM   #86 
                                                  - I am so grateful for the cooperative, non-confrontational posts  Hope2006   Aug-26-06 03:31 PM   #85 
                                                  - .  Make7   Aug-26-06 03:54 PM   #87 
                                                  - ROFLOL!  Hope2006   Aug-26-06 03:58 PM   #88 
                                                  - ..  Make7   Aug-26-06 04:07 PM   #89 
                                                  - Two dots  Hope2006   Aug-26-06 04:11 PM   #90 
                                                  - ...  Make7   Aug-26-06 04:20 PM   #91 
                                                  - Your post is ridiculous writ large.  greyl   Aug-26-06 10:57 PM   #96 
                                                  - I appreciate you pointing this out to me  Hope2006   Aug-26-06 11:00 PM   #97 
                                                  - I doubt that.  greyl   Aug-26-06 11:09 PM   #98 
                                                  - I know you wouldn't be calling me a liar  Hope2006   Aug-26-06 11:12 PM   #99 
                                                  - Have you heard of Descartes' Radical Doubt ? nt  greyl   Aug-26-06 11:31 PM   #100 
                             - I don't think it's columns per floor  sgsmith   Aug-23-06 01:29 PM   #46 
                                - Sure but the breaks weren't discontinuous. (n/t)  dailykoff   Aug-23-06 08:29 PM   #53 
                                   - They were indeed continuous. What is your point?  Carefulplease   Aug-23-06 09:01 PM   #55 
                                      - dailykoff seems to have trouble...  AZCat   Aug-23-06 09:07 PM   #56 
  - they built the top of the building first????  RedSock   Aug-20-06 02:45 PM   #5 
  - The cranes were jacked up  hack89   Aug-20-06 05:01 PM   #6 
     - Yes, my mistake  DoYouEverWonder   Aug-20-06 05:03 PM   #8 
        - Yes, but so does  John Q. Citizen   Aug-22-06 07:46 PM   #23 
           - Sorry, English is my second language...  Carefulplease   Aug-22-06 08:50 PM   #28 
  - WTC during plane impact:  greyl   Aug-22-06 11:47 PM   #30 
  - More crap science to wow the sheeple.  dailykoff   Aug-23-06 01:56 AM   #34 
  - Hysteresis can still occur.  AZCat   Aug-23-06 02:00 AM   #36 
  - As I was saying. . . .  dailykoff   Aug-23-06 02:04 AM   #37 
     - You must have me confused with the guy over there...  AZCat   Aug-23-06 02:06 AM   #38 
  - Do you see any errors? I can only presume you don't.  greyl   Aug-23-06 02:15 AM   #39 
     - His conclusions do not follow from his premises,  dailykoff   Aug-23-06 02:25 AM   #40 
        - Your reply is divorced from reality.  greyl   Aug-23-06 02:30 AM   #41 
        - 18 planes is one hell of an image though  Jim4Wes   Aug-23-06 06:26 PM   #49 
        - But of course you know what the correct figures are ..  hack89   Aug-23-06 07:39 PM   #50 
           - Does anyone?  dailykoff   Aug-23-06 08:30 PM   #54 
              - But you must know!  hack89   Aug-24-06 05:17 PM   #64 
  - Do any of these calculations take into account  DoYouEverWonder   Aug-23-06 09:07 PM   #57 
     - Interesting thought.  AZCat   Aug-23-06 09:11 PM   #58 
     - We're not talking just furniture  DoYouEverWonder   Aug-23-06 09:31 PM   #61 
        - I don't know.  AZCat   Aug-23-06 09:38 PM   #62 
     - NIST took the office contents into account  Carefulplease   Aug-23-06 10:30 PM   #63 
        - NIST did all of the modeling  DoYouEverWonder   Aug-25-06 05:58 PM   #66 
           - No they didn't assume that all the floors were alike.  Carefulplease   Aug-25-06 06:26 PM   #67 
              - "They did estimates for the layouts of floors  DoYouEverWonder   Aug-25-06 06:37 PM   #68 
                 - No, I don't think they considered that possibility...  Carefulplease   Aug-25-06 07:23 PM   #69 
                    - Of course  DoYouEverWonder   Aug-25-06 07:35 PM   #70 
                       - You are right...  Carefulplease   Aug-25-06 07:50 PM   #71 
                          - Are you suggesting  DoYouEverWonder   Aug-25-06 07:52 PM   #72 
                             - No. I am not "suggesting" that all the floors were occupied.  Carefulplease   Aug-26-06 01:31 AM   #73 
                                - Where did I say that they didn't ?  DoYouEverWonder   Aug-26-06 05:14 AM   #77 
                                   - NIST does not mention any vacant floor in the impact zones.  Carefulplease   Aug-26-06 04:42 PM   #92 
                                      - Well according to your Wikipedia link  DoYouEverWonder   Aug-26-06 06:40 PM   #93 
                                         - The 83th floors was not right in the middle of the impact zone.  Carefulplease   Aug-26-06 09:41 PM   #94 
                                            - According to the chart you posted  DoYouEverWonder   Aug-26-06 10:14 PM   #95 
                                               - There were no significant fires on floor 78 of WTC2.  Carefulplease   Aug-27-06 12:39 AM   #101 
                                               - Another issue...  Carefulplease   Aug-27-06 12:49 AM   #102 
                                                  - That is the question  DoYouEverWonder   Aug-27-06 05:24 AM   #103 
                                                  - Yes, I might eventually catch on.  Carefulplease   Aug-27-06 03:37 PM   #110 
                                                  - Well according to the NIST report  DoYouEverWonder   Aug-27-06 10:09 PM   #111 
                                                  - Now it is your turn to do some catching up. (Edited)  Carefulplease   Aug-27-06 11:32 PM   #112 
                                                  - You might want to read again my message #92?  DoYouEverWonder   Aug-28-06 07:08 AM   #115 
                                                  - Gee, what are those birds I hear chirping?  DoYouEverWonder   Aug-29-06 04:50 AM   #117 
                                                  - NIST could not afford to buy the plans.  Carefulplease   Aug-27-06 11:39 PM   #114 
                                                  - Is the NIST your bible?  seatnineb   Aug-27-06 09:04 AM   #104 
                                                     - It doesn't take long  DoYouEverWonder   Aug-27-06 09:52 AM   #105 
                                                     - Yes that is true.............  seatnineb   Aug-27-06 01:42 PM   #106 
                                                     - Ah, that is the other side of the coin  DoYouEverWonder   Aug-27-06 01:52 PM   #107 
                                                     - I think that is a dangerous assumption.  AZCat   Aug-27-06 01:58 PM   #108 
                                                     - What is so dangerous about finding out whether or not  DoYouEverWonder   Aug-27-06 02:19 PM   #109 
                                                     - "dangerous" might not have been the right adjective  AZCat   Aug-27-06 11:34 PM   #113 
                                                     - For WTC2, NIST claims they could not get the plans from the PA  DoYouEverWonder   Aug-28-06 07:56 AM   #116 
  - How can anyone believe that not one , but two towers  mirandapriestly   Aug-26-06 02:33 AM   #74 
     - I doubt that anyone does. I can't believe you've heard  greyl   Aug-26-06 02:48 AM   #75 
     - Welcome to DU Mirandapriestly...  Carefulplease   Aug-26-06 04:04 AM   #76 
        - No, it took me years to reach  mirandapriestly   Aug-29-06 05:34 AM   #118 
           - Way to miss the point. Btw  greyl   Aug-29-06 07:28 AM   #119 
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC