Reply #42: Two Points

[petgoat]

1) The questions remained AFTER the investigation. That's why they
wanted to do further studies. AFAIK the studies were not continued.
Despite their point that continued studies were vital to an
understanding of building safety, which was NIST's mandate, NIST did not
even incorporate their findings into its report.

2) The hypothesis of sulfidative attack was used to explain the erosion
of the steel I-beams to scrolls of foil. They did not articulate the
unthinkable (but undeniable) possibility that the erosion was due to
oxidative attack. Explosive molecules are all about delivering the
oxygen.