NIST Final Report on Building 7...

Well it's finally out... and as I've begun reading one thing stood out to me in the preface... On page xxxi of the preface or page 33 of the pdf there is this passage...

"Numerous facts and data were obtained, then combined with validated computer modeling to produce an account that captures the key features of  what actually occurred. However, the reader should keep in mind that the building and the records kept within it were destroyed, and the remains of all the WTC buildings were disposed of before congressional action and funding was available for this Investigation to begin."

So... even though I haven't even cracked the numbered pages yet... I'm going to go out on a limb and say a lack of evidence makes this entire report bullshit and conjecture... but I'm going to keep reading anyway... if anyone else wants to download the pdf here's the link...

http://wtc.nist.gov/media/NIST_NCSTAR_1A_for_public_comment.pdf

Now... here are some interesting passages...

"The debris damaged the spray-applied fire resistive material that was applied to the steel columns, girders, and beams, only in the vicinity of the structural damage from the collapse of WTC 1.  This was near the west side of the south face of the building and was far removed from the buckled column that initiated the collapse.  Even without the structural damage, WTC 7 would have collapsed from fires having the same characteristics as those experienced on September 11, 2001."

So what they're saying here is the damage from WTC 1 falling had absolutely nothing to do with the collapse of WTC 7...

"The partial or total collapse of a building due to fires is an infrequent event."

By adding in the word "partial" they can avoid saying never in the history of earth has a highrise building fallen due to fire...

"The fate of the fuel in the two tanks for the SSB system was also unknown.  Thus, NIST assumed that all of the fuel would have been available to feed fires either at ground level or on the 5th floor."

So what they're saying is there is no evidence to prove that either tank was compromised... but since it fits the "accepted story" they'll assume all of the fuel was burning... well that sure is "scientific"...

"No trace of the Mayor’s OEM system tank or fuel was found.  Since the pumps used to fill the day tank on the 7th floor would only have run when the low fuel switch came on, NIST assumed that all the fuel was available."

Again with the "assumptions"... isn't that the job of the "theorists"... what kind of "science" are they using again when they're admitting the report is based on nothing but guesses...

"Numerous facts and data were obtained, then combined with validated computer modeling to produce an account that is believed to be close to what actually occurred.  However, the reader should keep in mind that the building and the records kept within it were destroyed, and the remains of all the WTC buildings were disposed of before congressional action and funding was available for this Investigation to begin.  As a result, there are some facts that could not be discerned, and thus there are uncertainties in this accounting."

That's a helluva disclaimer to run twice... and who exactly is it that believes their computer models are even "close to what actually occurred"...

"Even though available images showing fires in WTC 7 did not allow the detailed description of fire spread that was possible for the WTC towers, there was sufficient information to derive general descriptions of fire ignition and spread on various floors of the building (NIST NCSTAR 1-9, Chapter 5).  It must be kept in mind that the fire observations were based on images of the exterior faces, which provided little indication about the behavior of fires well removed from the exterior walls.  It is likely that much of the burning took place beyond the views of the windows."

So... now they're saying they couldn't see the fires... and they don't know that the tanks were ever compromised... and the substation played little or no part in the collapse... the damage to the face of the building played little or no role in the collapse... which pretty much leaves us with this...

They have no evidence the fires burned hot enough to compromise the structure... the have no evidence there were any sort of added accelerate from the tanks... they didn't have any sort of physical evidence because it was all destroyed... so this pdf is 115 pages of toilet paper...

Now... you're all more than welcome to read this yourselves... you'll be able to plainly see as well that it's not just a white wash... it's an autopsy without a body...

Yet... we can count of Popular Mechanics to validate the "official story" (and they're sticking to it)...

World Trade Center 7 Report Puts 9/11 Conspiracy Theory to Rest

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/research/4278874.html

So much for journalistic integrity... at least the NIST ran the disclaimer twice...

Comments

[cl]

Wow，great content and your blog template is so beautiful. Is this template free or not. If so, would you please share this template? if not, how much does it cost? Thanks a lot!