3 ms·

A website claiming to tell the truth about why one of the World Trade Center buildings collapsed doesn't sound like the best source to prove how NIST was wrong,

A website claiming to tell the truth about why one of the World Trade Center buildings collapsed doesn't sound like the best source to prove how NIST was wrong, due to the historical accuracy of such websites. I admittedly don't have a source off the top of my head that specifically addresses this website, though.

kornhole 2y ago
This is not just a random website. This is a University of Fairbanks study conducted by the head of structural engineering and two other PHD's who spent two years trying to model what NIST said happened.
- howenterprisey 2y ago
  I do not doubt the academic credentials of anyone involved, and I'm sure they earned them fairly, but that doesn't influence my view of their report. If we're talking about the background of the report, I need go no further than noting that it was funded by Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth.
  - kornhole 2y ago
    I am as skeptical as you and agree many scientific studies are designed to produce the results that funders want to see. I did not find that here. Dr. Leroy Hulsey has an impeccable reputation and explained many times how he was given no constraints or guidance on this research. You can find many interviews with him here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXYpqJvjekM&t=19 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXYpqJvjekM&t=19 and elsewhere. BTW I don't know what is wrong with A&E for 9/11 Truth, but perhaps you know something more.
    - bongodongobob 2y ago
      My opinion is that it would be people with an agenda joining that group. If someone started a foundation called Rocket Scientists for Shape of the Earth truth, how many top minds do you think would join? Ballistics Experts for Kennedy assassination truth? Historians for Obama Birth Certificate truth? Etc.
      - kornhole 2y ago
        It could be that some people saw holes in the official government narrative and wanted an independent investigation done to get closer to the truth. Do you know of any other independent investigations done on the collapse of this building?
        howenterprisey 2y ago
        I take issue with the framing implied by the word "independent". Is NIST supposed to be in collaboration with whoever "really" did it?
        kornhole 2y ago
        NIST is a federal government agency when you look at their funding. https://ww2.aip.org/fyi/2023/fy23-budget-outcomes-nist https://ww2.aip.org/fyi/2023/fy23-budget-outcomes-nist. I do not know who influenced them to explain that a fire could topple a steel frame building into its footprint. This never happened before, and it has never happened since. The referenced study at the university clearly proves how that is not possible. Yes many questions still need to be answered.
      - kornhole 2y ago
        So I think what you are saying is that you don't know anything about the people who funded the study. You do not think they picked a good name for their group. If they had gone to a branding and marketing agency to come up with a better name, maybe you would read the study?

kornhole 2y ago

This is not just a random website. This is a University of Fairbanks study conducted by the head of structural engineering and two other PHD's who spent two years trying to model what NIST said happened.

howenterprisey 2y ago
I do not doubt the academic credentials of anyone involved, and I'm sure they earned them fairly, but that doesn't influence my view of their report. If we're talking about the background of the report, I need go no further than noting that it was funded by Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth.
- kornhole 2y ago
  I am as skeptical as you and agree many scientific studies are designed to produce the results that funders want to see. I did not find that here. Dr. Leroy Hulsey has an impeccable reputation and explained many times how he was given no constraints or guidance on this research. You can find many interviews with him here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXYpqJvjekM&t=19 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXYpqJvjekM&t=19 and elsewhere. BTW I don't know what is wrong with A&E for 9/11 Truth, but perhaps you know something more.
  - bongodongobob 2y ago
    My opinion is that it would be people with an agenda joining that group. If someone started a foundation called Rocket Scientists for Shape of the Earth truth, how many top minds do you think would join? Ballistics Experts for Kennedy assassination truth? Historians for Obama Birth Certificate truth? Etc.
    - kornhole 2y ago
      It could be that some people saw holes in the official government narrative and wanted an independent investigation done to get closer to the truth. Do you know of any other independent investigations done on the collapse of this building?
      - howenterprisey 2y ago
        I take issue with the framing implied by the word "independent". Is NIST supposed to be in collaboration with whoever "really" did it?
        kornhole 2y ago
        NIST is a federal government agency when you look at their funding. https://ww2.aip.org/fyi/2023/fy23-budget-outcomes-nist https://ww2.aip.org/fyi/2023/fy23-budget-outcomes-nist. I do not know who influenced them to explain that a fire could topple a steel frame building into its footprint. This never happened before, and it has never happened since. The referenced study at the university clearly proves how that is not possible. Yes many questions still need to be answered.
    - kornhole 2y ago
      So I think what you are saying is that you don't know anything about the people who funded the study. You do not think they picked a good name for their group. If they had gone to a branding and marketing agency to come up with a better name, maybe you would read the study?