(September 15, 2016 at 12:15 pm)Pandæmonium Wrote: Ah, I see it's the annual 'AF.org turns into the 9/11 truth forum' again.
Oh how droll! Look at all the nut job conspiracy fruitcakes. Bless their little cotton socks.
Don't worry, I'm done posting in here for now.
But I would certainly hope you all will be interested in Dr. Hulsey's further scientific findings. Because he repeatedly found the NIST's conclusions and model grossly negligent. He was asked as a professor would he accept the NIST account? He said no, he'd flunk the student.
The NIST computer model did not include a great many of the connections present in the actual building, it did not model full collapse and the part of the collapse it did model showed deformations not present in the actual collapse.
And as you are all so thankfully committed to hardcore science, that alone should raise some serious red flags.
Peace.
"Leave it to me to find a way to be,
Consider me a satellite forever orbiting,
I knew the rules but the rules did not know me, guaranteed." - Eddie Vedder
Consider me a satellite forever orbiting,
I knew the rules but the rules did not know me, guaranteed." - Eddie Vedder