Can someone link me to Nordenson's original fire paper and the new stuff please?

I'm having a problem with ARUP, Norsden and Bailey. The problem with their computer simulations, is it appears that if you spill a cup of coffee on the 13th floor, all the bolts snap, the beams vanish and the floor collapses, all the way to the ground, pulling the building down around your ears seconds later. Seriously, the floor deformations in the first 10 minutes are scary.

I just can't make my poor little brain follow their logic.

I get that if you got the worlds longest blow torch, and held it against girder 79-44 solidly for 57 minutes, it would do a three dimensional dance, coming completely out of it's restraints, and flapping around like a snake on an electric carpet. I understand that the 6 beams connecting that girder to the outer columns magically turn to spaghetti, and get eaten by the guy holding the blow torch. I guess I can also almost stretch my imagination to the entire NE floor plate falling en mass to the floor below, instead of breaking up.

I'm still not seeing how that one section of floor wipes out all of the other sections all the way to the ground though. I mean it's a reinforced concrete slab, supported by girders, beams and columns right? It was only a local failure of one girder, so falling on the floor/girder below, even if it was weakened by the towering inferno that was raging across the entire Manhattan area at the time (apparently), any single one of the floors below (especially the super steroid taking 5th floor) could have supported both the impact and the weight, right?

Where does the energy come from (please don't say space lasers) to push one floor through all the ones beneath it? Oh, that's right, the same place that 14 floors can move through 96 floors beneath them, how stupid of me, it had already happened earlier that day. Twice.

Are we sure it wasn't space lasers, because if it definitely wasn't fire, or gravity, and explosives have been ruled out so thoroughly that the mere idea is laughable (apparently), then what do we have left?

Please, someone do the math and tell me if my instincts are right here.

Marketing and persuasion. I have an interest in this. CorbettReport has some good videos on it, as does Sean Stone on "EntertheBuzzsaw".

This video was a nice overview of Trump's tactics.
Definition:
Heuristics in judgment and decision-making. In psychology, heuristics are simple, efficient rules which people often use to form judgments and make decisions. They are mental shortcuts that usually involve focusing on one aspect of a complex problem and ignoring others."

9/11
An example of this I see in my encounters with new people on the street about 9/11.
Many people know that there is a 9/11 Cover-up.
Many, many people know.
However, they don't really have the details sorted out...their thoughts on "why" it was an inside job can range all over the place from the Pentagon scenario to thermite to nukes to any number of things. Essentially, they saw something which "clicked" a judgment.
A broad spectrum of these people who are aware of the 9/11 Cover-up have not really studied the details and science and research. They saw something and made that decision. ...and left it at that.

I personally feel like we can use some of these simple marketing tools in the 9/11 Movement.
Example of one tool.
"Repeat the Message"
...another tool...
"Cite Experts" (e.g. Ae911truth, Steven Jones, etc.)
...another tool...
"Be visible" "Everybody knows" "Anyone who is aware knows" "lots of people know" (and lots DO know, but it is not perceived because the individual is timid to discuss the topic)

After all, not everyone is going to perform in-depth research.
But they will form a judgement.
Our mission includes increasing the number of people who are aware of the 9/11 Cover-up. So, simply, this can be accomplished "by telling people what to believe" (as much as I hate to phrase it like that). In other words, we can use these marketing techniques, because they are workable and effective. I say this because many people are not "science minded" nor "research minded" nor "higher order critical thinking skills"...a dumbed down civilization.

It is interesting to note that also in the news are stories about Brussels and stories about former Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert.

James Corbett and Sibel Edmonds have some great background about the Hastert case.

Prosecutors Detail Alleged Abuse in Hush-Money Case Against Dennis Hastert
http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/Hastert-Agreed-to-Pay-35-Million-to-14-Year-Old-Victim-Prosecutors-375104351.html

- One minute YouTube -