This latest update on the awaited WTC7 report is well behind the NIST previously stated issue date of December 2005. The revised date will now be no earlier than November 2006.
This webpage was updated on 4th Jan 2006 & for any contractors to be considered, they must contact NIST on or before January 10, 2006. That does not give any independent companies interested in the work much time!
It'll be interesting to note to whom the contract goes to, & what their previous association/history is with the NIST/Bushco government.
Reading the SOW Document, NIST has undertaken some analysis already (including major computer modelling etc.), but that they now seek a contractor to MAKE IT ALL FIT TOGETHER!!
If the collapse is a simple physical explanation (i.e. NO CONTROLLED DEMOLITION) then why can't a team of NIST Goverment Scientists/Engineers come up with a theory/explanation that fits?!
It seems that a contractor is being sought that can dance to the NIST Paymaster's tune and who can then be blamed/dimissed when any criticsm is receieved. & Why the 11 month delay - no explanation is given by NIST.
Note how the document states "This hypothesis may be supported or modified, or new hypotheses may be developed through the course of this study". THEY ARE ALMOST SAYING - PLEASE MR CONTRACTOR, FIND/SUPPLY ANY THEORY THAT FITS!!
The use of a sub-contractor (who will dance to the tune of the NIST Paymaster) will allow the excuse to be used when the analysis is criticised (as was used before in relation to criticisms of the NIST's reluctance to fully model the collapse visualisation & initiating events [NCE article of 6th October 2005]) along the lines of "Well, it was a sub-contractor & we have now terminated his contract.
The text of the NCE article of 6th October 2005 is as follows:
This article is copied directly from ‘New Civil Engineer’ (NCE) magazine, which is a magazine for construction professionals & members of the UK Institution of Civil Engineers (established 1818), (www.ice.org.uk). Publication date 6th October 2005. (Magazine website www.nceplus.co.uk)
_________________________- WTC Investigators Resist Call for Collapse Visualisation
World Trade Center disaster investigators are refusing to show computer visualisations of the collapse of the Twin Towers despite calls from leading structural and fire engineers, NCE has learned.
Visualisations of collapse mechanisms are routinely used to validate the type of finite element analysis model used by the investigators.
The collapse mechanism and the role played by the hat truss at the top of the tower has been the focus of debate since the US National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST) published its findings (NCE 22 September 2005).
NIST showed detailed computer generated visualisations of both the plane impacts and the development of fires within WTC1 and WTC2 at a recent conference at its Gaithersburg HQ. But the actual collapse mechanisms of the towers were not shown as visualisations.
University of Manchester (UK) professor of structural engineering Colin Bailey said there was a lot to be gained from visualising the structural response. “NIST should really show the visualisations, otherwise the opportunity to correlate them back to the video evidence and identify any errors in the modelling will be lost,” he said.
University of Sheffield professor Roger Plank added that visualisations of the collapses of the towers “would be a very powerful tool to promote the design code changes recommended by NIST.”
NIST told NCE this week that it did not believe there is much value in visualising quasi-static processes such as thermal response and load redistribution up to the point of global collapse initiation and has chosen not to develop such visualisations.
But it said it would ‘consider’ developing visualisations of its global structural collapse model, although its contract with the finite element analysis subcontractor was now terminated.
A leading US structural engineer said NIST had obviously devoted enormous resources to the development of the impact and fire models. “By comparison the global structural model is not as sophisticated,” he said.
“The software used has been pushed to new limits, and there have been a lot of simplifications, extrapolations and judgement calls. This doesn’t mean NIST has got it wrong in principle, but it does mean it would be hard to produce a definitive visualisation from the analysis so far.”
______________________________----
The point regarding the NCE news article regarding the NIST reluctance to produce the thermal dispersal and load redistribution visualisation models of the towersÂ’ collapse, to arrive at the points of global collapse initiation, and then to correlate these with the available video evidence (as the UK academic suggested), was that _this is what you would do if it was a genuine accident/event_, i.e. the only ever full scale collapse of (3) steel frame buildings.
MSM 9/11 NEWS:in the current issue of Vanity Fair, with Lindsay Lohan on the cover, there is a story called "Through the Lens,Darkly" about two 9/11 documentaries, one of which goes into conspiracys(they actually mention "The Great Deception" in the piece). In the same issue,they do a story on an upcoming Natalie Portman movie called "V for Vendetta", with a plot that follows:in an increasingly orwellian world,some of the worlds most famous towers are blown up-by the "good guys".This movie is gonna fucking rule.keep in mind,Vanity Fair is very mainstream.the truth is slowly bleeding through.....
I have to conclude that Daryll B Smith is a disinfo provocateur. His Zionist fixation is obsessive, and every other day he's trying to wedge the movement again-- attacking everyone who's not him, or Hufschmid. I don't hear the same vitriol coming from Hufschmid, and I'm torn as to what to make of him being partnered with Smith. It's too bad, Smith sometimes has good guests on his show.
i havent heard of him, but after looking at your link, i agree, he is indeed a jackass and quite possibly a dis-info agent. hes almost as bad as WING-TV when it comes to attacking the movement.
Heck, look at the plot for Revenge of the Sith. even that one newer Doctor Who episode. Ever since that Lone Gunman pilot...heh:)
That new theatrical documentary narrated by Kevin Costner called On Native Soil tries to be all "you didnt know the truth...until now!"...I had to laugh. here's the site/trailer: http://www.911report.com/
I wonder if Michael Moore will start laying a little 9/11 truth into his new work? Or will he continue being a corporate white washing schill?
pockybot (not verified) on Fri, 01/13/2006 - 11:35am.
That new theatrical documentary narrated by Kevin Costner called On Native Soil tries to be all "you didnt know the truth...until now!"...I had to laugh. here's the site/trailer:
http://www.911report.com/
that is almost as bad as that flight 93 crap that is coming out.
when i was kid, i never thought movies were so full of propaganda...probably why they worked so well, cuz you don't know they are full of shit until you understand life from a historical perspective.
these movies offer a great chance to set up shop and pass out flyers, papers, videos....imagine handing out DRG's paper on why the commission report is a 571 page lie after these people come out of the movie.
rayrayjones (not verified) on Sat, 01/14/2006 - 3:03am.
I took notice when the NATO force gets to Afghanistan they will not be involved with the hunt for bin-Laden and that mission will remain exclusively American.
ed kriner (not verified) on Sat, 01/21/2006 - 4:46am.
From the NIST website at
From the NIST website at http://wtc.nist.gov/media/WTC7_draftSOW.htm , NIST is seeking help with the structural analysis of the WTC 7 collapse.
This latest update on the awaited WTC7 report is well behind the NIST previously stated issue date of December 2005. The revised date will now be no earlier than November 2006.
The PDF document at http://wtc.nist.gov/media/Draft_SOW_WTC7jan06.pdf provides details of the draft statement of work for the WTC7 analysis required.
This webpage was updated on 4th Jan 2006 & for any contractors to be considered, they must contact NIST on or before January 10, 2006. That does not give any independent companies interested in the work much time!
It'll be interesting to note to whom the contract goes to, & what their previous association/history is with the NIST/Bushco government.
Reading the SOW Document, NIST has undertaken some analysis already (including major computer modelling etc.), but that they now seek a contractor to MAKE IT ALL FIT TOGETHER!!
If the collapse is a simple physical explanation (i.e. NO CONTROLLED DEMOLITION) then why can't a team of NIST Goverment Scientists/Engineers come up with a theory/explanation that fits?!
It seems that a contractor is being sought that can dance to the NIST Paymaster's tune and who can then be blamed/dimissed when any criticsm is receieved. & Why the 11 month delay - no explanation is given by NIST.
Note how the document states "This hypothesis may be supported or modified, or new hypotheses may be developed through the course of this study". THEY ARE ALMOST SAYING - PLEASE MR CONTRACTOR, FIND/SUPPLY ANY THEORY THAT FITS!!
The use of a sub-contractor (who will dance to the tune of the NIST Paymaster) will allow the excuse to be used when the analysis is criticised (as was used before in relation to criticisms of the NIST's reluctance to fully model the collapse visualisation & initiating events [NCE article of 6th October 2005]) along the lines of "Well, it was a sub-contractor & we have now terminated his contract.
The text of the NCE article
The text of the NCE article of 6th October 2005 is as follows:
This article is copied directly from ‘New Civil Engineer’ (NCE) magazine, which is a magazine for construction professionals & members of the UK Institution of Civil Engineers (established 1818), (www.ice.org.uk). Publication date 6th October 2005. (Magazine website www.nceplus.co.uk)
_________________________-
WTC Investigators Resist Call for Collapse Visualisation
World Trade Center disaster investigators are refusing to show computer visualisations of the collapse of the Twin Towers despite calls from leading structural and fire engineers, NCE has learned.
Visualisations of collapse mechanisms are routinely used to validate the type of finite element analysis model used by the investigators.
The collapse mechanism and the role played by the hat truss at the top of the tower has been the focus of debate since the US National Institute of Standards & Technology (NIST) published its findings (NCE 22 September 2005).
NIST showed detailed computer generated visualisations of both the plane impacts and the development of fires within WTC1 and WTC2 at a recent conference at its Gaithersburg HQ. But the actual collapse mechanisms of the towers were not shown as visualisations.
University of Manchester (UK) professor of structural engineering Colin Bailey said there was a lot to be gained from visualising the structural response. “NIST should really show the visualisations, otherwise the opportunity to correlate them back to the video evidence and identify any errors in the modelling will be lost,” he said.
University of Sheffield professor Roger Plank added that visualisations of the collapses of the towers “would be a very powerful tool to promote the design code changes recommended by NIST.”
NIST told NCE this week that it did not believe there is much value in visualising quasi-static processes such as thermal response and load redistribution up to the point of global collapse initiation and has chosen not to develop such visualisations.
But it said it would ‘consider’ developing visualisations of its global structural collapse model, although its contract with the finite element analysis subcontractor was now terminated.
A leading US structural engineer said NIST had obviously devoted enormous resources to the development of the impact and fire models. “By comparison the global structural model is not as sophisticated,” he said.
“The software used has been pushed to new limits, and there have been a lot of simplifications, extrapolations and judgement calls. This doesn’t mean NIST has got it wrong in principle, but it does mean it would be hard to produce a definitive visualisation from the analysis so far.”
______________________________----
The point regarding the NCE news article regarding the NIST reluctance to produce the thermal dispersal and load redistribution visualisation models of the towersÂ’ collapse, to arrive at the points of global collapse initiation, and then to correlate these with the available video evidence (as the UK academic suggested), was that _this is what you would do if it was a genuine accident/event_, i.e. the only ever full scale collapse of (3) steel frame buildings.
dz, plz confirm you received
dz, plz confirm you received my msg from yesterday. Thx
but that they now seek a
but that they now seek a contractor to MAKE IT ALL FIT TOGETHER!!
They need someone like a young Arlen Spector to give us a Magic Collapse Theory!
great stuff on the NIST..
great stuff on the NIST.. prolly will post that after work..
CB, email me via the link on the left, not sure i saw your msg.. won't be able to check it out til this evening..
may post the UBL clip from LC2E this weekend, any other short clips anyone would like to see hosted?
I have a bunch of new stuff
I have a bunch of new stuff on my blog. Links to various videos and articles. Feel free to click on over to my "homepage".
Tag, Iran is it!
Tag, Iran is it!
I send a message a couple
I send a message a couple days ago under "contact dz"
MSM 9/11 NEWS:in the current
MSM 9/11 NEWS:in the current issue of Vanity Fair, with Lindsay Lohan on the cover, there is a story called "Through the Lens,Darkly" about two 9/11 documentaries, one of which goes into conspiracys(they actually mention "The Great Deception" in the piece). In the same issue,they do a story on an upcoming Natalie Portman movie called "V for Vendetta", with a plot that follows:in an increasingly orwellian world,some of the worlds most famous towers are blown up-by the "good guys".This movie is gonna fucking rule.keep in mind,Vanity Fair is very mainstream.the truth is slowly bleeding through.....
http://iamthewitness.com/Dary
http://iamthewitness.com/DarylBradfordSmith_DeceptionDollar.htm
I have to conclude that Daryll B Smith is a disinfo provocateur. His Zionist fixation is obsessive, and every other day he's trying to wedge the movement again-- attacking everyone who's not him, or Hufschmid. I don't hear the same vitriol coming from Hufschmid, and I'm torn as to what to make of him being partnered with Smith. It's too bad, Smith sometimes has good guests on his show.
i havent heard of him, but
i havent heard of him, but after looking at your link, i agree, he is indeed a jackass and quite possibly a dis-info agent. hes almost as bad as WING-TV when it comes to attacking the movement.
"in an increasingly
"in an increasingly orwellian world,some of the worlds most famous towers are blown up-by the good guys."
Holy crap, that sounds awesome, I'm gonna search for some info on that.
V for Vendetta
Heck, look at the plot for
Heck, look at the plot for Revenge of the Sith. even that one newer Doctor Who episode. Ever since that Lone Gunman pilot...heh:)
That new theatrical documentary narrated by Kevin Costner called On Native Soil tries to be all "you didnt know the truth...until now!"...I had to laugh. here's the site/trailer:
http://www.911report.com/
I wonder if Michael Moore will start laying a little 9/11 truth into his new work? Or will he continue being a corporate white washing schill?
Open thread? Ok. GO BEARS!!!
Open thread? Ok. GO BEARS!!! Hi Mom. NYHC LIVES. Id like to thank Red Bull.........(sorry)
Looks like there might be
Looks like there might be hope for more coverage in the press in 2006:
http://www.forbes.com/home/2006/01/12/us-media-censor_cx_0113oxford.html
That new theatrical
That new theatrical documentary narrated by Kevin Costner called On Native Soil tries to be all "you didnt know the truth...until now!"...I had to laugh. here's the site/trailer:
http://www.911report.com/
that is almost as bad as that flight 93 crap that is coming out.
when i was kid, i never thought movies were so full of propaganda...probably why they worked so well, cuz you don't know they are full of shit until you understand life from a historical perspective.
these movies offer a great chance to set up shop and pass out flyers, papers, videos....imagine handing out DRG's paper on why the commission report is a 571 page lie after these people come out of the movie.
use
use headphones:
http://www.mediumrecords.com/wtc/southtower.hoboken03.mov
Good idea rayrayjones. Hand
Good idea rayrayjones. Hand out videos of Griffin's video "Omissions and Distortions." That would blow some minds.
I took notice when the NATO
I took notice when the NATO force gets to Afghanistan they will not be involved with the hunt for bin-Laden and that mission will remain exclusively American.