A&E 911 Truth: Beyond Misinformation - download

[ian neal]

Beyond Misinformation is now available to download for free here

http://www.beyondmisinformation.org/#beyond-misinformation

BEYOND

MISINFORMATION

What Science Says About the Destruction of
World Trade Center Buildings 1, 2, and
FREE E-VERSION AVAILABLE BELOW

WHAT'S INSIDE?

This 50-page primer provides a comprehensive overview of the evidence regarding the World Trade Center destruction and a careful examination of the hypotheses that researchers have put forward to explain what caused it.

With references to dozens of scholarly papers and videos, it is both a perfect starting point for those who are new to the subject and a valuable resource for those already immersed in it.
Intro-open-spread.png
REVIEW COMMITTEE

Beyond Misinformation was vetted by a committee of respected architects, engineers, and researchers.

Sarah Chaplin is an architecture and urban development consultant in the United Kingdom and a published author of many books and articles on urbanism and cities.
Dr. Mohibullah Durrani is a professor of Engineering and Physics at Montgomery College in Maryland with decades of experience in the nuclear, automotive, and printing industries.
Richard Gage, AIA, is an architect of 27 years and the founder and CEO of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth. He has worked on most types of building construction, including numerous fire-proofed, steel-framed buildings.
Dr. Robert Korol is a professor emeritus of Civil Engineering at McMaster University in Ontario, Canada and a fellow of the Canadian Society of Civil Engineering.
Dr. Graeme MacQueen is the co-editor of the Journal of 9/11 Studies and a retired professor of Religious Studies and Peace Studies at McMaster University in Ontario, Canada.
Robert McCoy has been a licensed architect in California since 1964. Most of his experience has been in steel-framed high-rise buildings, including the 34-story PG&E headquarters and the 44-story Standard Oil headquarters in San Francisco.
Dr. Oswald Rendon-Herrero, P.E., is a professor emeritus of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Mississippi State University and an associate editor of the ASCE’s Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities.

INTRODUCTION

What caused the destruction of the World Trade Center Twin Towers and Building 7 on September 11, 2001? More than a decade later, this question continues to be discussed by many people around the world.


FORMULATING A HYPOTHESIS
CHAPTER 1

This chapter provides a starting point for examining the hypotheses of fire-induced failure and controlled demolition. First it reviews the history of high-rise building fires and failures. Then it examines the features that distinguish fire-induced failure and controlled demolition......

[outsider]

Just Six Months to Go on the WTC 7 Study:
Dr. Leroy Hulsey Shares His Preliminary Findings
with the Fairbanks Branch of the ASCE

Video: WTC 7 Evaluation October 2016 Update: ASCE Fairbanks Engineers host Dr. Hulsey:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKN4qilUOfs&feature=youtu.be

UAF ASCE Student Chapter | September 29, 2016

“The NIST report…said that this building collapsed because of fire. We determined that’s not true.”

Video: WTC 7 Evaluation Sept 2016 Update: ASCE UAF Students host Dr. Hulsey:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8DNabmb9-k&feature=youtu.be

[outsider]

Former NIST Employee Speaks Out with

LTE in Europhysics News

Join and Support Our Rapid Response Publicity Effort!
Two days ago, Europhysics News released its first issue since the publication of “15 years later: On the physics of high-rise building collapses,” which has now been viewed nearly 350,000 times since its release — and which even caused the magazine's server to break down at one point.

Lo and behold, on page 43 is a startling and extraordinary letter to the editor by a former employee of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Peter Michael Ketcham, who worked at NIST from 1997 until 2011.

In his letter, Mr. Ketcham makes it clear that he did not contribute to NIST’s World Trade Center investigation. In fact, it wasn't until last August that he began reading the NIST WTC reports and watching documentaries challenging NIST’s findings. The more he investigated, he writes, “the more it became apparent that NIST had reached a predetermined conclusion by ignoring, dismissing, and denying the evidence.”

Mr. Ketcham closes his stunning 500-word rebuke by calling upon NIST to “blow the whistle on itself now” before awareness of the “disconnect between the NIST WTC reports and logical reasoning” grows exponentially.

The courageous stand Mr. Ketcham has taken in criticizing the reports issued by his former employer of 14 years is yet another sign of the rapidly increasing skepticism toward the official 9/11 narrative among scientific and technical professionals. No doubt, his emergence will help accelerate the path toward exposing NIST's WTC reports as false and unscientific.


'Thoughts from a Former NIST Employee:

I was a member of the NIST technical staff during the period 1997-2011. I initially joined the High
Performance Systems and Services Division and later became a member of what was, at the time, the Mathematical and Computational Sciences Division of the Information Technology Laboratory.
My fellow NIST employees were among the finest and most intelligent people
with whom I have ever worked.I did not contribute to the NIST WTC investigation or reports. But in August of this year, I began to read some of those reports. As I then watched several
documentaries challenging the findings of the NIST investigation, I quickly became furious. First, I was furious with myself. How could I have worked at NIST all those years and not have noticed this before?
Second, I was furious with NIST. The NIST I knew was intellectually open, non-defensive, and willing to consider competing explanations.
The more I investigated, the more apparent it became that NIST had reached a predetermined conclusion by ignoring, dismissing, and denying the evidence.
Among the most egregious examples is the explanation for the collapse of WTC 7 as an elaborate sequence of unlikely events culminating in the almost symmetrical total collapse of a steel-frame building into its own footprint at free-fall acceleration.
I could list all the reasons why the NIST WTC reports don't add up, but others have already done so in extensive detail and there is little that I could add.
What I can do, however, is share some thoughts based on common sense and experience from my fourteen years at NIST.
First, if NIST truly believes in the veracity of its WTC investigation, then it should openly share all evidence, data, models, computations, and other relevant information unless specific and
compelling reasons are otherwise provided. For example, would the release of all files and calculations associated with the ANSYS collapse initiation model jeopardize public safety to an extent that outweighs the competing need for accountability?
Second, in its reports, NIST makes a great show of details leading to collapse initiation and then stops short just when it becomes interesting.
The remainder of the explanation is a perfunctory statement that total collapse is inevitable and obvious.
It is easy to see through this tactic as avoidance of inconvenient evidence. In response to any challenges, NIST has provided curt explanations from its Public Affairs Office.
There were many contributors to the NIST WTC investigation: Why not let them openly answer questions in their own voice with the depth of knowledge and level of detail that follows from the nuts and bolts of their research?
Lastly, awareness is growing of the disconnect between the NIST WTC reports and logical reasoning.
The level of interest in "15 years later" is a good example.
Due to the nature of communication in today's world, that awareness may increase approximately exponentially.'

[outsider]

‘What REALLY sent it down? Shock report reveals 9/11 tower DID NOT collapse because of fire’:
http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/736223/9-11-tower-Building-7-colla pse-fire-conspiracy

‘…….The report, by a group of top engineers from the University of Alaska, insists the flames could not have brought the tower down.

Dr J Leroy Hulsey revealed the team’s boss findings at the Justice In Focus Symposium in New York.

He said: “It is our preliminary conclusions based upon our work to date that fire did not produce the failure at this particular building.”

The findings will add fuel to conspiracy theories which suggest the twin towers and WTC 7 were blown up.

Some have even blamed the US Government which they say wanted to provide the grounds for military strikes in the Middle East……’

‘..The report, by a group of top engineers from the University of Alaska…’ Not some bat-sh*t crazies with dodgy diplomas (or none at all) and tin foil hats.

What a surprise, being reported fairly reasonably by the ‘Express’. Truly, ‘wonders never cease’!

[outsider]

‘Former ITN and BBC Panorama correspondent Alan Hart talks about 9 11 and the media’:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hy4vhpFE4w

Short but sweet 4-minute Alan Hart video clip by Passing Clouds Works

[outsider]

‘Fraud Exposed in NIST WTC 7 Reports — Part 4 of 5’:
Fictitious Debris Damage:
http://www.ae911truth.org/news/320-news-media-events-fraud-exposed-in- nist-wtc-7-reports-part-4.html

‘I first noticed the conundrum that suggested that the “10-story gouge” in the side of WTC 7 could not have actually existed back on September 6, 2006, while I was “debating” with Ryan Mackey in an online forum: See Conundrum in June 2004 Progress Report.

NIST’s first report, published two years earlier, referred to the “middle 1/4 to 1/3 width of the south face was gouged out from floor 10 to the ground.” It then went on to read: “No heavy debris was observed in the lobby area as the building was exited, primarily white dust coating and black wires hanging from ceiling areas were observed.” — NIST June 2004 Progress Report, Appendix L, page 18 [PDF page 907] See June 2004 Progress Report on the Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster (NIST SP 1000-5).

Obviously, debris large enough to create a 10-story gouge, one-fourth to one-third the width of the building, would have landed in the first floor lobby, along with everything it brought down, including the third-floor lobby…….’

‘…Also, 9/11 researcher Winston Smith found another statement that conflicted with NIST’s 10-story gouge theory in the report on WTC 7 from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in Chapter 5 on page 20. It read: “According to the account of a firefighter who walked the 9th floor along the south side following the collapse of WTC1, the only damage to the 9th floor facade occurred at the southwest corner.” See Federal Emergency Management Agency, Chapter 5, WTC 7.

Later I found still two more quotes that were in conflict with NIST’s theory of the 10-story gouge.

The first quote came from FDNY Chief Frank Fellini, who was in charge of operations at West and Vesey streets. Referring to “building number seven, which had taken a big hit from the tower,” Fellini said: “When it fell it ripped steel out from between the third and the sixth floors across the facade on Vesey Street.” See World Trade Center Task Force Interview—Chief Frank Fellini—Interview Date: December 3, 2001.

The second quote was an obfuscated comment buried in NIST’s Progress Report. Only after careful reading does it become clear what NIST meant in referring to “debris damage across one-fourth width of the south face, starting several floors above the atrium (extended from the ground to the 5th floor*), noted that the atrium glass was still intact.” — NIST June 2004 Progress Report, Appendix L, page 18 [PDF page 907]

*The atrium, not the damage, extended from the ground floor to the fifth floor. Thus, the “10-story gouge” should have taken out much of the atrium glass; but it didn’t, according to this NIST report. See The Evidence for the “10-Story Gouge.”……’