Politics > Politics-USA > Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation
| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"Everybody Knows" |
| Date: |
01 Sep 2007 10:50:25 AM |
| Object: |
Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation |
Aug 22, 2007
Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of
World Trade Center Investigation
- By Alan Miller
James Quintiere, Ph.D., former Chief of the Fire Science Division of the
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), has called for an
independent review of NIST's investigation into the collapses of the World
Trade Center Towers on 9/11.
Original Content at www.opednews.com
August 21, 2007
Dr. Quintiere made his plea during his presentation, "Questions on the WTC
Investigations" at the 2007 World Fire Safety Conference. "I wish that there
would be a peer review of this," he said, referring to the NIST
investigation. "I think all the records that NIST has assembled should be
archived. I would really like to see someone else take a look at what
they've done; both structurally and from a fire point of view."
"I think the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable,"
explained Dr. Quintiere. "Let's look at real alternatives that might have
been the cause of the collapse of the World Trade Towers and how that
relates to the official cause and what's the significance of one cause
versus another."
Dr. Quintiere, one of the world's leading fire science researchers and
safety engineers, also encouraged his audience of fellow researchers and
engineers to scientifically re-examine the WTC collapses. "I hope to
convince you to perhaps become 'Conspiracy Theorists', but in a proper way,"
he said.
In his hour-long presentation, Dr. Quintiere discussed many elements of
NIST's investigation that he found problematic. He emphasized, "In every
investigation I've taken part in, the key has been to establish a timeline.
And the timeline is established by witness accounts, by information from
alarm systems, by any video that you might have of the event, and then by
calculations. And you try to put all of this together. And if your
calculations are consistent with some of these hard facts, then perhaps you
can have some comfort in the results of your calculations. I have not seen a
timeline placed in the NIST report."
Dr. Quintiere also expressed his frustration at NIST's failure to provide a
report on the third skyscraper that collapsed on 9/11, World Trade Center
Building 7. "And that building was not hit by anything," noted Dr.
Quintiere. "It's more important to take a look at that. Maybe there was
damage by the debris falling down that played a significant role. But other
than that you had fires burning a long time without fire department
intervention. And firefighters were in that building. I have yet to see any
kind of story about what they saw. What was burning? Were photographs taken?
Nothing!"
World Trade Center Building 7 was 610 feet tall, 47 stories, and would have
been the tallest building in 33 states. Although it was not hit by an
airplane on 9/11, it completely collapsed into a pile of rubble in less than
8 seconds at 5:20 p.m. on 9/11. In the 6 years since 9/11, NIST has failed
to provide any explanation for the collapse. In addition to NIST's failure
to provide an explanation, absolutely no mention of Building 7's collapse
appears in the 9/11 Commission's "full and complete account of the
circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks." [ To
watch a video of the collapse, click here www.whatreallyhappened.com ]
Dr. Quintiere said he originally "had high hopes" that NIST would do a good
job with the investigation. "They're the central government lab for fire.
There are good people there and they can do a good job. But what I also
thought they would do is to enlist the service of the ATF [Bureau of
Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives], which has an investigation force
and a laboratory of their own for fire. And I thought they would put people
out on the street and get gumshoe-type information. What prevented all of
this? I think it's the legal structure that cloaks the Commerce Department
and therefore NIST. And so, instead of lawyers as if they were acting on a
civil case trying to get depositions and information subpoenaed, those
lawyers did the opposite and blocked everything."
In his presentation, Dr. Quintiere also criticized NIST's repeated failures
to formally respond to serious questions raised about its conclusions
regarding the WTC building collapses and the process it employed to arrive
at those conclusions. "I sat through all of the NIST hearings. I went to all
of their advisory board meetings, as an observer. I made comments at all."
Responding to a comment from a NIST representative in the audience, Dr.
Quintiere said, "I found that throughout your whole investigation it was
very difficult to get a clear answer. And when anyone went to your advisory
panel meetings or hearings, where they were given five minutes to make a
statement; they could never ask any questions. And with all the commentary
that I put in, and I spent many hours writing things, and it would bore
people if I regurgitated all of that here, I never received one formal
reply."
Although Dr. Quintiere was strongly critical of NIST's conclusions and its
investigatory process, he made it clear he was not a supporter of theories
that the Twin Towers were brought down by pre-planted explosives. "If you go
to World Trade Center One, nine minutes before its collapse, there was a
line of smoke that puffed out. This is one of the basis of the 'conspiracy
theories' that says the smoke puffing out all around the building is due to
somebody setting off an explosive charge. Well, I think, more likely, it's
one of the floors falling down."
Dr. Quintiere summarized the NIST conclusion about the cause of the
collapses of the Twin Towers. "It says that the core columns, uninsulated
due to the fact that the aircraft stripped off that insulation; they
softened in the heat of the fire and shortened and that led to the collapse.
They pulled in the external columns and it caused it to buckle. They went on
further to say that there would be no collapse if the insulation remained in
place."
Dr. Quintiere then presented his and his students' research that contradicts
the NIST report and points to a different cause for the collapses; the
application of insufficient fire-proofing insulation on the truss rods in
the Twin Towers. "I suggest that there's an equally justifiable theory and
that's the trusses fail as they are heated by the fire with the insulation
intact. These are two different conclusions and the accountability for each
is dramatically different," he said.
Dr. Quintiere's presentation at the World Fire Safety Conference echoed his
earlier statement to the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on
Science, on October 26, 2005, during a hearing on "The Investigation of the
World Trade Center Collapse: Findings, Recommendations, and Next Steps", at
which he stated:
"In my opinion, the WTC investigation by NIST falls short of expectations by
not definitively finding cause, by not sufficiently linking recommendations
of specificity to cause, by not fully invoking all of their authority to
seek facts in the investigation, and by the guidance of government lawyers
to deter rather than develop fact finding.
"I have over 35 years of fire research in my experience. I worked in the
fire program at NIST for 19 years, leaving as a division chief. I have been
at the University of Maryland since. I am a founding member and past-Chair
of the International Association for Fire Safety Science-the principal world
forum for fire research. ...
"All of these have been submitted to NIST, but never acknowledged or
answered. I will list some of these.
1. Why is not the design process of assigning fire protection to the WTC
towers fully called out for fault? ...
2. Why were not alternative collapse hypotheses investigated and discussed
as NIST had stated repeatedly that they would do? ...
3. Spoliation of a fire scene is a basis for destroying a legal case in an
investigation. Most of the steel was discarded, although the key elements of
the core steel were demographically labeled. A careful reading of the NIST
report shows that they have no evidence that the temperatures they predict
as necessary for failure are corroborated by findings of the little steel
debris they have. Why hasn't NIST declared that this spoliation of the steel
was a gross error?
4. NIST used computer models that they said have never been used in such an
application before and are the state of the art. For this they should be
commended for their skill. But the validation of these modeling results is
in question. Others have computed aspects with different conclusions on the
cause mechanism of the collapse. Moreover, it is common in fire
investigation to compute a time-line and compare it to known events. NIST
has not done that.
5. Testing by NIST has been inconclusive. Although they have done fire tests
of the scale of several work stations, a replicate test of at least & [sic]
of a WTC floor would have been of considerable value. Why was this not done?
....
6. The critical collapse of WTC 7 is relegated to a secondary role, as its
findings will not be complete for yet another year. It was clear at the last
NIST Advisory Panel meeting in September [2005] that this date may not be
realistic, as NIST has not demonstrated progress here. Why has NIST dragged
on this important investigation?"
[ The full text of Dr. Quintiere's statement to the Science Committee can be
found at commdocs.house.gov ]
Dr. Quintiere is one of the world's leading fire science researchers and
safety engineers. He served in the Fire Science and Engineering Division of
NIST for 19 years and rose to the position of Chief of the Division. He left
NIST in 1990 to join the faculty of the Department of Fire Protection
Engineering at the University of Maryland, where he still serves.
Quintiere is a founding member and Past Chair of the International
Association for Fire Safety Science (IAFSS). He is also a Fellow of the
Society of Fire Protection Engineering and a Fellow of the American Society
of Mechanical Engineers. He has received numerous awards for his
contributions to fire science research and engineering, including:
.. The Department of Commerce Bronze Medal (1976) and Silver Medal (1982)
.. The Howard W. Emmons Lecture Award from the IAFSS in 1986
.. The Sjölin Award in 2002 for outstanding contribution to the science of
fire safety by the International Forum of Fire Research Directors, NIST
.. The 2006 Guise Medal by the National Fire Protection Association
His presentation "Questions on the WTC Investigations" was given twice at
the 2007 World Fire Safety Conference; Education Session M21 on June 4 (69
minutes) and Spotlight Session T54 on June 5 (102 minutes). Recordings of
the presentations can be purchased from the National Fire Protection
Association at www.fleetwoodonsite.com
http://www.ae911truth.org/info/12
.
|
|
| User: "John P." |
|
| Title: Re: Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review of World Trade Center Investigation |
01 Sep 2007 10:03:01 PM |
|
|
"Everybody Knows I'm a Moron" <EverybodyKnows@USA.com> wrote in a message
Although Dr. Quintiere was strongly critical of NIST's conclusions and its
investigatory process, he made it clear he was not a supporter of theories
that the Twin Towers were brought down by pre-planted explosives.
Dr. Quintiere then presented his and his students' research that
contradicts the NIST report and points to a different cause for the
collapses; the application of insufficient fire-proofing insulation on the
truss rods in the Twin Towers.
Original Content at www.opednews.com
Aug 22, 2007
Former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division Calls for Independent Review
of World Trade Center Investigation
- By Alan Miller
James Quintiere, Ph.D., former Chief of the Fire Science Division of the
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), has called for an
independent review of NIST's investigation into the collapses of the World
Trade Center Towers on 9/11.
"I think the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable,"
explained Dr. Quintiere. "Let's look at real alternatives that might have
been the cause of the collapse of the World Trade Towers and how that
relates to the official cause and what's the significance of one cause
versus another."
" I have not seen a timeline placed in the NIST report."
Although Dr. Quintiere was strongly critical of NIST's conclusions and its
investigatory process, he made it clear he was not a supporter of theories
that the Twin Towers were brought down by pre-planted explosives. "If you
go to World Trade Center One, nine minutes before its collapse, there was
a line of smoke that puffed out. This is one of the basis of the
'conspiracy theories' that says the smoke puffing out all around the
building is due to somebody setting off an explosive charge. Well, I
think, more likely, it's one of the floors falling down."
Dr. Quintiere then presented his and his students' research that
contradicts the NIST report and points to a different cause for the
collapses; the application of insufficient fire-proofing insulation on the
truss rods in the Twin Towers. "I suggest that there's an equally
justifiable theory and that's the trusses fail as they are heated by the
fire with the insulation intact. These are two different conclusions and
the accountability for each is dramatically different," he said.
[ The full text of Dr. Quintiere's statement to the Science Committee can
be found at commdocs.house.gov ]
Although Dr. Quintiere was strongly critical of NIST's conclusions and its
investigatory process, he made it clear he was not a supporter of theories
that the Twin Towers were brought down by pre-planted explosives.
Dr. Quintiere then presented his and his students' research that
contradicts the NIST report and points to a different cause for the
collapses; the application of insufficient fire-proofing insulation on the
truss rods in the Twin Towers.
So, now that you've defected from the kook side and given up on the insane
controlled demolition theories, who do you think should be held accountable
for the lack of sufficient SFRM on the floor trusses (if anyone)?
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
