Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Eric who wrote (1444269)	3/5/2024 5:08:46 PM
From: maceng2	Respond to of 1572631

FWIW, this is what the High School Teacher concludes with... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 6. Conclusion In an apparent attempt to make the remarkable free fall of WTC 7 seem compatible with a natural progressive collapse, NIST obscured the building’s instantaneous transition to free fall by claiming that global collapse initiated earlier than it actually did and asserting a gradual build-up to free fall between the early start time and the actual start of downward motion. Our measurements, however, indicate that the entire measurable roofline of WTC 7 entered free fall instantaneously and simultaneously to within two-tenths of a second. This occurred more than a second after the time NIST calls “global collapse initiation” or the start of its Stage 1. NIST then claimed in its final report that its global collapse analysis was consistent with the observed behavior. But careful review of NIST’s global collapse analysis reveals this claim to be false. NIST’s alleged column failure sequence is incompatible with the observed behavior, while its global collapse animation predicts such fundamentally different behavior that it provides strong evidence against NIST’s hypothesis. The only column failure sequence that is consistent with the observed behavior and readily explains the other available evidence is the near- simultaneous failure of all interior columns low in the building followed about a second later by the near simultaneous failure of all exterior columns low in the building — in other words, a classic controlled demolition. This conclusion was shared by researchers at the University of Alaska Fairbanks based on their computer modeling of WTC 7’s collapse (Hulsey, 2020). Jose Torero and his co-authors claimed there is “no real way” to know what caused the collapse of WTC 7. We disagree. All one needs to do is reject theories that have no basis in reality and follow the evidence where it leads. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Evidently he is not as well qualified as those leading academics at NIST, and barked up the wrong tree?