Reply #145: Ohhh my head hurts ... ! [View All]

1. I don't think Arup would have been considering demolition vs fire in the first place.

2. The mechanism they give is as counterpoint to the NIST scenario that they specifically disagree with, not as a conclusion of theirs that 'this is how it happened'.

3. I don't argue that the NIST report isn't an important document. From the point of view of a firm like Arup it will be all the more important - it raises up the agenda new building regs and procedures that are the bread and butter of an international engineer like Arup, so it will affect their work and potentially increase their fees and consultancy for years to come.

4. I don't think the NIST report is so much a smoking gun. In this specific aspect its more a case of a convenient conclusion put forward on weak and non-existent evidence, in the main assuming what it sets out to prove.

5. I don't have a cause as such. I simply would like to understand the truth of what happened, as I think it affects us all, particularly if government malfeasance was involved. If I can see evidence that supports the conclusion that OBL and 19 guys did this all on their own, I will happily subscribe to that viewpoint, but as things stand I see the evidence as being contradictory or for the most part being withheld, which makes me suspicious ...