His measurement of where column 79 ended up relative to the center of stiffness (and, by the way, Mick is right to point out above that the center of stiffness should have of course moved as damage accumulated in the building from the fire--so we actually don't know where column 79 ended up in Hulsey's model because he doesn't even tell us how far the center of stiffness moved during his simulation) is not the same thing as NIST's measurement of where the south end of girder A2001 ended up relative to the bearing seat on column 79. Two totally different measurements. They are not comparable. Hence the false comparison. Meanwhile, NIST's stated number is actually useful for evaluating whether girder A2001 failed, while Hulsey's is just a number, the relevance of which you have failed to establish over 3-4 pages of nonsense posts.Dr Hulsey stated where the elements ended up in his analysis.
He contrasted that with where the elements ended up in NIST's analysis.
What exactly is your objection again ?