Excuse me for focusing on Hulsey's stated conclusion, which conclusion he stated several times explicitly in his presentation last week. It also is the single top take away that AE911Truth has chosen to highlight in its press releases. Why can't you simply say you disagree with that conclusion? Is it so hard to be intellectually honest when you want to believe? Everyone in this thread knows it is a patently false conclusion based on the work Hulsey has done to date (just as it was a patently false conclusion when Hulsey was making it last fall before he even modeled column 79 at all, as I have documented).
You've been making that same tired claim about NIST being invalidated for years, including before Hulsey even started this study. Maybe Hulsey identified one or more significant issues with NIST's model, maybe he didn't. From his presentation, his model was very limited compared to NIST's in many respects and didn't even test the same fire scenarios. Was it similar enough to it shows NIST got it wrong? Again, maybe, maybe not. But your claim that it "invalidates" NIST is premature and unsupported, as is Hulsey's ridiculous conclusion, which you have avoided even addressing for 4 hours straight now. Do you think we all forget what Hulsey is claiming if you don't type the words?