So you think that, in order to determine whether fire could in any scenario cause a progressive collapse of the building, it was sufficient to test a single, unrealistic fire scenario (using a simplified heating curve that uniformly, and without any progression simulated, ramps area temperatures to certain temperatures pulled from a point in NIST's simulation when the area in question was cooling) in a limited model of part of less than half the floor space on two floors of the building? Well, good news--there may be an opening for you on the Titanic's PR team!
And, by the way, just a reminder that Hulsey announced his conclusion before he even finished the limited model described above.
Hulsey explains his reasoning for saying "Fire did not bring this building down." in this video:
Starting at 2:13 and concluding at 10:11
11:20 “So, my answer to you today is that the fire did not bring this building down.”
Where did you get your information about the particulars of the fire scenario?
In particular - the claim that the area in question was cooling?
Your complaint that it was
is bogus because the collapse trigger took place within that area. What happened in the rest of the building is irrelevant to the triggering event. Without the triggering event there would be no collapse.a limited model of part of less than half the floor space on two floors of the building