N.F.P.A. 921 - Did NIST disregard it in investigating 9/11?

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I don't see how the fact of the existence of the national standards guide for fire & explosive investigations (nfpa 921) can be perceived in more than one way.
Neither can I see the fact of NIST's evasion of certain basic guidelines as to be perceivable in more than one way.

Let's drill down into that. Can you quote the exact bits of NFPA 921 that you think have been ignored?
 

hiper

Active Member
Let's drill down into that. Can you quote the exact bits of NFPA 921 that you think have been ignored?

N.F.P.A. 921 (2001 Edition) 19.4.8.2.6 – Extremism

It reads:

"Extremism-motivated firesetting is committed to further a social, political, or religious cause. Fires have been used
as a weapon of social protest since revolutions first began. Extremist firesetters may work in groups or as individuals.
Also, due to planning aspects and the selection of their targets, extremist firesetters generally have a great degree of
organization, as reflected in their use of more elaborate ignition or incendiary devices. Subcategories of extremist firesetting
are identified as follows.
(a) Terrorism. The targets set by terrorists may appear to be at random; however, target locations are generally selected with
some degree of political or economic significance. Political targets generally include government offices, newspapers, universities,
political party headquarters, and military or law enforcement installations. Political terrorists may also target diverse properties
such as animal research facilities or abortion clinics. Economic targets may include business offices, distribution facilities of utility
providers, banks, or companies thought to have an adverse impact on the environments. Fires or explosions become a means of creation confusion
fear, or anarchy. THE TERRORIST MAY INCLUDE FIRE AS BUT ONE OF A VARITETY OF WEAPONS, ALONG WITH EXPLOSIVES, USED IN FURTHERING HIS OR HER GOAL…"

It very clearly states the Terrorist may use explosives along with fire to further their goal.
Obviously, explosives were used in 1993 on this very same complex.

It would seem to be obvious that a true investigation would test for the possibility that
“the terrorist may include explosives to further their goal.”

There is no excuse for refusing to test for explosives.

SUggesting that the top of the building remaining in place for 30 years means that on 9/11 it could not fall
and cause the floors beneath to pancake is just asinine. The building wasn't one "massive" structure, as a cement block.

Even if the floors pancaked the massive central core could not have disintegrated like it did due to fire.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
N.F.P.A. 921 (2001 Edition) 19.4.8.2.6 – Extremism

It reads:

"Extremism-motivated firesetting is committed to further a social, political, or religious cause. Fires have been used
as a weapon of social protest since revolutions first began. Extremist firesetters may work in groups or as individuals.
Also, due to planning aspects and the selection of their targets, extremist firesetters generally have a great degree of
organization, as reflected in their use of more elaborate ignition or incendiary devices. Subcategories of extremist firesetting
are identified as follows.
(a) Terrorism. The targets set by terrorists may appear to be at random; however, target locations are generally selected with
some degree of political or economic significance. Political targets generally include government offices, newspapers, universities,
political party headquarters, and military or law enforcement installations. Political terrorists may also target diverse properties
such as animal research facilities or abortion clinics. Economic targets may include business offices, distribution facilities of utility
providers, banks, or companies thought to have an adverse impact on the environments. Fires or explosions become a means of creation confusion
fear, or anarchy. THE TERRORIST MAY INCLUDE FIRE AS BUT ONE OF A VARITETY OF WEAPONS, ALONG WITH EXPLOSIVES, USED IN FURTHERING HIS OR HER GOAL…"

It very clearly states the Terrorist may use explosives along with fire to further their goal.
Obviously, explosives were used in 1993 on this very same complex.

It would seem to be obvious that a true investigation would test for the possibility that
“the terrorist may include explosives to further their goal.”

There is no excuse for refusing to test for explosives.



Even if the floors pancaked the massive central core could not have disintegrated like it did due to fire.
Seems to me . . . NIST and the defenders of NIST's approach are saying . . . we saw the planes fly into the buildings . . . we saw the fires . . . we saw the buildings fall down . . . there is a simple logical progression . . . there is no need to test for other possible causes of the events . . . all other testing and investigation is illogical . . . case closed . . . :)
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
N.F.P.A. 921 (2001 Edition) 19.4.8.2.6 – Extremism

It reads:

"Extremism-motivated firesetting is committed to further a social, political, or religious cause. Fires have been used
as a weapon of social protest since revolutions first began. Extremist firesetters may work in groups or as individuals.
Also, due to planning aspects and the selection of their targets, extremist firesetters generally have a great degree of
organization, as reflected in their use of more elaborate ignition or incendiary devices. Subcategories of extremist firesetting
are identified as follows.
(a) Terrorism. The targets set by terrorists may appear to be at random; however, target locations are generally selected with
some degree of political or economic significance. Political targets generally include government offices, newspapers, universities,
political party headquarters, and military or law enforcement installations. Political terrorists may also target diverse properties
such as animal research facilities or abortion clinics. Economic targets may include business offices, distribution facilities of utility
providers, banks, or companies thought to have an adverse impact on the environments. Fires or explosions become a means of creation confusion
fear, or anarchy. THE TERRORIST MAY INCLUDE FIRE AS BUT ONE OF A VARITETY OF WEAPONS, ALONG WITH EXPLOSIVES, USED IN FURTHERING HIS OR HER GOAL…"

It very clearly states the Terrorist may use explosives along with fire to further their goal.
Obviously, explosives were used in 1993 on this very same complex.

It would seem to be obvious that a true investigation would test for the possibility that
“the terrorist may include explosives to further their goal.”

There is no excuse for refusing to test for explosives.

All that says is that terrorist might use explosives. Which is just stating the incredibly obvious.

Where does it say something like "always check for explosives when investigating a fire"?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Seems to me . . . NIST and the defenders of NIST's approach are saying . . . we saw the planes fly into the buildings . . . we saw the fires . . . we saw the buildings fall down . . . there is a simple logical progression . . . there is no need to test for other possible causes of the events . . . all other testing and investigation is illogical . . . case closed . . . :)

Close, but the case was certainly not closed. That's was just the start of the case. They had to then determine why the buildings collapse. If they could not determine it, then they would have to look at other options (assuming there was some evidence pointing to - or at least not ruling out - those options).
 

hiper

Active Member
All that says is that terrorist might use explosives. Which is just stating the incredibly obvious.

Where does it say something like "always check for explosives when investigating a fire"?

I am beginning to suspect willful ignorance on your part.

You now say yourself that it is 'incredibly obvious' that terrorists might use explosives.
Yet you have no problem with NIST not checking for this. :rolleyes:
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
I am beginning to suspect willful ignorance on your part.

You now say yourself that it is 'incredibly obvious' that terrorists might use explosives.
Yet you have no problem with NIST not checking for this. :rolleyes:

It's not obvious IN THIS CASE though, is it?

In fact everything seems to point to them using planes.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Close, but the case was certainly not closed. That's was just the start of the case. They had to then determine why the buildings collapse. If they could not determine it, then they would have to look at other options (assuming there was some evidence pointing to - or at least not ruling out - those options).
Of course . . . but what if in the process . . . they lost the opportunity to examine evidence . . . would it not have been an efficient and prudent option to pitch a broader, more inclusive tent to capture more evidence than a narrowly focused plane + fire approach...maybe coconspirators, accelerants, explosives to increase damage and terror since that was the hijackers' objectives . . .
 

hiper

Active Member
It's not obvious IN THIS CASE though, is it?

In fact everything seems to point to them using planes.

You like NIST are now handpicking what evidence to investigate and what not.
This is not science. A scientific investigation leaves no stone unturned.

http://www2.ae911truth.org/downloads/Republic-Magazine16_Nanothermite_Smoking_Gun.pdf
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
You like NIST are now handpicking what evidence to investigate and what not.
This is not science. A scientific investigation leaves no stone unturned.

 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Actually they leave a lot of stones unturned. Given that there are an infinite number of stones, you've got a pick and chose.

Would you agree that the section you quoted provides recommendations on establishing the cause of a fire?

What do you think "should be considered" implies in the context of, say, the WTC7 fires?
Despite the title of this Thread . . . NIST's responsibilities went far beyond the fires themselves . . . are you truly saying testing for or looking for evidence that includes common practices of terrorists worldwide was not appropriate . . . ?
 

Landru

Moderator
Staff member
Despite the title of this Thread . . . NIST's responsibilities went far beyond the fires themselves . . . are you truly saying testing for or looking for evidence that includes common practices of terrorists worldwide was not appropriate . . . ?

NIST did consider the possibility of an explosion.

http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/wtc/faqs_wtc7.cfm

 

Landru

Moderator
Staff member
NIST explains why they didn't follow NFPA guidelines.

http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/wtc/faqs_wtc7.cfm

 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Despite the title of this Thread . . . NIST's responsibilities went far beyond the fires themselves . . . are you truly saying testing for or looking for evidence that includes common practices of terrorists worldwide was not appropriate . . . ?

No I'm not, and as noted they DID consider the possibility of explosives.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
No I'm not, and as noted they DID consider the possibility of explosives.
Did they consider explosions and accelerants which were targeting personnel specifically first responders in an attempt to increase fire damage and loss of life . . . I doubt seriously they thought the building would collapse . . . .?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Did they consider explosions and accelerants which were targeting personnel specifically first responders in an attempt to increase fire damage and loss of life . . . I doubt seriously they thought the building would collapse . . . .?

I'm sure they would have if there was any indication of such a thing.

A plane full of kerosene flew into the building. The idea that it would be rigged with bombs as well is both baseless and extraordinary.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
I'm sure they would have if there was any indication of such a thing.

A plane full of kerosene flew into the building. The idea that it would be rigged with bombs as well is both baseless and extraordinary.
Why would they rig the aircraft with such devices . . . ? Common sense would dictate planting devices in the areas most likely where responders would congregate . . . or where fire or disruption would be most beneficial . . .
 

Jazzy

Closed Account
Apart from everything else, WTC 7 was NOT subject to terrorist attack. It was set on fire by haphazard impacting pieces of the collapsing WTC 1.

The prime initiator of WTC 7's woes was that impact.

There is no reason to suppose that charges were laid in WTC 7 on the off-chance that WTC 7 might be struck by WTC 1, especially when the building collapsed progressively from one corner without explosions.
 

lotek

Active Member
wait so lemmy get this straight:

Logic says they would put bombs at first responder locations, but they didnt, so thats out.

Logic dictates they would put bombs at structural weak points? But no data supports this and it is just supposition against a standing body of theory. An overly complex, and likely to fail one.

If you had this degree of access and ability and reproducible, scale-able, bomb production, why planes too? or just the one building? if so why only one? wheres the defunct precision bomb factory, or trail of contractor theft, all the timers or det cord or cellular ignition blocks? nothing left at all? or am to to accept that is being actively covered up too?

Not bombs, but fire?
funny thing about thermite, it doesnt go away when you burn it, and it doesnt explode, so it would be all over that place if it were used. Or did they secretly give it an overnight coat of ultra fine particle thermite slurry, dull silver paint noone happened to see? and so it just coated all the debris in a fine layer?


All reactions going about like:
Fe2​O3​ + 2 Al → 2 Fe + Al2​O3
3 CuO + 2 Al → 3 Cu + Al2​O3

this obvious ultra high temp scorching and metal dust everywhere, or big pools of melted metals that do not belong there.

Liquid high temp additives leave fairly obvious patters that are encountered regularly and i would venture a guess these guys have seen more than a few used before..

I am willing to bet, that on another day, the two of you would say government bureaucracy gets in the way and slows things down, needlessly bloated etc. the ability to skip things like this after a qualified review is to get around situations like that in time sensitive cases.

Your research into what you have deemed valid enough to base the proclamation of a possible conspiracy is lacking at best. this claim is baseless, in my eyes at least..
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
wait so lemmy get this straight:

Logic says they would put bombs at first responder locations, but they didnt, so thats out.

Logic dictates they would put bombs at structural weak points? But no data supports this and it is just supposition against a standing body of theory. An overly complex, and likely to fail one.

If you had this degree of access and ability and reproducible, scale-able, bomb production, why planes too? or just the one building? if so why only one? wheres the defunct precision bomb factory, or trail of contractor theft, all the timers or det cord or cellular ignition blocks? nothing left at all? or am to to accept that is being actively covered up too?

Not bombs, but fire?
funny thing about thermite, it doesnt go away when you burn it, and it doesnt explode, so it would be all over that place if it were used. Or did they secretly give it an overnight coat of ultra fine particle thermite slurry, dull silver paint noone happened to see? and so it just coated all the debris in a fine layer?

All reactions going about like:
Fe2​O3​ + 2 Al → 2 Fe + Al2​O3
3 CuO + 2 Al → 3 Cu + Al2​O3

this obvious ultra high temp scorching and metal dust everywhere, or big pools of melted metals that do not belong there.

Liquid high temp additives leave fairly obvious patters that are encountered regularly and i would venture a guess these guys have seen more than a few used before..

I am willing to bet, that on another day, the two of you would say government bureaucracy gets in the way and slows things down, needlessly bloated etc. the ability to skip things like this after a qualified review is to get around situations like that in time sensitive cases.

Your research into what you have deemed valid enough to base the proclamation of a possible conspiracy is lacking at best. this claim is baseless, in my eyes at least..
Seems most of the burn injuries reported at WTC were at or near ground level . . . one might assume it was fuel on the elevator shafts or an unknown source . . . the lobby had the glass shattered outward as well . . . seems there are reasons to question alternative causes especially when it was a known terrorist attack . . . https://sites.google.com/site/911stories/insidethenorthtower:witnessaccounts,lobb
 

Cairenn

Senior Member.
Many of the folks in the AREA where the planes impacted did not get out. Since their bodies were crushed to dust, no way to see if then were burned. It those weren't fires, what the heck were they?
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Many of the folks in the AREA where the planes impacted did not get out. Since their bodies were crushed to dust, no way to see if then were burned. It those weren't fires, what the heck were they?
I am not questioning if there were fires . . . I am saying there was reason to question if terrorists could have tried to increase collateral injury and damage in addition to the aircraft effects . . .
 

MikeC

Closed Account
OK - so there is reason to question that.

did you get an answer, and what did you do with it if you did?
 

lotek

Active Member
im sure there was a reason to suspect, but it was probably painfuly clear it was not a secondary system/device upon inspection thus the waiving of the 921. the bioggest issue here is complexity george. to apply a boots on the ground force to their attack would greatly increase the number of things that could go wrong too.
 

hiper

Active Member
NIST did consider the possibility of an explosion.

http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/wtc/faqs_wtc7.cfm


The only valid scientific answer to question 13 above would have been :


"Yes, in order to acquire evidence supporting the existence of a blast event NIST has analyzed several dust samples from the WTC 7 debris by
trace chemical analysis but found no residue of accelerants or explosives."



The only scientific way to know if accelerants or explosives were in play was to analyze the dust.
NIST knows all this... as does every genuine scientist on the planet.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
im sure there was a reason to suspect, but it was probably painfuly clear it was not a secondary system/device upon inspection thus the waiving of the 921. the bioggest issue here is complexity george. to apply a boots on the ground force to their attack would greatly increase the number of things that could go wrong too.
That is undeniable . . . seemed pretty complex all around . . . heard rumors there were other suspected hijacker teams ready in other airports but stood down when everything was grounded or became too hot . . . to me it is not a stretch to consider some ground assets at WTC . . .
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
The only valid scientific answer to question 13 above would have been :


"Yes, in order to acquire evidence supporting the existence of a blast event NIST has analyzed several dust samples from the WTC 7 debris by
trace chemical analysis but found no residue of accelerants or explosives."



The only scientific way to know if accelerants or explosives were in play was to analyze the dust.
NIST knows all this... as does every genuine scientist on the planet.

Well, given the tons of dust available, surely if there was anything in it, then someone else would have found it by now?

AE911Truth takes in about $500,000 per year. Can't they get some dust analyzed by multiple independent labs?
 

lotek

Active Member
hiper, you are neglecting the part where it says they can skip parts to speed up the process if its deemed irrelevant.

and it can not have been thermite in any way, so you are left with cans of flammable liquid?! or bombs? as there is no evidence to support and inquiry into this to do so would only have hindered the investigation.

I postulate that a thorium breeder reactor powdered ultra high accuracy infrared laser system was concealed inside of a 3mx3m heat resistant ceramic teapot and placed into an elliptical orbit around earth. this teapot used its laser to start the fires and due to the elliptical orbit will not be observable for another 50 years. to prove this i suggest we fund a 200million dollar flyby mission to ascertain the teapot's true location in space!
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
Well, given the tons of dust available, surely if there was anything in it, then someone else would have found it by now?

AE911Truth takes in about $500,000 per year. Can't they get some dust analyzed by multiple independent labs?
Seems to be a just criticism. . . If AE911truth has these assets, seems they could conduct some well publicized testing and demonstrations like the 767 in the desert at 2,000 feet target simulation. . . . :)
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
hiper, you are neglecting the part where it says they can skip parts to speed up the process if its deemed irrelevant.
!
Oh! I didn't know they were in such a hurry . . . is that why it took years to publish their findings. . . ???
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Seems to be a just criticism. . . If AE911truth has these assets, seems they could conduct some well publicized testing and demonstrations like the 767 in the desert at 2,000 feet target simulation. . . . :)

From another thread, for reference

Let's say it would cost $100K. Couldn't AE911 raise that? What exactly are they spending their $434,526 revenue on? Richard Gage's $80,652 salary? $36K in travel and lodging. $32K in "event production". Looks like he's a full time 9/11 salesman now.

View attachment 1647



I suspect that they are really not interested in the facts. They just want to keep spinning it as long as possible. That's why they won't actually do any real science.
 
Last edited:

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
I think the key word here is "irrelevant", not "hurry"
I in no way consider testing of the steel or the perfunctory testing for a range of explosives or accelerants as irrelevant. . . .it is not like they didn't have the time and resources. . . . and you will not convince me nor many others likewise. . .


We seem to run out a bomb sniffing dog to almost any public event when no one has rammed an airplane into a building. . . ;)
 

F4Jock

Senior Member.
I in no way consider testing of the steel or the perfunctory testing for a range of explosives or accelerants as irrelevant. . . .it is not like they didn't have the time and resources. . . . and you will not convince me nor many others likewise. . .

While not every recommendation in NFPA 921 will apply to any particular fire or explosion investigation, the document itself recommends that if a particular fire investigator does not apply certain sections to an investigation where they are called-for, the investigator must be prepared to justify the exclusion.
[edit]


Which was, I believe, done.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Valid question to which I have no answer.

This I stumbled upon... it's an independent investigation that... does not find any evidence of nano-termite


http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=231314

Thanks, that seems like a pretty comprehensive report. Here's the PDF rehosted from there:
View attachment 9119ProgressReport022912_rev1_030112webHiRes.pdf

The (51 page) thread there goes over many of the likely issues. A good example of useful information being lost in a discussion thread.
 
Last edited:

hiper

Active Member
But I can't accept the collapse of 3 steel framed towers collapsing like they did due to fire.
 

George B

Extinct but not forgotten Staff Member
While not every recommendation in NFPA 921 will apply to any particular fire or explosion investigation, the document itself recommends that if a particular fire investigator does not apply certain sections to an investigation where they are called-for, the investigator must be prepared to justify the exclusion.
[edit]


Which was, I believe, done.
Good what was the rational for exclusion . . .?
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Good what was the rational for exclusion . . .?

See above:

NIST explains why they didn't follow NFPA guidelines.

http://www.nist.gov/el/disasterstudies/wtc/faqs_wtc7.cfm

 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
Jedo How can we interpret witness reports of buckling? 9/11 5
Mick West Have You Actually READ the NIST Report on Building 7? 9/11 12
gerrycan Did NIST examine Steel from WTC7? 9/11 16
Mick West False Authority: "Thoughts From a Former NIST Employee" on 9/11 9/11 92
Truthful New published physics article points out NIST limitations and need for new investigation. Conspiracy Theories 3
Major_Tom Do Subpixel Video Measurements Reveal Errors in the NIST account of 9/11? 9/11 17
Playing Games AE911Truth To File LawsuitTo End FEMA/NIST Stonewalling 9/11 179
gerrycan AE911 Letter to Inspector General Claims NIST WTC7 Report is Provably False 9/11 161
Oxymoron Professional Witnesses Disagree With NIST i.e. Ladder 15 we've got two isolated pockets of fire. 9/11 57
Mick West Does NIST not testing for explosives and not testing WTC7 steel invalidate everything 9/11 246
hiper Did NIST lack focus? 9/11 8
Landru Did NIST lie and claim that the fires melted steel? 9/11 13
lee h oswald WTC: Architects and Engineers, what percentage actually disagree with NIST? 9/11 9
Mick West Investigating: "Our purpose was to document the event" 9/11 7
Mick West Investigating "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 WTC Catastrophe" 9/11 32
deirdre FBI Agent investigating Clinton email leak commited murder/suicide (Satire/Fake News Site) General Discussion 1
Balance Investigating: Rain on Request Contrails and Chemtrails 12
Leifer 3 scientists investigating melting Arctic ice may have been assassinated Conspiracy Theories 8
Cube Radio Use of Scale Model or Full Sized models for investigating 9/11 collapses 9/11 959
sgirl Peru is Reopening Their UFO Investigating Office Science and Pseudoscience 12
Related Articles




















Related Articles

Top