NIST refuses to meet with AE911!

NIST flat out refuses to meet with AE911 to discuss their scientific findings.
After I watched this video, I was able to determine that NIST was avoiding having any communication with AE911. I am convinced just by NIST behavior and avoidance that they know they have committed fraud in their NIST report. NIST will not let any real independent expert in science, demolition, or engineering ever question them in an open video publicly.

We all know why because NIST cannot and will not be able to answer AE911 questions.
AE911 scholars and engineers has shown enough scientific proof that NIST has deliberately lied to the American people and in their report. Watch the video.

Richard Gage, AIA, founder of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth visits the National Institute of Standards and Technology after NIST's lead investigator for the World Trade Center disaster, Shyam Sunder, declines to meet with him. Gage hand-delivers a letter written to Dr. Sunder that raises serious objections to the official explanations for the three World Trade Center high-rise building collapses on 9/11. He is accompanied by AE911Truth members Matt Skarlatos and David Slesinger.

www.blip.tv...


So, my question is this:
Should the writers of the NIST report and their speakers for the NIST report be charged with fraud and deception for covering up a crime?

The crime that was covered up was a false flag operation orchestrated and committed by a handful of people in the Bush administration and carried out by a loyal group of high-level military officials loyal to Dick Cheney, in my opinion. The reason I come to this conclusions, is that NORAD did nothing on 911. There was no excuse for four hijack commercial airliners flying off course over highly restrictive air space for an hour, nothing, no excuse what so ever.

I don’t believe we will ever get the real evidences to prosecute these people because most if not all of the real evidences has been destroyed and I don’t believe anyone involved helping these people into pulling off 911 will blow the whistle. They know they will be killed if they talk. Now you all know why Dick Cheney had his own assassination squad, to silences anyone who may talk, this makes sense now.

reply to post by MonkeyWithANut

Even if NIST gave them all the facts and every physicist in the world agreed with NIST

The problem is, that as of now, every physicist in the world DOESN't agree with NIST. Why wouldn't NIST have given all of the facts in the first place?

Why would NIST waste tax payer dollars

Since when does any government agencies care about wasting tax payer dollars?



[edit on 10/26/2009 by JohnnyR]

reply to post by JohnnyR


Do you know how to spell executed or did you do a pun and I missed it?

reply to post by MonkeyWithANut


Welcome to ATS...I'm noticing a trend here. People are making accounts to derail conversations.

reply to post by R2D2LovesC3PO


no no no!!! I know how to spell it, just blind and couldnt read the silly font, thank you for pointing it out

:pens photoshop::

reply to post by JohnnyR


LOL... glad I could help out.. I thought you were one up on me and I was excited to get some real cool explanation that would blow my mind.

reply to post by MonkeyWithANut


So you're here on ATS and you're calling AE911 members nutjobs? AE911 science is about as good as it gets as far as conspiracy-related science goes. I have a Chemistry degree from UCLA and Mass Spectrometry and other material investigation techniques are pretty much infallible. The finding of both un-ignited Thermite and vaporized steel particulates in every WTC dust sample leads to only one conclusion: there were Thermite-based compounds in the towers that were ignited.

AE911 members are not concerned with why the towers were destroyed nor who was responsible. They are only concerned with how the towers were destroyed.

reply to post by amance

AE911 members are not concerned with why the towers were destroyed nor who was responsible. They are only concerned with how the towers were destroyed.

You’re absolutely right. AE911 are not conspiracy theorists, they are about science. Many of these people have laid their reputation and Job careers on the line, to prove NIST has deceived America, and I think they have proven it.

Reply to post by impressme

Ah I see. Only "truthers" is allowed to ignore they don't take seriously imagine that.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com



Mod Note: One Line Post – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 27/10/2009 by Sauron]

That will be enough, discus the topic. If you have nothing to ad but wise cracks, stop now.

]Due to member demand, the 9/11 forum is now under close staff scrutiny

Moderator

There is probably quite a large group of people, not only NIST, who would fall in the category of "accessories after the fact". Anyone who participated in any kind of cover-up, no matter how cleverly disguised, as shoddy science, or job ineptitude, "just following orders", or what have you, would be, I think, liable to being charged as an accessory, to some or all of the crimes perpetrated on 9/11.

These crimes, even under the most benevolent adjudication in the courts, could carry multiple consecutive life sentences and in some cases might involve the death penalty.

In many jurisdictions, including New York State, accessories are sentenced as if they were principals in the commission of a crime.

Of course an accessory could always cooperate with investigators or turn state's evidence. In that case they might receive more lenient treatment.


[edit on 27-10-2009 by ipsedixit]

Originally posted by impressme
I don’t believe we will ever get the real evidences to prosecute these people because most if not all of the real evidences has been destroyed and I don’t believe anyone involved helping these people into pulling off 911 will blow the whistle. They know they will be killed if they talk. Now you all know why Dick Cheney had his own assassination squad, to silences anyone who may talk, this makes sense now.

Thus, the definition of "circular logic": attempting to explain the premise by repeating the same premise in different terms. It's supporting a hypothesis with itself.

It always seems to be the case they're lying to us and the truth is really [fill in the blank] but they secretly control all the media to make us think what they want us to think. All the scientific material attempting to refute the truth that [fill in the blank] is coming from secret disinformation agents and shills, and insiders wouldn't ever dare to come forward and admit [fill in the blank] becuase hit squads would murder them to keep them quiet. If, after all this time, people still can't understand that [fill in the blank] it has to mean they're really scared to face the truth that [fill in the blank], preferring instead to be mindless sheep wallowing in comfortable ignorance.

Simply fill in the blank with anything from "the gov't staged 9/11" to "the world is being controlled by shapeshifing alien lizards" and the mechanism will be the same.

reply to post by ipsedixit

There is probably quite a large group of people, not only NIST, who would fall in the category of "accessories after the fact". Anyone who participated in any kind of cover-up, no matter how cleverly disguised, as shoddy science, or job ineptitude, "just following orders", or what have you, would be, I think, liable to being charged as an accessory, to some or all of the crimes perpetrated on 9/11.

I totally agree and we are taken names. When most of the truth is exposed, the American people will be screaming for justice. We know who the majority of the criminals are who have helped in the covering up of a false flag operation and they will go down as war criminals and traitors against the American people and our country.

Regardless of one's opinions of the Architects and Engineers group, they do represent an independent organization of professional citizens, peers of the NIST WTC team engineers, concerned with NIST's methodology.

That NIST is uninterested in hearing what they have to say only tells us what we already know about the intellectual honesty of NIST's WTC engineers. We have already seen John Gross lie about there being molten steel when it was in FEMA's report, we've seen him act nervous and guilty and red in the face. We've seen him and the director Dr. Sunder both give incoherent responses to questions on camera. Nothing new, though it is unfortunate.

reply to post by bsbray11


Not only did John Gross lie, he did it with arrogance. I think the real reason NIST won't meet, is that they are afraid of being challenged.

That an organization like NIST refuses to be challenged speaks volumes about their arrogance and elitist attitude. They know full well, there is a growing doubt over the story they tried to sell, that the number of professionals happends to be growing daily it seems.

Rather, then deal with it, they just wan't it to go away.

NIST DENIES MOLTEN METAL

www.youtube.com...

Gage a proven lair, there is no one with this kind of education that is this IGNORANT!

Gage claimed we scientifically explained the initial collapse. Then how come their, (NIST) science does not stand up to academic true science? Did you all notices the anger on gages face? He is angry because he realizes no one is buying their garbage of phony sciences.

reply to post by impressme


That video is definitely worth watching so I will post it here in the thread:




That's NIST engineer John Gross, though, not Richard Gage.

John Gross should be afraid of more than just having to debate people at this point, after that little show of emotion.

reply to post by bsbray11


You are correct I did use the wrong name.

NIST has no interest in discussing their theory with anyone because they know their methods do not follow the basic expectations of the scientific method.
For them to follow the scientific method, they have to consider ALL of the evidence and be able to reproduce the phenomena with methods that are acceptable to everyone. Producing a computer simulation that is tweaked to show the collapse can be possible is not following the scientific method. The scientific method is the acceptable way to prove the truth.
I have yet to see anyone build a scaled version of the buildings for testing that exhibits the collapse characteristics we saw on 9/11. It cannot be done. Common sense and experience tells us that asymmetrically challenged structures do not collapse symmetrically at near fall fall acceleration.