I'm interested in developing a database that could serve as the back end for a site dedicated to documenting and organizing facts, questions, and arguments related to the science of the destruction of WTC7. I am not a scientist, but I'm interested in doing this so that I can nail down the main points of contention about the destruction in context and in an organized fashion. I find this to be the most problematic thing about discussions which many times just jump from one topic to the next, with participants only hoping they've made a point, without any real idea if they have. I'd like to be able to clearly point to a node in the argument and say "here's where we disagree. are there any related (parent/child) arguments? can this argument be verified? what other information do we need to verify this argument?"

I'm imagining a lot of flexibility for the presentation of the data, such as a directory structure (threaded) and drill down into various sub branches. Yet, it would be less linear than a traditional outline - any particular argument-fact-item would only be viewed as a parent/child in context. A single item could appear in multiple threads because the logic of multiple arguments could lead to the same items (the way the 'net works). It could be at the top level in one thread and a sub-branch in another.

I'd also like to have decent search capabilites and intuitive filtering. Almost like you'd see in excel at the column headers where you can choose which records to filter out, based on which distinct values are checked.

So, I'm looking for feedback about such a project. Any advice or concerns about design or use(fulness) welcome. Am I just unaware of all the similar reference tools for Bld7 out there and reinventing the wheel?

Thanks in advance.