is there an opportunity to ask john gross and shyam sunder about the molten metal, point blank? and what about their reason for dismissing controlled demolition due to their assumption that it would have been too noisy? there is quality research and analysis conducted by dr. macqueen on this topic... and there is also ample video footage and witness testimony to back up both points, yet they claim to not have encountered any of it... what would happen to their theory if they were presented with this material? how can they possibly dismiss it?

It should be mentioned in interviews that Shyam Sundar is an employee of the George W. Bush administration.

This can be done indirectly by stating, for example, "I am not an employee of the George W. Bush administration. I am an independent researcher"

It is fair to state that if he reported the facts and obvious conclusions that are being reported by the independent researchers, he would be fired.

This should help people see through the coverup that he is promoting and his possible motivation.

Peace.

... if you don't look...

On 1, Shyam Sundar did not answer my questions at all -- he simply replied that they found some hypotheses "not credible," without doing the relevant experiments. Not a very scientific answer, IMO. PS -- they didn't look...

It is quite incredible what passes as a scientific investigation these days. And no politician, no media calling them on that... They ignore important evidence, yet remember to remind on every opportunity how many millions of dollars, how many years this study took and how many "credible" scientists were on the job...

Sunder answers “No” to the question: “Shouldn’t you have tested for those residues that Steven Jones had found according to your own dictates.”
Sunder goes on to say:
“…Just because thermite or thermate exists in some dust particles does not necessarily translate into thermate being the cause of the building failure. There is no theory around it, there’s just observations, isolated observations….”

From
A "Pull No Punches" Interview with Dr. Shyam Sunder.
This Interview was first broadcast Sunday, August 24, 2008.
http://noliesradio.org/ Archive is half-way down the page.
The above quote is a little past the half-way mark, with the slidebar under “ust”.

So, here we have Sunder admitting to thermite evidence being observed. However, he admonishes "observations". I guess that means that people should not observe phenomena because it doesn't fit a hypothesis. Comic books are more real than this guy.

He claims there were no explosions recorded when Building 7 went down.

LIE

Hers's a video that captured a huge explosion a second or two before the building fell:

Click on the link and it should take you to 27 minutes and 15 seconds into the video - about 30 seconds before the explosion is heard:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=65460757734339444#27m15s

On the same video, at 28:25, reporter Al Jones explains that it looked like a demo crew brought it down and that the building fell from an "explosion":

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=65460757734339444#28m25s

Then at 31:30, there's an interview with a first responder who witnessed the demolition of WTC-7 and explains that he heard a sound that sounded like a "clap of thunder" and then Building 7 fell a couple seconds after.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=65460757734339444#31m20s

Please forward this information to Sham and his other fraud budies at NIST with intensity!!

____________________
"If I had just paid $20 million for the NIST report, I'd be asking for a refund!... The trouble with the NIST Report is that it isn’t even science because it's not capable of being verified or negated!" -Dr. Frank Greening

Dr Jones,

Can you shed any light on this "Thermal Expansion" theory in which NIST is proposing that caused the single crippling column to fail. On its surface it seems like a real stretch. He psuedo explains it here but offers no data or experimental demonstration of this process.

http://media.putfile.com/Dr-Graeme-MacQueen-and-Dr-Shyam-Sunder

In the interview above, Dr. Sunder states that the "Magnitude of the thermal expansion is directly tied to length of the floor span. If you have a twice as long floor span; you will have 2x as much expansion beyond the order of 4 to 5 inches." 4 to 5 inches?!! Wouldn't we have seen this expanding property in steel given as many times as we've studied fire tests and other structure fires? I've only glanced over the report but Dr Sunder states that all this was played out in the computer model. Given the penchant for this investigation to rely solely on video analysis, I doubt they spent any of the $16M on a 50 foot piece of steel, mounted it up somewhere and cooked it at 800 degrees C for 7 hrs to actually see if it expanded 4 or 5 inches to prove this "thermal expansion" theory. And how could it expand? would it swell? lengthen? Don't things expand when they freeze for instance when a frozen soda bursts its container?

It just seems odd they would put so much stock in the "new phenomenon" of "expanding steel" if so easily disproved. Thank you for all your time and efforts. You are true hero.

Dan

Am I the only one wondering, how fires in building 5 and 7 came to be in the first place? When there is an earthquake, gaspipes and high voltage wires are ripped apart because of the ground moving and twisting (and therefore the pipes and wires in it) and fires ensue. And it is very likely, that gaspipes underneath WTC 1 and 2 vwhere severed and caused fires. But why did (fx.) building 5 and 7 catch fire? Did NIST say that the dieselfueltanks began the fires (I havn't heard that) or something else. As far I'm informed, Shyam Sunder just said that the debris from WTC 1 caused the fires - BUT HOW? I's it plausible, that the debris falling from WTC 1 would cause fires on 10 floors by just hitting building 7? Perhaps it is possible, but is it likely? There were many unusual thing going on with building 7 on 9/11!!