Author: admin

Prestigious journal agrees to new review of 9/11 paper a decade after censoring it

It took a four-year ethics complaint process and more than ten years of waiting, but finally the current editor of the ASCE’s Journal of Engineering Mechanics has agreed to conduct a new review of a “discussion paper” by researchers Tony Szamboti and Richard Johns that was unfairly rejected in 2013. The grounds for the rejection was that the discussion paper was “out of scope,” even though it was critiquing a paper published in the same journal.

Read More...

Peer Reviewing NIST: How years of FOIA requests exposed critical flaws in NIST’s Building 7 collapse analysis

Structural engineer Ronald H. Brookman writes in this newly published retrospective technical article: “As I discovered through years of painstaking review of hundreds of documents after the final NCSTAR reports were released — indeed, four weeks was not enough — crucial structural information was omitted from NCSTAR 1-9 without explanation, and NIST’s collapse-initiation sequence for WTC 7 was based on speculation.”

Read More...

Peer Reviewing NIST: How years of FOIA requests exposed critical flaws in NIST’s Building 7 collapse analysis

This article describes a series of FOIA (Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552) requests that I filed from 2009 to 2014 seeking information related to the alleged walk-off failures in WTC 7. Excerpts from these FOIA requests and appeals to NIST are indented in the following paragraphs. Links to the FOIA requests, appeals, and responses are provided throughout. All relevant documents regarding the design and construction of WTC 7 can be obtained by request from NIST, so that anyone with the requisite expertise can verify my observations. NIST’s responses, or lack thereof, to my technical questions should be enlightening to anyone studying the WTC tragedy.

Read More...