Originally Posted by
DGM
It certainly has no value in a study of a building collapse. Neither does his statement that the building was not hit by an aircraft. Why would he even bring up this irrelevant detail?
I hope his students keep him focused because it appears he needs it.
Even less important the stupid exclamation that the 9/11 Commission didn't study WTC7. This Professor has a poltical agenda.
He says he hasn't read any of the scientific literature on WTC7, to avoid being biased - but he has all the irrelevant stupid Truther claims in his presentation. And he gets payed handsomely by Truthers. He is most definitely biased.
Doesn't mean of course that the work won't be good, or even will be fraudulent. We'll simply have to wait for actual reporting on the actual work.