Families of 9/11 victims and the nonprofit organization Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth filed an administrative appeal late yesterday condemning the decision made by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) to deny the group’s “request for correction” regarding NIST’s 2008 report on the controversial collapse of World Trade Center Building 7.

The 47-story office building, though not hit by an airplane, fell straight into its footprint roughly seven hours after the Twin Towers were destroyed on September 11, 2001. NIST concluded in its report that Building 7 collapsed primarily due to fire — which would make it the first tall building ever to do so. The request for correction asks NIST to throw out that conclusion on the grounds that it violates NIST’s information quality standards under the Data Quality Act.

“The explanations given by NIST for its decision to deny our request are preposterous and totally avoid addressing our arguments,” said Ted Walter, spokesperson for the 9/11 families and AE911Truth. “Our hope now is that NIST’s associate director for laboratory programs, James Olthoff, will reverse this egregious decision and have the report revised.”

The appeal submitted late yesterday alleges that NIST’s decision to deny the request is “demonstrably in error and fails to provide a response to most of the relevant data quality arguments contained in the request.”

Among other things, the appeal takes aim at NIST’s refusal to study a melted piece of steel from Building 7 on the flimsy grounds that the steel cannot be confirmed as coming from Building 7 — an excuse the appeal calls “brazenly unscientific.”

The appeal also targets NIST’s refusal to perform new computer simulations that would include a structural feature NIST now admits was excluded from the modeling. AE911Truth argues that including this structural feature would have prevented the failure that NIST claims initiated the collapse.

Appeal of NIST Initial Decision WTC 7 RFC 09 28 20

“They are refusing to conduct new analyses that they know they should, and their justifications are beyond absurd,” said Richard Gage, AIA, architect and founder of AE911Truth.

The procedure governing requests submitted to NIST states that the associate director’s decision is communicated “usually within 60 calendar days after receipt of the appeal” and will constitute a final decision by the U.S. Department of Commerce, of which NIST is a part. The procedure also dictates that “[n]o individuals who were involved in the initial denial will be involved in the review of or response to the appeal.”

“Dr. Olthoff will have the final opportunity to restore NIST’s integrity and deliver some truth to the families who lost loved ones on 9/11,” said Walter. “If he doesn’t, NIST can expect we will take legal action.”

Download: The Appeal / Appeal Exhibits A, B, C, D, E / NIST's Initial Decision / The Request for Correction / Request Exhibits A, B, B1, C, D, E

Related News

Zach Vorhies: Artificial intelligence could expose lies in official narratives

Zach Vorhies: Artificial intelligence could expose lies in official narratives
Read More...

Alex Stein tossed from city hall for raising 9/11 truth!

Podcaster was an interviewee at AE911Truth’s The 24th Hour
Read More...

A light in the darkness

This day changed your life
Read More...

Chapter 4 of Roland Angle’s book finally names names

We have now released the next chapter of AE911Truth Chairman, Roland Angle’s work in progress, Engineering the 9/11 Cover-Up: How the WTC Evidence was Kept Secret from the World. Today, we are releasing the fourth chapter!
Read More...

RFK Sr. suggested false flag against Cuba

Free Fall panel on RFK’s false flag idea, Trump shooting, and WTC flashes
Read More...

We deserve better

Integrity: doing the right thing when no one is watching
Read More...

Candace Owens questions the 9/11 official story

Sticking up for those who don’t believe the government’s narrative of the events.
Read More...

AE911Truth’s Scientific Integrity Act would force government reports to be true

How many Americans realize that their own government is allowed to publish scientific reports that are false? And how many know that this is the case even with scientific data that the government knows to be false.
Read More...

As engineers, we have a legal responsibility to guard the public’s safety.

We are a small non-profit taking on a tremendous issue, and we need your support to help fund these efforts.

If you believe in the power of dedicated people and their ability to change the world, then please make a donation right now!

Thank you so much for your continued support and your willingness to stand with us! 

 

 

From Architects & Engineers for 9/11Truth and filmmaker, Dylan Avery comes this short documentary that is both hauntingly beautiful in its presentation and startlingly grim in its revelations. 


Join civil engineer, Jonathan Cole through an informational odyssey as he revisits the controversy surrounding the impossible destruction of towers 1, 2 and 7 on September 11th 2001, and how his research, along with the research of others, has pulled the rug out from under the conclusions offered by the federal government on why those three buildings ultimately failed. 

Through Cole's testimony, and that of mechanical engineer, Tony Szamboti, a dark picture comes into focus that demonstrates that not only is the official story of what killed so many people on America's darkest day provably false but that the federal government actively and willfully turned a blind eye to the observable facts during its unscientific investigation of the building collapses. 

In a little over twenty minutes, Thirty Seconds of Silence reveals more about the destruction of the three World Trade Center towers on 9/11 than the media has revealed to the public in the over twenty years since the event took place.