^ I said that in the context of official story from the government being proxy for 'established research'.
Only four or five papers in a decade? :O
What area you talking about? Structural properties of buildings like WTC if hit by a plane? Could you PM me the links?
i dont see any reason why the scientific community in general would take the government's theory as proxy for 'established research'. remember that journals are often international and outside the direct influence of the government. furthermore the review process usually is anonymous and decentralized, its difficult for even a large government like the US to impose its will on such a process.
i was talking about more specific papers i.e. the WTC and its collapse. if you scroll through my posts you'll find a couple of papers. those papers will have any previous research in the references.
there was infact one paper that found noticeable quantities of thermite that was siezed upon some conspiracy theorists of the thermite persuasion. Although the journal that published didnt seem very reputable it did get published, and subsequently cited in a higher quality paper that specifically considered the collapse and whether it could have been triggered by thermite (ruling it out based on the mechanics). you'll have to take my word for it though, its been a long time since i read those papers, and i dont want to dig into the web for references.
Please watch this video. This is how buildings collapse when all the columns do not fail exactly at the same time. Its just impossible to believe that all the columns of both WTC towers and WTC 7 failed at the same time for each building
if that is the case TLK why not write about it for a credible scientific place like a peer reviewed journal? you'll either get a very high profile paper out of it, or get technical feedback from much better qualified people than anyone else here.
