This is very much an important part if Kevin Ryan's statements 15 years ago. Certainly here in the US, and I assume that in all more advanced countries, building codes incorporate requirements that minimize the potential for damage from fires. Structures are designed and built to avoid raging fires and structural collapse. Furniture and other furnishings are designed and required to be flame resistant and more.
Aviation interiors must be fire blocked. Cars are designed to withstand certain crashes. Structural steel is designed to meet certain standards, and the insurance companies support these efforts to minimize their exposure and to offer a predictable performance. Underwriters Laboratory, the company for which Ryan worked, tests various products to determine how well they meet the safety requirements.
Clearly, as demonstrated by the Windsor Towers and other examples, our system works pretty well in that regard.
The obvious exception, the curious exception, was WTC on 911, in which in one day three modern steel and concrete structures presumably meeting the fire code and insurance requirements, mysteriously collapsed at almost free fall rates from relatively minor fires.
The London event demonstrates that even the London fire code, whatever it may be, worked to make the building withstand many hours of fire without collapsing. Recently buildings in parts of Russia, UAE and other places have also demonstrated that. Modern construction techniques incorporate methods that minimize fire damage.
The NIST sophistry was apparent to any honest person with a working knowledge of physics and fire engineering. It is nothing but a political bull**** story embraced by people in denial of facts.
Every major fire since 911 in a high rise building, Dubai or Russia and elsewhere, has demonstrated the absurdity and falsity of the NIST theory. So does this recent London event.
We now see how strongly those in denial of facts cling to their delusions. Sad, comical and oh so human.
eace
