no matter how extensive the evidence the other way they refuse to accept it.

I assume you are refering to the official version with that statement, since scientific analysis done independently (that is, without links to the Bush administration) has shown that the official theory is inadequate.

Do you have any links to back up your statements?

In this diary post I provided links, examples, analysis and evidence. You haven't provided any. Saying a topic is "off limits" for discussion doesn't mean it's an invalid topic, just that you perhaps feel uncomfortable considering it. If, as you claim, there are so many available professional sources, you should be apt to provide them, and explain how they refute my above points (as I was not discussing uniquely building construction above).

This kind of real research can lead to meaningful change. Chasing ghosts serves no purpose except keeping the paranoid busy.

Exactly. This is the entire false paradigm of the so-called "War on Terror."

"There were numerous investigations by panels of civil engineers and other experts on the collapse of the buildings. These involved hundreds of people at different institutions, some working together and some independently. They have explained everything in detail and their findings are now used when designing new buildings to make them more disaster proof. To think that all these people could be 'in on it' is absurd."

This is not true.  There are NIST, FEMA, MIT and Northwestern's Bazant.  Only Bazant has posited a theory for the "progressive collapse" and it is a sick joke.  Bazant's "crush down, crush up" theory  basically says that the less massive top of the building acted as a hammer crushing down through the progressively much more massive floors below, without being damaged itself until it hit the pile of debris below which now magically becomes able to crush up the upper part that hammered down.  Not only is this absurd on its face, it is contradicted by the videos showing the upper part of the buildings disappearing early in the pulverization process of each.

The engineering community is resisting incorporation of NIST's findings into building codes, particularly the "progressive collapse."  The argument they make is that this is a one-time event, and a terrorist act should not be the reason for very expensive changes.  

Yes, the engineering community is "in on it," and I don't just mean the frauds like Bazant.  Silence is complicity.