portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reporting global

9.11 investigation | police / legal

BYU Physics Prof Finds Thermate in WTC Physical Samples, Building Collapses an Inside Job

Based on chemical analysis of WTC structural steel residue, a Brigham Young University physics professor has identified the material as Thermate. Thermate is the controlled demolition explosive thermite plus sulfur. Sulfur cases the thermite to burn hotter, cutting steel quickly and leaving trails of yellow colored residue.
wtc steel with diagonal cut, thermate residue
wtc steel with diagonal cut, thermate residue
Prof. Steven Jones, who conducted his PhD research at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center and post-doctoral research at Cornell University and the Los Alamos Meson Physics Facility, has analyised materials from WTC and has detected the existence of thermate, used for "cutting" the steel support columns, as evident in the photo below.

Dr. Jones is a co-founder of Scholars for 911 Truth.

Dr. Jones in earlier work pointed to thermate as the likely explosive that brought down the WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 skyscrapers. But only recently was physical material analysed in the lab and the presense of thermate announced. The samples were provided Dr. Jones team from redundant sourses.

Both BYU and Prof. Jones have been offered additional grants if he would "change the direction" of his research. In addition, there have been threats made by an individual who "is taking action" to stop Steven Jones' research, specifically his experiment with thermites (aluminothermics), on the grounds his work may be helpful to "terrorists". Jones notes that much more detailed information on both thermite and thermate is readily available on the internet.

summary of 10 recent thermite/thermate posts 17.Jun.2006 15:59

foward me to someone

[COMMENTARY: in time order of article theme on thermite at WTCs, videos, discussion, pictures; [1] since thermite/thermate can be made of basic industrical chemicals, it can be made "tracerless"--i.e., avoid all signature tracer chemicals that the U.S. Govt requires be mixed in very small amounts in all highly powerful and highly monitored explosives to keep track of every batch's origin. [2] Moreover if he has found it in WTC7, as he says, then with Silverstein admitting that he conducted a controlled demolition on 9-11 of WTC7 around 5:30 p.m., then Silverstein is admitting that WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 all are thermate controlled demolitions. [3] And who was in charge of WTC security? Why, Marvin Bush, brother of George W. Bush, on the board of Securatech. [4] And written up in their mom's (ghostwritten) autobiography, Barbara Bush drops the other bombshell that it's just a coincidence that Marvin's contract at the WTCs was up on September 11, 2001 anyway. She wrote about it in the book! [5] The Bush family through Marvin Bush have been in charge of security of the WTCs since immediately after the first failed terrorist attempt to knock down the WTCs one month into Clinton's Presidential tenure in 1993. [6] The FBI is on record giving the order to conduct terrorism on the WTC in 1993, via their hired gun Salam, who didn't want to carry out the attack 'for real' since he was told by the FBI that he was hired simply for a sting opreation to arrest some perpetrators in a terror cell he infiltrated for the FBI. [two minute video summary on this:  http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6752092058844526234 [7] When the FBI instead told him to both suggest the WTC as a target for the 1993 attack, as well as teach them how to make bombs, as well as FBI allowing him to provide live explosives--their agent started taping everything covertly that he was ordered to do in reference to FBI ordering him to carry out the 1993 terrorist attack on the WTCs. [8] Immediately after the failed attack on the WTCs, the Bush family, through a corporate shell vehicle owned in part by the royal family of Kuwait, the Kuwaiti/American Corporation, was put in charge of security at the WTCs, with Marvin Bush on board. [9] Seven weeks before the controlled demolitions of 9-11, the towers change hands in their first (rushed) sale, being all bought up by Silverstein, who introduces a huge terrorism insurance appendage. [10] Despite admitting publicly that HE gave the order (in the PBS special "America Rebuilds") to blow up his own WTC7 on 9-11, the whole thing is so corrupt that he still collects 500 million dollars on the "terrorist destuction alibi" of WTC7, and has already collected several billion dollars on the 'terrorism clause' in the WTC1/2 insurance. [11] and We already know that the anthrax that was sent to congress and which killed several postal workers in the process (sent to Senator Daschle and to Senator Leahy), was weaponized under a covert CIA only contract, and it was a domestic Ames strain of anthrax coming from one of three or four of the U.S. bioweapons labs.[12] The "Patriot Act" was already written up before 9-11, just required a whiff of domestic anthrax to force passage with a bit more bio-terrorism on the Congress itself by domestic terrorists; [13] Bush and his whole Cabinet of course were out of danger: they were taking an anthrax exclusive drug to counter it, from September 11 onward, so when the anthrax hit in early October in DC, Bush's staff would be immune to the domestic-in-origin anthrax terrorism. The interesting point of course is Bush's whole team all psyched up and anticipating an anthrax attack one month in advance--which just so happens to be the incubation time for the anthax bacilli--I could go on ad nauseum. The whole U.S. government is a terrorist unit, operating under the guise of its counter terrorism squads.]




summary:
---------------------------------------------

Dr. Jones is a co-founder of Scholars for 911 Truth.

"If Dr. Jones's work ever breaks into the mainstream media, and the rest of the country reacts the way the Utah County audience reacted, traditional political divisions will evaporate like steel beams exploded with thermite, and the whole lot of them, the Democrats and the Republicans, will be swept away, along with the military-industrial complex that has apparently managed to subvert the constitution of these United States and to con the American public, mesmerized by the shock of 9/11 and hypnotized by spell-binding incantations of freedom and patriotism, into going along with their mad plans for world domination."

BYU Physics Prof Finds Thermate in WTC Physical Samples, Building Collapses an Inside Job.....Based on chemical analysis of WTC structural steel residue, a Brigham Young University physics professor has identified the material as Thermate. Thermate is the controlled demolition explosive thermite plus sulfur. Sulfur cases the thermite to burn hotter, cutting steel quickly and leaving trails of yellow colored residue.

[see video comparisons of thermite/ate here and compare to WTC photos and live video below--both video links available from here:
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/04/338202.shtml ]

Dr. Jones in earlier work pointed to thermate as the likely explosive that brought down the WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 skyscrapers. But only recently was physical material analysed in the lab and the presense of thermate announced. The samples were provided Dr. Jones team from redundant sourses.

INTERESTING HIGHER UP BRIBE AND THREAT COMING IN TO PLAY: ***"Both BYU and Prof. Jones have been offered additional grants if he would "change the direction" of his research. In addition, there have been threats made by an individual who "is taking action" to stop Steven Jones' research,*** specifically his experiment with thermites (aluminothermics), on the grounds his work may be helpful to "terrorists". Jones notes that much more detailed information on both thermite and thermate is readily available on the internet."

---------------------------------------------


1.

newswire article reporting global 17.Jun.2006 14:50
9.11 investigation | police / legal
BYU Physics Prof Finds Thermate in WTC Physical Samples, Building Collapses an Inside Job
author: Jacob Hamblin
Based on chemical analysis of WTC structural steel residue, a Brigham Young University physics professor has identified the material as Thermate. Thermate is the controlled demolition explosive thermite plus sulfur. Sulfur cases the thermite to burn hotter, cutting steel quickly and leaving trails of yellow colored residue.
wtc steel with diagonal cut, thermate residue
Prof. Steven Jones, who conducted his PhD research at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center and post-doctoral research at Cornell University and the Los Alamos Meson Physics Facility, has analyised materials from WTC and has detected the existence of thermate, used for "cutting" the steel support columns, as evident in the photo below.

Dr. Jones is a co-founder of Scholars for 911 Truth.

Dr. Jones in earlier work pointed to thermate as the likely explosive that brought down the WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 skyscrapers. But only recently was physical material analysed in the lab and the presense of thermate announced. The samples were provided Dr. Jones team from redundant sourses.

Both BYU and Prof. Jones have been offered additional grants if he would "change the direction" of his research. In addition, there have been threats made by an individual who "is taking action" to stop Steven Jones' research, specifically his experiment with thermites (aluminothermics), on the grounds his work may be helpful to "terrorists". Jones notes that much more detailed information on both thermite and thermate is readily available on the internet.

 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/06/341238.shtml

2.

newswire article reporting global 17.Jun.2006 14:50
9.11 investigation | police / legal
BYU Physics Prof Finds Thermate in WTC Physical Samples, Building Collapses an Inside Job
author: Jacob Hamblin
Based on chemical analysis of WTC structural steel residue, a Brigham Young University physics professor has identified the material as Thermate. Thermate is the controlled demolition explosive thermite plus sulfur. Sulfur cases the thermite to burn hotter, cutting steel quickly and leaving trails of yellow colored residue.

3.

newswire article reporting united states 08.Jun.2006 03:35
9.11 investigation
Molten Metal Migration Map
A quick search to find quotes describing molten metal at ground-zero found plenty of primary-sourced statements -- and a LIDAR map of molten metal migration at ground zero.
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/06/340774.shtml

4.

newswire article reposts united states 03.Jun.2006 09:18
9.11 investigation
The Amazing NIST Report on WTC 2
Someone told me that the final NIST WTC2 Fire Report is akin to reading the structural engineer's version of the Emperor's New Clothes! So I had a look at the report, and there within found intriguing pressure pulses, smoke/and or dust(!) screens, molten metal flows, metal fires, and other correlated unusual behaviors. (text and image extracts)
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/06/340461.shtml

5.

newswire article reposts global 14.May.2006 19:42
9.11 investigation
9-11 and the Israeli spies had explosive experts with them
A little known fact is that the israeli spy ring of 9-11 infamy had demolition expets.
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/05/339398.shtml

6.

newswire article reposts united states 24.Apr.2006 16:24
9.11 investigation
Thermite Identified As Likely Culprit Of WTC Collapse
A new branch of 9/11 research claims to have identified the cause of the collapse of the twin towers. The photographic and video evidence makes a very strong case for thermite being responsible for the unprecedented implosions of steel framed reinforced buildings on September 11.
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/04/338179.shtml

7.

newswire article reposts united states 15.Nov.2005 13:40
9.11 investigation
BYU Prof's WTC Demolition Theories on MSNBC's Tucker Carlson - 9/11 Truth Hits Mainstream
Unfortunately it appeared the Professor had never had such an interview before and was not prepared for the short time of the interview (5 min) or the fact that they wouldn't run the video he sent of the WTC collapse, or the types of questions being asked (i.e., don't you think this will be offensive to people to say that Muslims aren't to blame?). Nonetheless, he DID get some key points out there and has a great deal of courage and we should all thank him for that.
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2005/11/328884.shtml


8.

newswire article reporting global 25.Apr.2006 09:14
9.11 investigation | imperialism & war
Here's the video
author: check it out
A video showing one of the steal beems being cut on the first tower to come down on Sept 11, 2001.
The prisonplanet.com hotlink takes you to an explination page. Just under the blue "show video" hot button is the actual google video.

Both hyperlinks are:

link to prisonplanet.com

link to video.google.com

add a comment on this article

umm...wow! 26.Apr.2006 07:18
AP link

I watched the video - it's embedded in Flash and I can't save it to my folder.

It's truly astonishing footage.

I would like a copy for my hard drive.

---
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/04/338202.shtml


9.

newswire article reposts united states 09.Feb.2006 02:53
9.11 investigation | media criticism
VIDEO and review: Feb. 1, BYU Prof. Steven E. Jones packed presentation on 9-11 anomalies
author: repost and grouping
On February 1, 2006, BYU Professor Steven E. Jones gave a public lecture on the various anomalies of 9/11. The lecture took place at the Utah State Valley College in Orem, sponsored by the Center for the Study of Ethics, co-sponsored with the School of Science and Health, at UVSC.

The seminar revolves around various anomalies concerning the events of 9/11, notably, the rapid collapses of the WTC Towers, and specifically, WTC7, that comes under special scrutiny. The seminar also touches on political responses to the events of 9/11.

BE THERE: See Jones presentation for yourself on .avi video at the below link, or audio MP3 at another link.

Prof. Stephen Jones's lecture is very visual--driven by a multimedia slide presentation of text, photos and video clips.

The 150-seat auditorium was filled to capacity, with every seat occupied, and people sitting in the aisles from the stage floor to the back of the room. Video cameras on tripods lined the back row. Two documentary film crews were in attendance, plus the school's camera crew, and various independent journalists. Seven "spill-over" rooms, seating 40-50 each, were also filled to capacity.

...

"If Dr. Jones's work ever breaks into the mainstream media, and the rest of the country reacts the way the Utah County audience reacted, traditional political divisions will evaporate like steel beams exploded with thermite, and the whole lot of them, the Democrats and the Republicans, will be swept away, along with the military-industrial complex that has apparently managed to subvert the constitution of these United States and to con the American public, mesmerized by the shock of 9/11 and hypnotized by spell-binding incantations of freedom and patriotism, into going along with their mad plans for world domination."


 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/02/333621.shtml


10.

newswire article creative global 25.Apr.2006 21:26
9.11 investigation | imperialism & war
9/11: Controlled Demolition not just thermite but "nanothermite"
author: Nico Haupt
...getting the bigger picture of the unconventional part for the 9/11 controlled demolition...
During early 2006, i informed the 911Scholars about unconventional weaponry,
who could have additionally forced the collapse.
The suspects for "nanoenergetics" aka superthermite as part of the unconventional part of the controlled demolition should be instead located at the "Center for NanoEnergetics Research" (created in Spring 2001, only a few months before 9/11), Department of Defense Contractor "NANOTECHNOLOGIES, Inc." (also founded during 2001), Sandia and Lawrence Livermore.
 http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2006/04/338241.shtml

interview 17.Jun.2006 18:35

SEAN menskcreative@yahoo.com

If all is said is true lets have an interview with the professor. contact him and have his interview posted verbatim here. it would add to the authenticity of both the work and the focus of the information that has been concluded,per his research.

citation? 17.Jun.2006 19:27

jeff

could you please cite the assertion that he has been offered grants to change the direction of his research?

to the poster? 18.Jun.2006 01:17

where?

Where did you source this? Please come back and add the link.

is this work published? 18.Jun.2006 11:57

scientist

hey, if this is legit, where is the paper or presentation? he's a prof. so he must have published or presented this data and thus, there should be a record. would love to see the original offering....

Radio Interview That is Source of Original Post 18.Jun.2006 16:34

Jacob Hamblin

The source of the original post was an audio interview of Dr. Steven Jones by Alex Jones (no relation). I understand the interview took place at the Chicago 911 Truth Conference earlier this month. The whole interview is of interest. Alex Jones comes off slightly as the radio "shock jocky", maybe a little to often interrupts the academic for the sake of ostensible radio drama. Dr. Jones comes off as a prudent scientist valuing accuracy over sound bite drama. But that's just my take. Listen to the whole short interview. Jones also discusses his sources for the WTC samples. I hope I have linked it adaquately, as I am cybernetically slow as well as horrid speller. http://www.prisonplanet.tv/articles/june2006/160606jones.htm


9/11 was clearly an inside job 19.Jun.2006 11:29

Mike Donestal II

9/11 will never be investigated by the MSM. Evidence is constantly being compiled against the gov't. As an aside, a show on demolitions on the History channel had an excellent sequence on thermite-explosions taking down buildings. They described how a steel beam is angle-cut so that it explodes outward and allows an easier take-down of the building. They also show after-effects of a demolition. The photographs in the History channel demolition channel are eeirily similar to the pictures of the destroyed WTC. Anyway, it doesn't matter because the gov't keeps caging protestors, forcing book outlets to stop selling books like "America Deceived" by E.A. Blayre III and spies on every phone call. Add those abilities with a military and it will be difficult to overcome.
Support indy media.
Last link (before Google Books caves in):
 http://www.iuniverse.com/bookstore/book_detail.asp?&isbn=0-595-38523-0

How long would it take to place the thermite/thermate? 19.Jun.2006 11:47

Anonymous

Does anyone have experience with how long it would take to set up this controlled demolition?

I can foresee believers of the official fairy tale simply adjusting when they're confronted with undeniable proof: "Ok, the evil Iraqi terrorists flew planes into the building and damaged it so badly that its owner had to make the decision to blow it up to prevent worse damage. Just imagine the damage if they hadn't -- big chunks of the wall would have fallen down and caused even more damage to adjacent buildings. Thanks you for saving us, Marvin Bush! Let's nuke Iran and give Bush a 3rd term to make sure the world becomes a safe place".

Where's the original article? 19.Jun.2006 11:56

ResearchGuy

I see no link or reference of any kind for the article that started this thread. I have googled the first few words of the title, quoted as "BYU Physics Prof Finds Thermate", with no hits. All I see are links to videos, no web pages.

Am I mistaken in assuming that Jacob Hamblin wrote a longer article than what appears at the top of this thread?

If so, still, what are Hamblin's sources? Did he speak with Jones?

Even searching the home page of the Scholars site does not quickly lead me to such an article.

Re: How long would it take to place the thermite/thermate? 19.Jun.2006 12:31

Anonymous

"Does anyone have experience with how long it would take to set up this controlled demolition?"

Approximately one month with a crew of ten for a building this size.

30 HRS! 19.Jun.2006 12:34

LabradorMan

It has been reported that 1 week before 911,there was a "power down"at WTC complex,lasting 30 hrs.This shut down all security cameras,and no one was allowed to enter WTC complex!
It has also been stated that Marvin Bush was head of security at Dulles Intl.airport,and American airlines,as well as WTC.


Video of Jones Interview 20.Jun.2006 04:19

repost


One month? Your source or qualifications 20.Jun.2006 12:50

Mike

>>How long would this take to set up?

>>Approximately one month with a crew of ten for a building this size.

Well, even if you say so because youre "in the business" we have no way of knowing if you are or not.


When they blew up the Kindome in Seattle, the papers said the work took but several days-it was the planning that took a month-and the footprint of the building was much larger than the WTC-though of course not as tall. The clips on the Evening News showed a prime example of 'implosion';

So, with pre-planning done elsewhere,
1. could they charges have been placed during the 30 hour blackout? OR...
2. Could the planting of 'secondary' explosives have been done *over time* (weeks) under the guise of "routine building maintenance"?
ie: installing new computer conduits, working on the air conditioning, etc-where the perps would have access to rooms and areas not open to the public/buildings occupants?

So, perhaps the secondary, or easy to hide charges were placed over time during "building maintenance", and the critical charges during the 30 hour blackout. Sounds like the way to do it.

Dr. Steven Jones Interview Link 20.Jun.2006 13:37

Mel Chizedek


fema found large quantity of sulfer in wtc 7metal 20.Jun.2006 23:17

grafdog

In FEMA's study of one the few pieces of metal from post 911 wtc 7 they were allowed to look at, they found a huge amount of sulfer. They postulated that this may have caused a never before documented type of eutectic reaction initiated by the low temperature fires. FEMA was unable to explain how such a large amount of sulfer could have been deposited into metal I beams that were partially evaporated. They were also unable to explain the dynamics or physics that would cause a "eutectic reaction" in the wtc 7. Their only postulation on the source of all that sulfer, was that "acid rains over years caused sulfer to build up on the steel INSIDE building".
They admit that it was far fetched speculation but it was the only thing they could think of.
Considering they were asked to explain how "FIRES" caused the buildings collapse.

If asked "HOW" the building collapsed i'm sure they would have the answer in a few minutes.

Attached is the photo of the I-beam

re: Minimum amount of Thermate material required to cut steel columns 21.Jun.2006 11:49

more for you

Dr. Stephen Jones, in the video interview, notes that he contacted demolitions experts, and said that the total WTC1 and WTC2 would only take around 1000 pounds for each of the WTC1 or WTC2 of thermite/thermate. He describes it as an example of "10 separate 40 lb. trips into the WTC towers (400 lbs.), for 5 people", etc. Hardly difficult to do. Thermite/thermate burns well over 1000C more than steel's melting temperature, thus the thermite "super heat" explains the durable molten pools well after six weeks [!] sitting there attempting to cool down from 1000C+ more than was required in the first place to melt steel.

He additionally describes in the interview a patent from 1999 that his team found for a thermite "linear cutting system" Quoting his interview:

Dr. Stephen Jones: "[An] important point is that therimte can be...designed to either cut throuth steel without explosion...called an incendiary....[D]evices at least since 1999 [exist]...to have thermite come out essentially as a hot slicing molten iron...knife that will cut through thick steel...And we've dug out that patent....So you have this device that holds the thermite and lets it go out in such a way that it will cut through steel; it's called a "linear cutting system" and...that fits exactly with what we see. [From other things he says earlier, concerning the spalling metal melt (now solidified) that you can see in some pictures of damaged steel in the WTC demolition, there is only visual evidence of dripping in and out of the box columns for instance with an 'insta-melt'--without evidence of the whole column being buckled under uniform heat which is what the Bush false conspiracy theory requires. Instead, heat is only applied in one small "knife through butter" steel location in a line, which is indicative of thermite as well.]"

Crude Thermite Video 21.Jun.2006 18:40

AnnAngryBitch

You want to see what crude thermite can do, here is a couple of boys playing with the stuff.

Mind you, it isn't commercial or military grade thermite but it does makes an impression.

Think a little more sophisticated when considering how and what kind of thermite might have been used in bringing down the WTC towers, some specially designed thermite's are quite exotic.

Check it out at,......... http://www.guzer.com/videos/thermite_car.php

Thermite Use In WTC Tower Take Down 26.Jun.2006 12:49

Don Jones

Use of thermite in the collapse of the trade towers on 9-11 may have been a good choice. But the process would still remain as a conventional demolition even though more effective, The many other indications of the collapse would still remain unanswered.

The evil man who is called our president 07.Oct.2007 08:31

anonymous innocentbrowneyez14@yahoo.com

Everyone needs to know that George W. Bush is an evil man and that the 9/ll attack was all a setup by him and the Government. He killed his own people just so he can start a war!!!

discussion

SMOKING GUN!!! 17.Jun.2006 16:36

Alisvolatpropis

If this post is true, then it basically seals the deal that the collapse of the WTC was by controlled demolition--the very thought I had as I watched astonished as the buildings came tumbling down.

Those neocons just can't leave well enough along. The planes slamming into the towers and propaganda to get people to support demolishing the towers would have worked, but that would leave an extra $7 billion on the table from insurance (they only got $2.2B), so they got greedy. You can actually see the controlled domolition blasts cutting the steel beams below the collapse if you slow down footage. The presence of thermite (exactly what the immediate disposition of the steel beams was meant to cover up) is THE smoking gun for 9-11 conspiracy.

Any intelligent human being must now come to grips with the fact that 9-11 was an inside job.

buy the media 17.Jun.2006 17:02

whatif

There must be benefactors willing to help. We could even get Joe and Jane Sixpack to understand, if we had funds to buy whatever media we could. Where's Jimmy Walter when we need him?

A Little Skepticism Please! 17.Jun.2006 17:52

Ben Douglass bendouglass@cheerful.com

911 inside job?

Controlled demolition?

911 probably was an inside job so far as the FBI, CIA and Whitehouse probably knew months in advance of the terrorist attack but did nothing about it, so as to further their international agenda.

Controlled demolition takes weeks of "setup" like punching holes in walls and wrapping explosives around steel joints, etc. This would have been pretty noticeable to everyday people like janitors, restaurant staff and office workers. can anyone spell C.R.A.N.K. T.H.E.O.R.Y?

I'd like to see 17.Jun.2006 18:12

curious

I'd like to see footage of a plane hitting a building other than the WTC to compare to the world trade center collapse.
Anyone know of any in existance?

Ben Douglass 17.Jun.2006 18:26

you need to do a little research

Watch this video

 http://www.911revisited.com/video.html

and if a building had an evacuation for particular work that needed to be done during the days before 9/11, it could be done easily.


Just look at the evidence before making judgements. Is that so much to ask?

... 17.Jun.2006 18:27

this thing here

from what i understand, the WTC towers were not fully occupied on the morning of september 11th., 2001. just as they weren't months before. meaning, there were empty floors where who knows what was going on. janitors don't clean a bare, stripped down slab space, and office workers do not work in them.

in fact, most skyscrapers anywhere in the world are not 100% occupied on every floor on any given day.

the glut of unused office space in new york city was an issue in the early designs for the 9-11 memorial and "freedom tower" development.

Right Ben 17.Jun.2006 18:42

Even proof

Even fricking proof won't stop these psychotic pukes from lying and calling the truth a "theory".

Oh Ben, if you have been keeping up with the news about 9/11 you would know that people have come out and stated that some weird stuff was happening there in the weeks before the attack. Also a whole bunch of firefighters and rescue people gave tapped testimony (that was held back till just a few weeks ago) stating they heard explosions ......plural......and saw explosions.

Ben, will you please shut your ignorant uninformed yap!

Right Ben 17.Jun.2006 18:59

Not even PROOF

Not even PROOF will stop their lies.....just like a wise-guy in NY City.

Ben, if you would have been keeping up with the 9/11 news you would know that many people who worked in the buildings and survived have come forward saying that some strange stuff was going on for several weeks before the attacks. Also, there are a whole bunch of firefighters and rescue people who gave recorded testimony (held back till just a few weeks ago) stating that they heard explosions.......plural........and saw explosions. It took a court order to get the recordings released. I can't imagine why, can you. Can you spell
COVER-UP?

Ben, please keep your uninformed yap shut!

Hey Ben 17.Jun.2006 19:34

keep thinking

You are on the right track.

It does take days to set up a controlled Demolition. That brings up more questions. Who would have access to those buildings? Couldn't have been terrorist then. Oh, my, where is this going to take us?

Keep thinking and searching for answers. But don't just make a judgement without looking at all the perspectives and evidence.

See what perspectives fit the evidence best to your own common sense.

You may find a completely different picture.

Who was in charge of security at the WTC? 17.Jun.2006 20:35

Zardoz

Why, it was one of shrub's brothers! Gosh, what a coincidence!

Marvin Bush 17.Jun.2006 20:50

you guessed it!

And don't forget that in the late '90s the building owners were developing plans to tear down and rebuild because of the "battery affect" from the skin of the buildings. Then, all of a sudden, in 2000 the plans were scrapped.

Yes, what a coincidence......indeed!!!!!!!!!!!

this 17.Jun.2006 21:24

thing here

well it was a tad emptier than it was months before
because Zim Israel (12th largest container shipper globally)
moved out a few weeks before 911...
they moved over to virginia..near NSA
i think they left bread crumbs

This is what we've been waiting for 17.Jun.2006 22:52

messenger

Now, let's watch how Rove shoots this down.....with his souless devotion to the neo-con power structure......the military industrial complex!

They should be DEAD in the water with this information and proof.

"Truth & Evidence" pose no threat to the Bush Regime! 18.Jun.2006 12:12

R.Dahl

What these 911 scholars and all other anti-Bushites don't realize or haven't been able to learn is that "Truth & Evidence",no matter how well documented and verified,doesn't have any negative effect on the Bush White House or even threatens to wrest the reins of power from their murderous hands!

That radio shock jock 19.Jun.2006 11:30

Anon

Is one of the few people out there willing to risk his life in the pursuit of REAL truth. Yes he often comes off as loud-mouthed and tends to talk over his guests which can be annoying, but when you are going up against the NWO and the most powerful of the elite you need a real big bullhorn (see Waking Life)!!

The interview conducted with Steven Jones was eye-opening even for a bloke like me that has researched 9/11 extensively. If enough sheeple started talking about the fact that THERMATE (not thermite!!) was found amidst the rubble, then the next logical evolution in the discussion would pertain to how thermate got into the buildings, in large enough doses to take it down in a controlled manner.

Apparently, some of the people on par with the Bilderburg Group have used the excuse that Ayuhrabs must have found a way to compromise the security and ship in massive amounts of thermate to help bring the buildings down. Uh huh, ok. I'm pretty sure if it was some shadowy group hell bent on US destruction, they wouldn't be too considered about minimizing the radial destruction of buildings collapsing at severe angles.

THERMATE WOULD ONLY BE PRESENT IF THE ATTACKS WERE PRE-PLANNED BY PEOPLE WITH COMPLETE UNOBSTRUCTED ACCESS TO THE BUILDINGS AND ITS EMPTIED FLOORS!!

I'm feeling verklempt, discuss amongst yourselves.

The Silverstein Thread 19.Jun.2006 12:17

Archonos

What if a plane had been intended to crash into WTC7 too? What if United 93, which 'crashed' in Pennsylvania was actually shot down by a fighter jet (against orders) before it could reach WTC7? All along it has been said that United 93's target was the White House, but what if that is simply not true?

 http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/911-flightpaths-bases.htm

United 93 had turned back east before its 'crash' -- slightly northeast in fact toward NY. There is no proof it was headed for DC. It could very easily have been heading back to Manhattan to WTC7.

If all three towers had been rigged with demolitions, then there is no way that the perpetrators could allow WTC7 to be 'saved' and for the demolitions charges to be found. When United 93 failed to hit WTC7 a decision had to be made about what to do. The safest thing was to "pull it", as Larry Silverstein publically stated, albeit for differing putative reasons.

We have parts of United 93 found 8 miles from the 'crash' site, indicating some sort of pre-impact structural 'problem'. This is plausibly consistent with a shoot down. We have Rumsfeld accidently referring to it as a shoot down in a speech, before he corrects himself.

So many things about 9/11 don't add up. WTC7 is not even mentioned once in the 9/11 Commission Report.

If a decision was made to 'pull' WTC7 at noon on 9/11, how could a demolitions team be hired, rushed to the scene amidst the chaos, and expertly rig a 47-story building (which was burning at the time!) so that it collapsed neatly into its own footprint, all in less than 5 1/2 hours? Why hasn't the name of that world-class demolitions company been made public?

If public safety was the reason that WTC was 'pulled', why did it have to be done that day? Wouldn't the safest thing have been to evacuate, let the fire burn out while keeping it under some control, and then wait until the 'dust settled' to bring in a demolitions team?

Moreover, is there a demolitions company in the world that would willingly accept a job to try to rig a burning 47 story with explosive charges in 5 hours, in the aftermath of the 'worst attack' on the United States in history?!!! Talk about legendary bravado.

Larry Silverstein's reasoning makes absolutely no sense. He claimed to be concerned about the safety of the fire fighters, yet he apparently had no concern for the safety of the demolitions team he claims to have sent in to rig the building!

Why not wait until the scene was safer instead of risking the lives of demolitions experts? Why risk sending a demolitions team into a burning building to rig it, when there was no pressing need to demolish it on the same day as the WTC attacks? Why was it necessary to demolish WTC7 THAT SAME DAY?

Just like the magic bullet theory of the Kennedy assassination we have the magic demolitions team theory of 9/11. Realistically, there is no such magic demolitions team. If demolitions were used, then most likely the actual demolitions team worked covertly in the weeks before 9/11, in a building that was not on fire.

Larry Siverstein's comment about 'pulling' WTC7 is the fatal flaw in the 9/11 conspiracy. It's a loose thread that is not going away and that can't be mended. And when the public at large starts pulling that thread, the entire 9/11 theory is going to unravel like a cheap Wal*Mart sweater.

It's almost as if Larry Silverstein's comment was a clue, given intentionally, to CAUSE the conspiracy to eventually unravel. It's almost seems that the real conspiracy was to incite the backlash that will ensue as the official 9/11 story unravels. If you think about it, the PNAC document talks of a New Pearl Harbor, but what if the 9/11 'attack' itself was never intended to be that New Pearl Harbor. What if the unstoppable culture-shattering backlash against the 9/11 'conspiracy' and its subsequent 'cover-up' was the real intended New Pearl Harbor?

One thing we know for sure is that what really happened on 9/11 is different from the official narrative. There is no doubt about that. There are simply too many unanswered questions, too many inconsistencies, too many improbabilities, and too little real investigation.

We have no real choice at this point. We have to continue pulling at the Sliverstein thread and unravelling the conspiracy, for good or bad, if we are to ever again value truth as a virtue. Something may be at play here that is bigger than we imagine. It may be much more significant and far-reaching than a mere corrupt U.S. administration, who may be bit players in a larger drama. Or not. But we must pull that thread. We have no choice.

Archonos

diagonal cut it is not 19.Jun.2006 12:33

diggins diggins@rushmore.com

I had this picture labeled a diagonal cut months ago. The cut is not diagonal. It is perpendicular to the sides of the box column. The column is resting diagonally to the camera.

I had mixed feelings about the pic because the one box column was different than the rest, so I became suspicious of it.

What makes me curious is how Jones got a sample to test. Why no pictures of him testing? Why no mention of it on  http://www.st911.org ?

Recently saw this film, and suggest it for viewing.

 link to www.archive.org

Marvin Bush and Wirt Walker, his cousin, were principal executives at Securacom. (interesting note is that when MSWord spellchecks Securacom, it offers sickroom.)


WTC Pre-Collapse Bowing Debunks 9/11 Controlled Demolition Theory 19.Jun.2006 12:44

Indications of the Imminent Collapse Disprove Explosives

WTC Pre-Collapse Bowing Debunks 9/11 "Controlled Demolition" Theory

Indications of the Imminent Collapse
of the World Trade Center Buildings
Disprove Explosives Theory

Page 1

Quick Guide to Motives for 9/11

Scientists investigating the Sept. 11, 2001 collapse of the twin towers said, "the World Trade Center towers showed telltale signs they were about to collapse several minutes before each crumbled to the ground." There would not be telltale signs if it was explosives (Controlled Demolition) that caused the buildings to collapse.

"In the case of the north tower, police chopper pilots reported seeing the warning signs - an inward bowing of the building facade - at least eight minutes before it collapsed at 10:29 a.m." New York Daily News reporter Paul Shin wrote in his June 19th, 2004 article 9/11 cops saw collapse coming.

"Federal engineering investigators studying the destruction of the World Trade Center's twin towers on Sept. 11 said New York Police Department aviation units reported an inward bowing of the buildings' columns in the minutes before they collapsed, a signal they were about to fall." - NYC Police Saw Sign of Tower Collapse, Study Says

WTC photos show
buckling steel columns
in the minutes before
the collapse
of the buildings.

WTCTWO921thumb.jpg

East Face of WTC 2
9:21 AM

Maximum inward bowing of approx. 10 in.
(18 min after impact)
alt. link's: 1, 2, 3, 4
NIST 6McAllister.pdf
East Face of WTC 2
9:53 AM

Maximum inward bowing of approx. 20 in.
alt. link's: 1, 2, 3, 4
NIST 6McAllister.pdf
East Face of WTC 2
9:58 AM

Inward bowing of perimeter columns seconds before collapse.
alt. link's: 1, 2, 3, 4
NIST 6McAllister.pdf
South Face of WTC 1
10:23 AM

Max bowing of 55 in.
alt. link's: 1, 2, 3, 4
NIST 6McAllister.pdf

Several minutes before the WTC buildings collapsed, the structures of the buildings were clearly failing and the exterior steel columns could be seen buckling. This simply would not be happening if explosives caused the collapse because explosives don't go off in slow motion for several minutes. Explosives don't slowly buckle steel columns over several minutes.

Obviously, the way an actual controlled explosion happens is the explosives all go off in a matter of seconds. There simply would not be warning signs that the buildings were about to be demolished by explosives, it would of course just suddenly happen. But that is not what happened, the buildings did not suddenly collapse without any indications that they would. Instead, the fires were compromising the structural integrity of the buildings and the buildings' support structures failed. Exterior columns buckled because the fires weakened the floor trusses and the floors sagged. The sagging floors pulled on intact column connections so as the floors sagged down, they pulled the exterior columns inward. This inward bowing of the exterior columns was evident to observers such as the police helicopters circling the towers.

"The NYPD aviation unit reported critical information about the impending collapse of the buildings." They could see that the exterior steel beams of the buildings were bowing. You can see the inward bowing of the steel columns in pictures of both WTC 2, (the first building to collapse) and WTC 1 (the second building to collapse.)

Buckling Steel

Dr. Shyam Sunder, lead investigator for NIST's building and fire safety investigation into the WTC disaster, said, "While the buildings were able to withstand the initial impact of the aircraft, the resulting fires that spread through the towers weakened support columns and floors that had fireproofing dislodged by the impacts. This eventually led to collapse as the perimeter columns were pulled inward by the sagging floors and buckled." "The reason the towers collapsed is because the fireproofing was dislodged," according to Sunder. If the fireproofing had remained in place, Sunder said, the fires would have burned out and moved on without weakening key elements to the point of structural collapse." - Latest Findings From NIST World Trade Center Investigation Released

"According to Shyam Sunder, the concave bowing of the steel was seen on the sides of the towers opposite where the planes hit them. At 10:06 a.m. that morning, an officer in a police helicopter reported that ``it's not going to take long before the north tower comes down.'' This was 20 minutes before it collapsed. In another radio transmission at 10:21 a.m., the officer said he saw buckling in the north tower's southern face, Shyam Sunder said."



"Engineers believe the bowing of the exterior steel beams near the flame-engulfed floors was the critical "triggering point" because that's the direction each tower tilted as it came crashing down."

"The report includes photographs taken from police helicopters showing the bending columns."

Key findings include:

  • Floor sagging and exposure to high temperatures caused the perimeter columns to bow inward and buckle—a process that spread across the faces of the buildings.
  • Even though the jet fuel on the planes burned off in the first few minutes after impact, there was enough office furniture to sustain intense fires for at least an hour.
  • The original builders of the twin towers and those who later renovated the structures did not have a clear technical standard for deciding on how much insulation to use around the structural beams, many of which gave way in the intense heat.

Read more here: Police, Firemen and Civilians Saw Warning Signs of Collapse of the Twin Towers on September 11th 2001

We have an unacceptable risk to our nation because of specific foreign policies. People who promote these erroneous 9/11 theories undermine efforts to get the focus on stopping these foreign policies. We must take a serious look at the motives for the 9/11 attacks and call for a full review of the specific foreign policies that motivate terrorists to attack us. I see a lot of people are spreading this "controlled demolition" theory, I also notice they don't talk about ending the foreign policies. Please donate to help Representative Press get the facts out to the people.

False theories like "9/11 was a controlled demolition" or "9/11 was an inside job" or "The WTC collapsed because of explosives" really screw up efforts to stop the specific foreign policies that put our nation at risk. These false theories undermine serious efforts to get foreign policies addressed, for example, U.S. support for Israel. I suspect more than a few people pushing these false theories are very happy to misdirect the American public away from questioning specific foreign policies like U.S. support for Israel. (It is the main policy of the foreign policies that motivated the 9/11 terrorists. The plotter of 9/11, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, actually went to school here in the U.S. He was angry at the U.S. not because of his experiences here as a student, but rather because of the U.S. foreign policy favoring Israel.)



I am working hard to set the record straight and end the risk of terrorism. Please Donate to help me get the truth out. Those conspiracy websites are clearly well funded and like I have said, they misdirect the American public away from questioning specific foreign polices like U.S. support for Israel. I need some money to work with to undo the damage these websites are doing and get the facts to the people. 9/11 was not a game, these conspiracy theories undermine efforts to get the government to change the unjust Middle East policies: Please donate to help Representative Press get the facts out to the people.

Look at the real cover up:

The Gorilla in the Room is US Support for Israel.

Promote the Truth

BushLiesItems.jpg


Get the word out to your fellow citizens.


False theories like "9/11 was a controlled demolition" undermine serious efforts to get foreign policies addressed, for example, U.S. support for Israel.

We were attacked and are still at risk for being attacked again because of specific foreign policies. Please donate to help Representative Press get the truth out to the public.

These "9/11 was an inside job" websites look like they are well financed and they are duping many people into not questioning policies like U.S. support of Israel. Some people may indeed be deliberately misleading Americans so we won't look at the real motives for the 9/11 attacks.

We have the mainstream media avoiding dealing with the prime motive for the 9/11 attack and we have these conspiracy people also not talking about the prime motive for the 9/11 attack.

We need to raise funds so we can raise our voices so all Americans can learn the truth: We were not attacked because of our freedoms and we were not attacked because the U.S. government engineered it. Anyone who plays along with these lies is helping special interests protect specific foreign policies at the expense of the American people.


Promote the Truth

BushLiesItems.jpg


Get the word out to your fellow citizens.


The cover story that Bush feeds the American people robs the American people of the chance to decide for themselves if they want to continue to be put in harm's way over specific foreign polices. Lying to the American people about why Americans have been killed is one of the lowest and dirtiest political games a politician can every play. It is an insult your basic dignity to be lied to about why your life is in harm's way.

We were attacked and are still at risk for being attacked again because of specific foreign policies. Please donate to help Representative Press get the truth out to the public.



Debunking Video 19.Jun.2006 12:51

Facts the "9/11 Skeptics" don't want you to see

"Inside Job" advocates push a false reason for why we were attacked on 9/11. Fact is their theories have been debunked, they just don't want you to know.

There are photos THAT SHOW the columns were bowing WELL BEFORE the buildings collapsed. that debunks "controlled demolition"

Exterior columns buckled because the fires weakened the floor trusses and the floors sagged which pulled exterior columns inward. This inward bowing of the exterior columns was evident to observers such as the police helicopters circling the towers. Right there, that debunks "controlled demolition"

SEE THE VIDEO:
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGAoRrBoPRM
 http://www.representativepress.org/
 http://www.geocities.com/factsnotfantasy/
 http://www.tinyurl.com/pe62n

FBI-Tipoff 19.Jun.2006 12:59

Veronica Chapman me@veronicachapman.com

You will find that most of the questions raised in the comments to this article by Jacob Hamblin are embodied in this Tip-off I posted into the FBI WebSite on Monday, 12th June, 2006.

Preface: Since the FBI has now openly declared that Usama bin Laden has NOT been formally indicted and charged in connection with the 9/11 attacks because of a lack of hard evidence, it seems clear the real perpetrator(s) of this crime is/are still at large.

The Tip-off itself (containing the links you are looking for):

Sirs,

This is a tip-off insofar as it draws your attention to publicly-available, corroborated, and incontrovertible (or, I believe in your terms 'hard') evidence, which could form the basis of an important investigation. I have reason to believe that such an investigation would in no way be a waste of the FBI's valuable time.

I refer you to respected physicist Prof. Steven E. Jones' paper on the subject of the collapses of the Towers on 11th September, 2001 (reference:  http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html).

If you read Prof. Jones' paper, you will extract the following information which, in my opinion, needs to be investigated:

1) As a result of the collapses, pools of molten metal were discovered. You will also read approximate temperatures, indicated by colouring. It is well-known that as metals are heated their colouring changes, rendering (visibly) an approximation to their temperature. You will also find accurate infra-red temperature measurements obtained by means of satellites. Added to this aspect (i.e. the existence and temperatures of these pools) is their persistence, at Ground Zero, for weeks following the events.

2) Neither the original FEMA Investigation, nor the Independent 9/11 Commission, nor the National Institute of Standards and Technology (nor, indeed, articles in Popular Mechanics, etc.) have addressed this incontrovertible evidence in any way whatsoever.

Consequently none of these prior investigations has created a scientifically-conclusive description as to why the Towers collapsed, how they collapsed in the manner we all saw on television, and (most importantly) how these residual pools of molten metal could have been formed. And, furthermore, how the molten metal could have persisted for up to six weeks following the events.

I suggest that you should apply resources to create a definitive explanation, which takes all aspects into account, and considers all possibilities. I believe that the American people, especially the bereaved, deserve your fullest attention to this.

In addition to the foregoing, I understand the Mayor Giuliani was instrumental in arranging shipment of the metallic rubble, from the crime scene to overseas locations, before a serious and stringent forensic examination could be performed. I understand that the removal of evidence prior to a complete investigation is a Federal Crime. I presume that permission for this was given, and that it was done in order to facilitate rescue operations. However, in concert with others, I fail to understand why the rubble was not relocated to a secure location, so that it would remain available for forensic analysis.

I repeat, I believe such an investigation would in no way be a waste of the FBI's valuable time. I would not have sent this tip if I believed to the contrary. I am firmly convinced that a stringent investigation would elicit the following benefits:

a) As of June 5th, 2006, the FBI is on record(*) as admitting there is insufficient evidence to link Usama bin Laden and Al-Qaeda with the 9/11 atrocity. I believe that a scientifically-consistent explanation would conclusively rule out any such link once and for all.
(* Reference link:  http://www.teamliberty.net/id267.html)

b) I firmly believe that a scientifically-consistent explanation would point the FBI clearly in the direction of the true perpetrators.

These are my reasons for supplying this tip. All that is necessary is to start with the evidence and work backwards, in the same manner that any crime is normally investigated. I believe I am in possession of documents that indicate this crime to be perfectly solvable, in particular the paper to which I initially referred you. To the best of my knowledge the City of New York has made no effort to investigate on the basis of the evidence I bring to your attention, and five years have passed in the meantime.

If this tip-off is not followed up it might suggest to many, both inside the USA and elsewhere, that your organisation has been specifically directed NOT to solve these crimes, regardless of widespread awareness of these facts. For example, mainstream Italian TV is now debating the collapse of Building 7, and showing side-by-side comparisons with a known controlled demolition. Here is a reference:
 http://www.911podcasts.com/display.php?vid=113

I look forward to a positive response from you in this matter.

Yours faithfully (in the hope that justice is done, and seen to be done),

Veronica Chapman
Member, Scholars for 9/11 Truth
www.st911.org

The original paper (via BYU) for those doubting the origins of this story 19.Jun.2006 14:40

anon

 http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/

This appears to be the professors university site. If you still think this is all an internet-made hoax, maybe you could take it up with Steven Jones and BYU?

I'm sure Steven would be more than happy to answer your technical questions via email and provide you with his sources and the nature of his testings...


(And to the guy who said the bar was cut 'perpendicular'... duh... i think you're looking at the wrong pole buddy. middle of the background. definitely a sharp angle there. if that is a 90-degree angle, then i guess the world might be flat afterall)

One solution to the impending all-out fascism 19.Jun.2006 15:17

Patriot

People, consider the options. Bush and the neoscum control all branches of gov't and have instituted secret laws -- itself and impeachable offense. The one thing they have been counting on (at least so far) is not waking the sheeple from their faux news induced sleep. They want the braindead to remain in their stupor and be happy cannon fodder and not notice they already live in a fascist regime. In order to keep the charade going as is for the next 2 1/2 years until they install Jeb, they must maintain the illusion of democracy -- primarily the illusion that we have elections. Take that away and they either go away or declare martial law and hope for the best. The one thing we can do to force the NeoKillers' hand is to actually count the votes in the 2006 elections. If votes are counted, the Dems win control of the House and probably the Senate, and impeachment and indictments can begin.

The only way to ensure that the votes will be counted is:
Paper Ballots, Hand Counted.
Paper Ballots, Hand Counted.
Paper Ballots, Hand Counted.
Paper Ballots, Hand Counted.
Paper Ballots, Hand Counted.
Paper. Ballots. Hand. Counted.

Excuse my faux news-like repetition, but it is effective for their propaganda purposes and I suspect it may be helpful for my "save democracy" purposes.

Make bumper stickers and t-shirts, freeway blog it, keep pounding it out until enough Americans wake up and realize we are only one easy-to-get-onboard no-brainer mass movement away from making this a reality. It is cheap, easy, quick to implement, and the ONLY secure way to count votes.

These scum will be on their way out in Jan '07 if we count the votes this coming November.

Ignored Clue from PrisonPlanet 19.Jun.2006 15:59

Sojourner

snippet; The World Trade Center was destroyed just days after a heightened security alert was lifted at the landmark 110-story towers, security personnel said yesterday.



 http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/june2004/062804ignoredclue.htm

Clarification 19.Jun.2006 17:11

Steven E. Jones hardevidence@gmail.com

Just a quick clarification: As I said in my talk at the Chicago conference, and in my remarks to Alex Jones, the results so far on the analysis of the previously-molten metal samples are PRELIMINARY. I emphasized that, in fact.

The samples are predominantly iron, so we can rule out the 'molten aluminum' hypothesis with a high degree of confidence. There is very little chromium, so that the 'molten structural steel' hypothesis is highly suspect. Yes, there is sulfur -- but proving the use of 'thermate' positively will certainly require further analyses and comparisons with samples of known origin (such as thermate-products). And that analysis takes a lot of time, unfortunately. Patience is a virtue.

Hmm 19.Jun.2006 17:21

Fuzz

Diggins, if it is as you claim, not a diagonal cut (my experience with working with perspective says while not entirely as steep of a diagonal as it seems, it is still to some extent) then, how do you explain the slag dripping down from the cut, which looks exactly like a high temperature steel cut?

Demolition crew knows something... 19.Jun.2006 19:45

AS

"'Does anyone have experience with how long it would take to set up this controlled demolition?'"
"Approximately one month with a crew of ten for a building this size."

The members of any such demolition crew obviously would know that they placed charges on these buildings. I read something once about demolition charges being put on large buildings - routinely? - so that the buildings can be pulled in case of fire. Is that true? Could these charges have been there for years?

WTC - Asbestos Abatement 19.Jun.2006 20:41

Vicky eyeswideoopen@yahoo.com

"Three months prior to the destruction of both towers the owners of the WTC leased the buildings, for incomprehensible reasons, to the Jewish real estate tycoon Larry Silverstein. Since then "Silverstein Properties Inc." took in the rent from the 430 tenants and other source income (i.e. tourist admission fees). Silverstein in return paid a leasing fee to the owners: "Only three months before the attack Silverstein signed a rental contract for the WTC. Silverstein agreed to pay over 99 years a total of 3,2 billion Dollars in leasing installments to the Port Authorities: 616 million as an initial payment and then annually 115 million Dollars. The Port Authorities remained the owners of the WTC." --Die Welt, Berlin, Oct 11, 2001."
 http://globalfire.tv/nj/03en/jews/wtc-silverstein.htm

[Note: the website above describes the WTC as being a tremendous financial success. That isn't really true. Notice they mention 3 million sq ft of office space rented. The WTC had 10 million sq ft of office space. That's 7 million sq ft of prime Manhattan property unaccounted for. Another internet source said that the building was only half rented because after the 1993 bombing, a lot of tenants moved out but this is unconfirmed]


Silverstein insured the WTC for $3.5 billion. Ultimately he collected over $7 billion because the hits on the towers were counted as two separate incidents. The article below is regarding a very interesting dispute among the insurance companies regarding the wording of the insurance policies pertaining to terrorist incidents.
 http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/east/2003/09/29/32663.htm

As described above in the history of The World Trade Center, it "was a complex of 7 buildings on 16-acres". It had over 10 million square feet of office space. The Port Authority of New York built it for a cost of $1.5 billion. It opened in 1970. It had a Path train station in the basement that connected it with New Jersey and Midtown Manhattan."

The buildings were loaded with asbestos and under New York state law, the asbestos was going to have to be removed. The Port Authority was already under attack with asbestos lawsuits and they were losing. In 1989 it was estimated that it was going to cost the Port Authority $1 billion for asbestos abatement at the World Trade Center and La Guardia. The costs for abatement increased significantly with each year that went by and these were not the only properties that the Port Authority had that required abatement. Eleven years later - by 2001, the cost of abatement could easily have topped $3 billion dollars.

 http://www.fumento.com/asbest.html
 http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/oct2001/nf2001105_5320.htm

All things considered, the smart business decision was to demolish the towers and cut the losses. But this was not feasible because of the inevitable lawsuits. There were lawsuits to prevent it from being built and there would be lawsuits to prevent it from being torn down. After tearing it down, there would be more asbestos lawsuits. Just thinking about it would make every liability lawyer in New York salivate.
 http://www.newyorksilicosis.com/index.html
 http://www.businessweek.com/bwdaily/dnflash/oct2001/nf2001105_5320.htm

Why would Larry Silverstein lease buildings that he knew he would have to pay billions for asbestos abatement? And wasn't it a 'lucky break' there there was a discrepancy in the insurance paperwork that allowed Silverstein to collect double? Isn't the timing incredibly coincidental?

and I have already downed a six pack, hours east of you 19.Jun.2006 20:48

TheTroll

Proof NOW means there has always been proof. Proof NOW means that certain elements within the inteligence comunity covered up the fact. proof NOW means that certain elements within US inteligence not only conspired to protecte the real killers of thousands of Americans on 911, but conspired to kill thousands of US troops sent to Afghanistan and since the Iraq war was sold as fighting the terrorists, in Iraq as well.

You would think that at least SOME people in the US inteligence community would care about WHO protected the real 911 attackers and have murdered thousands of US troops since then. How about it??? Do any of you "patriots" spying on US care about who conspired to protecte the real 911 attackers and have since conspired to kill thousands of US troops sent to Afghanistan and Iraq??? No? I didn't think so. We know what masters you serve. Why you would serve masters rather than YOUR OWN COUNTRY is what we DON'T understand. "Patriots", to you is a slogan, nothing more. Collect your paycheck and pretend you earn it.

thermate jackpot 19.Jun.2006 20:48

.

Then of course we already have real estate mogul Silverstein who bought the whole WTCs complex merely seven weeks beforehand, ADMITTING he gave the order to conduct a controlled demolition on his other WTC7 building, so there is little argument that this is what happened to WTC7.

The clean up crew cut the collumns you are pointing to 20.Jun.2006 03:07

see video where this is explained.

Watch the demo Dave video.
The steel was cut at an angle when they did clean up.
See:

 http://www.pbs.org/americarebuilds/videostories/index.html

Jones gets basic facts wrong.

The "Why" of WTC demolition 9/11/2001 20.Jun.2006 04:41

Pogo

Anyone wishing to understand the fundamental "why" of the demolition of the WTC complex should read the following article on Jeff Rense's website:
 http://www.rense.com/general47/pulled.htm
Comment
From Tom Gordon
Systems Engineer
11-19-4
I have tried to figure out a way to debunk this article, but have come up empty. It seems that the author has substantiated his identity, his profession, and his presence at the meeting he describes, and by so doing may be exposing himself to mortal danger, with zero personal profit potential. All of these factors taken together give this the ring of truth, at least for me.
Basically, he states as fact that the WTC twin towers had been discovered to be structurally unsound, and were going to have to be demolished and rebuilt on new foundations, and that, short of demolition, it was several times over too expensive to do that. Ergo...
The "Muslim fanatics" were just a decoy. Larry Silverstein collected billions of $ in insurance settlements with which to rebuild the WTC, despite the FACT that he was not the owner, but merely the lessee! So the structurally unsound WTC buildings turned into a windfall profit instead of a catastrophic loss for the owners and Larry Silverstein.
Despite all of this apparently incriminating evidence, no actions have been taken against him, either by a Grand Jury, or by the insurance company which paid out on the obviously fraudulent claim.

who did this is the next question? 20.Jun.2006 05:29

dingeldorff

based on what i have read on the internet in the last five years
we know the buildings were dystroyed (demolished )the owner of the building (a dedicated zionist)even admitted he had building seven "pulled" on public tv.and we still are asking who did this ?now the big question is why is the currently self placed dictator protecting such evil ? ,i belive the answer is obvious .(the isrealie lobby pays out a lot of money to thoes people in charge of our government to do as they ask)i belive thoes who we may suspect are only protecting thoes who did this .althou they are indeed paid accomplices ,the actual culperts are made even more obvious by the 5 dancing,laughing ,high fiving , isrealies who stood acrossed the river and celebrated this evil .consider the 200 isrealies simply deported just after 911 ,while all the arabs were rounded up and thrown into gulags .apparently the moving company who hired these thugs is actually back in norfolk va still doing business ....even the fbi has no direct evidents that a pack of deseart rats pulled off 911.thus "you know who" is not even on the fbi most wanted list and nor is he being sought out as the perpetuator ...and most of the accused have been found alive and well living in their home towns ...all if not most of the vedios of "you know who" suposedly sent have been proven to be blatient fakes ....
our government has been paid off , bought, purchased ....like a pie at a fruit stand ...all that tax payer money americans send to isreal as aid every year yet the isrealie lobby manages to pay thousands and thousands of dollars to polititions to support their bribes ...OPEN UP YOUR EYES AND LOOK AT THE OBVIOUS TRUTHS AND AVOID THE BLATIENT DECEPTION !!i belive our military has been highjacked as well by yet a nother dedicated zionist ....as well as both political parties .mean while our religious leaders who visit isreal tolerate isreals religious leaders spitting right in their faces when they visit the holy land .so what are we going to do about it ?continue to support electronic voting machines so they can put who they want in office again?hire mor corrupt voting officials who can also be paid off to alter or miss manage absentee ballots ?put more corrupt officials in office who let thousands of american people parish in floods for days when they could be saving american lives ?i get the strong impression that america as we all knew it is no more and that it has been taken over by sinester people who have drained it dry of resources and continue to do so .when officials in isreal were asked what they thought about 911 they said ohh it is "very good for isreal".WHO EVER DID THIS OPERATES BY WAY OF LIES AND DECEPTION !!!!!Mean while airline companies have installed and are sparying down onto the heads of all americans god only knows what kind of posions chemical trails) and doing it all right under our noses with no oversight what so ever ..many of the safty restraints have been lifted from big cooperations to spite the health implications . good concerned americans are being taken off the streets and thrown into "goolags "for simple protest .but i belive americans are too absorbed in their daily little dramas and too preoccupied in their little personal lives or too brain washed to even care .some of the most liberated people i have ever spoken to have so little concern about what is going on in the big picture .they simply turn a totally blind eye to all of it .but then again what could we do about it if we wanted to do any thing about it?

Useless Effort and Insignificant Movement 20.Jun.2006 06:48

Brian Lyle Blyle2003@yahoo.com

With all due respect to the professors of the 911-truth movement, your work is fantastic and impressive. However, I don't care how many times you repeat the 500 smoking guns, your efforts are a waste of time. America has been under attack before by criminal element within our federal government resulting with amplified success. From my understanding, the truth movement has made Elliot Spitzer more than aware of the sufficient evidence of this crime and has he proceeded to seek justice? MSNBC on June 19th invited Michael Berger on the program to discuss the legality of the 911 commission. When asked by the host to provide one piece of evidence refuting the commission's official report, the best response Mr. Berger could muster was false information pertaining to the black box supposedly lost in the rubble at Ground Zero. Now I may not be a scholar, but when given the opportunity of a lifetime to expose a tragedy of this magnitude, Mr. Berger undoubtedly should have mentioned Steven Jones report of thermate in rubble examples or Larry Silverstein's confession to the demolition of WTC#7. The movement, in my opinion, is of little significance as witnessed first hand recently in Chicago. Media and those in attendance seemed only to care about pushing their gimmick tables and all were in possession of cam-recorder's, in hopes of mustering up enough footage to make another video for more suckers to purchase at the next symposium. Did I forget to mention that only about 500 people attended, in a Chicagoland area, which has residency in the millions! My question is to the scholars for 911 and other movements such as infowars. Do you work for the criminal element or is your goal in reality to expose the truth? Time has come to quit wasting your efforts and take the next step, before another attack occurs.

815-878-1956

Crime Scene 20.Jun.2006 08:40

John Hanks portage@uwyo.edu

If you add up all the internal evidence related to the crime scene including theg the thermite, and then you add it to all the external evidence involving Mossad, Pentagon treason, Anthrax, Wellstones, PNAC, Neocons, Delays and Coverups; then the case is more than compelling.

9/11 Inside Job 20.Jun.2006 08:54

Robert captrim99@yahoo.com

After years of studying information regarding 9/11 I'm convinced it was an inside job. The DVD Loose Change sums it all up in one neat package. It doesn't seem as if anyone cares though. The government surely doesn't. They've had their commission reviews, told their side of the story and moved on. For those who disagree with their version - we're labeled as nuts. Unless the people (nuts) organise some type of rally on a national level to bring attention to 9/11 untruths then all of these websites like Rense, Prisonplanet, etc. are just wasted words to pacify the nuts. If the mexicans can rally for legal immigration won't Americans rally for their own country. I'd be glad to help organise but I need help people. Any ideas??

No statute of limitations for obstruction of justice 20.Jun.2006 08:58

Rumple Stiltskin

There is no statute of limitations for Obstruction of Justice. Find the person responsible for quickly removing all the structural steel, and sending it to Japan to be recycled before any official analysis could take place. Lock that person up at Guantanimo Bay (I think it was Rudy Giuliani who gave that order). Read Bovier's Law Dictionary (1914), it defines obstruction of justice by public officials as "high treason."

Date on Pic Needed 20.Jun.2006 10:29

Allen

A date on the photo (showing a diagonally cut beam) is required. I ask the proponents of this conjecture to place themselves in viewpoint of any reasoning person. I'm ignorant of the facts and timeline but thoughts come to mind. The beam could have been cut to remove rubble and make the area safe. Was there post-collaps use of thermite to remove beams. Was this picture taken 9/11, 9/12, 9/30, 10/15 ???

Kudos for Dr. Jones 20.Jun.2006 12:19

Tomkat

My hat goes off for Dr. Steven Jones and anyone else who defies the Gestapo mentality that so permeates and putrifies the central government of our (former) Great Republic. Dr. Jones and people like him are in my humble opinion, true patriots ranking with the likes of Patrick Henry. Kudos to you sir!

Proper spelling is needed to increase credibility... 20.Jun.2006 13:46

Tamryn H t595i@hotmail.com

Whoever wrote this lost credibility with me immediately, when the explosive allegedly used was misspelled. It is THERMITE not THERMATE.... Oh, and BTW Thermite is NOT an explosive, it is an incendiary mixture that produces a slow, high temperature exothermic reaction capable of melting or welding steel.
This post is a fake....
Tamara

The failure of the 9/11 truth movement is.. 20.Jun.2006 14:24

Marik marik@aracnet.com

It's inability to offer anything up more then a few slaps on the wrist. Shit this article has generated 50+ comments...My fucking father reads this kind of shit...Clearly there's a huge amount of people who are already convinced. But where is the movement? Where are the protests? Where is the FIGHT?

This should have caused nothing short of revolution; but instead we're all concentrating on finding the 'smoking gun', the Bush family or Israeli connections as offerings to the mass media in the futile hope that one day they'll get airtime on CNN and all the 'sheeple' everyone pisses on will magically wake up and revolt. As if Bush and Israel are the only things bad about this country...

It's the same fucking bullshit surrounding the anti-war movement. Or any movement for that matter. We're depending on the system and it's pissant politicians to bring about revolution, or social change or 'another world'...We're looking everywhere for that change; everywhere but in the streets! It's certainly not going to come from representatives of the ruling class, no matter what side of the aisle they're on.

This is war...class war and we need to figure out what it is we are fighting for. What do we want to see come from this? A meaningless lawsuit thrown at some scapegoat? OR we do we want to shake the very foundations of this imperialist society and bring it to it's knee's? Do we want to beg MSNBC to play our evidence or do we want to force them to acknowledge the truth because they've run out of ways to try and deceive us? They WILL throw us Bush in an attempt to buy us off from what should be our REAL goal; it's just a question of getting there. And it doesn't involve voting Democrat in November:P

Kudos to the 9/11 truth people who see the need to leave leading left media figures like Amy Goodman in the dust....they need us we don't need them. Now we need to apply that to politics.


get some creditability 20.Jun.2006 15:39

observer

Dr Steven Jones and company may all be brilliant people. They be 100% accurate. They lose their creditability through articles such as this that have misused, misspelled words and vague "redundant sources", whatever that means. They need a well spoken and logical spokesperson. Without such a person, the desired result will evade them.

I had the pleasure of seeing Dr. Jones presentation in Utah County. Because of the disorganization and rambling exhibited in his presentation, he appeared to be a mad scientist and not someone as creditable as he probably is.

Just a thought. Sales presentation laced with facts is what gets results. Look at any incompetent politician for varification of this statement.

Time Required 20.Jun.2006 16:09

Saamata

The charges in all three buildings could have been set up in under thirty hours... and in far less time, if small nuclear explosions were used in the basements of WTC 1 and WTC 2, for which a viable case has been made by a Finnish scientist (source below). The presence of tritium in lower Manhattan (and in no other part of the city) several months after the attack also attests eloquently to the use of small hydrogen bombs.

 http://www.saunalahti.fi/wtc2001/soldier4.htm

Rumored: originally built to implode? 20.Jun.2006 16:23

sofla

It is a fairly well known rumor in NY, according to some natives I've talked to, rumors predating the 9/11 incident, that part or all of the WTC complex was originally designed for a quick demolition in the case of some accident that threatened to collapse the buildings onto their surrounding buildings and environs. (Alternatively, some versions of this concept have it that this was a retrofitting of the towers for quick implosion done after the first bombing attempt in '93).

Stoking that rumor was the oddity that investigators seeking the floor plans of the towers were denied access to them unless they agreed to hold harmless from all liability those providing them (the Port Authority? the architects?). It's my understanding that no such waiver of liability could be given, and accordingly, the plans were not ever turned over to the Congressional investigation or the 9/11 commission.

Some have suggested that high powered explosives were formed into thin sheets and then used to 'flock' the beams, fully jacketing some or all the beams at critical areas, with that plastique kind of explosive safe even in a fire, until a triggering fuse would be set off.

This could be used as a limited hangout cover story (even if it isn't true), to try to explain away to the public the mounting evidence of demolition as it becomes more widely known.

bu$h's Reichstag Fire 20.Jun.2006 16:51

Markoff Chaney

When I turned on the news and saw the towers fall, I could swear, my first thought was....gosh, that looked a lot like all of the demolition videos I've seen. Also for some reason I could never resolve myself to buy that crap about "ignited jet fuel" melting the steel of the columns. It seems to me that once exposed to an open atmosphere that whatever flame was there would drown in all the oxygen. As for how long to get the planting done??? They could have imported the crap one device at a time over years...Time was not an issue. Marvin bu$h was the HEAD OF SECURITY. That means he knows which areas are monitored, how they are monitored....etc. All he would have to do is stack his security team with ex-military personnel (lot's of demolition experts in the military) or have his daddy (former head of the CIA, ex-vice-president/ ex-president of the UNITED STATES)scare up a few dozen or so sympathizers from CIA, NSA, FBI sources, and bam you have an expert team willing to do your bidding. Why would time be an issue, if the guys that are supposed to be tending to the security of the buildings are planting the bombs???

-The Mgt

ps-<a href=" http://www.barnsdle.demon.co.uk/hist/fire.html">
Reichstag Fire</a><br>


Will this be on TV? 20.Jun.2006 17:20

Nick G.

Is there any chance that these proofs will be shown on TV? (I live in Canada but I get abc, nbc, cbs, cnn and fox... although I dunno if I can rely on any of those!). Because I would really like to see how the Maqueavelian (I dunno if it's spelled like this) neo-conservatives would answer back.

INSIDE JOB - SO WHAT? 20.Jun.2006 18:50

Rob

So what if 911 was an inside job!

Are you going to do anything to stop Bush, the Carlyle Group, the Saudis, the "new" Iraqi government, and of course David Rockefeller's "new" World Order?

I say NO! Not a single one of you are willing to bleed for this. NONE. The entire Bush family has a long history of treason against the USA. Yet the Republicans don't give a shit as long as they can buy Haliburton Stock and start wars against petty dictators they themselves installed.

They ARE the terrorists! Why do think Anthrax was sent to the opposition democrats and of course to the Media? Because it's a message. What is the message? "We will fucking kill you and not give a shit if you don't play our gotdamn game."

Bush is beyond corrupt. He's a HIGH TRAITOR. He uses Christianity to manipulate people. If Bush is a Christian then I'm changing religions.

Don't even think about arresting THE REAL TERRORISTS. Why?

It's really very fucking simple. THEY HAVE ALL YOUR NUCLEAR WEAPONS and BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS at their disposal. Are you going to arrest them? If you do, they'll kill ALL of you and not give a rotten rat's ass, and the mainstream media will call you ALL "domestic terrorists" and applaud when Bush and his cronies murder you all for trying to stop him.

Was 911 an inside job? OF COURSE it was, you stupid idiots! BUT NOBODY CARES. Americans like killing Iraqis, and listen, the official count of "2500 dead" in Iraq approaches nowhere near LBJ's and "Tricky" Dick Nixon's 50,000 sacrifices. And I do mean SACRIFICES because that's exactly what they all were - HUMAN SACRIFICES.

Do it matter if Bush kills you himself with a knife in your chest on an altar of some strange god, or if he sends you to do die in a war in the some foriegn land that he fomented on COMPLETE TOTAL FUCKING LIES? He's still the one killing you. The only difference is one is personal, the other impersonal. And if you don't think Bush will not try to get you killed, ASK VALERIE PLAME.

Fucking American Idiots.

What I find highly unlikely... 20.Jun.2006 19:31

Mark

...is that BOTH of the WTC towers fell onto themselves. I say for several reasons:
1) I have watched several shows on building demoltion on some of the science channels (History and Discovery Channels I think...) and in these shows, they say it takes days and days of blueprint studying, planning and weakening the building before it can be imploded in the designed way. The fact that both of these towers fell onto themselves just seems to me to be highly likely...
2) One of the planes hit near a corner of its target. I would think that this area would be weakend more since it bore the brunt of the impact and in addition, it also was subjected to heat longer. You would think that this side would have collapsed first.
3) Its very possible terrorists could have planted explosives around the beams beforehand. Perhaps the records of the WTC towers should be examined to see who rented the floors near where the buildings started to fall. The records of night personal should also be checked as well as the backgrounds of vendors going into the buildings.

Perhaps some exact scale models of the WTC should built to try to duplicate how the buildings would fall in a similar crash. Structural engineers would have to scale down the beam sizes and other factors and the same factors should be considered for the planes, fuel, and heat so we can see what happens.

Mark

Re: How long would it take to place the thermite/thermate? 20.Jun.2006 20:22

Jim

You wouldn't need to do a normal demo job here, the weight of the two buildings would do half the work for you. add to that destablization of the structure caused by the planes, some well placed C-4 and thermate charges....

The WTC had power-downs, security lapses, and many 'workmen' in the building, in the weeks before 9-11.

What a load 20.Jun.2006 20:45

truth-seeking-moisture-missile

Just where is the report on the chemical analysis?

Minimum amount of Thermate material required to cut steel columns 20.Jun.2006 21:16

wild guess please disprove if necessary

I'd like to add the minimalist approach to tower distruction with a material like thermate; twenty minutes of painting and vacation tickets to Cuba...a little mission impossible mixed with a little creative chemistry.

(Please note that I read somewhere that the WTC was built with 'Liteweight steel and Aluminum and Concrete' so maybe the planners realized that these towers would only stand for a limited time anyway...so might as well make the most of the 'asset')

1. Find a location in the structure that is private or rent space; location very dependent to structural collumns somewhat midway up the tower but not at the top. You'll need a lot of mass above the thermate cut for potential energy.

2. start renovations by removing walls and exposing metal structure collumns.

3. Aquire enough thermate material to cut a majority of structural ellements, enough to weaken the structure so it collapses, basically a 2-5 gallons in two paint buckets

4. Liberally paint on the cutting material with enough thickness to cause the collumn to be cut when the thermate is exposed to sufficient temp to ignite the chemical reaction then paint over it with Magnesium Acetate or some other chem as a thermo catalist

5. Complete the renovations, then run your business into the ground and owe lots of money to everyone, be sure to never pay off the debt, just get more loans and invest this cash in the stock and bond markets and hide the profits. Then just days before the planned event sell off everything and buy futures against the airline companies, etc.

6. Wait until A. Planes crash into the tower (and no real post-investigation is possible cause the building collapses and everyones
dead)
B. Hot fire ignites the sulfur and K materials and presto...collapse
C. Set a timer with high voltage to ignite the cutting charges...

7. When A or B happens your in the clear go and collect your insurance settlement and live in Cuba with a mistress or three...

8. If A or B fail to materialize use 6C above to assure a massive disaster that will change the face of the world and line your pockets with insurance cash just be sure to tell all your friends and loved ones first so they can remain at a safe distance...

9. Dont get caught! otherwise just deny everything or susicide out, no big deal...

10. NWO at your doorstep...now you've stacked the markets and set them up for a sure crash of the house of cards in a few years - no possible way to stop it because you've wiped out the 'real wealth building potential of the world's capital markets' in a single blow; you've tripped up the capitalist dinosaur and now it will be torn apart by the ants...you've wiped out your enormous debts by killing off the bankers you owe and distroying the paperwork, a very common mob'ish crime, make sure you get the rights to the sequel...

11. Last but not least dont tell a soul; just wait around for the world market crash and buy up the severly undervalued companies at pennies to the dollar...Of course whats the real value of capitaist industry?? Not alot, just humankind survival...

12. Of course if doubt any of this now; dont worry much; your twenty bucks will still buy a least a can of soda pop or a bagel...

13. And yes lets finish this all off with the real true result of this capitalistic greed - World Anarchy or World Poverty; cant really decide which I prefer...untold human suffering... a living hell on earth...

14. OK so if this is a basic movie script who got the leading $20 MB role?? can somebody guess?? And who got a cameo?? or the emmny??

I'm not sure how to credit the movie file but thanks to the videographer.
SQUIB MOVIE
SQUIB MOVIE

There Is No Question As To The Integrity Of Dr. Steven Jones and His Work. 20.Jun.2006 22:43

Christopher Emery - Independent Film Producer okctruth@cox.net

I am proud to say that I [along with several hundred other individuals who attended the recent 9/11truth conference in Chicago] had the opportunity to speak with Dr. Jones in person. In addition we
were privelaged to attend his presentations on the 9/11 collapses of all three WTC towers - 1,2 and 7 during the same conference.

Dr. Jones is regarded by his peers as one of the best Physics professors in the U.S. And as a former Civil Engr. student, I can vouch for the integrity of his work as I had to take several advanced physics related courses during my undergrad studies. I know first hand the difference between solid, well researched science and complete garbage. Dr. Jones's work is well researched and stands on it's own very well.

The N.I.S.T. and the 9/11 commission reports are complete garbage. These reports amount to nothing more than a slap in the face insult to the intelligence of all of us. Notwithstanding the 9/11 Victims Family Members and Survivors. Whomever signed off on these reports are incredibly inept, criminally irresponsible and daft enough to believe the nonsense they attempted to pawn off as fact.

Just like Dr. Steven Jones, Dr. David Ray Griffin and their colleagues have done so very well in the past few years; we need to step up to the front of the line with these men and stand up for the truth and the facts pertaining to the 9/11 tragedy.

Christopher Emery
Film Producer
Oklahoma City, OK

errors 21.Jun.2006 00:17

myspace reader

a friend of mine on myspace posted this story as a bulletin. while the story sounds convincing with the use of science in it, i don't buy it. first and foremost, as i read the story i noticed multiple mispellings and typos. as a graduate student with a 4-year journalism degree, i automatically wrote this article off. anyone who has any pride in their work whatsoever proofreads it several times, especially a "topic" as big as this one. also, i did a google search for "thermite in world trade center" and every link that came up was a link to an opinion site. on the other hand, i thoroughly combed trustworthy news sites such as cnn.com and msnbc.com, and found no results at all regarding this supposed finding. wouldn't you think that would be solid front page news? i sure do. sorry guys, this story is BS

Misconceptions? 21.Jun.2006 03:56

BassHead

Some Common Misconceptions Regarding the Collapse of the WTC.

Free Fall Time of Collapse
With all the smoke and dust it is impossible to give an accurate time for the entire collapse. What can be seen free falling is in fact loose debris.
 http://www.indybay.org/uploads/2006/04/11/wtc_core.mpg

"Squibs"
Debris seen shooting out from the building's exterior walls as collapse progressed, could in fact be compressed air being expelled out under great pressure, like a giant syringe being squeezed. The exit points could be ventilation ducts. If these were explosions, what were they attached to? The outer wall or the central columns? Blowing holes in the outer wall would do nothing, so they must be the core. But wait, if attached to the core why does the explosion exit through a small point only?
 http://wtc.nist.gov/WTC_Conf_Sep13-15/session5/5Ferreira.pdf

Steel and Fire
It is often said that the fires were not hot enough to melt steel. Structural steel does not need to melt to fail. At around 550°C steel will start to lose its strength. This is way lower than the melting point of 1400°C. Steel will also expand when exposed to heat, putting undue stress on adjacent members. Tests have shown that normal office fires in modern offices with hydrocarbon materials can reach temperatures of 1300°C.
 http://www.interactfire.co.uk/legislation.asp

Kevin Ryan
Ryan says the steel was certified to ASTM E119. He obviously knows nothing of this test. The ASTM E119 standard fire test requires that specimens be representations of actual building construction - ie. complete with fire-proofing. A mock-up of the proposed construction is subjected to a typical fire in a furnace. This verifies that the construction will hold out for the required amount of hours. With the WTC, the impact dislodged the fire-proofing. The test results therefore do not reflect the removal of fire-proofing by aircraft or flying debris. He seems to be suggesting that the steel was tested on its own without fire insulation. If you were to construst a steel framed building without fire protection it would instantly be deemed unfit for occupation by the authorities.
 link to www.aisc.org
Note: The subsidiary that Ryan directed, specializes in the testing of drinking water, according to the Web site for Environmental Health Laboratories.

Eutectic Reactions
Some say the presence of sulphur on the WTC steel indicates the use of thermate. Maybe there is another explanation. "The important questions," says Biederman, "are how much sulfur do you need, and where did it come from? The answer could be as simple - and this is scary - as acid rain." Have environmental pollutants increased the potential for eutectic reactions? "We may have just the inherent conditions in the atmosphere so that a lot of water on a burning building will form sulfuric acid, hydrogen sulfide or hydroxides, and start the eutectic process as the steel heats up," Biederman says. He notes that the sulfur could also have come from contents of the burning buildings, such as rubber or plastics. Another possible culprit is ocean salts, such as sodium sulfate, which is known to catalyze sulfidation reactions on turbine blades of jet engines. "All of these things have to be explored," he says. From a building-safety point of view, the critical question is: Did the eutectic mixture form before the buildings collapsed, or later, as the remains smoldered on the ground. "We have no idea," admits Sisson. "To answer that, we would need to recreate those fires in the FPE labs, and burn fresh steel of known composition for the right time period, with the right environment." He hopes to have the opportunity to collaborate on thermodynamically controlled studies, and to observe the effects of adding sulfur, copper and other elements. The most important lesson, Sisson and Biederman stress, is that fail-safe sprinkler systems are essential to prevent steel from reaching even 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit, because phase changes at the 1,300-degree mark compromise a structure's load-bearing capacity.
 http://www.wpi.edu/News/Transformations/2002Spring/steel.html

Preservation of Evidence
It seems that there was a thorough investigation of the WTC remains. Debris was meticulously examined by the country's leading experts in the relevant fields.  link to www.wpi.edu The bill gives NIST, etc. similar powers to that of the NTSB. The events of 9/11 were unprecedented, so the need for such a bill had not been anticipated. It's usual for new laws to come in after an event or incident has taken place for the first time, because only then does the problem become apparent.

As we can see, the demolition theory just doesn't stand up to scrutiny. The 9/11 movement should put this on the back burner, and concentrate on the other evidence.

ha ha ha ha ha 21.Jun.2006 04:24

good one

right, right, the mean planes bumped the "fireproofing" so the steel all turned to jello even though the fires were burning out

and the remains were shipped immediately to asia where they were melted down

so tell us, archimedes, ... why'd WTC 7 fall down?

open floors for rent 21.Jun.2006 05:43

greg0658

It may be of some help to search for available rent space on 9/11 in the three buildings, or the buildings that were more open access to the everyday public, ie 1 & 2, to see if a rented out pattern exists to suggest a spacing sequence of charges, and thus providing more time for placing the charges in floors available for rent.

Accuracy 21.Jun.2006 07:08

Kevin R OBrien desdinovatheluckyone@yahoo.com

What was found at the World Trade Center was-THERMATE not Thermite,Thermite is very similar except Thermate uses sulfur as an accellorant,which enables it to cut through steel instantly.

WTC IRON BURNS 21.Jun.2006 08:23

This explains "molten iron" formed in the burning piles mferran@nycap.rr.com

----- Original Message -----
From: Mark Ferran
Cc:  jfetzer@d.umn.edu ;  steven_jones@byu.edu
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2006 3:18 PM
Subject: WTC IRON BURNS!!!


"ABC News reported that, "the temperature at the core of "the pile," is near 2000 degrees Fahrenheit, according to fire officials, who add that the fires are too deep for firefighters to get to."  http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2006/240406thermiteidentified.htm
The only likely source of the heat great enough to actually "melt" significant quantities of iron in the piles (or even just raise so much of it to red-hot or to 2000F) would be chemical energy (i.e., "combustion" of some sort). Professor Jones assumes that all the carbonaceous "combustible" matter in the "piles" would have burned away long before the time that the red-hot and molten iron was discovered (weeks after the collapse of the WTC towers). Perhaps it did, by weeks after the collapse. But Professor Jones obviously does not comprehend that the hot, red-hot and molten IRON IS COMBUSTIBLE matter.

Here, Jones clearly missed it, when he wrote: "At these temperatures, steel will melt, and aluminum materials from the buildings should continue to undergo exothermic oxidation reactions with materials also entrained in the molten metal pools including metal oxides which will then keep the pools molten and even growing for weeks despite radiative and conductive losses. ... The government reports admit that the building fires were insufficient to melt steel beams -- then where did the molten metal pools come from?"  http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html

Jones has no clue because he has conception of Steel Burning (iron oxidation).

The Truth is that: HOT STEEL WILL CONTINUE TO UNDERGO EXOTHERMIC OXIDATION REACTIONS WHILE EXPOSED TO AIR, CAUSING IRON TO INCREASE ITS TEMPERATURE UNTIL IT MELTS, FORMING POOLS OF MOLTEN IRON.

Professor Jone's comments and conjectures about the origin of the alleged molten iron found within the three huge piles of combustible matter burning after the collapse of the WTC towers, distinctly prove that Professor Jones is oblivious of the fact that Iron Burns.

I found this children's educational webpage that further illustrates that "Professor Jones" (among the "9-11 Scholars") is an incompetent ignoramus because he ignores the scientifically provable (or disprovable) fact that Iron metal itself burns, and that when amassed in large piles can ignite fires (and can even melt itself). The article discusses child-safe experiments observing a very slow oxidation of iron (rusting at room temperature), but also mentions:
"Sometimes a big load of iron in a ship can get hot. The heat can even set other materials on fire. That's because the iron is rusting, which means it is burning very, very slowly. Iron rusts in a chemical reaction called oxidation. That means the iron reacts with oxygen gas from the air. Oxidation is the chemical reaction that occurs when anything burns in air. Like most oxidations, rusting gives off heat."
 http://www.highlightskids.com/Science/TryThis/h3TT1004_ironBurns.asp?subTitleID=159

Beyond the scope of this child-oriented article, it is important to understand that general rule in chemistry that most chemical reactions (e.g., oxidation of iron) are accelerated by higher temperatures. This is especially true of iron oxidation. This means, that the hotter iron metal in contact with oxygen is, the faster it will oxidize (burn). For example, it is a familiar sight at iron foundries to see hot iron rust forming instantaneously on red-hot iron beams. This hot rust usually falls off spontaneously (because of the difference in thermal expansion properties between iron and rust). Meaning, a hot iron beam, if combined with a large enough number of other hot iron beams in a confined or semi insulated pile (e.g., covered with cement dust), will burn CONTINUOUSLY until it consumes itself, (and thus will appear to have been "vaporized" to those not looking for the rust residue). It will just thin away (and turn into rust), as illustrated by this photo of burned and thinned I-beam metal recovered from the rubble of the WTC towers:

 http://stream.paranode.com/imc/portland/images/2006/06/341368.gif

It has also been suggested that Sulfur especially from tons of decomposing Gypsum (a Sulfer ore used in sheetrock walls and partitions in offices and homes) in the piles accelerated the oxidation or melting of the iron burning in the piles. "Sulfur is widely distributed in nature. It is found in many minerals and ores, e.g., iron pyrites, galena, cinnabar, zinc blende, gypsum..."  http://columbia.thefreedictionary.com/Sulpher
"Gypsum does not have a true melting point, as it decomposes under heat before it can melt"  http://www.gp.com/build/PageViewer.aspx?repository=bp&elementid=3358 With high heat, Gyspum decomposes and releases sulfur dioxide (SO2) gas, which is a weak oxidizer that may transfer its sulfur and oxygen to the burning iron in the piles. A more direct transfer of sulfur from Gypsum to the burning iron would occur where the gypsum (dust) is in direct contact with the burning (e.g., red hot) iron. Iron oxide also reacts with the sulfur dioxide to form iron sulfates.

Ancient Wisdom about burning iron:

19th Century:
"Iron commences to 'burn' at 2500[F], while at the end of the operation in the Bessemer process, when the temperature reaches some 3000[F], the iron burns violently, as demonstrated by examination of the Bessemer flame with the spectro- scope. (See p. 46, Vol. II.)"
 link to memory.loc.gov))::
Manufacturer and builder / Volume 3, Issue 6, June 1871

"At 1000C iron burns as easily as wood."  http://www.learning-org.com/01.09/0073.html

Thomas Aquinas and other theologins remarked on this famous burning property of Iron:

Aquinas maintains that:
The head causes an influx of sensation and motion to all members of the body. ... [S]omeone can understand "to flow into" ("influere") in two ways according to the spiritual sense and mode. One mode as principal agent: And thus it belongs to God alone to provide an influx of grace in the members of the Church. In another mode instrumentally: And thus even the humanity of Christ is a cause of the said influx; because as Damascene says ... as iron burns on account of the fire conjoined to it, so were the actions of the humanity of Christ on account of the united divinity, of which the humanity itself was an instrument. Christ, nevertheless, according to the two last conditions of head [governance, influence] is able to be called head of the angels according to human nature, and head of both according to divine nature; not, however, according to the first condition [namely, sameness in nature], unless one takes what is common according to the nature of the genus, according as man and angel agree in rational nature, and further what is common according to analogy, according as it is common to the Son along with all creatures to receive from the Father, as Basil says, by reason of which he is said to be the first-born of all creatures, Col. 1:15.16  http://www.unav.es/cryf/georgemaritain.html

DAMASCENUS, (lib. 3, cap. 17) wrote:
"For not according to its [the flesh's] own operation, but by the Word united to it, He wrought divine things, the Word displaying through it His own operation. For glowing iron burns not by possessing in a natural manner the power to burn, but by possessing this from its union with the fire. Therefore in itself it was mortal, and on account of its personal union to the Word, quickening."  http://www.iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/wittenberg/concord/web/augsc-05.html
Iron smiths (Blacksmiths) modern and ancient are aware that glowing Iron Burns:
"With bellows blowing additional air through the fire, it can reach temperatures of about 3,000° Fahrenheit. Iron burns at 2,800°, however, so the smith has to be careful to not ruin his work! ... The smith's fire contains too much oxygen to allow iron to melt; as it approaches its melting point the iron burns instead."
 http://www.osv.org/cgi-bin/CreatePDF.php?/tour/index.php?L=12&PDF=Y

Also of note: Faraday's lectures and a demonstration of iron powder burning:  http://www.fordham.edu/HALSALL/MOD/1859Faraday-forces.html ("Michael Faraday was the son of a blacksmith, and was born at Newington Butts, near London, September 22, 1791.")

A WWII witness in Germany recounts seeing the "iron" of three Russian tanks "burn" from March 9 1945 until November 3, 1945:  http://members.tripod.com/~radde/RaddesFlight.html ("The three Russian tanks before Bresin still burned as we passed by them on the morning of 11-3, and this taught me something surprising: iron burns.") This account suggests that the "critical mass" of iron metal that will sustain itself burning may be quite small compared to the huge amounts of iron debris the WTC piles. This account of prolonged iron combusion also supports the conclusion that the main source of high heat in the piles of the WTC 1, 2 and 7, weeks and months after their collapse, was due to burning iron in these piles. This conclusion could be readily verified or disproved through simulation or experimentation.

The other interesting thing about "iron fire" (fast oxidation of iron) is that it creates a "vacuum" of sorts that "sucks" oxygen to itself. Ordinary carbonaceous "fire" creates carbon monoxide (CO) or carbon dioxide (CO2), which are gases that can take the place of consumed oxygen (02) gas. Carbon monoxide production releases two molecules of CO gas per one O2 molecule consumed. Thus, such a carbon fire requires a "convection" current to remove the hot carbon mon/dioxide (out the top) to make room for more cold oxygen to be brought in (at the bottom).
By contrast, an "iron fire" converts the oxygen gas (and possibly also nitrogen gas, but that is tangent) into a solid (rust). Thus, the burning iron metal effectively sucks atmospheric oxygen INTO the pile of burning metal, regardless of convection currents. Convection currents are a strong mechanism for REMOVING heat from a fire. Of course convection currents will also be present even in a huge iron pile furnace, but a result of direct conversion of oxygen gas into a solid (rust) is that there are weaker convection currents and that means that the heat of combustion escapes more slowly from the metal fire furnace than from a carbonaceous fire furnace. Thus, since the heat of combustion does not leave with the combustion products, a metal-air furnace could become much "hotter" faster than a carbon-air furnace of the same scale (e.g., at the same oxygen demand level).
Theoretically, there is no limit upon the temperature that such a large metal-fire could attain. It could, in theory, attain a temperature high enough to not only melt iron, but also to boil (vaporize) iron, but not at the same location at the same time. (You cannot have solid, liquid, and gaseous iron at the same location, because "melting" and "vaporization" occur at greatly different temperatures). The difficulty with that however is that the molten (burning) iron would tend to settle into a pool, having a smaller surface area (on its top surface only), thus reducing its rate of oxidation.

For practical purposes, all this means that a huge pile of iron beams (e.g., mixed in with tons of other materials initially burning) can itself begin to burn like huge iron logs in a pile furnace, and there is no reason not to expect this system to reach a temperature high enough to melt iron. The first "molten" iron in the WTC piles was reportedly discovered WEEKS AFTER the collapse of the WTC towers, and molten iron was reportedly found regularly during the following MONTHS during excavations of the huge piles. The only rational explanation for this steady-state phenomenon is IRON BURNING. "Professor Jones" is not a rational man, and thus he fails to consider the fact that Iron Burns, and instead assumes that the reported "molten iron" was all created (by surreptitious "Thermite") on September 11, 2001 and that all this red-hot liquid metal just stayed clumped together on its chaotic descent down 70+ floors and then stayed in molten form until it was dug up weeks and months later.

Further, as an aside, it is total idiocy for Jones and his associates to assume that someone intent upon both bringing down the WTC towers and being undetected in doing so would go to the trouble of actually "melting" some of the iron (let alone alot of it) within the iron support columns (steel will not "melt" until reaching temperatures of nearly 3000F), rather than just heating some of them to the much lesser temperature point at which the iron would EXPAND and DEFORM (see photos linked below) and become worse than useless to support the enormous weight of the building. (That temperature can be scientifically calculated given the load parameters, and was evidently equal to or less than the core temperature of the carbonaceous office fires spanning an enormous area e.g., one square acre in size, on each of several floors of each WTC tower). Note: "A typical house fire can reach 2000 degrees Fahrenheit after just five minutes of flame."  link to www.jsc.nasa.gov Aluminum melts at about 1218 F. It is an observable fact that virtually all carbonaceous-fires (e.g., bonfires, house fires, burning-paper fires, airplane fires) are readily capable of melting aluminum. (Note: "Fire" is not synonymous with "flame".)

When even smaller aluminum aircraft burn on the ground, the resulting fire usually "melts" their aluminum portions, thus proving temperatures exceeding 1200 degrees Fahrenheit:

Aircraft Crash: Aluminum Fire


 http://www.nps.gov/yuch/Expanded/b24/b24_graphics/aerialview_big.jpg


"The forward portion of the fusilage [sic] containing the cockpit burned, the aluminum being almost completely consumed by the heat of the fire which ranged from 1310 degrees to 2100 degrees (F)."  http://www.nps.gov/yuch/Expanded/b24/b24.htm



These temperature estimates exceed the melting point of aluminum. See also the burning-aircraft photos in this thoughtful rebuttal of Professor Jone's lunatic "thermite" theory.  http://www.geocities.com/debunking911/moltensteel.htm ("Air France flight 358 didn't hit a steel building at 500 miles an hour. It didn't even burn the fuel in the wings yet it's aluminum skin melted to the ground. It simply went off the runway and caught fire. What melted the airliner was the contents like seats, clothing and other combustibles including chemical oxygen generators. It's not unreasonable to conclude the airliner and contents didn't even need the contents of the building to melt.") (unfortunately, the author of that article also mistakenly assumed that iron is "non-combustible")



It should also be kept in mind that "aluminum ... ignites at relatively low temperature," Aluminum, "melts at about 1,220[F] degrees. At about 1,400[F] degrees, it can automatically ignite and burst into flames without any spark" "The formation of aluminum oxide is accompanied by the release of a tremendous amount of heat ... temperatures can reach around 5,000 degrees."

 http://www.dmanuta.com/dmm/aluminum.doc



More information about aluminum is provided here:  http://www.911myths.com/WTCTHERM.pdf (although I think he tends to oversell the role of melted aluminum in the collapse of the WTC)



In other words, why use readily DETECTIBLE "thermite" (or even "explosives") when just burning tons of paper, plastic, rugs, aircraft-chairs, clothes, flesh, computers, (perhaps aluminum metal), and some hydrocarbon (jet) fuel, would (and evidently did) accomplish the same result?

To bolster his nonsensical conclusions, Professpr Jones says absurd and misleading things like: "Brigham Young University physicist Professor Steven Jones told peers at a Utah meeting that, "while almost no fire, even one ignited by jet fuel, can cause structural steel to fail."  http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2006/240406thermiteidentified.htm

Professor Jones is an attention whore, who does not check his facts:

The essay at  http://www.cagenweb.com/quarries/articles_and_books/stone_magazine/fire_trap.html by an early American civil engineer of great repute (William Sooy Smith, 1830-1916) explains the known weaknesses of Iron (steel) beams and columns exposed to fire. He notes that the primary mechanism of structural failure in steel buildings is the DESRUCTIVE FORCE generated in the steel itself when it EXPANDS due to heating by FIRE. He describes the destruction of several steel frame buildings due to the heat of fire, including one in New York city. In view of these examples, there is a warning (or prophesy) by the Fire Chief of the City of New York of the eventual collapse of a very tall steel frame building, (such as the World Trade Center buildings), due to exposure to the heat of fire. His essay is essential reading for anyone who would express or consider an opinion about the likelihood that a steel framed building exposed to fire would be brought down by the heat of fire.

Excerpts:
1) "Witness the Manhattan Savings Bank building, Broadway and Bleeker street, New York, which was destroyed a few weeks ago by the heat generated in the burning of the ... building next to it."

2) "fire ... partly destroyed the Athletic Association building in this city. ... and it is evident that if this heat had continued but a little longer the whole structure would have fallen."

3) "And notably at the burning of the Tribune building in Minneapolis, about three years ago, which resulted in its entire destruction."

"There may be steel buildings in which the fireproofing has been so well done that they will pass through an ordinary fire without such failure. But if the steel becomes even moderately heated its stiffness will be measurably diminished, and the strength of the upright members so reduced as to cause them to bend and yield. This is more likely to occur, as the horizontal beams and girders will at the same time expand (unequally from the different degrees of temperature) and throw the posts out of vertical and into buckling positions. This is the third difficulty. ... The third difficulty, resulting from the expansion and contraction of the metals employed in the construction of tall buildings, may be obviated by protecting these metals absolutely from any considerable change in temperature..."
Chief Bonner, of the fire department of New York, says in reference to the destruction of the Manhattan Bank building:
....We shall have in this city, unless the citizens of New York are warned in time, a calamity by fire which will rend their hearts. ... The heat thrown from a large burning building of any height is immense. ... I am prepared to declare, from my experience, that a building of brick and yellow pine in case of fire is easier to manage, and the contents have more chance of being saved than the modern fire-proof building. In the former structure the fire burns more slowly and has no chance to concentrate its heat as in the iron and steel structure.

Chief Swenie, of the Chicago fire department, is quoted in the essay as follows:

"I think very much as Bonner does," said Fire Marshal Swenie to-day, when his attention was directed to a statement of the chief of the New York fire department to the effect that the modern skyscraper is a veritable firetrap. .... Fire in a room so filled with goods might in very short time gain such headway as to imperil seriously the entire structure by the expansion, warping or twisting of the iron or steel framework.

No ... building of any kind in which inflammable goods are stored should ever exceed 125 feet in height, and might with advantage be much less. This is not because we cannot throw water high enough. But suppose such goods are stored in a twelve-story building; a fire breaks out, say on the sixth floor, and gets to burning furiously. The heat ascends and causes the pillars and beams to expand. The expansion first raises all that part of the building above where it takes place. At the same time the whole weight above continues on the expanded metal. before you know where you are something is going to give, and what will be the results? They will be too fearful to contemplate.

... It does not take a great amount of heat to cause steel and iron to expand, and when beams and columns begin moving something has got to break. Suppose a fire breaks out in one of these buildings. We work at it from below, and the steel beams expand, the ceiling breaks and the floor above comes down. ...

The statements of Professor Jones and others that "almost no fire, even one ignited by jet fuel, can cause structural steel to fail" are insane distortions of reality and misrepresentations of practical experience of fire-fighers and engineers (See  http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/spain_fire_2005.html A fire in a Madrid steel-frame building collapsed 10-story sections of the building -even without a plane crash weakening those sections-, and almost brought down the rest of it, which had to be torn down. "At its peak, temperatures reached 800 degrees Celsius (1,472 F)," )

Professor Jones' irresponsible claims disparaging the capacity of fire to damage and collapse iron/steel structures are readily proved false by photographs of iron beams distorted and large sections of buildings collapsed by fire, including those photos of the distorted iron beams in the highway bridge that I include (below).

As for Jones' claims that a molten metal pooled and pouring out of the floors near where the planes impacted was necessarily iron, not aluminum: How does Jones "get rid of" the Molten Aluminum that would result from contact of the airplane parts with the alleged molten iron? Molten iron in contact with solid aluminum will produce molten aluminum and solid iron, or motel aluminum and molten iron (i.e., always molten aluminum). The molten metal emerges (only) at the same corner and at the same floors of the WTC where the aluminum body of the aircraft "gently landed." What a coincidence. Also, it almost certain that much of the aluminum of the aircraft had melted in the heat of the fire(s), so if "iron" can "pool" there and pour out as Jones claims, why wouldn't some of the tons of molten aluminum (which just happened to land there) also pour out? What happened to the molten aluminum according to Jones? Jones only asserts that melted aircraft aluminum "would flow away from the heat source ... Thus, the observed molten metal flowing from WTC 2 on 9/11 cannot be aluminum."

Why would melted aluminum "flow away from the heat source" if not by action of gravity and the shape of the surface (floors) it was pooled on? Molten Iron would follow the same path as molten aluminum. And, why does Jones suppose that "out a window" is not "away from the heat source"? Why would (pooled?) molten iron have a preference over pooled molten aluminum to flow "away" out of a window from the same location?

More fundamentally, what good is molten iron falling out of a window to someone who wants to use it to HEAT a VERTICAL IRON BEAM to the point of failure???? In order to USE theremite to heat something, you have to let the molten iron transfer its heat to that thing, which means that the molten iron would cool and solidify if were actually USED to heat something. And, since Jones claims that the thermite was placed on the internal columns of the building (since they failed first), how and why would molten iron show up at the outside perimeter (near a corner) to fall out of a window? Thermite charges are always used ABOVE (or inside) the subject to be heated, because any other position would result in the hot molten iron formed by thermite flowing down away from the subject to be heated and being useless waste. Jones offers no explanation for why anyone would go to the trouble of using "thermite" to produce many gallons of WASTE molten iron that was not kept in intimate contact with vertical Beams and therefore served no purpose other than to fall out of a window and attract attention to itself. So, shall we call Jones' Theory: The Theory of the Incompetent Thermite Bombers Who Just Needed to Call Attention to their Handywork by Pouring Molten Iron out of a Window. Or, maybe the Airplanes were really Hijacked by well-intentioned American Patriots who knew that the only way to expose the secret plot to destroy the WTC with Thermite was to fly a plane into the buildings at exactly where the Thermite was installed to hopefully cause some of its residue to fall out a window where the World could see it and certainly know that it was "molten iron" produced by thermite. Bless their souls.

Jones writes:
"Dramatic footage reveals yellow-to-white hot molten metal dripping from the South WTC Tower just minutes before its collapse:  link to video.google.com. Photographs capture the same significant event, clearly showing liquid metal dropping from the South Tower, still hot as it nears the ground below:"
 link to www.physics.byu.edu


"Who can deny that liquid, molten metal existed at the WTC disaster? The yellow color implies a molten-metal temperature of approximately 1000 oC."

Jones admits that: "We note that aluminum has many free electrons, so it reflects ambient light very well -- and it appears 'silvery'. Aluminum ... aluminum would appear silvery due to high reflectivity combined with low emissivity..."

Look at the shiny blocky highly reflective (silvery) solid masses that were produced from the falling (cooling) molten metal, seen in the bottom of the photo above right. Is it solid Iron, or solid Aluminum?

I believe that it may be possible to "prove" that the molten metal falling out of the WTC was aluminum based on its behavior (e.g., breaking up in the air, failure to "spark" white all around, and turning into a blocky silvery solid while falling). Aluminum is much less massive (dense) than iron, so molten aluminum will be more affected by air resistance than molten iron would be. See the horizontal shift of the falling molten metal in both of the photos above. (E.g., Aluminum would be broken up out of a poured stream (or blown to one side) sooner than heavier molten iron) Also, at any given temperature, molten iron would probably be differently viscuous or would have different surface tension than molten aluminum. Thus, it would visibly behave differently upon being poured of a window. The photos show molten metal pouring out of the WTC that appears to be somewhat widely dispersed (and shifted horizontally) by wind and air resistance, suggesting that it is lighter than iron. [It just does not quite "look" like a stream of heavy liquid iron.] Experimentation or simulation could prove or disprove this hypothesis.

Keep in mind also that Jones is oblivious that hot (molten) Iron Burns spontaneously in air.

Another problem with Jone's theory that this falling molten metal is "iron" (and not aluminum) is that IF it were IRON, at the temperature of melted iron, some of it would probably have constantly been seen exploding/flashing/burning into bright white Light upon being released as small particles in the air. "The smith's fire contains too much oxygen to allow iron to melt; as it approaches its melting point the iron burns instead."  http://www.osv.org/cgi-bin/CreatePDF.php?/tour/index.php?L=12&PDF=Y

Read Faraday's demonstration of moderately heated iron particles burning in air, producing "scintillations".
"I have here a circular flame of spirit of wine, and with it I am about to show you the way in which iron burns, because it will serve very well as a comparison between the effect produced by air and oxygen. If I take this ring flame, I can shake, by means of a sieve, the fine particles of iron filings through it, and you will see the way in which they burn. [The lecturer here shook through the flame some iron filings, which took fire and fell through with beautiful scintillations.]"  http://www.fordham.edu/HALSALL/MOD/1859Faraday-forces.html
Absent constant bright White "flashes" of burning iron droplets/particles, it more probably was aluminum at or near its melting temperature. I have "poured" molten aluminum that I got by melting scrap in a wood-fire, short distances, and that did not readily produce flashes of light (maybe because it cools down faster in cold air than it can oxidize), although it theoretically can. (molten aluminum is fairly tame) I have not "poured" molten iron, but see this photo showing the smaller iron droplets burning bright WHITE in air during even a very short pouring operation at a foundry:
 http://www.bbc.co.uk/cumbria/features/askaway/industrial/images/iron270.jpg

And see here, the veritable fireworks of hot iron particles diverging and exploding into white light/flashes during a pour:

 http://www.ship-technology.com/contractor_images/daros/Castingclose-2.jpg
"In the foundry. The cast iron is being poured into the sand mould."

 http://www.ship-technology.com/contractors/propulsion/daros/daros4.html

And, see all the bright white sparks flying in this series of photographs of an iron pour:
 http://www.taylor.org/~argus/all/burn/00/second_roll/iron_pour/

Dante observed and wrote about this commonplace property of poured molten Iron, in his The Divine Comedy:
"I could not endure it long, but enough to see him sparkle all round, like iron poured, molten, from the furnace. And suddenly, it seemed that day was added to day, as though He who has the power, had equipped Heaven with a second sun."  http://www.tonykline.co.uk/PITBR/Italian/DantPar1to7.htm
This video  link to video.google.com. noted by Jones does show a few reluctant "sparkles", (which of course could also be consistent with aluminum particle flashes), but does not quite show the constant "sparkle all around" that would be expected (by Dante) from poured molten iron at the temperature of 1000C claimed by Jones.
Also, more definitely, the falling molten material clearly turns into a silver colored (highly reflective) (flat, blocky) solid material after it cools (as soon as it stops glowing) after falling down a number of stories (strongly suggesting aluminum metal, not iron). Solid iron is generally not that highly reflective without polishing, but aluminum is. [Molten iron would probably not loose its glow and convert into a solid so quickly, since it does not conduct heat as well as aluminum and because it would be formed much hotter than molten aluminum.
Also, iron would be expected to coalesce into a rounder clump while falling before solidifying. [Shot towers are used to form iron ball-bearings, and lead musket balls, out of poured molten metal. But, there is no indication that aluminum can be formed into round balls by this method, perhaps because it cools down to quickly] If the "shot tower" behavior of iron (forming sperical balls of molten iron before solidifying) holds with larger amounts of poured iron, then the molten metal pouring out of the WTC, IF IT WERE IRON WOULD HAVE FORMED CANON-BALL SHAPED gobs of molten metal before it cooled down and solidified.
The falling metal pieces formed by that pour out the window of the WTC tower are clearly NOT ROUND and are very elongated, or flat, indicating a very rapid cooling of the falling poured (aluminum) metal. [These distinctions can be readily proved or disproved by experimentation or calculation]. Jones does not comment upon the silvery flat, blocky, (not round) metal pieces visible falling in the photo frames in his own thesis.

The NISC report seems to agree:
"The composition of the flowing material can only be the subject of speculation, but its behavior suggests it could have been molten aluminum." (p. 375)
There is of course the possiblity that the falling molten metal was some other material from the airplane or offices other than aluminium or iron. But, I believe that there is enough information from the video to scientifically determine its approximate denisty and also its Specific Heat, its melting/solidifying temperature, and its thermal conductivity. The latter determinations could be based on standard formulas used to determine cooling rates due to "forced convection."
"Bah. This guy has been debunked all over the web. Professor Stephen Jones is wrong."

 link to www.answers.com

"A few department chairmen at Jones' university have issued critical statements, though none of these has yet addressed any of the points which Jones made in his paper and at his presentation at BYU. Chairman of the BYU department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Dr. Miller, is on record stating in an e-mail, "I think without exception, the structural engineering professors in our department are not in agreement with the claims made by Jones in his paper, and they don't think there is accuracy and validity to these claims."

About Professor Jones, assocated with the so-called "9-11 Scholars" website, I previously wrote (to him) substantially the following assessment of his wacky half-baked theories about thermite and molten iron:

Speaking as an engineer of high accademic achievment, I am shocked that Brigham Young University has employed an ignorant moron of such epic and treasonous proportions. I will be further shocked if he is not removed promptly from his position of trust and confidence. It has been my understanding that the Latter Day folks are a close knit group who watch out that their members far and wide do not embarrass the community. In other words, it is my hope that the Latter Days will take the initiative to contact the leadership at BYU so that justice to the truth may be served.

Excerpt of published assertions by BYU professor Jones:
"Jones argues that the WTC buildings did not collapse due to impact or fires caused by the jets hitting the towers but collapsed as a result of pre-positioned "cutter charges." Proof, he says, includes:

. Molten metal was found in the subbasements of WTC sites weeks after 9/11; the melting point of structural steel is 2,750 degrees Fahrenheit and the temperature of jet fuel does not exceed 1,800 degrees. Molten metal was also found in the building known as WTC7, although no plane had struck it. Jones's paper also includes a photo of a slag of the metal being extracted from ground zero. The slag, Jones argues, could not be aluminum from the planes because in photographs the metal was salmon-to-yellow-hot temperature (approximately 1,550 to 1,900 degrees F) "well above the melting temperatures of lead and aluminum," which would be a liquid at that temperature.

.... No steel-frame, high-rise buildings have ever before or since been brought down due to fires. Temperatures due to fire don't get hot enough for buildings to collapse, he says."
Having seen first hand the rubble of the WTC on the night of September 11, 2001, I can tell you there was fire and fires everywhere around the scene, and fumes rose steadily from the "piles" after the collapse, and fumes continued to rise from the piles when I went back to Ground Zero over a week later. As I described it " I saw a hellish vapor slowly rising everywhere from the rubble like something out of Dante [Inferno]." See: While Leaving Ground Zero - September 11, 2002  http://www.federalobserver.com/archive.php?aid=4108 (Note, I am not the same "Mark Ferran" as the NYC fireman by that name, and we have never met) When I first heard about the fires in the WTC buildings that morning, I said to myself, in my office, that the metal must be getting very hot. When I later saw the images of smoke and fire billowing out of those buildings, I knew they would not stand. After they fell, the huge piles of iron beams and combustible materials formed two enormous furnaces, comprising burning office materials, burning metal, and burning human flesh (not to mention many tons of combustible aircraft aluminum and iron, i.e., thermite) which over the course of several weeks and months. It was widely reported that the temperature (e.g., measured by infra red imaging from above) in the interior of the piles INCREASED in the weeks after the collapse of the towers, due quite obviously to the combustion of combustible matter in these large furnaces.
The moron employed at BYU seems to have no conception of the nature of a furnace, no concept of the fact that metals burn, and seems to be unable to comprehend that there were much combustible materials in the piles from the collapsed buildings OTHER THAN what the airplanes brought in.
"[W]hile the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper [and humans, and aluminum of the planes]. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F [even before the buildings collapsed]." The jet fuel was the ignition source," Williams tells PM. "It burned for maybe 10 minutes, and [the towers] were still standing in 10 minutes. It was the rest of the stuff burning afterward that was responsible for the heat transfer that eventually brought them down."  http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=4&c=y
Even ordinary dry WOOD (charcoal) in a large enough furnace, is capable of melting iron:
www.uky.edu/.../BigSinking/ Furnace/furnace.htm

While a mixture of aluminum and (oxygen and iron) (e.g., rust) called "Thermite" is capable of producing molten iron, evidently, a combination of metalic Iron and Oxygen (or Carbon Monoxide) is itself capable of melting iron in a large pile furnace. Large piles of pure iron dust are capable of "burning" themselves into a molten mass solely due to the heat of combustion of the iron itself. Iron itself is a combustible material (and is commonly used in powder form to warm hands and feet in little packs sold at Wal-Mart etc., and in MREs).

It is certainly known to be possible for ordinary hydrocarbon fuels (like oil, gasoline or jetfuel) alone to destroy heavy iron and iron-concrete structures, as in the case of the Bridgeport gas tanker fire which destroyed a highway overpass formed of large iron I-beams and concrete.  link to www.urbanplanet.org

I believe that these photos (below, and seven images at EHOWA) fairly illustrate the type of expansion, distortion and yielding that most likely happened to destroy some of the iron columns supporting the enormous weight of the World Trade Centers' top 30+/- floors.




 http://images.ehowa.com/alabamatruck/alabamatruck1.jpg

The iron columns of the WTC towers did not "melt" in the scientific sense of the word, but they certainly EXPANDED (due to heat), and yielded (due to the enormous pressure caused by their own thermal expansion). Just turn these above pictures from horizontal to vertical, and think what would happen if that beam were instead a column holding up a heavy building. (Look at the distorted iron, heated by ordinary hydrocarbon fuel burning, and keep in mind what Professor Jones said: "almost no fire, even one ignited by jet fuel, can cause structural steel to fail." ) Also note how the metal of the fuel tank itself so completely disintegrated. (see the other photos at at EHOWA ). It's tank may have been made of flammable aluminum metal, like the skin and structure of a jetliner, or of stainless steel. I believe that the fires confined inside the world trade center towers could have been much hotter than this fairly "open air" (unconfined) gasoline fire, due to the greater containment of the heat-of-combustion by the ceilings, floors and debris in the burning WTC towers. See  http://www.zmag.org/interactive/content/display_item.cfm?itemID=3944

The False Leaders of the so-called "9-11 Truth" movement typically do not understand or don't acknowledge the power of ordinary FIRE nor the known weaknesses and behaviors of iron exposed to fire, and they peddle their false explanations of occurrences to people even more ignorant than them. They are the blind leading the blind. Most of the uneducated people (e.g., WebFairy, Lisa Guliani, Victor Thorne etc.) selling videos books, etc., claiming that "fire could not have destroyed the WTC towers" are just pathological liars who will tell any lie to take a buck from the gullible.

Furthermore, there is no such thing as a "maximum temperature" for the combustion of any dry fuel. If you raise the temperature of a dry fuel, like paper, or wood paneling, or charred flesh, and then expose it to oxygen, its temperature will INCREASE, not remain the same. Duh!!! The bigger the furnace, the higher the temperature of the unburned fuel gets before it combines with oxygen, and thus still higher will its temperature be when it finally combusts. "Temperature" inside of a furnace system is solely a function of how much heat enters the system versus how much leaves the system, over time, and not a function of the type of fuel. Insulation, or a large enough mass, slows the exit of heat from the system. (Note: melting things removes energy from a system) A large pile of debris forms an insulating furnace retaining much of the heat of combustion, raising the internal temperature, evidently high enough to melt iron. That is how the ancients used piles to make and refine and melt iron from ore.

It is shocking that a "professor" would assume that molten iron found weeks or months later in the bowels of a huge pile of continuously burning debris (containing tons of combustible iron and other materials) would have to have been generated at the very begining of the fire, or even before the pile was formed. It is even more nonsensical for him to presume that a molten metal supposedly formed before the buildings collapsed would remain molten for months without some subsequent source of heat being applied to it. And, it is totally absurd for him to presume that a molten (liquid) metal supposedly formed in the top floors before the buildings collapsed (his "thermite" theory) would remain both molten and intact after it fell 70+ stories in a chaotic collapse while even more solid objects (bones, concrete, flesh) were obliterated on the way down. The "professor" also seems to be oblivious that (aircraft) aluminum is itself a high-energy fuel, that would not be found in bright molten form weeks later (because it burns continuously when molten and exposed to air). (They use Aluminum metal as fuel to propel the Space Shuttle into Orbit around the Earth).

Also apparent, is that the so-called "professor" is incompetent or lazy in the use of search engines, such as Google. On this very subject, I wrote this back in 2001:
"Furthermore, if it is true that "pools of molten steel" were found in the (basement of) remains of the WTC twin towers, this molten material probably began to form and accumulate days AFTER THE COLLAPSE of the tower, when the huge mass of material trapped the heat of slowed combustion that continued within the pile. I saw the fumes of combustion folks, the piles were slowly burning after the buildings collapsed. Everyone with the slightest recollection of the events knows this. Even a huge pile of iron filings will form a red-hot fused mass of metal because the heat produced internally by rusting will build up in the pile. Any combustible material in the "piles" of the WTC that was exposed to heat and to any amount of infiltrating air (oxygen) would contribute to hot-spots. All of the conjectures that say the steel formed before the buildings collapsed are ignorant and preposterous. The Steel in the rubble of the WTC melted, if at all, because of the enormous size of the piles and presence of much combustible materials in them, not merely because of the burning of jet fuel. Those who say otherwise are either lying, or are overlooking something fundamental. While jet fuel flame burning in OPEN AIR will may not maintain the temperature you need to melt steel, if you inject any fuel mixed with air into a huge porous mass that cannot rapidly release the built-up heat of combustion, you will produce a furnace capable of melting steel or practically any other metal. An open flame rapidly dissipates the heat of combustion, but a furnace conserves and accumulates the heat of combustion. Any fuel will produce this effect in the appropriate furnace. Its like the difference between the heat of an open wood-flame of a single stick burning in open air, compared to the (steel-melting) white-hot heat produced in the bottom of a large pile of wood and burning wood-coals. This is also the principle by which large piles of organic materials (e.g., saw-dust, leaves, hay) will spontaneously begin to burn- the heat of decay builds up inside them. "No matter which mechanism is involved, the oxidation reaction will generate heat. If there is some form of insulation, which is usually provided by the mass of the material itself, the heat cannot be dissipated. Because the heat is not dissipated, the temperature of the material increases. The increase in temperature will in turn increase the rate at which the oxidation reaction occurs, which in turn will increase the amount of heat generated, and so on. This increase after increase continues until either the heat is dissipated some way [e.g. by melting steel], or the material reaches its ignition temperature and starts to burn. (the same basic process occurs in stored green bio-mass materials such as hay, saw dust, corn cobs, etc. but the heat is generated by the life process of micro-organisms)."  http://bifrost.unl.edu/ehs/ChemicalInfo/flamsol.html "

"This scientific principle of a furnace, understood by primitive humans since the bronze age, could potentially destroy the credibility of anyone who forwards and endorses the erroneous theories (e.g., "nuclear" bombs). You are literally playing with fire by promoting such bogus theories. People, for the sake of our country, and out of respect for those who died at the WTC, please do not promote or forward those Urban Legends.

"I am sorry if my words are harsh, but I do not have much patience for people who are either irresponsible for forgetting what they themselves saw, who pretend to understand physical principles that they have not studied or otherwise have no competence in, or who are simply liars who are out to make a reputation by misrepresenting to others what happened on September 11, 2001. Everyone with common sense knows that two commercial air planes hit and burned inside the towers and caused the towers to break and to fall. Mark R. Ferran BSEE scl JD mcl  http://billstclair.com/ferran/index.html

 http://www.zmag.org/interactive/content/display_item.cfm?itemID=3944

I am aware that there are millions of science-ignorant people and some total morons walking around America babbling about the World Trade Center (and I have tried in vein to address this  http://www.zmag.org/interactive/content/display_item.cfm?itemID=3944 ) , but when a "professor" who knows that he has no formal education nor any practical education in the science of chemistry, combustion, nor of metallurgy, nor of the Strength of materials decides to spew his ignorant reckless notions as scientific "FACTS" to the gullible volatile public at a time of crisis, I feel that his reckless conduct warrants extreme and swift punishment. Professor Jones has also misrepresented the significance of the "Law of Entropy" to bolster his false claims. Given the tendancy of this professor's misrepresentations to give aide, comfort, and encouragement to those who have overtly declared Jihad against our pathetic country, (and who must be able to recruit more jihadists just by laughing at our domestic morons) I would be satisfied to see this "professor" tried, convicted, and executed for Treason. He breached a Trust in time of WAR. Jones' reckless remarks will probably kill as many Americans as President Bush's misuse of the word "Crusade" has and will.

I have never heard of a single NYC fireman doubting that a fire of the proportion of those in the towers could destroy such a building that was not designed to withstand such an enormous fire. See, e.g.,  http://www.firehouse.com/terrorist/911/magazine/gz/vallebunoa.html ("We thought 7 World Trade Center was going to fall").

I think it is preposterous for anyone to assume that a tall building or any conventional material or mode of construction can not fall down if you fly a large fuel-laden airplane into it at more than 500 miles per hour.

In summary, we have a moron posing as President, and now we have morons posing as "Professors" too. No wonder that the people of the world increasingly find it necessary to destroy US for their own preservation.

Mark Ferran BSEE scl JD mcl
www.billstclair.com/ferran

P.S.
Snopes may be a good starting point for information to counter some of the Anti-American 9-11 propaganda (e.g., from the French):

 http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm






--------------------------------------------------------------------------------






--------------------------------------------------------------------------------






--------------------------------------------------------------------------------






--------------------------------------------------------------------------------






--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://images.ehowa.com/alabamatruck/alabamatruck1.jpg
http://images.ehowa.com/alabamatruck/alabamatruck1.jpg

mark ferran is on a personal mission to "punish" us and have us "executed" 21.Jun.2006 09:16

in case anybody missed it -- what's his fucking problem?

> I am aware that there are millions of science-ignorant people and some total morons walking around America
> babbling about the World Trade Center (and I have tried in vein to address this link to www.zmag.org ) , but
> when a "professor" who knows that he has no formal education nor any practical education in the science of
> chemistry, combustion, nor of metallurgy, nor of the Strength of materials decides to spew his ignorant reckless
> notions as scientific "FACTS" to the gullible volatile public at a time of crisis, I feel that his reckless
> conduct warrants extreme and swift punishment. Professor Jones has also misrepresented the significance of the
> "Law of Entropy" to bolster his false claims. Given the tendancy of this professor's misrepresentations to give
> aide, comfort, and encouragement to those who have overtly declared Jihad against our pathetic country, (and who
> must be able to recruit more jihadists just by laughing at our domestic morons) I would be satisfied to see this
> "professor" tried, convicted, and executed for Treason. He breached a Trust in time of WAR. Jones' reckless
> remarks will probably kill as many Americans as President Bush's misuse of the word "Crusade" has and will.

this is from the scholars for 911 truth site 21.Jun.2006 10:02

is this ferran? or some other violent stalker?

From a mechanical engineer with 'government contacts', sent to Prof Jones and BYU administrators:

[Nov. 2005, shortly after Prof. Jones' article first appeared on the web] "The publication of this [Jones] article can be stopped on the basis of endangerment, and I have the contacts to make this happen if necessary, but I prefer to give you the opportunity to consider the consequences - which you have not addressed. You need to give this very serious consideration. [Endangerment to whom? The current administration?] This is an issue that is more important than any individual career, [I think he means Dr. Jones' career] or whether or not you believe that you are correct. ... The molten metal may be the best evidence that local conditions in the fire where [sic] hotter than the post-test evaluation of specific points... your theories are likely to be subject to intense scrutiny and criticism. As painful as it may seem now, perhaps it may be less painful than could occur after publication."

[Nov. 2005, after responses by Prof. Jones]: "The North Tower "squibs" [Jones discusses in his paper] are more interesting and deserve more attention because they are quite similar to the material ejected from the Southwark Towers shown at Implosionworld.com/cinema.htm."

[Dec. 2005, following answers and detailed responses by Prof. Jones]: "I... have learned to appreciate the value of silence, even in the case of superior data and information... . [He seems to be telling Dr. Jones to shut up!] There are, perhaps, several reasons why the administration [at BYU] would pay more particular attention to me than to you in this matter. First, you made many assertions without the least amount of analysis to support your assertions... [Prof. Jones challenged this comment!]

"I regret that you are still trying to publish your paper. The fact that a paper passes peer review and is accepted for publication should not be viewed as validation of ideas unless the peer reviewers are really qualified to perform the peer review.

"In contrast to studying things that could cause harm, the whole focus could be changed to something that is assured to prevent harm... Maybe a low velocity rocket fired from a helicopter could disperse fire retardants on a floor that can't be reached otherwise. Even if explosives are planted, this makes it much more difficult to cause the collapse of the building. If this interests you, I would be happy to contact Tom Hunter and the Head of Homeland Security to see if funding for BYU could be found to research options for this purpose.

Again, I am sorry for the difficulty of this interaction."

[end of Dec., 2005]: "Steven: I have recently given some thought to how I can help you preserve your good name at BYU. My intent is to show that I have as much concern for your well being as I have in preserving the safety and security of others.

"It is better to demonstrate that structural collapse can be prevented than to show how or why structures may be collapsed. Toward this goal, I have recently had some ideas that may be inexpensive, passive, light weight and effective against attack by both fire and explosives. [A rather detailed outline for a suggested grant proposal follows, snip... ]

"The concept is patentable, could be easily applied during construction (beneath facia), could be required by building codes, and has a potentially large market. Naturally, research is required to define the required thicknesses, attachment in a way that preserves existing fire protection, and attachment in a way that is difficult to remove without obvious alterations. It could even be added as a decorative feature in existing buildings.

"Perhaps you may come up be different or better ideas, but it suggests a course of action that protects others, rather than put them at risk. It could bring substantial resources to BYU, and could involve a cooperative effort between the structural design group and physics department. This would give you the opportunity to address your explosive ideas without having to capitulate, while improving the resistance of the structure to collapse by fire. It also generates a project that could bring the various departments together in a cooperative effort. Naturally, you are most likely to achieve the greatest success in such an effort if you change course, rather than continue to pursue your present effort... "[Is this some sort of bribe? The reader can judge for her/himself the statements and tactics used by this man with "contacts." Note that his comments and efforts to thwart publication of the Jones paper did not succeed, but may have influenced the statement by the BYU Fulton College of Engineering which follows.]


natural reaction? 21.Jun.2006 10:43

none

Is it possible to get a thermate/thermite-like reaction if the iron of the building and the aluminum of the aircraft, or where ever else the metals may originate, were suddenly brought together and ignited by jet fuel? Or must it be a precise mixture of fine grains or something?

Mark was at Ground Zero! 21.Jun.2006 10:54

special privileges

from Mark's own website:
-----------------------------------------------------
I was upset when I returned, to see so few men working the "bucket brigades". The sight of a few hundred men (police, firemen, contractors, Reserves) passing buckets to/from a few dozen men actually digging, while THOUSANDS of able bodied men stood behind rigid police lines wishing they could help in the rescue effort was shocking and disturbing to me.
[...]
Many weeks after the collapse of the Twin Towers, an attempt was made by many NYC firemen to enter Ground Zero to "RECOVER" the "bodies" of their fallen brothers, resulting in their arrest.
 http://www.billstclair.com/ferran/groundzero.html
------------------------------------------------------

Best not to let too many people see that molten pile of WTC, I suppose.

another Interview with more info, peer groups widely support his contentions 21.Jun.2006 12:01

more

911 Demo: BYU's Prof Jones Has Wide Academic Support
BYU Professor Has Plenty of Company in the Academic Community,
Including 60 Faculty Members from Two Utah Universities
Who Concur a Controlled Demolition Most Likely Brought
Down the WTC and Further Investigation Is Needed

By Greg Szymanski
11-15-2005

Professor Steven E. Jones is another in the long line of conservatives in the political and academic world joining the 9/11 truth movement and asking to open up further investigations on the true cause of 9/11.

The BYU physics professor who believes the WTC collapsed from a controlled demolition isn't alone in the academic community, as a group of more than 60 colleagues from two universities also agreed with Professor Steven E. Jones' conclusions.

Jones told the Arctic Beacon Saturday in a telephone conversation from Provo, Utah, he first presented his explosive conclusions at Brigham Young University (BYU) on September 22, to 60 people from the BYU and Utah Valley State College faculties, including professors of Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Geology, Mathematics and Psychology.

After presently scientific arguments in favor of the controlled demolition theory, Jones said everyone in attendance from all backgrounds, conservative and liberal, were in total agreement further investigation was needed.

"I was quite surprised how my conclusions were received," said Jones, adding he plans to give two continue telling the public how he came to his startling conclusions essentially ripping apart the official government story that jet fuel brought down the towers, including Building 7.

"In fact, after I researched how Building 7 fell, I am certain there existed pre-positioned explosives to bring down the three buildings."

Jones added that the contingent of faculty members at the September seminar were all in agreement that the government needed to "come clean" and release more that 6,900 photographs and close to 7,000 segments of video footage, now being held from independent investigation by the FBI and other agencies.

Since day one, the Bush administration has safely guarded much of the 9/11evidence, including the WTC steel hauled away by FEMA and eye-witness testimony of basement explosions censored by the 9/11 Commission and the state sponsored press, as well as discrediting many other scientists or academics like Jones who have disagreed with the official story.
"We are calling for the release of all the data, including the videos and photos, in order that a cross-disciplinary, preferably international team of scientists and engineers can reach an independent conclusion," said Jones, adding all 60 professors in attendance agreed with this course of action.

"Since I decided to come forward with my findings, I have found the people in the 9/11 community very supportive and helpful. I hope my contribution will one day help get at the truth of what really happened and specifically how the towers collapsed."

Jones' theory on the way the towers collapsed was presented in a 9,000 word formal paper already approved for publication in an upcoming academic journal. The following is a partial explanation of how and why he came to his conclusions that the WTC most likely collapsed due to pre-positioned explosives. He writes:

"In writing this paper, I call for a serious investigation of the hypothesis that WTC 7 and the Twin Towers were brought down, not just by damage and fires, but through the use of pre-positioned explosives.

"I consider the official FEMA, NIST, and 9-11 Commission reports that fires plus damage alone caused complete collapses of all three buildings. And I present evidence for the explosive-demolition hypothesis, which is suggested by the available data, testable and falsifiable, and yet has not been analyzed in any of the reports funded by the US government.

And the reasoning behind his conclusions can be summed up as follows:

* The three buildings collapsed nearly symmetrically, falling down into their footprints, a phenomenon associated with "controlled demolition" - and even then it's very difficult, he says. "Why would terrorists undertake straight-down collapses of WTC-7 and the Towers when 'toppling over' falls would require much less work and would do much more damage in downtown Manhattan?" Jones asks. "And where would they obtain the necessary skills and access to the buildings for a symmetrical implosion anyway? The 'symmetry data' emphasized here, along with other data, provide strong evidence for an 'inside' job."

* No steel-frame building, before or after the WTC buildings, has ever collapsed due to fire. But explosives can effectively sever steel columns, he says.

* WTC 7, which was not hit by hijacked planes, collapsed in 6.6 seconds, just .6 of a second longer than it would take an object dropped from the roof to hit the ground. "Where is the delay that must be expected due to conservation of momentum, one of the foundational laws of physics?" he asks. "That is, as upper-falling floors strike lower floors - and intact steel support columns - the fall must be significantly impeded by the impacted mass. . . . How do the upper floors fall so quickly, then, and still conserve momentum in the collapsing buildings?" The paradox, he says, "is easily resolved by the explosive demolition hypothesis, whereby explosives quickly removed lower-floor material, including steel support columns, and allow near free-fall-speed collapses." These observations were not analyzed by FEMA, NIST nor the 9/11 Commission, he says.

* With non-explosive-caused collapse there would typically be a piling up of shattering concrete. But most of the material in the towers was converted to flour-like powder while the buildings were falling, he says. "How can we understand this strange behavior, without explosives? Remarkable, amazing - and demanding scrutiny since the U.S. government-funded reports failed to analyze this phenomenon."

* Horizontal puffs of smoke, known as squibs, were observed proceeding up the side the building, a phenomenon common when pre-positioned explosives are used to demolish buildings, he says.

* Steel supports were "partly evaporated," but it would require temperatures near 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit to evaporate steel - and neither office materials nor diesel fuel can generate temperatures that hot. Fires caused by jet fuel from the hijacked planes lasted at most a few minutes, and office material fires would burn out within about 20 minutes in any given location, he says.

* Molten metal found in the debris of the World Trade Center may have been the result of a high-temperature reaction of a commonly used explosive such as thermite, he says. Buildings not felled by explosives "have insufficient directed energy to result in melting of large quantities of metal," Jones says.

* Multiple loud explosions in rapid sequence were reported by numerous observers in and near the towers, and these explosions occurred far below the region where the planes struck, he says.

For Jones' full report go to www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html .


Greg Szymanski is an independent investigative journalist.

9/11 21.Jun.2006 13:07

David Howard fiat@sofnet.com

Google Search: Morgan Reynolds on the 911 Hoax

417-624-5326
2331 South Duquesne-Joplin, Missouri 64804

Reality 21.Jun.2006 13:29

Michigan Mike

Just one little comment to those who did us in. "The only thing HOTTER than Thermite is the TRUTH!"

HOW LONG / 24 OR LESS. 21.Jun.2006 17:42

Lou

A well trained team of military type demolition experts could no doubt RIG and WIRE two buildings such as the WTC for TAKEDOWN within 24 hrs or less, remember, these guys would have been on a mission, not on the clock for a paycheck, so it would have been an in and place the charges and get the hell out of dodge timetable, the homework would have been done long before the mission was good to go.

From 9/11 on, I watched the sickening sight of the WTC towers on TV go down over and over and I said then there was no way two planes alone could have taken them down, I still hold that to be true.

Having been in the United States Navy for a number of years I recognize military precision when I see it and on 9/11 that precision was very evident in the destruction of the WTC towers.

I never imagined that I would or could conceive that my country, my government would be involved in an attack of such magnitude and high treason on it's own citizens but the evidence to such has passed circumstantial long ago, Two planes and a handful of so called terrorist are not responsible for the events of 9/11, the real terrorist are alive and well and residing within the beltway of Washington DC. and they are the terrorist that we should be hunting down and bringing to justice.

Straight Down 21.Jun.2006 18:51

Machia v johnv@dodgeit.com

Does anyone in the World have eye's, watch them on video, see how they fall, they fall in a very planned way, that's the planners biggest mistake, TO PERFECT!

A soulution to end all this internet specultation on 9/11 Truth 22.Jun.2006 10:58

truthhunter@shaw.ca truthhunter@shaw.ca

On 10/11/01, in a effort to resolve/understand/accept what had just been witnessed from afar, I had in fact imagined just such a scenario as is now being attested to here about the World Trade Center atrocity. This contemplative process is how I attempt to balance my perception of reality and help my conscience survive; a process of contemplation/problem resolution that is quite common during the survival processes of all sentient beings.
This last week I seem to be right back at square one with this "day of infamy". After reading many of these cyber reports of new "evidence" and speculations as to what is believed to have really happened during 9/11, I must now express the results of the last weeks survival scenario contemplations in a effort to conclude matters.
Given that the fallout, weather true or false, from all this is liable to be the "last straw" to the current "way of things believed and being"; more so if one is assuming that much of this cyber chatter is FACTUAL TRUTH about the type of megalomaniac beings in control of society : I can only deduce the following way out for those accused as very likely in there attempts to continue their own social pathetic survival. The most likely scenario to rapidly unfold (without due intervention from those of conscience, ability & authority (each and every citizen)- Given the timing of the North Korean "evil doers" efforts to join M.A.D. survivability doctrines and the unfortunate time that has them on the eve of test launching their first true ICBM and accused of developing Thermal Nuclear Fission/Fusion devices, the most likely diversion to the 9/11 allegations fallout for the accused to easily attained would be a symotaniously launch a faked North Korean I.C.B.M. for a High Altitude Nuclear Electro Magnetic Pulse over North America . The blame would go to the North Koreans test launch. The result would be a immediate shut down of all this inter net communication for a long time, not to mention implementation of marshal law to deal with the ensuing breakdown of much of our current infrastructures . One does not have to contemplate long & far to imagine how such a drastic maneuver would line up the dominoes for those with the world totalitarian agendas which are undeniably & allegedly unfolding on the world scene.
I truly hope I am wrong in my guess/calculations just this once and hope sharing what I have imagine does more good that harm as far as making informed decision goes. The dangers of belief are such, and acting on them is often at the root of evil actions. Good conscience to all, and may our efforts focus more on mutual existence than this unsustainable competitive reciprocal destruction.

204-944-8925
98 Grove Street, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada R2W-3K7 (untill June 31)

9/11 an inside job 22.Jun.2006 11:38

Gypsy Taub uncensored911@yahoo.com

I am very pleased to see that a scientist finally did a test like this. I have spent a lot of time studying physics, it was once my big passion. I always knew that analysis of the debris would reveal what exactly happened to the WTC. That's why the Bush administration made sure to dispose of the debris in a hurry. I admire professor Jones for his courage. The experiments that he conducted are pretty basic and could have been conducted by anybody. But it is the courage that distinguishes professor Jones from other scientists who did not do what he did. It is the courage to face the truth about 9/11 and the courage to take action despite the danger that Professor put himself in for the sake of humanity. This is what I call "serving" your country. Killing innocent people overseas DOES NOT serve anybody, yet in our hypocritical society it is often referred to as "serving". What professor Jones did is true service to humanity. THANK YOU, PROFESSOR JONES!!!
Gypsy Taub
www.HippieNewsNetwork.com


diag cut is an obvious oxy-acetylene cut by site cleanup 22.Jun.2006 17:04

jhond g jhondg@msn.com

After looking at the enlarged photo, I am clearly convinced that the "thermate" cut in question , reveals, INSTEAD, the very obvious blow/burn marks of a large cutoff oxyacetylene torch. Iv'e have done, and been around this type of work for years. That's what it is! I'm sure you could find hundreds of such cuts by examining Ground Zero cleanu photos. This was an essential part of the cleanup process. Wher is the name of the photographer? What are his credentials? What is the date of the photo?

detailed 9/11 information nexus 22.Jun.2006 17:27

OWN-the-NWO



Business As Usual 22.Jun.2006 18:48

Peter Schnapp pschn@comcast.net

Since the Civil war, when the Republicans came into their own, they have shafted the public. They have our "leaders", ( bought and paid for). That in and of itself is not too surprising. The real shock is the vast number of blue collar Republicans.
Neo-con swine have always been for the wealthy and powerful. one need only look into history books to see how they use and abuse rank and file.

Our anticedents died for the rights we finally got put into place to protect us from their greed and arrogance. Sadly, especially since Reagan, those rights have been castrated to the point they mean nothing.

Now Bush,.....Satan's twin seperated at birth. Ironic that the most powerful army on earth's Commander in Chief is a draft-dodging coward eh?

I cannot figure out how they sleep at night. Not because of guilt, but from the excitement of being able to write their own ticket, make the sheeple pay and DIE and still be lauded by them.

A nation of Sheep, lead by a cartel of whores, controlled by big business. Welcome,....to the REAL Evil Empire.

al Qaeda thugs 22.Jun.2006 21:59

Whilimena whilimena@netscape.net

Sometimes we are fooled because the facts are too technical to understand; and other times we are fooled because we are, fools.

The Washington al Qaeda dingbats did not think that we would fall for this one - I mean the 9-11 scam!
(1) Hah! Two buildings, 110 stories each just fell because of alleged airplane crashes and kerosine fires; and another 47 stories just fell solely because of fire.
(2) List of all alleged hijackers published even though there was no airline manifest or witnesses to the crime. Those crackpot al Qaeda boys!

You know, Daddy needs to change details of the plan. It has been used too many times. Whilimena


Yes, thanks very much, folks, indymedia portland: 23.Jun.2006 19:12

andrés (canarias)

Collectively, including all the questions and answers, we are presented here with some vitally important documentation. (And I say so after having followed many, but not yet all, of the associated links).

Thank you very much again. I speak from Western Europe. Thiks kind of deeply ethical, honest, truthful material rekindles our sense of hope, of trust in the people of the USA.

And in the future of us all.

Gracias.

Videos of the WTC collapses ... and other video material 24.Jun.2006 12:58

theSaiGirl lynnertell@comcast.net

=================================== ===================================== Why Did the Trade Center Skyscrapers Collapse? by Morgan Reynolds (Professor Emeritus at Texas A&M and former Chief Economist in the Labor Dept. of the Bush administration) http://www.lewrockwell.com/reynolds/reynolds12.html http://www.lewrockwell.com/reynolds/reynolds7.html Prof. Steve Jones of Brigham Young Univ. (Physics Dept.) http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html Scholars for 9/11 Truth http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/ ========================== Video Material follows, for your examination: Controlled demolition of WTC7 at 5:20 on the evening of 9/11 http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc7.html ============================= Controlled demolition of the WTC South Tower on 9/11 (Windows Media Viewer required to view these) Note how the shock-wave from the explosion rocks the helicopter... These shots were taken by a German video team and have been shown on television in Europe. Not much likelihood that we will see them broadcast here in the good 'ol' United States of Amnesia. But ... not to worry...... we still have the Internet .... so millions will see them anyway. Shockwave hits Helicopter http://thewebfairy.com/911/shockwave/ http://thewebfairy.com/911/shockwave.wmv 179k - full speed, documenting the violence with which the helicopter was tossed about http://thewebfairy.com/911/from.helicopter.wmv 62k - One frame per second showing the view of the expanding dust clouds while the helicopter is buffeted. =========================== Broadcast of fake/doctored video by CNN purporting to show a Boeing commercial jet striking the South Tower: This is a close-up of the video originally broadcast by CNN on 9/11 Watch it and make up your own mind. Planes are made mostly of lightweight aluminum ... light enough so they can be lifted into flight. A jet plane is essentially an aluminum can. Ever crushed an aluminum beer can in your hands ? Watch the "plane" in the CNN video "melt" seamlessly into the concrete and steel of the South Tower ... http://thewebfairy.com/911/slideshow/noplane2 / Look Ma' .... NO IMPACT !!! Here is the original "live network news" video broadcast by CNN on the morning of 9/11: http://www.911hoax.com/gZoomCNN.asp?intPage=14&PageNum=14 And here is how it was done .... http://www.reopen911.org/bluescreen.htm And here are the skilled professionals who made it all happen ... right before our very eyes .. http://www.counterpunch.org/cnnpsyops.html http://www.democraticunderground.com/articles/06/02/28_psyops.html http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/1/30/95642/8018 http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1748 http://www.davesweb.cnchost.com/cnn.htm http://www.geocities.com/saufor/unsorted/cnnpsyops.html http://atangledweb.typepad.com/weblog/2004/12/most_trusted_am.html Now.... guess who got PSY-0P'ed on 9/11 .... ?? But a population certainly has to be prepped for a 9/11, as Webster Tarpley chronicles so clearly in his "911 - Made in the USA" .. placing it all in a contnuous historical context. ============================================ Still unconvinced about the broadcasting of manufactured video on 9/11 .. ? Check these out: Hmmmmm... I didn't realize that on the morning of 9/11, the networks very early on, were showing both this video: (WindowsMediaViewer) http://www.terrorize.dk/911/wtc2hit8/911.wtc.2.hit.north.1.enl.wmv and this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXOVFdjon_g&search=wtc (blue plane video) screenshots here: http://covertoperations.blogspot.com/2006/06/once-more-we-were-lied-to-about-planes.html If you watch the videos, it is painfully obvious the plane paths are completely different. In the first video, there is only a slight descent before the plane turns and hits the building. In the second video, there is a huge descent before the turn. The discrepancy is also in the approach direction. Video 1 shows the plane coming from the SW, whereas video 2 shows an approach from the SSW or even S. Very different directions of approach.

Natural reaction? 25.Jun.2006 00:10

none

All,

Is it possible to get a thermate/thermite-like reaction if the iron of the building and the aluminum of the aircraft, or where ever else the metals may originate, were suddenly brought together and ignited by jet fuel? Or must it be a precise mixture of materials and a precise trigger/detonator?

A Time For Heroes 25.Jun.2006 06:12

JerryB9105

I find the concept of controlled demoltion to be probably the most honest appraisal of truth regarding things as we have been led to believe about September 11, 2001. Nothing except a controlled demolition of these beautiful towers otherwise makes sense. I say that because (accordingly to FEMA's own recent research) -- No steel-structured high-rise building has ever before or after 9/11 collapsed due to fire. Again that is in their official report, and was well accepted even before they made comment on the same. And we have an excellent example of the damage expected when a large airplane collides with one of the tallest buildings in history, I am speaking of the B25 collision with the Empire State Building in 1945 -- the New York Times did an excellent report on this incident when it occured and would require examination for those that truly have an open mind regarding the TRUTH and what obviously happened to drop the towers at the World Trade Center -- the Empire State Building still stands nearly 60 plus years after the incident mentioned, unfortunately the towers (which were constructed of steel of even more strength and better design did not. The entire collapse mimics a perfect example of a controlled demoltion, and that act requires the hand of man to pull off since nature is not willing to oblige in doing the same. We are led to believe that two airplanes hitting the towers and exploding into flame caused the demise of the two towers -- not very likely in view of contradicting evidence. And now there is the matter of the third building that collapsed that very same day, i.e., WTC - 7; let's not forget it had no airplane sticking out of it, not that it truly would matter, but it also collapsed in an identical fashion to the towers and a controlled demoltion. How can anyone with any sense view this otherwise. We seriously need a new and unbiased official panel to fairly evaluate all pertinent evidence regarding that terrible day in our nation's history; and have the wits to announce to the world their findings. I am pretty sure they will contradict the current official story. Thanks for listening.

Too Many Loose Ends 26.Jun.2006 11:30

Anonymous

It appears all too easy for those who want the thermite theory to be true to accept that Prof. Jones is telling the truth while Government is lying. This is how disinformation works, of course, to cast information out there that creates 'suspicion' against the target. The goal of terrorism in particular is to create divides between a nation's people and the government that they expect to 'protect' them. That divide renders the civilian population unwilling to remain united with its own government in the struggle against enemies.

Let's review some facts:

1) In 1993, Islamist terrorists related to Al Qaeda (including Ramzi Yousef) attacked one of the WTC towers with a truck bomb that destroyed several levels of its parking structure. The objective was to knock down the tower but the attempt failed.

2) In 1995, several persons destroyed the Oklahoma City Federal building with a truck bomb of the same design as the 1993 WTC attack. History channel and Fox News covered in detail the apparent connection of Terry Nichols to Ramzi Yousef, designer of the WTC truck bomb. Nichols apparently met Yousef in the Philippines after several phone calls. Again, the Islamist terrorist connection, this time with more success.

2a) Khobar tower bombing, USS Cole and other attacks worldwide...

3) Beginning in about 1998, a group of Al Qaeda members trains in piloting and hijacking drills in preparation for another go at the WTC towers and other targets. (Iraq's Intelligence Agency conducted hijacking courses at Salman Pak, training foreign Islamist agents who may have included Mohammed Atta and his cohorts)

4) September 11, 2001: Among the four targets of the hijacked aircraft are the WTC towers that Al Qaeda failed to knock down on the first try. Airliners ram into the two buildings at different locations. There are no red 'X' marks on the sides of the buildings to guide the pilots to a specific impact point. The buildings eventually collapse, beginning at exactly the point of impact and fire.

5) World Trade Center building 7 is set on fire by falling debris. It burns for 7 hours before finally collapsing too.

6) The buildings mentioned all had special fireproofing applied to their support beams because the engineers understand, which much of the public apparently do not, that steel grows softer as it becomes warmer. As it becomes warmer, it will eventually become too soft to support the enormous weight above it. A temperature increase of only a couple hundred degrees creates a SIGNIFICANT reduction in strength, bringing the strength of support beams below the engineering tolerances and resulting in failure. A mere office fire would have been a threat to the building's integrity, hence the application of fireproof insulation to the steel beams.

7) The aircraft collisions scraped the fireproof insulation off the steel beams, allowing them to be heated by the ensuing fires. Significantly, BOTH buildings burned for about the same length of time before collapsing, giving us two empirical samples to demonstrate just how long that particular structure design could survive those nearly identical tests.

8) There is no likelihood that thermite charges would have survived the initial collision and fire that ravaged the buildings. They would have been ignited/consumed immediately.

9) There is little chance those barely skilled pilots would have been able to guide their aircraft to the exact locations where the thermite charges were set (during previous weeks) to conceal the alleged scheme, notably in different locations on each building.

10) Building 7 also burned for a period of time, softening up its metal support structure, before collapsing due to the heat from fire. Would anyone like to insist it also had thermite charges placed that survived 7 hours of intense fire? Its collapse, like those of the main WTC towers, ALSO began at the location of the fire.

10a) Two more airliner bombs were used that day, one striking and damaging the Pentagon building and the other crashing before reaching its intended target. Does one really wish to believe addition of thermite is necessary to enhance the destructiveness of this Al Qaeda attack?

11) The irrational gullibility of the ignorant is exactly what opportunists like Prof. Jones play upon to get grant money in the first place. There seems to be a certain segment of the population who WANT to believe in the overarching evil of their own government and will therefore grasp at any bone tossed them by Jones, Michael Moore or any other deceptive polemicist interested in making a few bucks, or a few million, from the flocking faithful.

12) Demoralizing Disinformation and Fomenting Civil Unrest are tools used against enemy nations to weaken their resolve in a time of conflict. Notice who is using such tools against the US and you will know who your enemies are.

Since the first WTC attack in 1993, we have been in conflict against the Islamist networks as well as far-Left ideological enemies of the US (and enemies of GW Bush) who live and work within the US to do as much damage through propaganda as possible. They surely appreciate your usefulness to their efforts.

If you have a compelling need to believe in conspiracy theories you can choose one that does not fly in the face of the physical evidence and scientific reason. Try this:

The Mafia runs the construction unions on the East Coast. They are notorious for buying off building inspectors to get away with substandard workmanship and have considerable influence in various levels of government. If anyone has anything to hide regarding the buildings not surviving something they should have, it would be the Mafia and the Unions doing construction work.

Have a nice day.

Dr. Jones is the same whack-job that brought you Cold Fusion in the 90's 26.Jun.2006 12:15

DWalla

Just so you all know... Dr. Stephen Jones is the same whack-job nut that helped bring about "cold fusion" in the 90's. Remember that debaucle? Remember how ridiculous everyone was that was involved? He was one of the key players in the whole affair. Fortunately (for him) Pons and Fleischman took the brunt of the ridicule as they were the ones who officially announced the find. Unknown to most people who don't read any further than the headline and bullet-points... the University of Utah was working in conjunction with BYU physics department professor Stephen Jones. How do I know all of this? First off, I LIVE in Utah right near BYU... and secondly, Dr. Stephen Jones is my neighbor who I have known for nearly 20 years. He's a genuinely a nice guy... but he's a certifiable whack-job. I'd take anything this guy says "professionally" irregardless of the subject material with a dump-truck load of skepticism.

no direct sample analysis was done by this guy 26.Jun.2006 21:39

pudbiscuit

After reading the paper, he only mentions sulfidation on samples in the FEMA report. He does not have access to samples of WTC structural steel at all, and the paper makes no claim of conducting "chemical analysis of WTC structural steel residue" or that any "samples were provided Dr. Jones team from redundant sourses. [sic]" In fact, the paper reads "When a sample is obtained, a range of characterization techniques will quickly give us information we seek." And that is a rather wishful "when."

Rather, he replicates the behaviors of various materials as observed in photos and videos of the WTC collapse in his lab.

Still an important paper, though.

DWalla, stick to WTCs instead of char assassination; more for Pudbuscuit 27.Jun.2006 02:34

me

"After reading the paper, he only mentions sulfidation on samples in the FEMA report. He does not have access to samples of WTC structural steel at all,..."

Then do a bit more research before glorifying yourself. Contact him. He mentions that he has conducted direct sample studies in the 44 minute interview with Alex Jones at the Chicago 9-11 truth conference in June 2006.

random photographs prove nothing 28.Jun.2006 11:51

Reinflatable Edgar

The photo at the top of the article purports to show beam with "Thermate residue" but the photo is dinky and unattributed. When was it taken? By whom? How do I know it isn't one of the many chunks of steel that had to be slashed with a cutting torch during removal of debris?

That's what it looks like to me, something cut with a cutting torch. Nice straight line, slag falling away from the torch (into the beam on the top and side cuts, then to the outside of the beam for the bottom cut as the off-cut fell away) , black residue, minimal distortion of the metal from highly directed high-intensity heat rather than warped and random edge with slag falling into and out of the beam equally.

Any fact checking on this, or do you guys just run any old thing that fits your twisted worldview?

Have you considered the fact that this whole 9-11 conspiracy nonsense might just be a put-on started by the CIA to keep you guys from questioning the real world problems created by the president?

Dr. Jones, Demolition, and the Media. 29.Jun.2006 01:12

Gina Judd

I download a lot of stuff off of Limewire I found a song list that was for an inauguration gala hosted by FOX. The songs on this list had a definite theme. I wasn't overly suspicious of Brick House or Disco Inferno, because all parties with a DJ seem to play those two songs. But when I got to the one on the list by the Bare Naked Ladies called "When I Fall" about a Window Washer looking in the 90th story window of a tower...(not even a good dance song)it caught my breath. NYNY and September were also songs on the list. I don't know it just seems like this party of media gurus were celebrating a certain event that was about 7 months in the future more than the president that was awarded the presidency in a lawsuit. My point is, when it comes to the brilliant Dr. Jones who I have watched give interviews and I totally respect his viewpoint and agree with it...he will never get the media to expose itself in this crime. NBC owned by GE who makes a lot more than Blenders, telephones and hair dryers makes its big money off of defense weapons...the media were part of the conspiracy. If the media wasn't involved one of the big networks would have jumped on the opportunity to interview Dr. Jones and air to the world what he knows.

False Flag Attack 30.Jun.2006 07:39

J Alden Dillen

I believe 9/11 was a Mossad False Flag attack. Americans had better wake up and know who the real terroists are.

you know who you are 02.Jul.2006 04:21

elroy

How exactly does one sleep at night? Big question, many answers. Who made the call, pushed the red button, set explosives, set charges. It takes a physical human to do these things. So how exactly do you sleep at night? You know who you are.

Look at the collapse video again? 06.Jul.2006 07:32

Epidemic

obviously the collapse of the WTC happened at the upper floors in the damaged and burning areas.

DR Jones is obviously just trying to foster the conspiracy to get his little piece of the pie.
He would need to be an idiot in order to miss the simple fact that the collapse did not begin in
the basement. The structural failure was at the top we all saw it. Please do tell how the evil
illuminatti ninja turtles were able to go into the burning structure and plant thermate in the middle
of the towering inferno?

DR Jones seems to miss alot of simple truths

His molten steel theory is all wet super heating steel vaporizes it, it does not create molten pools of
steel 6 weeks later. The steel would cool off in a matter of hours to a solid from the edge of vaporization.

Finally the missile pentagon theory is absolutely fake for the simple fact that we see a fireball approximately
200 feet wide, orange with black soot (evidence of an in-efficient fuel fire). Think about it folks how could a missile
have caused such a fire. Even napalm would have penetrated the building and burned mostly inside not wide like we saw.
Oh yeah and the hole in ring what ever. If a missile had gone that deep the explosion would have happend in ring E (i think) the explosion would have been radiating centrally from that point. Yet damage appears to be surface and lessen the deeper into the building.

Someone to claim to be such a conspiracy authority I would think Dear old DR Jones could match wits with at least the average joe.

Photo of cut column shows it was cut by a blowtorch, not by thermate 19.Jul.2006 19:39

Mark Roberts imatters@mail.com

The photo that's used as evidence of thermite/thermate simply shows a column that's been cut witha blowtorch. If Jones or any others had just taken a minute to enlarge the photo, they'd see the obvious torch cutting marks, just like all the other columns have. You can even see some slag sitting on top of the debris. Below is a link to an enlargement, along with several other photos of oxyacetylene-cut columns from the WTC. If in doubt, consult any ironworker who's cut heavy steel.

 http://forums.randi.org/imagehost/8790444fc1fe0f45c.jpg

 http://forums.randi.org/imagehost/879044a1a9d88e3d5.jpg

 http://forums.randi.org/imagehost/879044bbfe7024907.jpg

 http://forums.randi.org/imagehost/879044a1a9d8cb822.jpg

 http://forums.randi.org/imagehost/879044a1a9d9086e7.jpg


Jones' presentation at the L.A. symposium etc. 22.Jul.2006 00:35

Anonymous

"Answers to Objections and Questions" by Prof. Jones: http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/AnsQJones1.pdf Thermite-signature detected from WTC samples (p.70~)

A little on the photo of the cut column 25.Jul.2006 17:01

jessethebuilder jessethebuilder@yahoo.com

This image finaly convininced me that the columns must have been cut in a controled demolition:


...almost

There are only two posiblities as indicated by this photo: the building was brougt down in a controlled demolition, or the column pictured was cut by a clean up crew.

The most important clue is the firemen in the photo. It has been argued that the firemen were still on the scene after the cleanup work had begun, which may be true, but much more importantly, the firemen pictured could indicate when that photo was taken. I am trying to track them down through FDNY. If anyone knows their idendity, please let me know, as I would love to speak to them. Similarily with the source of the photo and photographer. The date of that photo may give definitive evidence of a controled demoliton.


CDI confession on History Channel 25.Jul.2006 21:48

PirateNews.org piratenews@infowars.net


Diagonal cut by Thermate Linear Cutting Charges at greater than 45-degree angle
Diagonal cut by Thermate Linear Cutting Charges at greater than 45-degree angle
Controlled Demolitions Inc installing RDX Linear Cutting Charge
Controlled Demolitions Inc installing RDX Linear Cutting Charge
More linear angle cuts at WTC
More linear angle cuts at WTC

Blame It On the Jews! 08.Aug.2006 10:39

Uziyahu

"Blame it on the Jews, Yeah, Yeah"
"But what you do, don't put the blame on you
"Blame it on the Jews, Yeah, Yeah!" --Phonee Balonee

A much more likely scenario than hundreds of Israeli demo experts shipped to America to carry out these staggering demo jobs is that the country in which the buildings were located did it. It's not like there is any lack of demo experts in America's dark hallways. Maybe it has all been there since the first bombing?

Consider the black obelisk in 2001: a Space Odyssey and how it inspires the monkeys to start smashing skulls. What will the sequel "2010" bring? LOTS of black obelisks in that one!

Misspelling is not for true authors 08.Aug.2006 12:52

SkepticAuthorNow

Below is an excerpt from your webpage at http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/june2006/200606Thermate.htm showing misspelling of the highlighted word which greatly reduces your credibility and so I greatly suspect your native language is NOT english. Who are you then? -- Dr. Jones in earlier work pointed to thermate as the likely explosive that brought down the WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 skyscrapers. But only recently was physical material analysed (s/b analyzed) in the lab and the presense (s/b presence) of thermate announced. The samples were provided Dr. Jones team from redundant sourses (s/b sources).

Fire and Gravity versus Professor Steven Jones 09.Aug.2006 21:21

Mark Ferran BSEE scl JD mcl www.billstclair.com/ferran mferran@nycap.rr.com

Professor Steven Jones of BYU is getting an education in Physics and in Chemistry from us volunteers  http://www.debunking911.com/ironburns.htm , but he is still kicking and screaming as we drag him towards the ultimate realization that he has befooled himself and is wrong to the core. So far, he has already recanted his original assertions that "almost no fire, even one ignited by jet fuel, can cause structural steel to fail".

Steel-frame buildings do fail and have failed because of fire.
See:  http://enr.construction.com/images2/2006/02/060206-30A.jpg



A fire in a Madrid steel-frame building collapsed 10-story steel-frame sections of the building -even without a plane crash weakening those sections-, and almost brought down the rest of it, which had to be torn down. "At its peak, temperatures reached 800 degrees Celsius (1,472 F)" )  http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/spain_fire_2005.html

It is no secret that fire destroys steel-frame buildings. This has been known for more than 100 years. The essay at  http://www.cagenweb.com/quarries/articles_and_books/stone_magazine/fire_trap.html by an early American civil engineer of great repute (William Sooy Smith, 1830-1916) explains the known weaknesses of Iron (steel) beams and columns exposed to fire. He notes that the primary mechanism of structural failure in steel buildings is the DESTRUCTIVE FORCE generated in the steel itself when it EXPANDS due to heating by FIRE. He describes the destruction of several steel frame buildings due to the heat of fire, including one in New York city. In view of these examples, there is a warning (or prophesy) by the Fire Chief of the City of New York of the eventual collapse of a very tall steel frame building, (such as the World Trade Center buildings), due to exposure to the heat of fire. His essay is essential reading for anyone who would express or consider an opinion about the likelihood that a steel framed building exposed to fire would be brought down by the heat of fire.

Excerpts:
1) "Witness the Manhattan Savings Bank building, Broadway and Bleeker street, New York, which was destroyed a few weeks ago by the heat generated in the burning of the ... building next to it."

2) "fire ... partly destroyed the Athletic Association building in this city. ... and it is evident that if this heat had continued but a little longer the whole structure would have fallen."

3) "And notably at the burning of the Tribune building in Minneapolis, about three years ago, which resulted in its entire destruction."

"There may be steel buildings in which the fireproofing has been so well done that they will pass through an ordinary fire without such failure. But if the steel becomes even moderately heated its stiffness will be measurably diminished, and the strength of the upright members so reduced as to cause them to bend and yield. This is more likely to occur, as the horizontal beams and girders will at the same time expand (unequally from the different degrees of temperature) and throw the posts out of vertical and into buckling positions. This is the third difficulty. ... The third difficulty, resulting from the expansion and contraction of the metals employed in the construction of tall buildings, may be obviated by protecting these metals absolutely from any considerable change in temperature..."
Chief Bonner, of the fire department of New York, says in reference to the destruction of the Manhattan Bank building:
....We shall have in this city, unless the citizens of New York are warned in time, a calamity by fire which will rend their hearts. ... The heat thrown from a large burning building of any height is immense. ... I am prepared to declare, from my experience, that a building of brick and yellow pine in case of fire is easier to manage, and the contents have more chance of being saved than the modern fire-proof building. In the former structure the fire burns more slowly and has no chance to concentrate its heat as in the iron and steel structure.

Chief Swenie, of the Chicago fire department, is quoted in the essay as follows:

"I think very much as Bonner does," said Fire Marshal Swenie to-day, when his attention was directed to a statement of the chief of the New York fire department to the effect that the modern skyscraper is a veritable firetrap. .... Fire in a room so filled with goods might in very short time gain such headway as to imperil seriously the entire structure by the expansion, warping or twisting of the iron or steel framework.

No ... building of any kind in which inflammable goods are stored should ever exceed 125 feet in height, and might with advantage be much less. This is not because we cannot throw water high enough. But suppose such goods are stored in a twelve-story building; a fire breaks out, say on the sixth floor, and gets to burning furiously. The heat ascends and causes the pillars and beams to expand. The expansion first raises all that part of the building above where it takes place. At the same time the whole weight above continues on the expanded metal. before you know where you are something is going to give, and what will be the results? They will be too fearful to contemplate.

... It does not take a great amount of heat to cause steel and iron to expand, and when beams and columns begin moving something has got to break. Suppose a fire breaks out in one of these buildings. We work at it from below, and the steel beams expand, the ceiling breaks and the floor above comes down. ...

The [previous] statements of Professor Jones and others that "almost no fire, even one ignited by jet fuel, can cause structural steel to fail" are insane distortions of reality and misrepresentations of practical experience of fire-fighters and engineers. That is why Professor Jones has since then acknowedged that he was wrong about that.

-----Original Message-----
From: "Jones, Steven"
Sent: Aug 3, 2006 2:59 PM
To: Jon Moseley ,  911Issues@yahoogroups.com

Subject: RE: Steven Jones' 2nd response to Jon Moseley

I'm not running away at all, but again you haven't read
my papers yet, where I explain that while structural steel can
fail, it cannot result in the COMPLETE, symmetrical and rapid
collapses of the WTC skyscrapers as observed. I also refer to
the peer-reviewed and published paper by Ross Gordon which
reaches the same conclusion, based on detailed energy and
momentum arguments, here:

 http://www.journalof911studies.com

Furthermore, in actual fire-endurance tests of WTC floor
assemblies contracted by NIST and performed by Underwriter Lab,
the assemblies did NOT

- no, I stop - you will have to read it in my
papers! Then get back to me.

Steven J

PS - my critiques of the no-plane theories are based on hard
physical evidences, like my critiques of the official theory of
the collapse of the WTC buildings due to a conspiracy of 19
hijackers.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jon Moseley [mailto: ruthercap@earthlink.net]
Sent: Thursday, August 03, 2006 11:50 AM
To: Jones, Steven;  911Issues@yahoogroups.com
Judy Wood
Subject: RE: Steven Jones' 2nd response to Jon Moseley

WHY ARE YOU RUNNING AWAY FROM THE PROOF THAT YOUR ESSENTIAL
THESIS IS WRONG?

DO YOU ADMIT THAT STRUCTURAL STEEL IN A BUILDING CAN FAIL AT THE
TEMPERATURES FROM AN ORDINARY FIRE?

YES OR NO?

-----Original Message-----
From: "Jones, Steven"
Sent: Aug 3, 2006 2:36 PM
To: Jon Moseley ,  911Issues@yahoogroups.com
Judy Wood
Subject: RE: Steven Jones' 2nd response to Jon Moseley

...

... in my two papers, ... I address the contention that fires in the
WTC were sufficient to cause weakening and COMPLETE collapse of
these buildings.
...
Steven Jones

----- Original Message -----
From: Mark Ferran
To:
Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2006 4:21 PM
Subject: Collapsing buildings


My quick explanation of the affect of Gravity upon a falling top-of-a-building explains/outlines the mechanisms of the collapse and "fast" descent of the collapsing towers.



Responding to comment made elsewher that "because the fires were not symmetrical, deformation should have resulted in an asymmetrical collapse." This mistakenly assumed that there was a "symmetrical collapse". Once the columns on one side of the building fail, they cause the failure of the next nearest columns, and so on. This can occur in less than a second, and it will appear from outside that all columns failed at the same "time" or that there was perfect symmetry, but that is not quite correct.



Imagine that the simplified figure below is looking from the side at one floor of the core with five massive columns holding up the massive core of the building above.

____________

I I I I I



Take away the first column on one side (e.g., by airplane impact)

____________

I I I I



And the building might still stand (and it did), but now there is more weight (load) on the second column, and that "more weight" is not merely the same amount of the weight that the first (missing) column used to support, because there is LEVERAGE. Some of the weight that the third, fourth, and fifth columns were carrying is now being carried by the second column, due to LEVERAGE. The cantilever (unsupported end) multiplies the force added to the next nearest column. Because iron is flexible, the fulcrum point and muliplication factor of the leverage is NOT easily calculated, but it is real and postive.



If fire causes expansion (causing buckling, or shortening), distortion (Bucking, shortening) or weakens the second column (strength failure),

____________

I I I

then all the weight of the missing first and second columns is shifted to the remaining three, but the third column absorbs ALL of this shifted weight, PLUS a leverage factor, and the last column may be carrying less of the load than before, or may even be in tension (not supporting any weight of the building at all, but pulling down on it). The fourth column may be in tension or in compression like the last column. The point is, that the moment that the second column fails, the entire load of the building might be pulsed down upon the next (third) column. At that moment, perhaps a fraction of a second after the second column failed, the third column will be crushed (because it may be carrying the entire load of the building above it);

____________

I I

and a fraction of a second after that, the load will shift to the fourth column, and the fourth column will be crushed.

____________

I



When you get to the last column standing, two things can happen: 1) because there is no "leverage" acting on it, it might survive long enough to momentarily act like a pivot or a hinge (as was seen in the tipping of the WTC tower with the antenna)

or 2), because the weight is bearing down or has shifted too erratically, it may fail completely a moment after the fourth column failed (in that case, the whole building core above will appear to drop approximately straight down (as in the second tower).



The illusion of "symmetry" is preserved by the large scale of the falling building, but the only symmetry is in the shape of the building.



The same principles of progressive failure of adjacent columns due to shifting loads apply in three-dimensions, where you have a distribution of columns in an area, but the mathematics of load re-distribution is more complex.



Concerning Professor Steven Jones' comments on the appearance and rate of the collapse of the WTC towers:



Professor Steven Jones promised me earlier in July that he would respond by July 28 to my note pointing out that: 1) the thinning of steel I-beams in the burning wreckage at ground zero was due to steel burning in air; and 2) the sulfidation of steel occurs naturally whenever steel is exposed to the fumes of any fire burning organic materials, or when otherwise exposed to sulfur dioxide (SO2) gas.

 http://www.debunking911.com/ironburns.htm



Apparently, Professor Jones finds it easier to pontificate about other matters of which he knows nothing at all, such as for example his recent comment: "while structural steel can fail [due to fire], it cannot result in the COMPLETE, symmetrical and rapid collapses of the WTC skyscrapers as observed". That is baseless nonsense. There is little else for the damaged collapsing top-of-a--building to do but to fall DOWN though the portion standing below it. Professor Jones disregards Newtonian Physics, and fraudulently interjects "The Law of Entropy" into his public discussions of the final descent of the towers.



The typical crackpot claims about the WTC towers falling "fast" and the "law of gravity" are simply testimony proving the total idiocy and unmitigated ignorance of their proponents. When there is nothing available to resist the affect of Gravity (which pulls things DOWN), Gravity takes over.

Newton's first law of motion is often stated as

An object at rest tends to stay at rest and an object in motion tends to stay in motion with the same speed and in the same direction unless acted upon by an unbalanced force.

Once the structural integrity of a building is destroyed, for example the columns holding up the top floors fail, there is simply not enough left in the right positions to hold up or to stop the falling portion.



Professor Steven Jones expressly adopted and endorsed an argument made by foreigner Gordon Ross that a "collapse driven only by gravity would not continue to progress beyond" the height of the column sections (e.g., one floor) that initially failed.



The glaring fallacy of Gordon Ross' analysis is his absurd assumption that the standing columns will reconnect with something substantial in the falling debris that will maximally resist the descent of all of the debris above. Here is one of Ross's statements of his absurd premise:

"Upon impact with the lower section the falling mass would deliver a force which would grow from zero, up to the failure load of the impacted storey columns, over a finite period of time and distance."

Here is the absurd conclusion that Ross's absurd premise leads to:

"The analysis shows that despite the assumptions made in favour of collapse continuation, vertical movement of the falling section would be arrested prior to completion of the 3% shortening phase of the impacted columns, and within 0.02 seconds after impact. A collapse driven only by gravity would not continue to progress beyond that point."

Ross seems to assume a perfectly neat descent and a perfect reconnection of the columns of the falling floors with the standing columns below, something that had no chance of happening.



Because the column sections that failed did not vaporize and disappear instantaneously, they likely imparted some horizontal forces upon the ends of the columns on the top and bottom, making them horizontally displaced as they converged downward upon each other. Even if the top floor columns were displaced only 4 inches in any direction relative to the bottom columns, that would drastically reduce the area of metal-metal contact between them, since they are hollow box columns, not solid bars. Thus, the impact of the top column 4-inches off center with the bottom column would apply a great force to only a small fraction of the cross-sectional area of the box column. If the contact area was reduced to 10%, then, instead of a pressure of 100,000 PSI acting upon the steel column's end, it would impart 1,000,000 psi to a smaller part of it. This increased amount of pressure would result in the tearing or slicing of the metal, not a loading and compression of the entire column to failure. Thus, Gordon's whole premise, that the entire cross-sectional area of the standing columns would somehow become loaded to failure by the falling debris is total nonsense.



The total sum of the area of the "footprint" of each standing core column added up was only a small fraction of the area of the floor-space of the WTC towers or of the core itself, and thus only a small fraction of the falling debris would directly impact/encounter such standing core columns; and that small directly-impacting portion would then find the path of least resistance (around those standing columns), which would be between the standing columns. So, the great majority of the falling debris would fall BETWEEN the standing columns, not directly impacting them on their ends.



There is little likelihood that the standing columns would connect perfectly with any falling debris such that the debris would be capable of imparting a vertical "failure load" upon the whole column. Before that could happen, the falling debris would deflect away horizontally, going towards the path of least resistance. As can be plainly seen in the video tapes, the result of the collision of the falling top floors and the still-standing core was a great horizontal expansion of debris. Thus, the standing columns were pushed sideways and torn off to the horizontal, a direction in which they had virtually no strength nor resistance.



The standing columns remaining below the break floor were probably never again loaded to their full rated capacity, let alone loaded to their failure point. Thus, they simply could not have provided their full rated force to resist or slow the descent of the falling debris from the top floors.



The falling debris does not all neatly stack up on the top ends of the still-standing columns. Most of the debris will fall around the standing columns. Bottom standing columns are designed to support upper COLUMNS, not to support or resist the fall of steel debris falling down between or horizontally crashing against the columns. Similarly, the horizontal bracing and concrete floor between core columns on each floor within the core was not designed to carry let alone stop the fall of thousands of tons of steel and concrete debris falling from 20+ floors above. The horizontal beams between the core columns would simply shear-off of the stronger core columns before the core columns would be significantly re-loaded by the debris falling upon the horizontal beams.



The falling steel debris accumulating between core-columns and impacting the horizontal beams would create a horizontal bursting force/pressure (e.g., seen in videos as the horizontal expansion of the debris at the floor(s) of collision) that would peel the individual upright standing columns sideways off the top of the standing stack as the debris descended. In net, the standing columns of the core below the falling floors/debris presented only a tiny fraction of the vertical resistance to the falling steel debris that the standing columns had originally provided to support the intact columns and structure that they used to support. Because the standing columns provided so much less vertical force to resist the fall of the debris falling AROUND THE COLUMNS, the buildings appeared to fall just a little slower than the free-fall demonstrated by debris that fell outside of the perimeter of the WTC towers. See:  http://www.debunking911.com/freefall.htm



The only way for Gordon Ross' analysis to make any practical sense, would be if the floors of the cores were made so strong that they could not only support the static weight of the falling building floors, but also catch and stop the whole mass and perfectly redistribute that impulse force to all the standing columns. The only way to accomplish that would be to make the floor out of a slab of steel about one foot thick, spanning the entire core floor area and redistributing the weight/shock of the falling debris to all the core columns at the same time.



If one such "safe" floor within the core of the WTC tower (e.g., at floor #70) had been formed of solid steel slab (e.g., one foot thick plate), welded solidly to all the core columns, instead of being formed of little horizontal steel-beams and cast concrete, the load of the leading falling debris might have been shock-absorbed (by the standing columns below the steel slab without destroying them) and the mass of debris above that would be deflected horizontally away from the core, thus resulting in a free-standing core section 70 floors tall and stripped of all suspended floor spans. But, it would have left the escape stairways on the floors below relatively intact, preserving the lives of people descending those stairs. However, that "safety" design would also have forced more of the falling debris to expand away horizontally, spreading the falling core debris even farther outside of the footprint of the towers, creating a much larger zone of collateral destruction.


Because there was no slab of solid steel to support, catch, and redistribute the weight of the falling top floor debris, Gordon Ross's analysis is total nonsense. And, Professor Jones' acceptance and endorsement of Ross's obviously flawed analysis is a further indication that Professor Jones is himself defective.

Fire versus Steel Sturctures:  Fire Wins.
Fire versus Steel Sturctures: Fire Wins.

The burning question? 11.Aug.2006 21:16

gordon ross gordonjross@yahoo.com

"The glaring fallacy of Gordon Ross' analysis is his absurd assumption that the standing columns will reconnect with something substantial in the falling debris that will maximally resist the descent of all of the debris above. " Said Mark.

So an analysis of a mathematical model which assumes that the strength of an entire storey's columns are totally and instantaneously removed allowing the upper storeys to fall onto the lower storey's is considered absurd because it wouldn't match up correctly.
Strange that you should consider it absurd that they do not meet up, but fail to even raise an eyebrow about the effective disappearance of one whole storey's columns.
Strange also that you did not level exactly the same criticism at Dr. Bazant, who was actually the first to use exactly the same mathematical model, almost five years ago.
Also strange that you did not level the same criticism at Dr. Greening who also used the same model.
But then again, I do not believe that it is the model that you are having trouble with, but rather the inescapable conclusion that the energy balance would have reached exhaustion at an early stage and the collapse would be arrested.
Are you still peddling your theory that the reason the fire was so hot was because the iron caught fire?
For anyone who wishes to make their own mind up the articles in question appear here,

 http://www.journalof911studies.com/

Anyway it is getting a little chilly round here so I will just go and get another girder to throw on the fire,

Gordon Ross.

Who benefits? if America revolts? 06.Sep.2006 09:34

Alastair Carnegie CrnAlas@aol.com

Anyone with an ounce of common sence, should regognise that revolution plays into the hands of rabble-rousers, despots, and crooks. Perhaps this is precisely what the perpetrators of 9/11 want. 'Mobocracy' America governed by brutal racketeers.

How convenient that the lease on the WTC was given to a company calling itself; "Controlled Demolition Inc." If you read that in a pulp fiction, you would chuck the book in the garbage can! We learn from Cornelius Tacitus, who personally loathed Emperor Nero [so his account is trustworthy], that because so many of Nero's friends were cashing in on the Great Fire of Rome, he must have been implicated. Then the security services of the day, unearthed a radical sect of Christian 'Martyr' Fire-Bombers, led by Jesus Christ's prophecied "Wolves in Sheep's Clothing" Sound familiar? The whole lot were rounded up and the ring leaders were hoisted on poles drenched in oil and used as street illumination, the lucky few were crucified. the rest torn to shreads by dogs in the Arena. These unlucky pseudo-christians had gambled on Emperor Nero taking the blame, a revolution was prepared. It never happened. Rome extracted confession after confession, as erstwhile conspirators eagerly came forward to denounce their former 'revolutionaries' in a bid to gain pardon and a lenient sentence.

Just watch the News as it happens all over again. History repeating itself like clockwork. Revolutionaries are one the whole, of violent disposition, extremely stupid, cowardly, treacherous, and of very low intelligence. just like those that conspired to murder thousands of innocent American Citizens five years ago at the WTC. they will all be brought to justice. Caveat

+44 (0) 1282 859649
13 Hawley Street, Winewall Lane, Winewall, Colne, Lancashire BB8 8BY U.K.

thermate + micronukes? 09.Sep.2006 22:56

Piotr Bein

A micronuke theory at
 http://www.saunalahti.fi/wtc2001/soldier4.htm
and
 http://www.vialls.com/nuke/bali_nuke.htm
might explain:
- pools of molten steel found at the bottom of WTC 1, 2, and 7 and tremors recorded by the Palisades seismic observatory (see AFC report on  http://www.rense.com/general28/ioff.htm);
- coloring and internal glow in the plumes of smoke and dust from the falling buildings (shown at a 9/11 website I lost track of);
- absence of the core columns sticking up over the debris after collapse;
- reports of measured increased radioactivity (could be from WTC equipment, though);
- collapse of the centre core first (evident in the WTC with the antenna on top and in WTC 7).

Perhaps controlled demolition with BOTH micronukes (core columns at foundation level) and Thermate charges (selected columns on floors above) should be considered.

Still, how would dust form, instead of chunks of structural and equipment debris?

What "they" could do to us:  http://www.rense.com/general73/bol.htm

Deliberate demolition 04.Oct.2006 09:22

Interested UK

Could this not be done using methods/materials that would have been undetectable after the event??

psyhics 08.Oct.2006 06:21

COMMON SENCE

It is impossible for a rigid to colapse in on itself, unless acted upon by a massive internal force. There was nothing inside either tower when built, to cause such a catastrophic colapse. The "causes" of the explosions where placed there within 2 weeks of the planes hitting. Certain people have disappeared since. WHY? Please start asking questions, the families deserve the TRUTH.

REDUCAO COMPLETA DO CONCRETO EM PO 04.Nov.2006 02:09

BAMBA

eu penso que o dr. jones esta correcto no entanto eu penso que ele nao esta a dizer tudo.eu penso que so o thermate nao seria o suficiente para vaporizar tudo o que se encontrava dentro das torres ,incluindo a total reducao do concreto em po .

WHAT A LOAD OF ****** 18.Nov.2006 20:13

NOT ALLOWED

It is too bad Dr. Jones area of expertise is in particle Physics and not in engineering, chemistry, explosives, or realism. Did anyone ever wonder why if thermate was so effective in destroying buildings, it is not used in the terrorist building demolition industry, instead of C-4, symtex, ANFO, or dynamite? I believe that for the demolition of a structure to be effective, timing is everything. Thermite or even thermate does not have the almost instanteous speed of detonation that high explosives have (usually over 20,000 feet per second). Instead, it ignites and BURNS at a very high temperature. It is used for welding and cutting. It is not even close to being instanteous. Ask yourself how one would program the demolition of something as complex as the World Trade Center, when you couldn't count on the split second timing needed to bring it down. Also, how was the "thermate" applied to the structural members? It is a powder. Was it in the form of a paste so that it would stick? Gravity, which I am sure Dr. Jones has heard of is usually the mechanism used with Thermite and probably thermate to weld or cut the steel. Thermite/thermate does not work sideways to cut through a beam, as far as I am aware. Also, did someone scrape off all the asbestos fire coating on the structural elements in order to apply the Thermate? In most office buildings, the structural members are covered by walls and floors, which would have to be breached. I would think this would create quite a mess, which might be noticed by even a mentally deficient individual. And since conspiracy theorists claim the weight of the upper floors pancaking onto the lower floors could not bring down the building, we must surmise that this would also hold true for the case of a mythical thermate demolition. This would mean that every single floor would have to be prepared and timed. Were wires and detonators used to set the thermate off, or was it all radio controlled? Ever wonder why there are signs warning against radio transmissions in blasting zones? By the way weren't the rescue people using radios? Maybe the collapse was initiated with lasers and fiber optics, so they didn't end up "cutting out" one of the middle floors, before the collapse of the top floors reached it. Does anyone but me start to wonder about the ignorance/"intelligence?" of the conspiracy theorists? Maybe Dr. Jones should apply Occam's razor. Maybe he has heard of it in the course of his education.

Misinformed and Naive 26.Nov.2006 21:58

The truth

The above authors of previous comments are either misinformed or naive. I have a PhD in chemical engineering, but even as a teenager I experimented with thermite and thermate. It is very very simple to get a hold of the stuff and even more simple to detonate. Anyone with a little understanding of the physical structure of the WTC would be able to figure out the correct quantities to be used and as someone mentioned before a couple of guys carrying 40 or more pounds of the stuff could do it in a couple of trips. It would not take a month to set up a demolition of that size and even if it did take a month, terroists could have done it just as easily as anyone else. There is no government conspiracy behind 9/11. 9/11 was a horrible event planned by a very smart, but evil man. Osama bin Laden was not paid by the United States to do it. The United States did not plan the attack so that they could declare war, so all you people out there saying that it is a huge conspiracy theory are idiots. Our country has already suffered enough so quit trying to tear the country apart by saying that our own government planned it. Your lies are hurtful to our country and are just another contribution to the terrorists mission. The terrorists want us to think crazy things like that, it makes their actions more effective. So stop it. THERE IS NO CONSPIRACY BEHIND 9/11!!!!!

you are crazy 29.Nov.2006 19:39

gchgfchg

you are all a bunch of stupid left wing libral nut jobs that jave nothing better to do then to make your own country and govenment look bad. if you want to make a differance that is good for the country go vote and join the military. by the way you do realize this was not the first time the world trade centers were attacked. back in 93 they were bomb but last time i check bush was not president you stupid mother fucking libral ass holes. if you hate this amazing country and its leaders then get the fuck out of here. if not stop trying to spread your anarcy way of life you dumb assholes. P.S. you guys need to find another hobby or get laid.

That Is NOT "Thermate Residue" 18.Dec.2006 15:41

John Berryhill

That picture has been discussed on a profesional welder's forum, and the material on that column is slag from a cutting torch. In fact, you can tell that three sides were cut from the outside-in, an then the remaining side was bent over and cut from the inside out. (take a look at how the slag goes "in" in the high side and "out" on the low side.

The welding discussion is here:
 http://www.hobartwelders.com/mboard/showthread.php?t=19417

Pictures of someone actually *making* a diagonal cut on standing WTC debris, and producing the identical type of slag are here:

 http://www.debunking911.com/cut.jpg

I've been in masonry for more than two decades and can tell you this... 18.Jan.2007 06:19

Kenny Hendrick kennyhendrick@tampabay.rr.com

There is absolutely no way that concrete powders....ALL structural concrete has reinforcing (wire, rebar, and sometimes is plasticized, etc.)

Here's my theory (coupled with a biblical background of revelations 17&18)

DOES THE PRESENT AMERICAN RULING ELITE NEED AMERICA TO RULE ?

Let's see now....if america were to suddenly be abandoned (the corporations, or the "base" is still the base whether they are here or abroad but they are in fact abroad) and now our military is also abroad and wouldn't it be uncanny if america were to suddenly burn up as that bible states (a great and powerful country that nobody else could defeat but in one hour defeats herself and burns and no man, woman or child survives).....


THINK ABOUT IT!!! OVER 9 TRILLION DOLLAR DEBT IS DISOVED WITH ONE CLEAN EASY SWIPE....NOW THEY CAN START OVER IN THE "NEW AMERICA"....

so who's the 666 dude now (supposedly a leader in the middle east but who ever would have guessed he might be american!!!!???)

P.S. it's just a thought.

http://home.tampabay.rr.com/kennyhendrick/
727-359-4882
Port Richey, FL
I'm not sure but I think it's now
I'm not sure but I think it's now

WTC 01.Feb.2007 02:43

Tommy Martin t.martin3561@wowway.com

so let,s get the w out .

614-299-6484

oh my God... 03.Feb.2007 10:13

effexor

oh my GOD effexor!


preparation for demolition 19.Feb.2007 20:42

Hank, Va.

Marvin Bush and his uncle were in charge of security from about 1995 to 2001 between them and during that time they installed an 8.5 million dollar security system. The building could have easily been wired for the demolition during that time under the guise of a new security system. All that would have been left to do is set the charges during the 30 hour power down.

thermite cuts? 01.Mar.2007 18:42

a non fictuous company

so the thermite was planted on the struts on the wtc buildings?

... 04.Mar.2007 06:42

... Giorgia_Palmas4984@yahoo.com

luogo interessante, soddisfare interessante, buon!


Too many questions, the wrong people giving the answers 20.Apr.2007 19:26

9/11 Bill of Rights dennis_sweatt@yahoo.com

9/11 isn't over until the truth is exposed and those that died are allowed to rest. We hold that the lies about Ground Zero are clearly evident and that all victims are created equal, even those forced to lie. Not every victim of 9/11 died during the collapsing of the towers; there are more victims being created everyday.

11 facts about 9/11
11 facts about 9/11
11 facts about 9/11 cont'd
11 facts about 9/11 cont'd

In ten or so years is the usual time when something is released 17.May.2007 00:10

Kenny Hendrick kennyhendrick@yahoo.com

In reference to the statement "9/11 isn't over until the truth is exposed..."

Isn't it historically true that they (the ruling elite that will probably be killing us off soon) don't release the facts till a few decades go by? Usually when the generation involved has died off or is too old to do anything about it.

buy amlodipin 14.Aug.2007 17:48

buy amlodipin hf@joke.com

nice news thanks!Glucophage

http://ortho evra
effexor
eurax

Nasonex 22.Aug.2007 14:33

Nasonex idsfo@fyyewt.net

fresh news and information about please see.. thanks || ultram || buy valtrex fresh news and information about please see.. thanks || ultram || buy valtrex fresh news and information about please see.. thanks || ultram || buy valtrex fresh news and information about please see.. thanks || ultram || buy valtrex

http://lexapro
zoloft
vaniqa

Help for Children 24.Aug.2007 11:18

Help for Children idsfo@fyyewt.net

help children! if you search for Internet Poker and any thing SEARCH FOR HELP all incomes will go for the needs of children.email this and say to your friends! Thanks

http://colchicine
microzide
fluoxetine

Help for Children 24.Aug.2007 11:57

Help for Children hf@jotye.com

help children! if you search for Mortgage Lead and any thing SEARCH FOR HELP all incomes will go for the needs of children.email this and say to your friends! Thanks

http://viagra
motrin
elidel

Ever heard of flame cutters ? 31.Aug.2007 14:09

Peter Weaver

The so called thermite cuts were made with an oxy acetylene blow torch. Oxy acetylene flame cutters can reach 1800 degrees C (steel melts at 1500 degrees C).

During the clean up operation there were teams of engineers using flame cutters and thermal lances (larger scale flame cutters), to cut the debris pile into more manageable pieces that could be loaded onto lorries.

There is no evidence at all that thermite / thermate which burns downwards, can burn diagonally through vertically aligned steel girders, gravity would prevent it from working...

... 04.Sep.2007 08:32

... Anthony1488@yahoo.com

[URL= http://www.dreor29.info/mamma] mamma [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/mamma'> mamma </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/dolls] dolls [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/dolls'> dolls </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/goggle] goggle [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/goggle'> goggle </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/web-chat] web chat [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/web-chat'> web chat </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/fumetti] fumetti [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/fumetti'> fumetti </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/pavimenti] pavimenti [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/pavimenti'> pavimenti </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/amateur] amateur [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/amateur'> amateur </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/biglietti] biglietti [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/biglietti'> biglietti </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/little] little [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/little'> little </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/gameboy] gameboy [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/gameboy'> gameboy </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/sesso-con-cavalli] sesso con cavalli [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/sesso-con-cavalli'> sesso con cavalli </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/capelli] capelli [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/capelli'> capelli </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/arabe] arabe [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/arabe'> arabe </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/immagini-porno] immagini porno [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/immagini-porno'> immagini porno </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/mature] mature [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/mature'> mature </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/foto-mare] foto mare [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/foto-mare'> foto mare </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/soluzioni] soluzioni [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/soluzioni'> soluzioni </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/culo] culo [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/culo'> culo </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/disney] disney [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/disney'> disney </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/xxx-gratis] xxx gratis [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/xxx-gratis'> xxx gratis </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/supereva] supereva [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/supereva'> supereva </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/disegni] disegni [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/disegni'> disegni </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/bacio] bacio [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/bacio'> bacio </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/cartoon] cartoon [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/cartoon'> cartoon </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/mamma] mamma [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/mamma'> mamma </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/dolls] dolls [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/dolls'> dolls </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/goggle] goggle [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/goggle'> goggle </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/web-chat] web chat [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/web-chat'> web chat </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/fumetti] fumetti [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/fumetti'> fumetti </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/pavimenti] pavimenti [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/pavimenti'> pavimenti </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/amateur] amateur [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/amateur'> amateur </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/biglietti] biglietti [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/biglietti'> biglietti </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/little] little [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/little'> little </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/gameboy] gameboy [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/gameboy'> gameboy </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/sesso-con-cavalli] sesso con cavalli [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/sesso-con-cavalli'> sesso con cavalli </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/capelli] capelli [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/capelli'> capelli </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/arabe] arabe [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/arabe'> arabe </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/immagini-porno] immagini porno [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/immagini-porno'> immagini porno </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/mature] mature [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/mature'> mature </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/foto-mare] foto mare [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/foto-mare'> foto mare </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/soluzioni] soluzioni [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/soluzioni'> soluzioni </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/culo] culo [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/culo'> culo </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/disney] disney [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/disney'> disney </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/xxx-gratis] xxx gratis [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/xxx-gratis'> xxx gratis </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/supereva] supereva [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/supereva'> supereva </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/disegni] disegni [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/disegni'> disegni </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/bacio] bacio [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/bacio'> bacio </a> [URL= http://www.dreor29.info/cartoon] cartoon [/URL] <a href=' http://www.dreor29.info/cartoon'> cartoon </a> [URL= link to www.dreor29.info chat web cam </a>


News Media in America new all about 911 19.Sep.2007 17:25

Shame to say I'm American anymore

Look at our news videos on 911 there all VERY POOR quality. That day it was very sunny and clear.
If you look at Sweden tv it's clear as can be.
I don't trust our media any more.
We have a one race of people taking over our country.
AMERICA WHERE IN TROUBLE