Physics professor argues against official version of 9/11

"Nuts" explained....

Note that I am not attacking you "personally", nor am I calling you "names".

However, a nut is a nut is a nut!

Here's why I say that.

The last thing that the Bush Administration would want would be for its tremendous hold on the financial power in this nation to be disrupted in any way. There is no way you can slice or dice it where bringing down the Twin Towers doesn't accomplish that. Therefore, there is absolutely NO possibility that Bush or anyone else in the so-called "secret government" had anything to do with this. These facts alone completely demolish the pre-positioned demolitions conspiracy theory.

Now, let's assume that someone else placed the explosives. Someone with connections to the highest levels of security both nationally and locally. If that's not Bush and the federal government, who is it? Could al-Qaeda have done this on their own? Could some other group have co-opted hundreds of organizations and agencies to somehow get those explosives placed in the building? Or were they put there when it was built, for just such an event - and if so, by who?

The answers to these questions lead to the absurd very quickly. It is but one small step from the absurd to the insane - hence my liberal use of the word "nut"(s) to describe a reasoned analysis of those who have identified and present as a viable alternative the "pre-positioned explosives" theory.

Does that help?

 

I found Dr. Jones report to be quite informative.
Can we please discuss without name calling, what is written at:
http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html

Certainly after reading his work, which I find to be well- researched, I question the events of 9/11.

Dr. Jones starts his paper by discussing WTC 7 and the fact that it was never hit by a jet. He asks how did WTC 7 fall so " rapidly and symmetrically".

He goes on to ask more questions about the Twin Towers and WTC 7 could have collapsed due to "jet fuel".

" I presented my objections to the “official” theory at a seminar at BYU on September 22, 2005, to about sixty people. I also showed evidence and scientific arguments for the explosive demolition theory. In attendance were faculty from Physics, Mechanical Engineering, Civil Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Psychology, Geology, and Mathematics – and perhaps other departments as I did not recognize all of the people present. Two local universities were represented (BYU and Utah Valley State College).

The discussion was vigorous and lasted nearly two hours. It ended only when a university class needed the room. After presenting the material summarized here, including actually looking at and discussing the collapses of WTC 7 and the Towers, all except one attendee agreed (by hand-vote) that further investigation of the WTC collapses was called for. The next day, the dissenting professor said he had further thought about it and now agreed that more investigation was needed. He joined the others in hoping that the 6,899 photographs and 6,977 segments of video footage held by NIST plus others held by the FBI would be released for independent scrutiny; photos largely from private photographers (NIST, 2005, p. 81). We call for the release of these data to a cross-disciplinary, preferably international team of scientists and engineers."

Wow! Yes I concur, further investigation is needed without name calling or ridicule.

As for eyewitness accounts, and no one being alive, what about this from Dr. Jones paper:

"Firefighter Edward Cachia independently reported:

[We] thought there was like an internal detonation, explosives, because it went in succession, boom, boom, boom, boom, and then the tower came down…It actually gave at a lower floor, not the floor where the plane hit. (Dwyer, 2005; emphasis added.)"

http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/met_WTC_histories_01.html

http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyregion/20050812_WTC_GRAPHIC/Cachia_Edward.txt

I also agree with Dr. Jones statement, "That is precisely my point: further investigation and analyses are needed, including consideration of the controlled-demolition hypothesis which is neglected in all of the government reports".

Think about it. Our whole War on Terror is based on 9/11. Those 2,000 US deaths from the War are only from direct combat in Iraq, they are not totals from deaths occuring in hospitals. Furthermore, what about all of the deaths in the region from the US military?

Is it wrong to question? Can we question without resorting to personal attacks?

So again I will ask; has anyone here read Dr. Jones full report at the website, and if so, what do you think about it, without resorting to name calling?

 

This is how this person got inspired (according to the article):

Even more ridiculous (his own words again),

I was living in NY in 1993. Al Qeda back then tried to blow with explosives those buildings, the symbol of Western (or American) opulence and sumptuousness. They failed that time. It is absolutely clear for the TV images what happened that day. I find more believable Reginstein´s robots and annihilated antimatter conspiracy theory than that of this Physics professor. The guy may be looking for media exposure and notoriety. Or money. Or both. I think it is insulting to those who lost a relative or a friend.

 

Or maybe he's desperate to get one more obscure journal article to meet his publish or perish requirements.

 

It all reminds me much of the whole "grassy knoll" theories. People want desperately to believe something OTHER than the truth. It is definately a scary side the human mind.

 

So, you're denying there's a grassy knoll, are you?

 

Debunking The Myths

 

For anyone generally interested in debunking, please go to the site below.
http://www.skeptic.com
Jack

 

Re: "Nuts" explained....

You're using one conspiracy theory to dispel another.

 

A voice of reason in this madness.

 

Wonder if Jacques denies the Holocaust.

 

I wonder if this steps to Moloch and the Bohemian Grove and so on.

It's of course true that Bush Sr. is half-human and half of the lizard space aliens but that other stuff is just silly.

 

I'm not sure what to believe. Since neither of my degrees are in physics I can neither argue with a physics professor ... nor understand what he said.

 

http://infowars.com/articles/sept11/professor_jones_exposes_controlled_demo.htm

Here is a link to video of Dr. Jones on MSNBC.

 

Jimmy Clifton, why are you making racist innuendos toward me?

 

http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=855

What about this zogby poll?

 

Racist? Far, far from it. You seem to like to revise history, that's what my post is about. It's about revisionism, not racism.

 

"Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation
17. Change the subject. Usually in connection with one of the other ploys listed here, find a way to side-track the discussion with abrasive or controversial comments in hopes of turning attention to a new, more manageable topic. This works especially well with companions who can "argue" with you over the new topic and polarize the discussion arena in order to avoid discussing more key issues."
18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents. If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how 'sensitive they are to criticism.' "

Jimmy Clifton, why are you making racist innuendos toward me?

Because, of course, this is the implication that you are making to everyone when you make a comment about me like that.

By the way, which "holocaust" are you referring to? Are you referring to American Indians and that holocaust? Are you referring to the holocaust of animals and the abusive treatment of animals? 5-6 million animals are killed at animal shelters every year here in the US. Jimmy Clifton, are you referring to the 1932-33 genocide in which Josef Stalin's Soviet regime murdered seven million Ukrainians and sent two million more to concentration camps, are you sir, referring to that "holocaust"? Are you referring to the three million Gentile Poles that were killed by mass executions, starvation or in labor camps? Are you referring to the holocaust of the Chinese Cultural Revolution?

Jimmy Clifton, by "Holocaust", are you referring to what is commonly referred to as the Jewish Holocaust? While there is no argument that Hitler abhorred the Jews and caused almost six million to be ruthlessly killed, often non-Jewish victims are tragically forgotten from Holocaust remembrances. Eleven million precious human lives were lost during this time. Five million of these were non-Jewish. Three million were Polish Christians and Catholics. It would be very sad to forget even one precious life extinguished so ruthlessly. It would be a tragedy to forget five million. Furthermore, please be specific in which Holocaust you are referring to. It is shame to focus on only one holocaust, which I assume you were doing.

I am NOT NOW, nor at any time have I denied ANY of these terribly tragic deaths.

I submit, sir, that this is an attempt by you to make fun of me, and see if I will take your bait and post an ignorant reply.

Where have I made any "racist" statements? Because, of course implying that I am a Jewish Holocaust denier or any HOLOCAUST, that I am a racist. Where, where, where on earth did I EVER make any such statement?!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

My original posting was merely providing the link to a professor that questioned the physics of WTC 7 because I thought that it would be interesting to consider at the degreeinfo forum, since this forum does involve higher education.

I respectfully ask all members here who have common sense, to look again at my original post.

 

Again, I am not rewriting history. My original posting was the link of the professor who is not rewriting history, but he is rather calling for more investigations and asking questions. Have you Jimmy Clifton, read his paper?

 

Never mind the fact...

If someone was to go to all of the trouble to plant explosives to bring down a building why would they then go to the additional trouble of hijacking the planes?

If you posit it was a government plot there are much easier ways to do it and still blame it on the Arabs.

The debate on this can rapidly approach the absurd.

On the other hand, since Carl is being so logical, why would Bush and the Neo Cons lie about WMD so they could invade knowing that the invasion would reveal them to be a bunch of liars. One would think they would have at least made some effort to plant something if they knew they were lying.

Just not logical....