WTC 9/11 Buildings Were Controlled De...

WTC 9/11 Buildings Were Controlled Demolition

Posted in the Top Stories Forum

First Prev
of 8
Next Last

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#1 Sep 9, 2011
By Dr. Steven E. Jones
Physicist and Archaeometrist
The views in this paper are the sole responsibility of the author.

http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200...

In this paper, I call for a serious investigation of the hypothesis that WTC 7 and the Twin Towers were brought down, not just by impact damage and fires, but through the use of pre-positioned cutter-charges. I consider the official FEMA, NIST, and 9-11 Commission reports that fires plus impact damage alone caused complete collapses of all three buildings. And I present evidence for the controlled-demolition hypothesis, which is
suggested by the available data, and can be tested scientifically, and yet has not been analyzed in any of the reports funded by the US government.

On the basis of photographic and video evidence as well as related data and analyses, I provide thirteen reasons for rejecting the official hypothesis, according to which fire and impact damage caused the collapse of the Twin Towers and WTC 7, in favor of the
controlled-demolition hypothesis. The goal of this paper is to promote further scrutiny of the official government-sponsored reports as well as serious investigation of the controlleddemolition hypothesis.(No rebuttal of my arguments for in-depth investigation can be complete, of course, unless it addresses all of these points.)

Judged:

13

13

13

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#2 Sep 9, 2011
For more than three months, structural steel from
the World Trade Center has been and continues to
be cut up and sold for scrap. Crucial evidence that
could answer many questions about high-rise
building design practices and performance under
fire conditions is on the slow boat to China, perhaps never to be seen again in America until you
buy your next car.
Such destruction of evidence shows the astounding
ignorance of government officials to the value
of a thorough, scientific investigation of the largest fire-induced collapse in world history. I have combed through our national standard for fire investigation, NFPA 921, but nowhere in it does one
find an exemption allowing the destruction of evidence for buildings over 10 stories tall.

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#3 Sep 9, 2011
From a NIST FAQ:[Question:]“Did the NIST investigation
look for evidence of the WTC towers being brought
down by controlled demolition? Was the steel tested for explosives
or thermite residues? The combination of thermite
and sulfur (called thermate) "slices through steel like a hot
knife through butter." [Answer:] NIST did not test for the
residue of these compounds in the steel”

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#4 Sep 9, 2011
"..what about that letter where NIST said it
didn't look for evidence of explosives?” Neuman
[spokesperson at NIST, listed on the WTC report]:
"Right, because there was no evidence of that."
Abel: But how can you know there's no evidence if
you don't look for it first?

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#5 Sep 9, 2011
The evident evasiveness of this answer might be humorous if not for the fact that NIST’s approach here affects the lives of so many innocent people. We do not think that looking for thermite or other residues specified in the NFPA 921 code is “wasting your time.” We may be able to help out
here as well, for we have looked for such residues in the WTC remains using state-of-the-art analytical methods, especially in the voluminous toxic dust that was produced as the buildings fell and killed thousands of people, and the evidence for thermite use is mounting.

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#6 Sep 9, 2011
Right and cell phones are good for your brain. There is no evidence to the contrary.

Thats because nobody is looking for any evidence that cell phones are bad for your brain.

DUH and or what ?

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#7 Sep 9, 2011
NIST

“…we are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse”

“Taste great in milk!”

Since: Aug 08

.

#8 Sep 9, 2011
Huh.

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#9 Sep 9, 2011
Even articles in peer reviewed journals who agree with at least 14 points of the official government report NIST do not know why the buildings came down the way they did.

http://www.benthamscience.com/open/tociej/art...

“Taste great in milk!”

Since: Aug 08

.

#10 Sep 9, 2011
Yup.

“DECEPTION = MOST POWERFUL ”

Since: Jul 11

POLITICAL FORCE ON THE PLANET

#11 Sep 9, 2011
"Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would
be the fact that all the fuel (from the airplane)
would dump into the building. There would be a
horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed,"
he said. "The building structure would still be
there."

Skilling - a recognized expert in tall buildings -
doesn't think a single 200-pound car bomb would
topple or do major structural damage to a Trade
Center tower. The supporting columns are closely
spaced and even if several were disabled, the others would carry the load.
…Although Skilling is not an explosives expert,
he says there are people who do know enough about building demolition to bring a structure like the Trade Center down.
"I would imagine that if you took the top expert in
that type of work and gave him the assignment of
bringing these buildings down with explosives, I
would bet that he could do it." [6]
PigPie Face

San Anselmo, CA

#12 Sep 9, 2011
Now this is the truth

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Nanton, Canada

#13 Sep 9, 2011
You already have a thread for this birther.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Nanton, Canada

#14 Sep 9, 2011
Would you first like to address how your "peer" reviewed article from the urinalof911stundies.com changes vernacular from "molten mental" to " molten steel" all dishonest like with no proof that there was any molten steel?

Or do you just mindlessly accept anything that supports your delusional view of the world regardless of its veracity?

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Nanton, Canada

#15 Sep 9, 2011
PigPie Face wrote:
Now this is the truth
Slurp and swallow...that won't require thinking so it should be right up your alley.

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Nanton, Canada

#16 Sep 9, 2011
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
For more than three months, structural steel from
the World Trade Center has been and continues to
be cut up and sold for scrap. Crucial evidence that
could answer many questions about high-rise
building design practices and performance under
fire conditions is on the slow boat to China, perhaps never to be seen again in America until you
buy your next car.
Such destruction of evidence shows the astounding
ignorance of government officials to the value
of a thorough, scientific investigation of the largest fire-induced collapse in world history. I have combed through our national standard for fire investigation, NFPA 921, but nowhere in it does one
find an exemption allowing the destruction of evidence for buildings over 10 stories tall.
NFPA 921 is a code, not a law and how much of the steel would you say should have been saved and why.

Please answer from a technical POV as if you were the one conducting the investigation.

Oh and, all of the steel was first brought to Fresh Kills land fill, examined for signs that it may be useful to the investigation then the decision on what was kept and what was'nt was made.

The claim that it was all shipped off to China is yet another example of twoof cult dishonesty.

BTW, you do realise that when steel is tested the entire piece isn't required right?

In fact companies I work for routinely test steel by removing a section, called a coupon, and sendingn it off for analysis. So why should it have been different for the WTC steel?

“Twoof, a true act of ignorance”

Since: Jun 09

Nanton, Canada

#17 Sep 9, 2011
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
"..what about that letter where NIST said it
didn't look for evidence of explosives?” Neuman
[spokesperson at NIST, listed on the WTC report]:
"Right, because there was no evidence of that."
Abel: But how can you know there's no evidence if
you don't look for it first?
They never dusted for bigfoots finger prints either.

OMFG!!!!

If the viual examination of the steel yields no evidence for bombs theen why test for it?

And you do know metallurgical analysis' were also done too right?

And that those tests would have revealed traces of expolsives had they been present?

And what about all the daul trained dogs on site that would have found explosives residues?

Were the puppies in on it too....birther?

“Google Operation Northwoods”

Since: Aug 10

** 9-11 was an inside job **

#18 Sep 9, 2011
WTC 9/11 Buildings Were Controlled Demolition

Visuals tell it all....
http://www.google.com/url...
.
http://www.google.com/url...

Since: Jun 07

Manhattan, New York

#19 Sep 9, 2011
"We screwed up. We had never seen the CBS video when we claimed that it took WTC 7 6.5 seconds to collapse. We only relied on the street video that does not show the Penthouses. By the time we saw the CBS video, we had so much invested in the 6.5-second collapse time, we could not disappoint our supporters who were successfully using the 6.5 free fall time to push 9/11 Truth. We just ignored the evidence - Dr Steven E. Jones May 19th 2007

We just ignored the evidence - Dr Steven E. Jones May 19th 2007

NOW THAT SAYS IT ALL !!!!!!!!!
Dr_Zorderz wrote:
By Dr. Steven E. Jones
Physicist and Archaeometrist
The views in this paper are the sole responsibility of the author.
http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200...
In this paper, I call for a serious investigation of the hypothesis that WTC 7 and the Twin Towers were brought down, not just by impact damage and fires, but through the use of pre-positioned cutter-charges. I consider the official FEMA, NIST, and 9-11 Commission reports that fires plus impact damage alone caused complete collapses of all three buildings. And I present evidence for the controlled-demolition hypothesis, which is
suggested by the available data, and can be tested scientifically, and yet has not been analyzed in any of the reports funded by the US government.
On the basis of photographic and video evidence as well as related data and analyses, I provide thirteen reasons for rejecting the official hypothesis, according to which fire and impact damage caused the collapse of the Twin Towers and WTC 7, in favor of the
controlled-demolition hypothesis. The goal of this paper is to promote further scrutiny of the official government-sponsored reports as well as serious investigation of the controlleddemolition hypothesis.(No rebuttal of my arguments for in-depth investigation can be complete, of course, unless it addresses all of these points.)
And Magically

Redondo Beach, CA

#20 Sep 9, 2011
RADEKT wrote:
"We screwed up. We had never seen the CBS video when we claimed that it took WTC 7 6.5 seconds to collapse. We only relied on the street video that does not show the Penthouses. By the time we saw the CBS video, we had so much invested in the 6.5-second collapse time, we could not disappoint our supporters who were successfully using the 6.5 free fall time to push 9/11 Truth. We just ignored the evidence - Dr Steven E. Jones May 19th 2007
We just ignored the evidence - Dr Steven E. Jones May 19th 2007
NOW THAT SAYS IT ALL !!!!!!!!!
<quoted text>
UH OH! And AGAIN we have the porkpie douche FOLLOWED by the RATDOUCHE. COINKY DINK? I THINK NOT!!!!
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 8
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing 2 min Buck Crick 18,283
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 6 min Gabriel 983,482
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 8 min kent 684,041
MESSAGE 4 Kyrie Irving of the Cleveland Cavaliers 1 hr Doctor REALITY 6
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 1 hr lil whispers 619,715
We Real Americans Love President Trump!! 3 hr Gismys 1
harthside COOKIES 5 hr C eh N eh D eh 2
More from around the web