|
MP3
ALBUM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DUBROOM
ARTICLE SECTION |
|
|
| BYU
Professor disputes planes caused WTC
collapse |
| The
physics of 9/11 — including how fast and
symmetrically one of the World Trade Center
buildings fell — prove that official
explanations of the collapses are wrong,
says a Brigham Young University physics
professor.
|
|
Y. professor thinks bombs, not planes, toppled
WTC
By Elaine Jarvik
Deseret Morning News
The physics of 9/11 — including how fast and
symmetrically one of the World Trade Center
buildings fell — prove that official
explanations of the collapses are wrong, says a
Brigham Young University physics professor.
In fact, it's likely that there were
"pre-positioned explosives" in all three
buildings at ground zero, says Steven E. Jones.
In a paper posted online Tuesday and accepted for
peer-reviewed publication next year, Jones adds
his voice to those of previous skeptics, including
the authors of the Web site www.wtc7.net, whose
research Jones quotes. Jones' article can be found
at www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html.
Jones, who conducts research in fusion and solar
energy at BYU, is calling for an independent,
international scientific investigation
"guided not by politicized notions and
constraints but rather by observations and
calculations.
"It is quite plausible that explosives were
pre-planted in all three buildings and set off
after the two plane crashes — which were
actually a diversion tactic," he writes.
"Muslims are (probably) not to blame for
bringing down the WTC buildings after all,"
Jones writes.
As for speculation about who might have planted
the explosives, Jones said, "I don't usually
go there. There's no point in doing that until we
do the scientific investigation."
Previous investigations, including those of FEMA,
the 9/11 Commission and NIST (the National
Institutes of Standards and Technology), ignore
the physics and chemistry of what happened on
Sept. 11, 2001, to the Twin Towers and the
47-story building known as WTC 7, he says. The
official explanation — that fires caused
structural damage that caused the buildings to
collapse — can't be backed up by either testing
or history, he says.
Jones acknowledges that there have been "junk
science" conspiracy theories about what
happened on 9/11, but "the explosive
demolition hypothesis better satisfies tests of
repeatability and parsimony and therefore is not
'junk science.' "
In a 9,000-word article that Jones says will be
published in the book "The Hidden History of
9/11," by Elsevier, Jones offers these
arguments:
- 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.
Jones says he became interested in the physics
of the WTC collapse after attending a talk last
spring given by a woman who had had a near-death
experience. The woman mentioned in passing that
"if you think the World Trade Center
buildings came down just due to fire, you have a
lot of surprises ahead of you," Jones
remembers, at which point "everyone around me
started applauding."
Following several months of study, he presented
his findings at a talk at BYU in September.
Jones says he would like the government to release
6,899 photographs and 6,977 segments of video
footage for "independent scrutiny." He
would also like to analyze a small sample of the
molten metal found at Ground Zero.
|
|
|
|
|
|
DISCLAIMER |
|
In
case the article on this page was quoted from
another source, the two following statements
apply:
-1- Fair Use policy applies since the quote is for
non-profit educational and research purposes only.
For more information, go to: http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html
-2- The DUBROOM has no affiliation whatsoever with
the originator of the articles nor is The DUBROOM
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.
|
|
|
|
ADVERTIZEMENT
www.reggaeloops.com |
|
|
|
|
|
