Physics Professor's Peer Reviewed Paper on WTC CONTROLLED DEMOLITIONS on 9/11

"TRUTH" wrote in message
...
Tenured Physics Professor Steven E Jones gave two seminars to hundreds of
people on WTC controlled demolitions and how the government's version of
events "defies physics". The Feb 1st seminar can be viewed on Google
Video, or downloaded to your computer.


The following is a excerpt from Jones' PEER REVIEWED paper:

"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 controlled 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. A local university and college 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, only one attendee disagreed (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."



Professor Jones now has dozens of people suporting him. His finding are
based on scientific evidence and logical reasoning.

In other words, you won't find any people using terms like kook, tin foil
hat, or any other childish terms. The people who understand his
scientific evidence are clear minded and not closed asshole headed like a
lot of people in this newsgroup seem to be. You people are pathetic.


You stupid people don't know anything about anything when it comes to
9/11.

The airplanes were flown by remote control. The events were for the
purpose of building public support to invade Afghanistan and Iraq. Some
of you will still deny this fact. If so, it will be because your thinking
process is too much filled with tin foil hat commments, and you're too
stupid and brainwashed to understand real evidence


So when Atta come over the ATC frequency on accident instead of the onboard
PA that was just all computer controlled? What about the people on the
planes who said that they seen the hijackers enter the cockpit while on the
phones to their families? I guess all this "data" doesn't fit into the grand
conspiracy that you have cooked up.

Let's see. Muslim terrorists hijack airliners and crash then into buildings
because they can't get away from the death cult of Islam OR the goobermint
faked it all to start an unpopular war where nothing has been gained. Gee
that is a toughy.

-------------------------------------------
DW

"Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote in
:


"TRUTH" wrote in message
...
Tenured Physics Professor Steven E Jones gave two seminars to
hundreds of people on WTC controlled demolitions and how the
government's version of events "defies physics". The Feb 1st seminar
can be viewed on Google Video, or downloaded to your computer.


The following is a excerpt from Jones' PEER REVIEWED paper:

"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 controlled 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. A local university and college
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, only one attendee
disagreed (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."



Professor Jones now has dozens of people suporting him. His finding
are based on scientific evidence and logical reasoning.

In other words, you won't find any people using terms like kook, tin
foil hat, or any other childish terms. The people who understand his
scientific evidence are clear minded and not closed asshole headed
like a lot of people in this newsgroup seem to be. You people are
pathetic.


You stupid people don't know anything about anything when it comes to
9/11.

The airplanes were flown by remote control. The events were for the
purpose of building public support to invade Afghanistan and Iraq.
Some of you will still deny this fact. If so, it will be because your
thinking process is too much filled with tin foil hat commments, and
you're too stupid and brainwashed to understand real evidence


So when Atta come over the ATC frequency on accident instead of the
onboard PA that was just all computer controlled? What about the
people on the planes who said that they seen the hijackers enter the
cockpit while on the phones to their families? I guess all this "data"
doesn't fit into the grand conspiracy that you have cooked up.


As I said before, the telephone calls were all faked, using new voice
synthesizer technology.


When was the last you called your mom and told her your last name?

"Mom, this is Mark Bingham"

http://www.thewebfairy.com/killtown/chart.html



Let's see. Muslim terrorists hijack airliners and crash then into
buildings because they can't get away from the death cult of Islam OR
the goobermint faked it all to start an unpopular war where nothing
has been gained. Gee that is a toughy.

-------------------------------------------
DW



I'm sorry, but the evil doers are in our own government

"TRUTH" wrote in message
...
"Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote in
:


"TRUTH" wrote in message
...
Tenured Physics Professor Steven E Jones gave two seminars to
hundreds of people on WTC controlled demolitions and how the
government's version of events "defies physics". The Feb 1st seminar
can be viewed on Google Video, or downloaded to your computer.


The following is a excerpt from Jones' PEER REVIEWED paper:

"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 controlled 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. A local university and college
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, only one attendee
disagreed (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."



Professor Jones now has dozens of people suporting him. His finding
are based on scientific evidence and logical reasoning.

In other words, you won't find any people using terms like kook, tin
foil hat, or any other childish terms. The people who understand his
scientific evidence are clear minded and not closed asshole headed
like a lot of people in this newsgroup seem to be. You people are
pathetic.


You stupid people don't know anything about anything when it comes to
9/11.

The airplanes were flown by remote control. The events were for the
purpose of building public support to invade Afghanistan and Iraq.
Some of you will still deny this fact. If so, it will be because your
thinking process is too much filled with tin foil hat commments, and
you're too stupid and brainwashed to understand real evidence


So when Atta come over the ATC frequency on accident instead of the
onboard PA that was just all computer controlled? What about the
people on the planes who said that they seen the hijackers enter the
cockpit while on the phones to their families? I guess all this "data"
doesn't fit into the grand conspiracy that you have cooked up.


As I said before, the telephone calls were all faked, using new voice
synthesizer technology.


When was the last you called your mom and told her your last name?

"Mom, this is Mark Bingham"

http://www.thewebfairy.com/killtown/chart.html



The people on the other end sure seemed to be convinced they were talking to
their loved ones. Your "facts" are utter bull****. How convenient that we
have new voice synthesizer technology. The government is to incompetent to
do anything close to this magnitude.

----------------------------------------------
DW

"Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote in
:


"TRUTH" wrote in message
...
"Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote in
:


"TRUTH" wrote in message
...
Tenured Physics Professor Steven E Jones gave two seminars to
hundreds of people on WTC controlled demolitions and how the
government's version of events "defies physics". The Feb 1st
seminar can be viewed on Google Video, or downloaded to your
computer.


The following is a excerpt from Jones' PEER REVIEWED paper:

"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 controlled 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. A local university and
college 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, only one attendee
disagreed (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."



Professor Jones now has dozens of people suporting him. His finding
are based on scientific evidence and logical reasoning.

In other words, you won't find any people using terms like kook,
tin foil hat, or any other childish terms. The people who
understand his scientific evidence are clear minded and not closed
asshole headed like a lot of people in this newsgroup seem to be.
You people are pathetic.


You stupid people don't know anything about anything when it comes
to 9/11.

The airplanes were flown by remote control. The events were for the
purpose of building public support to invade Afghanistan and Iraq.
Some of you will still deny this fact. If so, it will be because
your thinking process is too much filled with tin foil hat
commments, and you're too stupid and brainwashed to understand real
evidence


So when Atta come over the ATC frequency on accident instead of the
onboard PA that was just all computer controlled? What about the
people on the planes who said that they seen the hijackers enter the
cockpit while on the phones to their families? I guess all this
"data" doesn't fit into the grand conspiracy that you have cooked
up.


As I said before, the telephone calls were all faked, using new voice
synthesizer technology.


When was the last you called your mom and told her your last name?

"Mom, this is Mark Bingham"

http://www.thewebfairy.com/killtown/chart.html



The people on the other end sure seemed to be convinced they were
talking to their loved ones. Your "facts" are utter bull****. How
convenient that we have new voice synthesizer technology. The
government is to incompetent to do anything close to this magnitude.

----------------------------------------------
DW




Umm.. no they weren't. Some of them stated that they did not act like
their loved ones. The government version of 9/11 is utter bull****. There
are no facts to back them up.


Here are some 9/11 FACTS. They are indisputable. You disagree? Prove it.
Believe me, you won't be able to.



FACT: Never before in world history has a steel framed building
completely collapsed from fire. Not before 9/11, not after 9/11.
Never!

FACT: WTC 7 was ***NOT*** hit by an airplane!

FACT: WTC 7 collapsed from "fire and debris", according to the government

FACT: The WTC 7 collapse mimicked controlled demolition, as did the
Towers. They all collapsed almost symmetrically, near free fall speed,
into their own footprints.

FACT: There were small puffs of smoke (known as squibs) coming out of
all three buildings, a sign of controlled demolitions.

FACT: Explosives expert Van Romero said just days after 9/11 that he
could tell all three buildings collapsed from controlled demolition just
by watching the video footage

FACT: Romero recanted just a few days later without giving any scientific
explanation as to why. He was then promoted.

FACT: WTC 7 leaseholder Larry Silverstein bought a 99 yr lease on the
entire WTC complex just six weeks before 9/11, which just happened to
include terrorist attack insurance

FACT: The structural engineer that worked for Silverstein's insurance
company told the Discovery Channel that the Towers' massive vertical
columns all failed simultaneously, and mimicked controlled demolition

FACT: Silverstein said WTC7 was "pulled" on a PBS documentary

FACT: In that same documentary, a construction worker used the word
"pull" as slang for "professionally demolish"

FACT: The WTC7 fire alarm was put into "test mode" the morning of 9/11

FACT: Silverstein was absent from his 88th floor office in the North
Tower on the morning of 9/11 due to a "doctors appointment"

FACT: Over a hundred witnesses have made statements of explosions

FACT: The FBI was going under the assumption that bombs were in the
buildings.

FACT: The FDNY Chief Of Safely told an NBC reporter there might be a
secondary device in the building

FACT: FDNY personnel (including Fire Commissioners, Fire Marshals,
Captains, and Lieutenants) reported flashes, bombs, and explosions
that they compared to controlled demolitions.

FACT: Many of the FDNY personnel above stated that controlled demolition
was their gut instinct.

FACT: The NIST investigators made the assumption that collapse initiation
would "inevitably" lead to global collapse, despite the fact that it
never happened before in world history.

FACT: The NIST investigators performed little analysis of the structural
behavior of the Towers following collapse initiation

FACT: The NIST investigators altered the data for their computer
simulations

FACT: The NIST investigators refuse to show their computer simulation
model despite calls from leading structural and fire engineers.

"TRUTH" wrote in message
...
"Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote in
:


"TRUTH" wrote in message
...
"Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote in
:


"TRUTH" wrote in message
...
Tenured Physics Professor Steven E Jones gave two seminars to
hundreds of people on WTC controlled demolitions and how the
government's version of events "defies physics". The Feb 1st
seminar can be viewed on Google Video, or downloaded to your
computer.


The following is a excerpt from Jones' PEER REVIEWED paper:

"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 controlled 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. A local university and
college 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, only one attendee
disagreed (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."



Professor Jones now has dozens of people suporting him. His finding
are based on scientific evidence and logical reasoning.

In other words, you won't find any people using terms like kook,
tin foil hat, or any other childish terms. The people who
understand his scientific evidence are clear minded and not closed
asshole headed like a lot of people in this newsgroup seem to be.
You people are pathetic.


You stupid people don't know anything about anything when it comes
to 9/11.

The airplanes were flown by remote control. The events were for the
purpose of building public support to invade Afghanistan and Iraq.
Some of you will still deny this fact. If so, it will be because
your thinking process is too much filled with tin foil hat
commments, and you're too stupid and brainwashed to understand real
evidence


So when Atta come over the ATC frequency on accident instead of the
onboard PA that was just all computer controlled? What about the
people on the planes who said that they seen the hijackers enter the
cockpit while on the phones to their families? I guess all this
"data" doesn't fit into the grand conspiracy that you have cooked
up.


As I said before, the telephone calls were all faked, using new voice
synthesizer technology.


When was the last you called your mom and told her your last name?

"Mom, this is Mark Bingham"

http://www.thewebfairy.com/killtown/chart.html



The people on the other end sure seemed to be convinced they were
talking to their loved ones. Your "facts" are utter bull****. How
convenient that we have new voice synthesizer technology. The
government is to incompetent to do anything close to this magnitude.

----------------------------------------------
DW




Umm.. no they weren't. Some of them stated that they did not act like
their loved ones. The government version of 9/11 is utter bull****. There
are no facts to back them up.


Here are some 9/11 FACTS. They are indisputable. You disagree? Prove it.
Believe me, you won't be able to.



FACT: Never before in world history has a steel framed building
completely collapsed from fire. Not before 9/11, not after 9/11.
Never!

No building has ever had a terrorist fly a completely loaded B757 into it
either.


FACT: WTC 7 was ***NOT*** hit by an airplane!

Falling debris took that down.


FACT: WTC 7 collapsed from "fire and debris", according to the government

Good call.


FACT: The WTC 7 collapse mimicked controlled demolition, as did the
Towers. They all collapsed almost symmetrically, near free fall speed,
into their own footprints.

It fell after the damage finally took its toll, big whoop.


FACT: There were small puffs of smoke (known as squibs) coming out of
all three buildings, a sign of controlled demolitions.

That is the levels pancaking on top of one another, the building didn't
simply "fall over".


FACT: Explosives expert Van Romero said just days after 9/11 that he
could tell all three buildings collapsed from controlled demolition just
by watching the video footage

There are plenty of "experts" that are wrong.


FACT: Romero recanted just a few days later without giving any scientific
explanation as to why. He was then promoted.


And.....

FACT: WTC 7 leaseholder Larry Silverstein bought a 99 yr lease on the
entire WTC complex just six weeks before 9/11, which just happened to
include terrorist attack insurance

That was not the first time the WTC had been terrorist attacked, DUH!


FACT: The structural engineer that worked for Silverstein's insurance
company told the Discovery Channel that the Towers' massive vertical
columns all failed simultaneously, and mimicked controlled demolition


Mimicked doesn't mean is.


FACT: Silverstein said WTC7 was "pulled" on a PBS documentary


They decided to not try and save it, once again big whoop.


FACT: In that same documentary, a construction worker used the word
"pull" as slang for "professionally demolish"

See above.


FACT: The WTC7 fire alarm was put into "test mode" the morning of 9/11


And this could of been standard issue or bad timing, happens every day.


FACT: Silverstein was absent from his 88th floor office in the North
Tower on the morning of 9/11 due to a "doctors appointment"


Oh my god he went to the doctor???!


FACT: Over a hundred witnesses have made statements of explosions


All sorts of **** was going crazy, eyewitness testimony is notoriously
BOGUS.


FACT: The FBI was going under the assumption that bombs were in the
buildings.


As well they should in any kind of terrorist incident.


FACT: The FDNY Chief Of Safely told an NBC reporter there might be a
secondary device in the building

MIGHT doesn't mean WAS.



FACT: FDNY personnel (including Fire Commissioners, Fire Marshals,
Captains, and Lieutenants) reported flashes, bombs, and explosions
that they compared to controlled demolitions.


Once again it doesn't prove ****.


FACT: Many of the FDNY personnel above stated that controlled demolition
was their gut instinct.


See above. Experts are wrong a lot.


FACT: The NIST investigators made the assumption that collapse initiation
would "inevitably" lead to global collapse, despite the fact that it
never happened before in world history.

When 30% of the upper part of a high rise building has tons of JetA on fire
as well as office equipment and more on fire it is no wonder that the
buildings couldn't take that weight and structual damage.


FACT: The NIST investigators performed little analysis of the structural
behavior of the Towers following collapse initiation


The building fell down and the reason was pretty ****ing easy to see, fully
loaded jets heading aross the country full of Jet A hit the building at high
speed and exploded. Doesn't take a rocket scientist.

FACT: The NIST investigators altered the data for their computer
simulations


Says the conspiracy nut....

FACT: The NIST investigators refuse to show their computer simulation
model despite calls from leading structural and fire engineers.

Bull****.

In article ,
TRUTH wrote:

WTC7 was NOT hit by an airplane.

Neither were the other buildings in the area, but the fires and other
damage sure affected them, too.

Chad Irby wrote in news:cirby-195812.22014022022006
@news-server1.tampabay.rr.com:

In article ,
TRUTH wrote:

WTC7 was NOT hit by an airplane.

Neither were the other buildings in the area, but the fires and other
damage sure affected them, too.




WTC7 collapsed in classic controlled demolition style.

In article ,
TRUTH wrote:

Chad Irby wrote in news:cirby-195812.22014022022006
@news-server1.tampabay.rr.com:

In article ,
TRUTH wrote:

WTC7 was NOT hit by an airplane.

Neither were the other buildings in the area, but the fires and other
damage sure affected them, too.

WTC7 collapsed in classic controlled demolition style.

Nope. I saw the tapes. It collapsed in classic "steel weakened by
damage and fires" style.

Some fools have tried to claim otherwise, but it's just more crap from
the looneytoons brigade.

Chad Irby wrote in news:cirby-A53043.00160223022006
@news-server1.tampabay.rr.com:

In article ,
TRUTH wrote:

Chad Irby wrote in news:cirby-195812.22014022022006
@news-server1.tampabay.rr.com:

In article ,
TRUTH wrote:

WTC7 was NOT hit by an airplane.

Neither were the other buildings in the area, but the fires and
other
damage sure affected them, too.

WTC7 collapsed in classic controlled demolition style.

Nope. I saw the tapes. It collapsed in classic "steel weakened by
damage and fires" style.

Some fools have tried to claim otherwise, but it's just more crap from
the looneytoons brigade.



You're now resorting to childish comments because you obviously know I'm
right.

WHACKO!