| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Patrick Brown
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 10 Oct 2006
Posts: 1201
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Patrick Brown
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 10 Oct 2006
Posts: 1201
|
 Posted: Sun Oct 22, 2006 11:27 am Post subject: |
 |
|
On page 13 of Jones paper he explains where he got his samples from:
| Jones wrote: | | The provenience of the WTC dust sample is an apartment at 113 Cedar Street in New York City, NY. A memorial constructed from structural steel from the WTC Towers located at Clarkson University in Potsdam, New York, is the source of previously-molten metal samples. Porous, solidified splatter found with the compacted dirt from this memorial is being analyzed. |
_________________
We check the evidence and then archive it: www.911evidencebase.co.uk
Get the Steven E Jones reports >HERE< |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Patrick Brown
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 10 Oct 2006
Posts: 1201
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 22, 2006 6:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well I read it all and I thought it was pretty compelling stuff here's a few snippets:
| Quote: | Review of videotape recordings of the collapse taken from various angles indicates that
the transmission tower on top of the structure began to move downward and laterally
slightly before movement was evident at the exterior wall. This suggests that collapse
began with one or more failures in the central core area of the building. (FEMA,
2002, chapter 2; emphasis added.)
North Tower showing antenna (top) at beginning of collapse.
Yes, we can see for ourselves that the antenna drops first from videos of the North Tower
collapse. (See http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/videos/wtc1_close_frames.html ; also
http://home.comcast.net/~skydrifter/collapse.htm.) A NY Times article also notes this behavior:
The building stood for more than an hour and a half. Videos of the north tower's collapse
appear to show that its television antenna began to drop a fraction of a second before the
rest of the building. The observations suggest that the building's steel core somehow
gave way first… (Glanz and Lipton, 2002; emphasis added)
But how? What caused the 47 enormous steel core columns of this building which supported the
antenna to evidently give way nearly simultaneously, if not cutter charges?
The anomalous early antenna-drop was noted by the FEMA report (FEMA, 2002) and the
New York Times (Glanz and Lipton, 2002) yet not resolved in the official reports (FEMA, 2002;
Commission, 2004; NIST, 2005). The NIST report notes that:
...photographic and videographic records taken from due north of the WTC 1 collapse
appeared to indicate that the antenna was sinking into the roof {McAllister 2002}.
When records from east and west vantage points were viewed, it was apparent that the
building section above the impact area tilted to the south as the building collapsed.
(NIST, 2005) |
This part was interesting as the calculation of the explosives needed is much less than the debunkers suggest.
| Quote: | One of the people a thorough investigation should question would be demolition expert
Mark Loizeaux, president of Controlled Demolition, Inc. Speaking of the way the WTC
buildings came down, he said in an interview: “If I were to bring the towers down, I would put explosives in the basement to get the weight of the building to help collapse the
structure.” (Bollyn, 2002; emphasis added.)
Just right – “explosives in the basement” agrees with eyewitness reports of pre-collapse
explosions down low in the buildings (point 7 above). Also, this would be the way to effectively
sever the support columns, consistent with both the apparent initial drop of the communication
tower (WTC Tower 1) and the “kink” in the middle of WTC 7 as its collapse began. Yes, and as
president of Controlled Demolition, Inc., Mr. Loizeaux would know the “handful of demolition
companies in the world [that] will attempt” a symmetrical controlled demolition or "implosion".
(Harris, 2000) His company is certainly one of these and was hired to help in the rapid clean-up
work following the building collapses.
In summary, we have discovered substantial evidence supporting the idea that thermites
were used on the steel columns of the WTC Tower to weaken the huge steel supports, not long
before explosives finished the demolition job. We can next estimate the amount of explosives
needed by comparing with a known controlled demolition: the explosive demolition of the
Landmark Tower.
“The explosive charges used to bring down the Landmark Tower [380 ft tall,
30 stories] weighed only 364 pounds [165 kilograms], consisting of 198 pounds
of 60-percent nitroglycerine-based gel in 1-1/4 inch sticks, and 166 pounds of
RDX (a C-4 derivative)." http://www.acppubs.com/article/CA6325450.html
Scaling to the 110-story WTC Towers, roughly 1300 pounds [590 kg] of explosives per Tower
would suffice. Scaling to the size of WTC 7, 570 pounds [260 kg] would be indicated. The
videos referenced above show WTC 7 falling top-down, in conventional controlled demolition
fashion. On the other hand, the Towers were evidently demolished from the top downward,
which although unusual is certainly possible using explosives. Indeed, for very tall towers such
as these, top-down demolition seems be the best approach, to avoid toppling over of the tower
onto surrounding buildings. |
Read full text or download full PDF here: http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=5011
_________________
We check the evidence and then archive it: www.911evidencebase.co.uk
Get the Steven E Jones reports >HERE< |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ian neal
Angel - now passed away
Joined: 26 Jul 2005
Posts: 3140
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2006 12:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
FYI
Steve Jones Announces Early Retirement From BYU
Friends and Colleagues:
BYU issued a press release today -- I have elected to take early retirement from BYU. I don't have the actual release -- it will be in local papers tomorrow and may be on the BYU web site now.
I feel that this is a good move for me. I have been contacted by another school about joining their faculty, and may do so -- but no decision on that yet. I think it will work out for the best. I assure you all that I will continue in my research on 9/11 issues, and speaking out -- should have more time for these activities in fact.
With this window of opportunity, I sent the letter below to local newspapers; perhaps it could be posted at st911.org, Jim, if you wish. "Dr. Jones letter to newspaper editors upon announcement of his retirement from BYU," or something like that.
I feel good about this -- not angry with BYU, moving on and happy with it overall.
Thanks for all your support, especially to those who signed the petition at st911.org in my behalf.
My sincere thanks to all my friends in the 9/11 truth community worldwide; we have a great, growing community of intelligent, caring people. We can do this!
Sincerely,
Steven E. Jones
Physicist
20 October 2006 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Patrick Brown
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 10 Oct 2006
Posts: 1201
|
| Posted: Mon Oct 23, 2006 1:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah got that, it's on anouther thread in the news section I think.
Thanx anyway.
_________________
We check the evidence and then archive it: www.911evidencebase.co.uk
Get the Steven E Jones reports >HERE< |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
