View Single Post
  #7   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-07-2006, 23:21
JoeXIII'007's Avatar
JoeXIII'007 JoeXIII'007 is offline
Pragmatic Strategy, I try...
AKA: Joeseph Smith
FRC #0066
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: Ypsilanti, MI (Ann Arbor's shadow)
Posts: 753
JoeXIII'007 has a reputation beyond reputeJoeXIII'007 has a reputation beyond reputeJoeXIII'007 has a reputation beyond reputeJoeXIII'007 has a reputation beyond reputeJoeXIII'007 has a reputation beyond reputeJoeXIII'007 has a reputation beyond reputeJoeXIII'007 has a reputation beyond reputeJoeXIII'007 has a reputation beyond reputeJoeXIII'007 has a reputation beyond reputeJoeXIII'007 has a reputation beyond reputeJoeXIII'007 has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to JoeXIII'007
Re: Steve Jones and his physics analysis of 9/11...

Quote:
Originally Posted by KenWittlief
I dont think I will have 2 1/2 hrs free during the next several days to watch it, so Im hoping someone will give us a summary?
I will try to keep this summary brief and simple:

-As far as WTC 7 is concerned, it fell too fast mathematically (basic physics equations involving distance, time, velocity, and acceleration of gravity) for the official story to say that collapsed due to fires (which there were little of) and whatnot. There had to be some sort of resistance to slow the fall. Too much of a sign that there were implanted explosives or implosive devices (and quite frankly, if the building was able to stand for that long after the initial collapses, it should have never fell).

-A video looking at one of the burning towers shows an extremely bright molten metal flowing out of the corner of the tower near the crash levels. Fire from the gasoline of the plane that crashed into it cannot burn that bright, nor can the heat from that alone (and the papers inside file cabinets) make the steel that made up the towers falter and cause collapse. What Steve Jones is theorizing is that due to some of the 'signatures' if you will photographed after the collapses on the metal (red, odd rust marks), there was a high temperature alkaline metal (i think) called thermite w/sulfur that cut through the steel and thus made the towers collapse (military grade I believe). He also adds as in other conspiracies the fact that before the attacks, there were unannounced evacuations of the building.

-An engineer at Underwriter's Labs stated that after several attempts to make model towers collapse under the conditions that the real ones were in, that the model towers didn't collapse or show great weak areas to allow collapse. That engineer was fired. Thus, if you watch the video, you will see steve has a cartoon showing how things are being investigated, and that is starting with a conclusion ending with the evidence to support it instead of finding evidence to create a conclusion.

-Speaking of evidence, the evidence at the scene of the crime was immediately cut up and destroyed after the attacks. No time for investigations or analysis. THAT'S A PROBLEM!!! Frankly, there is very little evidence to analyze, still a problem.

There were other non-scientific facts, such as no warnings of toxic dust in the air (in fact they told clean up workers not to wear masks to keep scare levels low) that has probably claimed the lives of a few people, and too much time before jets were scrambled to escort the hijacked jets. Lots of warning, little action.

That's all I can remember from the lecture. It is my very humble opinion that everyone needs to reserve a couple hours to go through what may be a boring lecture, but contains rather important information. Post a bulletin about it in myspace, etc. etc. Blog it, do whatever.

A very cautious 2 cents... slowly put in the can...
-joe
__________________
Joeseph P. Smith
jpthesmithe.com
University of Michigan - Informatics (B. Sci. 2012)
General Purpose Programmer - Cooperative Institute for Limnology and Ecosystems Research (CILER) at NOAA-GLERL
Reply With Quote