Darthben’s Weblog

I am posting a summary of the paper that I posted a link for.  The paper is rather long, so I thought it might be good to post a summary, and then if you want to look into it more you can click on the link to the paper. 

This summarizes 13 reasons that Professor Steven Jones gives to challenge government sponsored reports on the collapse of the buildings, and to investigate a controlled demolition hypothesis.

1. Molten Metal: Flowing and in Pools:

 Steven Jones points out that there were pools of molten metal underneath all three buildings, and says that the jet fuel cannot be the reason for the molten metal.  And even if jet fuel could explain it, that still leaves building seven to explain-because it was not hit by a jet.  He also says that molten metal is a sign of thermite-which is used in controlled demolitions.  He also says in the section that the fires from the jets could not have gotten hot enough to weaken structural steel enough so that the buildings would collapse-but again, even if they could, this still would not explain why building seven collapsed-because it was not hit by a plane. 

1. Observed Temperatures around 1000°C and Sulfidation in WTC 7 Steel.

 In this section, Jones points out that there is evidence that the temperature inside of a steal beam  of the building reached 1000 C, and he points out that it is difficult for a jet fuel fire to reach even 650 C even in the building, let alone reach 1000C inside the steel beam.He also talks about the sulfur in the steel, and  that there has been no explanation of why sulfur would be there.  He goes on to say that the presence of sulfur and of temperatures of 1000 C indicate that there was thermate, which weakens structural steel even faster, and is also often used for controlled demolitions.  

1. Near-Symmetrical Collapse of WTC 7

 In this section, Jones talks about the way that building 7 collapsed and the similarities between it’s collapse and a controlled demolition.  He also points out that the few fires in building seven were scattered, which is not conducive to near symmetrical collapse.  

1. No Previous Skyscraper Complete Collapse Due to Fires

 In this section, Jones says that no other building like the three WTC buildings has ever collapsed due to fires-I gave an example of this in another post-a building in Madrid burned for 24 hours in 2005 and did not collapse.  

1. Plume-timing during the Collapse of WTC 7

 Jones says that there were puffs of smoke and debris coming out the sides of WTC 7 kist as it starts to collapse, and says that this is similar to controlled demolition. (Jones has links to video clips of the buildings’ collapse in his paper)  

1. Early Drop of North Tower Antenna

 In this section, Jones talks about the antenna on the top of the north tower, and points out that it began to fall into the center of the building, just before the rest of the building collapsed, and says that no explanation of this has been given, and says that this suggests that the building’s steel core gave way before the rest of the building, which is sign of cutter charges being used.  

1. Eyewitness Accounts of Flashes and Loud Explosions

 Jones points out that there have been several eyewitnesses who have said they heard explosions and saw flashes in the bottom of the buildings, which are similar to controlled demolition, and says that jet fuel is not sufficient to explain explosions on the bottom of the buildings.  

1. Ejection of Steel Beams and Debris-plumes from the towers

 This one is similar to number 6, but Jones says that the pieces of structural steel that flew out of the building, and the pulverized concrete also suggest the use of explosives.  

1. Rapid Collapses and Conservation of Momentum and Energy

 In this section, Jones talks about how the towers fall way too fast if what happened is that the top floors began to fall onto the bottom floors.  Jones said that if this did happen, then the lower floors would have slowed the momentum of the top floors, but as Jones points out, the towers collapse down nearly as fast as something would if it were just dropped from the top of the building.  Jones says that the use of explosives, however, would cause the towers to collapse that fast. 

Also, Jones talks about how the top 30 floors (approximately) of the south tower began to fall to the side as the building collapsed, but in mid-air this part of the building turns into dust-Jones asks-“How can we understand this strange behavior, without explosives?” 

Jones also quotes the NIST team as saying that their report on 911, “does not actually include the structural behavior of the tower after the conditions for collapse initiation were reached.” (NIST, 2005, p. 80, fn. 12; emphasis added.)

1. Controlled Demolition “Implosions” Require Skill

 Here Jones talks about the difficulty that controlled demolition would be for these kinds of buildings.  He quotes Tom Harris an authority on controlled demolitions as saying that few companies in the world would even attempt a project  that big, and also quotes another authority on controlled demolition, who is president of controlled demolition inc,  as saying that if he were called to take on this kind of project, he would put explosions in the basement, which is what several eyewitnesses said they heard and saw.  This clearly implies that if explosion were used, then the buildings’ collapse cannot be attributed to Muslims flying into the buildings.   

1. Steel Column Temperatures of 800°C Needed: A Problem in the Argument of Bazant and Zhou

 In this section Jones basically says that the jet fuel and the office supplies that were burning would not have been able to raise the steel temperatures to 800 C.  He also points out that the buildings were made to withstand the affects of a larger commercial aircraft flying into them.  He also says that the gas fires would only last a few minutes, while the office material fires would only last about 20 minutes-if this is true, then it is strange that the collapse of the buildings would not happen until about an hour after the planes hit.  

1. Problems in the NIST Report: Inadequate Steel Temperatures and Tweaked Models

  Here, Jones says that the NIST adjusted the models and exercises they had done to study the reason and manner of the buildings’ collapse.  He talks about how NIST contracted a company called Underwriters Laboratories to test the fire endurance of buildings like WTC-none of the specimens that were tested collapsed in the time that the WTC buildings did.  However, NIST adjusted the information they got from these simulations.  And Jones quotes Kevin Ryan, who was a manger at Underwriters Laboratories at the time, as saying, “the results of these tests… indicate that the buildings should have easily withstood the thermal stress caused by… burning [jet fuel, paper, etc.].”    

1. NIST’s Failure to Show Visualizations

Here Jones points out that NIST does not include the visualizations that were used to test the collapse of the buildings in their report.

Here is the link to the paper again if you want to look into it more:

http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200609/WhyIndeedDidtheWorldTradeCenterBuildingsCompletelyCollapse

I’ve been watching some debates on youtube, and I’ve really like what Ron Paul has to say, or maybe not so much what he says but the philosophy behind what he says. He made a statement that pretty much said-we need to always think about what we do in other parts of the world in terms of how we would feel if someone else would do that to us. It’s the golden rule, but I don’t here many politicians say that. The majority of the time (not always) politicians are mainly talking about what does this do for America. If it works out for us then lets do it, but we do need to think about how we would feel if someone did it to us.

He just seems willing to say things that most politicians are not willing to say because it is not diplomatic enough and will lose them votes. I also so a video of him saying that he does not initially trust anything the government says, because there is usually some kind of a cover up. Maybe I’m just naive when it comes to different politicians, but I don’t remember a politician running for president that has been this honest about things.

Although I don’t agree with him on some things, and I’m still looking around, I’ve really liked Paul. However, we need to stay away from the politician messiah idea-that if we vote for the right person the world will be all right again.

This morning I took my sister to the bus station for her trip to Iowa, and I had a wonderful experience there.

As I was leaving the bus station, a black man named Rick asked if I could help him out with some money for some food.  I did not have any cash , but decided that I could go to an ATM and get some out for him.

 As we were driving over there, Rick said to me, “You’re a Christian aren’t you?  I can tell.”

 I think that’s one of the greatest compliments that I have ever recieved.  I don’t know that it was-that I was helping him, or that I acknoldged his existance, or that I was the only white person who didn’t treat him like a criminal, but such small things can show people who we really are.

 I realize he could have just been trying to play with my head, but I felt real with him, I think he meant, and I want that to be what people can say about me-that I follow Christ.  And not because I tell them how horrible they are, but because I show Christ’s love to them.

This is a link to an article that contains a lot of stuff on 911, but the thing I’m pointing out now is what Bush was up to during the attacks.  This artilce points out that Bush was in a Florida classroom during the attacks, and even though he know about the fact that our country was being attacked, he did nothing but instead finished what he was doing.  If you want, you can go to youtube and type a search like “What was bush doing during 911″ and you can watch footage of him being in that classroom during the attacks.  Some of the videos have erie music added for effect, but erie music aside, is this an appropriate response from a president who has just learned that his country is under attack?

 http://www.historycommons.org/essay.jsp?article=essayaninterestingday

 Also, I’ll add the things that I added to the comments for my previous 911 post:

Here is a link to a paper written by a physicist-Dr. Steven Jones, I think he teaches at BYU. He deals with questions of how the two towers and building seven collapsed.

http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200609/WhyIndeedDidtheWorldTradeCenterBuildingsCompletelyCollapse

1.NORAD stood down while the planes crashed into the two towers. Why would the air defense of the most powerful country in the world stand down during the deadliest terror attack ever? The reason: NORAD was running a drill- a drill that involved the very things that happened on 9-11. So when they heard that the towers were being hit by the planes, they assumed it was part of the drill, and they stood down. (Actually, this very same thing happened with the London Bombings of 2005. Either the police (or some sort of public safety) was running a drill that was the exact story line of the London Bombings)

2. Some of the men who were alledged to be of the 19 hijackers have been found to be alive around the world. So you would think that in light of this, the FBI would change their story of who the hijackers were. Well they can’t, because they claimed that they knew who the 19 were because they found the list of their names in one of the hijackers suitcases at the motel he was supposedly staying at.(I saw a video of a convention where  someone was talking about this, I need to look into this one a little more)

3. The way the buildings came down looks just look controlled demolitions. In fact, there was a substance, I think it’s called thermate, that was found in the rubble. This is the substance that is used in controlled demolitions to cut through steal. There’s no reason for that substance to be there.

Also, the kind of fire that resulted from the places crashing in the buildings is not hot enough to cut or melt steel. There have been many buildings that have burned for much longer than the twin towers burned, and yet their steel frame still stood afterward. One example is there was building in Madrid in 2005 that burned for 24 hours and did not collapse.

Also, the building seven that collapsed, all it had was a few scattered fires in it, nothing like the twin towers. There were other buildings that were much closer to the twin towers than building seven were, but they did not collapse either. Building seven also looks just like a controlled demolition.

4. There is reason to believe that the phone calls that happened on filight 93 did not happen. Cell phones are not supposed to be able to call out at that altitude.

1. On the flight recording, the hijackers are heard to say “Allah Ackbar” (which means Allah is great) just before the planes are about to crash. However, this is not what a Muslim are supposed to say when they know death is imminent. What they are supposed to say is –There is but one God-Allah, and Muhhomad is his prophet.

Well, I’m out of time right now, these are some of the main reasons.

Well, for the past 2 1/2 months, we have been helping a homeless family find a place to live, and find the dad a job.  And for the past six weeks I’ve been picking the dad up from the bus station in the morning and taking him to work. 

However, he now is required to come to work earlier, something I can’t help him with, so he pretty much needs to find some mode of transportation, or else he will end up losing his job.

 This experience has without a doubt been the most challenging of my life.  I’ve learned a lot of things about this family and about myself.  I am not a confrontational person, and often struggle to be assertive.  So it was difficult for me to set boudaries for how much I can help this family, and to confront them when they were not holding up their end of it all.

At times it was and still is frustrating to see how many hoops he has to jump through, but it’s also been frustrating to see how many times they have done things or made decisions that we only lead them back to homelessness.  Learning how to handle all these things, while starting up school and work again, has been so hard.

I am so glad to have had the experience.  This was a great time of learning for me, and it will only help me in the future.  And God has done some amazing things for this family and for me.  He has really directed me and guided me in tough decisions, and helped me to be at peace about letting go of this family.  There is nothing more I can do, and God is helping me to see that that is okay.