New evidence of controlled demolition not included in "official" report.
Extensive eye witness testimony of the explosives used to destroy the World Trade Center Twin Towers and Building 7 on September 11, 2001.
This 10 minute video includes presentations by physicist Steven E. Jones on explosive nanothermite found in the World Trade Center dust, and by Richard Gage of Architects and Engineers for 911 Truth, and Erik Lawyer of Fire Fighters for 9/11 Truth.
For more information, please visit AE911Truth.org
Showing posts with label Steven E. Jones PhD. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Steven E. Jones PhD. Show all posts
Physicist Steven Jones shows thermate/thermite in WTC dust from PNACitizen Conference
We all know the official story of September 11th: four jetliners were hijacked by groups of four and five Arabic men armed with box cutters, who proceeded to fly three of the four jets into the Twin Towers and the Pentagon.
Subsequently the World Trade Center Towers, weakened by the impacts and fires, collapsed into piles of rubble. The FBI had compiled a list of hijackers within three days, and it was so obvious that Osama bin Laden had masterminded the operation from caves in Afghanistan, that there was no need to seriously investigate the crime or produce evidence.
The "retaliatory" attack on the Taliban would soon commence.
Is this story true? No. And questioning that story is an act of responsible citizenship.
This is POWERFUL evidence that hi-tech explosives were used to bring down the towers during 9/11:
Professor Steven Jones gave a lecture at University of Texas in Austin as part of the Project for the New American Citizen's conference called 'Rebuilding America's Senses (Exposing false-flag terrorism to prevent a new 9/11).
In this talk is a never-before released X-EDS (X-Ray Energy Dispersive Spectroscopy) analysis of WTC dust taken from the scene showing conclusively the presence of thermate (a hotter reaction than thermite) in iron sphericals. He shows the presence of Sulfur, Aluminium, and Iron in the exact concentrations used in Thermate reactions.
This, according to Steven Jones, explains how molten steel was found in the debris since office debris and even JET-A fuel is not capable of melting steel.
He is able to scientifically rule out other possibilities (including the torches used at ground zero during cleanup) and even shows the orange glow of the dripping steel that was videotaped pouring out of the WTC towers just 5 minutes before their collapse.
In His Own Words: BYU and Prof. Steven Jones Revisited
The following is from Prof. Steven E Jones in his own words.
A few days ago I was asked by a Professor at the University of Massachusetts what happened to me at BYU, in my own words. My response follows:
"0. In September 2005, I presented a colloquium at Brigham Young University (BYU) in a large auditorium, presenting the physical evidence I had accumulated by then that the “official story” of the 9/11 disaster was highly suspicious. I had invited professors from across campus and many came, from numerous disciplines including physics, math, psychology, engineering. I asked them to take the “kid gloves off” and tell me where I was in error. In particular, we watched the rapid, nearly-symmetrical collapse of WTC 7 and discussed this at length. After two hours, we had to leave because a class had the room scheduled. But before they left, I asked the audience (about 70 in all) if they agreed with me that an investigation into 9/11 events was warranted. By show of hands, all agreed with this proposition, except one, a geology professor. The next day, he saw me on campus and said that he had changed his mind and that he now supported a full investigation into 9/11. A number of those in attendance provided helpful, critical comments for my nascent paper published later in a volume by Profs. David Ray Griffin and Peter Dale Scott, and available on-line here:
http://journalof911studies.com/volume/200609/Why_Indeed_Did_the_WTC_Buil...
In February 2006, I presented a 2-hour colloquium at Utah Valley State College (which soon became Utah Valley University). That seminar was taped and aired on BYU’s TV station, KBYU. Later in 2006, I was invited to speak on my 9/11 research at a colloquium sponsored by the BYU Mathematics Department – the reception to my 9/11 research was cordial and supportive at this colloquium.
1. BYU put me on administrative leave on Sept. 6, 2006, for my research on 9/11 -- but while clearly stating that "The university doesn't have an opinion regarding the theory."
Quote:
http://www.heraldextra.com/content/view/193556/4/
“Jones was placed on administrative leave for publishing a theory that explosives
were involved in the towers' collapse through channels university officials deemed inappropriate,"
BYU spokesperson Carri Jenkins said.
"The university doesn't have an opinion regarding the theory," she said.
This was an important distinction -- BYU was specifically NOT denigrating my "theory" that explosives were involved in the World Trade Center towers' collapse, as you see from the statement to the press by the BYU spokesperson. It was never clear to me why the channels I chose were "inappropriate" (one was the Utah Academy of Arts and Sciences, April 2006 which was reviewed and approved by a fellow BYU Physics Professor), but the point is that BYU did NOT take a position on my 9/11 work and they made that point very clear.
2. BYU allowed me to continue my research on 9/11 after I was placed on admin leave, particularly regarding the dust generated during the collapse of the Towers, and even encouraged that research. It was important to the work that I was allowed to use the electron microscopes at BYU for this research. Dr. Jeffrey Farrer, director of the Transmission Electron Microscopy Laboratory at BYU was (and still is) permitted to work with me.
3. Based on that research at BYU, a group of scientists wrote the paper now published in the Open Chemical Physics Journal, "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe," April 2009. BYU reviewed the paper prior to publication and found it to represent sound science, and approved it for publication in the Open Chemical Physics Journal. Specifically the chair of the BYU Department of Physics and Astronomy approved publication and told me personally this was sound scientific research and that he was now persuaded that explosives/pyrotechnics were involved in the destruction of the World Trade Center on 9/11.
4. There were two authors from BYU listed on that paper, Dr. Farrer (as second author) and Daniel Farnsworth. Their affiliation with the BYU Department of Physics and Astronomy was listed in the paper, with the approval of BYU.
http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCPJ/2009/00000002/000000...
Deseret News article on the paper:
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/705295677/Trace-explosives-in-911-dus...
5. About the same time as this paper was published, I was made an Emeritus Professor of Physics at BYU.
6. BYU explained that they had been under considerable pressure to let me go, which is to their credit to admit this. We know from press releases that Dick Cheney's office contacted BYU; and this resulted in Cheney's coming to BYU to give a commencement address just three months after my "early retirement" from BYU. BYU -- also to its credit -- allowed TWO on-campus demonstrations against the policies of Dick Cheney. I understand that outside of Utah, it was these on-campus protests against Cheney that received favorable attention. (How many protests has BYU allowed through the years? Very few!)
7. BYU provided a nice (not large) pension as I accepted their offer of early retirement, gave me a (shared) office that I still use. They allowed me to keep my research web page, which links to three formally-published peer-reviewed papers regarding 9/11 in technical journals, here: http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/
In view of these contributions to 9/11 research, my friend and fellow 9/11-researcher Kevin Ryan said "Hurray for BYU!" And I have to agree.
Reply from Professor Niels Harrit, Department of Chemistry, University of Copenhagen, Denmark (March 13, 2010)
Steven: I am glad that you can see beyond your own (and ours!) annoyance and point to the positive aspects of BYUs handling of their situation.
Let me hasten to join Kevin and cheer for BYU – loud and clear.
We have to acknowledge the political space they live and operate in, and BYU deserves the credits you point out.
One senses a high level of decency at BYU.
Kind of the same thing I feel in the mainstream press these days. The young journalists try to squeeze some information in and take the discussion as far as they can before they run their head into the editors hammer.
Regards
Niels
Steven E. Jones
Emeritus Professor of Physics"
[end of quote]
Original Source here.
Why Didn’t Millions of Gallons of Water Put Out the Ground Zero Fires?
Nanothermite usage is hazardous due to the extremely high temperatures produced and the extreme difficulty in smothering a reaction once initiated.
These toasted cars are in the lot northwest of the WTC complex. There is little visible rust so the photo was probably within a day or two of 9/11/2001.
Why Didn’t Millions of Gallons of Water Put Out the Ground Zero Fires?
4 million gallons of water were dropped on Ground Zero within the first 10 days after September 11, according to the U.S. Department of Energy’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratories
Approximately three million gallons of water were hosed on site in the fire-fighting efforts, and 1 million gallons fell as rainwater, between 9/11 and 9/21 .
The spraying continued for months afterward (the 10 day period was simply the timeframe in which the DOE was sampling). Enormous amounts of water were hosed on Ground Zero continuously, day and night:
“Firetrucks [sprayed] a nearly constant jet of water on [ground zero]. You couldn’t even begin to imagine how much water was pumped in there,” said Tom Manley of the Uniformed Firefighters Association, the largest fire department union. “It was like you were creating a giant lake.”
Moreover, the fires were sprayed with thousands of gallons of high tech fire-retardants.
And yet, the world trade center fire was “the longest-burning structural fire in history”. The temperatures were so high that there was molten metal at ground zero for months after 9/11.
Why didn’t the enormous quantities of water and fire-retardant sprayed at Ground Zero put out the fires? How could fires and molten metal have burned for months, when fires from normal office and building materials and available sources of oxygen should have been doused by all of the water?
Dr. Steven Jones gives one possibility: “Thermite contains its own supply of oxygen and so the reaction cannot be smothered, even with water”.
The thermite reaction releases dangerous ultra-violet (UV) light requiring that the reaction not be viewed directly, or that special eye protection (for example, a welder’s mask) be worn.
Original source for this article here.
These toasted cars are in the lot northwest of the WTC complex. There is little visible rust so the photo was probably within a day or two of 9/11/2001.
Why Didn’t Millions of Gallons of Water Put Out the Ground Zero Fires?
4 million gallons of water were dropped on Ground Zero within the first 10 days after September 11, according to the U.S. Department of Energy’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratories
Approximately three million gallons of water were hosed on site in the fire-fighting efforts, and 1 million gallons fell as rainwater, between 9/11 and 9/21 .
The spraying continued for months afterward (the 10 day period was simply the timeframe in which the DOE was sampling). Enormous amounts of water were hosed on Ground Zero continuously, day and night:
“Firetrucks [sprayed] a nearly constant jet of water on [ground zero]. You couldn’t even begin to imagine how much water was pumped in there,” said Tom Manley of the Uniformed Firefighters Association, the largest fire department union. “It was like you were creating a giant lake.”
Moreover, the fires were sprayed with thousands of gallons of high tech fire-retardants.
And yet, the world trade center fire was “the longest-burning structural fire in history”. The temperatures were so high that there was molten metal at ground zero for months after 9/11.
Why didn’t the enormous quantities of water and fire-retardant sprayed at Ground Zero put out the fires? How could fires and molten metal have burned for months, when fires from normal office and building materials and available sources of oxygen should have been doused by all of the water?
Dr. Steven Jones gives one possibility: “Thermite contains its own supply of oxygen and so the reaction cannot be smothered, even with water”.
The thermite reaction releases dangerous ultra-violet (UV) light requiring that the reaction not be viewed directly, or that special eye protection (for example, a welder’s mask) be worn.
Original source for this article here.
All About Demolition Squibs
These are frame shots as it is easier sometimes to see squibs when the picture isn't moving:
Squibs are explained and analyzed by Dr. Steven Jones in the beginning of this video clip. (Later on he suggests preparing food storage...)
MOVIE: Nanothermite
Part 1 of 12
A scientific presentation given by Physics Professor Steven E. Jones, Ph.D., co-editor of the peer-reviewed Journal of 9/11 Studies, and member of Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice gives a presentations in Sacramento, California, on April 30th, 2009.
Part 2 of 12
This is the first lecture by Steven E. Jones after the publication of the peer-reviewed paper Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe, published in The Open Chemical Physics Journal on April 3rd, 2009, which describes that nanothermite, a high-tech, military grade explosive, was used during the destruction of the Twin Towers and Building 7.
This is the loaded gun of 9/11. Please spread it.
Part 3 of 12
Part 4 of 12
Part 5 of 12
Part 6 of 12
Part 7 of 12
Part 8 of 12
Part 9 of 12
Part 10 of 12
Part 11 of 12
Part 12 of 12
A scientific presentation given by Physics Professor Steven E. Jones, Ph.D., co-editor of the peer-reviewed Journal of 9/11 Studies, and member of Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice gives a presentations in Sacramento, California, on April 30th, 2009.
Part 2 of 12
This is the first lecture by Steven E. Jones after the publication of the peer-reviewed paper Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe, published in The Open Chemical Physics Journal on April 3rd, 2009, which describes that nanothermite, a high-tech, military grade explosive, was used during the destruction of the Twin Towers and Building 7.
This is the loaded gun of 9/11. Please spread it.
Part 3 of 12
Part 4 of 12
Part 5 of 12
Part 6 of 12
Part 7 of 12
Part 8 of 12
Part 9 of 12
Part 10 of 12
Part 11 of 12
Part 12 of 12
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
