Professor Jones is Right: Government Refused to Examine Trade Center Collapses
BYU Physics professor Steven Jones has stated that the government agency tasked with examining the collapse of the World Trade Centers did NOT investigate any anomalies in the collapse of the buildings, failing to even examine any evidence regarding the buildings’ impossible near free-fall speeds and symmetrical collapses, apparent demolition squibs, the fact that the buildings turned to dust in mid-air, the presence of molten metal in the basement areas in large pools in all of the buildings, or the unexplained straightening out of the upper 34 floors of the South Tower after they had precipitously leaned over and started toppling like a tree.
I just ran across an article from a respected civil engineering trade journal which backs up Professor Jones' claim that the government did not really examine the conditions immediately prior to collapse or the collapses themselves. Specifically, the article from the journal of the 180-year old UK Institution of Civil Engineers states:
"World Trade Center disaster investigators are refusing to show computer visualisations of the collapse of the Twin Towers despite calls from leading structural and fire engineers".
The article goes on to state "a leading U.S. structural engineer said 'By comparison [to the modelling of fires] the global structural model is not as sophisticated' . . . The software used has been pushed to new limits, and there have been a lot of simplifications, extrapolations and judgement calls . . . it would be hard to produce a definitive visualisation from the analysis so far.'”(free subscription required; copy posted here).
In other words, the U.S. structural engineer is saying that even the non-visual computer models which NIST used to examine why the trade centers collapsed are faulty.
So this article from an old and respected engineering society shows two things:
(1) NIST (the government agency examining the collapse of the world trade centers) refuses to show any computer visualizations of the collapses themselves, while NIST has released models of much of the pre-collapse events with extravagant (even if incorrect) animation; and
(2) NIST pushed its software "to new limits", and used "simplifications, extrapolations and judgement calls" to reach a pre-established conclusion: that the towers collapsed due to fire and jet impact alone (a tricky feat, since the data actually indicates controlled demolitions).
I just ran across an article from a respected civil engineering trade journal which backs up Professor Jones' claim that the government did not really examine the conditions immediately prior to collapse or the collapses themselves. Specifically, the article from the journal of the 180-year old UK Institution of Civil Engineers states:
"World Trade Center disaster investigators are refusing to show computer visualisations of the collapse of the Twin Towers despite calls from leading structural and fire engineers".
The article goes on to state "a leading U.S. structural engineer said 'By comparison [to the modelling of fires] the global structural model is not as sophisticated' . . . The software used has been pushed to new limits, and there have been a lot of simplifications, extrapolations and judgement calls . . . it would be hard to produce a definitive visualisation from the analysis so far.'”(free subscription required; copy posted here).
In other words, the U.S. structural engineer is saying that even the non-visual computer models which NIST used to examine why the trade centers collapsed are faulty.
So this article from an old and respected engineering society shows two things:
(1) NIST (the government agency examining the collapse of the world trade centers) refuses to show any computer visualizations of the collapses themselves, while NIST has released models of much of the pre-collapse events with extravagant (even if incorrect) animation; and
(2) NIST pushed its software "to new limits", and used "simplifications, extrapolations and judgement calls" to reach a pre-established conclusion: that the towers collapsed due to fire and jet impact alone (a tricky feat, since the data actually indicates controlled demolitions).
2 Comments:
Bush based his illegal war for oil in Iraq in part on the official propaganda of 9/11. I am surprised you could not see that, unless the corporate controlled media already indoctrinates you.
The really cool progressives do not accept the corporate controlled media propaganda of 19 hijackers and jet airplanes. There are many really cool progressive Web sites that show it was squib charges and holograms used on 9/11.
The Web Fairy and me question authority and use Internet chat boards to show others that the 72 dpi images we use certainly disprove the months of detailed study by engineers from the National Science Foundation.
As long as we keep up with our really cool postings to let the world know the truth, I would have to assume that we will in fact stop the illegal war in Iraq, have Rummy and Bush and Cheney arrested as war criminals, force Halliburton to give all of their illegal war profits to the Free Mumia Abu-Jamal fund, and overturn the marijuana laws in the U.S.
Peace. -- Scott Laughrey
The proof that 9/11 was an 'inside job' is not that the buildings collapsed, it is that all of the major structural components of these buildings collapsed at exactly the same instant. The east, west, north and south sides of all three buildings collapsed at once in perfect synchronization.
The odds against this happening are are astronomical.
Post a Comment
<< Home