Originally Posted by GA-Beta

Dr. Steven Jones, the physics professor involved in the so-called "9-11 Truth Movement" has been suspended by BYU.

Two weeks ago he published his theory in a paper called "Why Indeed did the World Trade Center Buildings Collapse?" In it, the professor says the towers fell not because of planes hitting them but rather pre-positioned demolition charges.

The other side: the State Department has released a rebuttal to Jones' theory in a 10-thousand page report.

BYU's statement:

"Physics Professor Steven Jones has made numerous statements about the collapse of the World Trade Center. BYU has repeatedly said that it does not endorse assertions made by individual faculty.

"We are, however, concerned about the increasingly speculative and accusatory nature of these statements by Dr. Jones."

The university added, "BYU remains concerned that Dr. Jones' works on this topic has not been published in appropriate scientific venues."

Originally Posted by Deke4life

Actually, as Dr. Jones notes Building number 7 had minor to moderate fires, Also, In the History of Steel buildings, never has one ever colpapsed due to fire. I would encourage you to read the article and especially Dr. Jones' paper:

Article
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,635160132,00

http://kutv.com/topstories/local_story_314234334.html

Paper: http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html

Originally Posted by starang21

if he continues on this path, he'll be laughed out of academia

LOL

Originally Posted by Deke4life

1.The point is: Larry Silverstein purchased the buildings 1,2, and 7, then finalized a massive record breaking insurance deal just six weeks prior to 9-11... - which would satisfy motive for building 7 under Dr. Jones' hypothesis... - Although, I still maintain that my qualitative speculation here should be considered independently from the physics in this matter (quantitative data):

http://www.cbsnews.com/elements/2003...6_person.shtml

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/background/owners.html

http://www.insurancejournal.com/news...6/07/15925.htm


*2. And of course, *most importantly*, the Operation Northwoods documents explain the potential motive for buildings 1 and 2, as well as somewhat building 7:

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/northwoods.html

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods



I would also like to add here that Marvin Bush was hired as head of security for the entire complex.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/911security.html


3. and... that the person who was in charge of certifying the steel in those buildings does not see any reason why those buildings should have colapsed due to fire or any type of fuel.

here is his letter of obvious concern:

http://www.septembereleventh.org/new...11-11-ryan.php

Thus Dr. Jones' hypothesis :

http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html


a hypothesis which is echoed by many others, including many engineers. Here is just one example:

PHYSICS 911 is created and maintained by a group of scientists, engineers and other professionals known collectively as the Scientific Panel Investigating Nine-eleven

http://physics911.net/

Originally Posted by Deke4life

Fortunatley... Im not using those sources. Pointing at other people that may or may not promote some of the ideas in my hypothesis is unfair and illogical deamonization. I suggest that everyone read my last post in its entirity, including the links.

Operation Northwoods (links provided in my last post) was an official U.S. government plan to carry out acts of terrorism to incite a desired state of public opinion. - this could be the motive that would satisfy Dr. Jones' hypothesis. - and its just that... its a hypothesis, to be tested against others...

I am open to other ideas - (and I am aware they exist), but I am very concerned, especially given the obvious problems outlined in Dr. Jones' paper and others, including the potential motive that exists. FEMA owes the American public a better investigation.

Originally Posted by macallan25

Perhaps he didn't see any reason why it failed because they didn't design the building to withstand a couple of huge jet airliners crashing into it with an ass-load of jet fuel in them. I mean Jesus Christ, every structural engineer I have seen or witnessed talking about it has agreed to this point.......and frankly, I am sure as hell going to listen to extremely well respected engineers over your wack job dumbass "Dr" of physics.