BYU Brass Discredit Physics Professor for Saying WTC Brought Down by Controlled

[Guest guest]

S

Mon, 5 Dec 2005 16:37:32 -0800 (PST)

BYU Brass Discredit Physics Professor for Saying WTC Brought

Down by Controlled Demolition

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.arcticbeacon.citymaker.com/articles/article/1518131/38233.htm

 

 

BYU Brass Discredit Physics Professor for Saying WTC Brought Down by

Controlled Demolition

 

 

Professor Steven E. Jones only was in the public eye for five days

before BYU told him to stop giving interviews. Now the university has

issued a public statement distancing itself from Jones and even

discrediting his work. Critics suggest Bush administration had its

dirty hand in forcing BYU to 'shut up' its professor.

29 Nov 2005

 

By Greg Szymanski

 

 

 

Brigham Young University (BYU) issued a public statement this week,

discrediting and distancing itself from physics Professor Steven E.

Jones for publicly claiming the WTC was brought down by explosives not

jet fuel like the government contends.

 

 

 

Jones, a tenured BYU professor, went public two weeks ago after

releasing a 19 page academic paper, essentially showing how the laws

of physics do not support the WTC's freefall and, consequently, the

official government story.

 

 

 

While expressing doubt about the government's version of 9/11, he

called for an independent investigation concerning the strange

collapse of the towers and Building No. 7, something the 9/11

Commission failed to do and something the Bush administration

adamantly opposes.

 

 

 

However, Jones' notoriety turned out to be short lived as only days

after giving numerous press interviews, including a six-minute spot on

MSNBC, BYU officials twisted his arm and convinced him to stop

appearing publicly.

 

 

 

Critics quickly pointed out that Jones must have been `silenced

quickly' after the Bush administration pressured BYU to end any

further embarrassment while, at the same time, reminding officials

about the numerous government grants swinging in the balance.

 

 

 

But before the situation turned ugly, Jones himself tried to

immediately end the controversy, claiming all parties reached an

amicable agreement without anybody strong arming anybody.

 

 

 

" I want to thank everyone for the attention, but it is best that I

limit my appearances at this time, " said Jones in a telephone

conversation from his BYU office only five days after first appearing

publicly about his controversial 9/1 statements. " University officials

and I have come to an understanding that in the best interest for all

parties involved, it is better that I limit my speaking on 9/11 to

academic peer reviews. "

 

 

 

Even tough all parties appeared to be on the same " closed mouth " page,

BYU this week BYU came out with an official statement, distancing

itself from its professor and even finding a way to politely criticize

him for the methods he used in researching his 9/11 paper, adding his

techniques may have not been up to high standards usually attached to

other BYU academic work.

 

 

 

The paper now openly questioned by BYU officials is entitled " Why

Indeed did the WTC Buildings Collapse " and has been accepted for

academic publication included in the book " The Hidden History of

9-11-2001, Research in Political Economy, Volume 23. "

 

 

 

Finding a way to discredit Jones in a subtle way, BYU issued the

following public statement about Jones' controversial 9/11 views:

 

 

 

" Brigham Young University has a policy of academic freedom that

supports the pursuit and dissemination of knowledge and ideas. Through

the academic process, ideas should be advanced, challenged, and

debated by peer-review in credible venues. We believe in the integrity

of the academic review process and that, when it is followed properly,

peer-review is valuable for evaluating the validity of ideas and

conclusions.

 

 

 

" The university is aware that Professor Steven Jones' hypotheses and

interpretations of evidence regarding the collapse of World Trade

Center buildings are being questioned by a number of scholars and

practitioners, including many of BYU's own faculty members. Professor

Jones' department and college administrators are not convinced that

his analyses and hypotheses have been submitted to relevant scientific

venues that would ensure rigorous technical peer review. "

 

 

 

Jones was unavailable for comment as he is no longer talking openly

with the media, but when he did talk it created a stir which even was

addressed on MSNBC by conservative talk show host, Tucker Carlson.

 

 

 

Jones made a brief six minute appearance, saying publicly afterwards

he was unhappy by the " one-sided presentation " siding with the

government as well as Carlson's failure to show the video clip of

Building No. 7 freefalling to the ground as requested by Jones during

the show.

 

 

 

" I asked three times to play the clip of Building No. 7 falling but

they wouldn't do it, " said Jones after the appearance with Carlson, a

well-known Bush administration mouthpiece who slanted Jones' story in

favor of the government, as expected.

 

 

 

Not only did Carlson refuse to address key visual evidence clearly

showing a freefall of the WTC, he also issued a statement telling

Jones and others who think the government may have been complicit in

9/11 to leave the country, an analysis completely lacking sensibility

and bordering on outright insanity.

 

 

 

Responding to a caller about pre-positioned explosives detonated in

all three buildings at Ground Zero, Carlson said:

 

 

 

" If you really believe the U.S. government killed 3000 of its own

citizens for no reason and lied about it and invaded Afghanistan as a

result of something it did, you ought to leave the country… because

that's so terrible… so evil, that your tax dollars go in to support it

make you complicit in it… if you really believe that, you ought to leave… "

 

 

 

Besides the MSNBC appearance, Jones previously granted one of his

first interviews to the Arctic Beacon and American Free Press, also

making one of his only radio appearances before going silent on Greg

Szymanski's radio show, " The Investigative Journal, " on the Republic

Broadcasting Network. For a replay of the hour-long radio interview go

to www.rbnlive.com (archives page) and for a feature article on Jones

go to www.arcticbeacon.com.

 

 

 

Before ending his media appearances, Jones tried to explain why he

wrote his paper:

 

 

 

" I wanted to limit my discussion to my expertise and that is why I

talked mainly about the physics of the freefall of the towers and

Building 7, " said Jones, adding he did criticize the so-called " pod

theory " or the theory that a " drone plane " was used to crash into the

towers.

 

In his paper, Jones stayed away from commenting on most other aspects

of 9/11 except for the freefall of the towers and the limited

criticism of the " pod theory. "

 

 

 

" I did receive emails about why I did that (criticized the pod theory)

and even told Morgan Reynolds, I really felt it was important to stick

with the issues of 9/11 that are the most obvious and the easiest to

prove. That is why I wanted to limit my discussion, but in further

papers I plan to address other 9/11 issues. Also, I feel the 9/11

community needs to work together and not be splintered by constantly

arguing among ourselves over conflicting theories that may take away

from the ones we can conclusively prove. "

 

 

 

Jones literally shocked the " Red State " of Utah and the conservative

world when he released his 19 page critical paper basically ripping

apart the official 9/11 story, limiting his discussion to his

expertise in physics and the virtual impossibility of the towers

falling from merely jet fuel as the government contends.

 

 

 

Jones earlier said he first presented his explosive conclusions at

Brigham Young University (BYU) on September 22, to 60 people from the

BYU and Utah Valley State College faculties, including professors of

Engineering, Electrical Engineering, Geology, Mathematics and Psychology.

 

 

 

After presently scientific arguments in favor of the controlled

demolition theory, Jones said everyone in attendance from all

backgrounds, conservative and liberal, were in total agreement further

investigation was needed.

 

 

 

Jones added that the contingent of faculty members at the September

seminar were all in agreement that the government needed to " come

clean " and release more that 6,900 photographs and close to 7,000

segments of video footage, now being held from independent

investigation by the FBI and other agencies.

 

 

 

In Jones' 9,000 word paper, his conclusions why the towers most likely

were brought down by a controlled demolition can be summed up as follows.:

 

 

 

• The three buildings collapsed nearly symmetrically, falling down

into their footprints, a phenomenon associated with " controlled

demolition " — and even then it's very difficult, he says. " Why would

terrorists undertake straight-down collapses of WTC-7 and the Towers

when 'toppling over' falls would require much less work and would do

much more damage in downtown Manhattan? " Jones asks. " And where would

they obtain the necessary skills and access to the buildings for a

symmetrical implosion anyway? The 'symmetry data' emphasized here,

along with other data, provide strong evidence for an 'inside' job. "

 

 

 

• No steel-frame building, before or after the WTC buildings,

has ever collapsed due to fire. But explosives can effectively sever

steel columns, he says.

 

 

 

• WTC 7, which was not hit by hijacked planes, collapsed in 6.6

seconds, just .6 of a second longer than it would take an object

dropped from the roof to hit the ground. " Where is the delay that must

be expected due to conservation of momentum, one of the foundational

laws of physics? " he asks. " That is, as upper-falling floors strike

lower floors — and intact steel support columns — the fall must be

significantly impeded by the impacted mass. . . . How do the upper

floors fall so quickly, then, and still conserve momentum in the

collapsing buildings? " The paradox, he says, " is easily resolved by

the explosive demolition hypothesis, whereby explosives quickly

removed lower-floor material, including steel support columns, and

allow near free-fall-speed collapses. " These observations were not

analyzed by FEMA, NIST nor the 9/11 Commission, he says.

 

 

 

• With non-explosive-caused collapse there would typically be a

piling up of shattering concrete. But most of the material in the

towers was converted to flour-like powder while the buildings were

falling, he says. " How can we understand this strange behavior,

without explosives? Remarkable, amazing — and demanding scrutiny since

the U.S. government-funded reports failed to analyze this phenomenon. "

 

 

 

• Horizontal puffs of smoke, known as squibs, were observed

proceeding up the side the building, a phenomenon common when

pre-positioned explosives are used to demolish buildings, he says.

 

 

 

• Steel supports were " partly evaporated, " but it would require

temperatures near 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit to evaporate steel — and

neither office materials nor diesel fuel can generate temperatures

that hot. Fires caused by jet fuel from the hijacked planes lasted at

most a few minutes, and office material fires would burn out within

about 20 minutes in any given location, he says.

 

 

 

• Molten metal found in the debris of the World Trade Center may

have been the result of a high-temperature reaction of a commonly used

explosive such as thermite, he says. Buildings not felled by

explosives " have insufficient directed energy to result in melting of

large quantities of metal, " Jones says.

 

 

 

• Multiple loud explosions in rapid sequence were reported by

numerous observers in and near the towers, and these explosions

occurred far below the region where the planes struck, he says.

 

 

 

Greg on the Radio.

 

Listen to my Radio Broadcast live every Monday night at 8pm Pacific

time on LewisNews Radio. Look for program scheduling each week at

http://webs.lewisnews.com/radio/index.htm. Greg is also a weekly

regular on " The Power Hour with Joyce and Dave, " a three-hour

syndicated daily radio broadcast on the Genesis Network, broadcasting

on many AM/FM stations nationwide. Greg appears every Monday at 7a.m

to 8a.m. Pacific time.

 

Streaming audio can be heard at:

 

Internet: http://www.m2ktalk.com ;

http://www.whri.com

 

 

 

On-air call in numbers for our listeners:

 

U.S.: 800-259-9231

 

International: 952-707-9960x125.

 

On Oct. 3, Greg will be starting a daily afternoon show on the

Republic Broadcast Network, airing on shortwave, low band FM and on

the internet. Go to www.rbnlive.com for information.

 

Greg Szymanski is an independent investigative journalist and his

articles can been seen at www.LewisNews.com. He also writes for

American Free Press www.AmericanFreePress.net and has his own site

www.arcticbeacon.com. Greg has a live Radio show every Monday night

on mms://media.LewisNews.com/Greg and on

mms://media.LewisNews.com/RadioLewisNews at 8 pm Pacific time. Greg

is also looking for sponsors for his popular new show and he can be

contacted at patriott2424. On Oct. 3, Greg will be starting a

daily afternoon show on the Republic Broadcast Network, airing on

shortwave, low band FM and on the internet. Go to www.rbnlive.com for

information.