Scholars for 9/11 Truth

[Blotan Hunka]

Demolished buildings dont "free fall". Stuff hitting the ground and the "stuff" above it hitting that causes resistance. It didnt "free fall" at all.

 

[kid]

Buildings like these should never collapse even near freefall speed.

 

[Blotan Hunka]

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html

This started the domino effect that caused the buildings to collapse within ten seconds, hitting bottom with an estimated speed of 200 km per hour. If it had been free fall, with no restraint, the collapse would have only taken eight seconds and would have impacted at 300 km/h.1 It has been suggested that it was fortunate that the WTC did not tip over onto other buildings surrounding the area. There are several points that should be made. First, the building is not solid; it is 95 percent air and, hence, can implode onto itself. Second, there is no lateral load, even the impact of a speeding aircraft, which is sufficient to move the center of gravity one hundred feet to the side such that it is not within the base footprint of the structure. Third, given the near free-fall collapse, there was insufficient time for portions to attain significant lateral velocity. To summarize all of these points, a 500,000 t structure has too much inertia to fall in any direction other than nearly straight down.

 

[Blotan Hunka]

Ill believe engineers who build skyscrapers over physics teachers who really think their calculations are 100% a representation of reality or kooky internet conspiracy theorists anyday.

 

[Blotan Hunka]

http://www.heraldextra.com/component/option,com_smf/Itemid,/topic,5725.msg16877#msg16877

*Professor Jones is no more an expert in matters of structural engineering that you, me or any lay reader of this paper. He is a physicist in the astronomy department. I find it odd that one man without expertise gets so much attention for conspiracy theories when the ENTIRE BYU Engineering Department has rejected his theories (see below).

*The American Society of Civil Engineers conducted a multi-year study examining the collapse of the towers and found that the metal did not melt, but became weakened at the high temperature of the burning fuel. All it took was for the upper floors to collapse and then the weight of the top of a sky scraper falling on each successive floor caused the next one to collapse. Of course the weight of such a fall would blast out the windows of each floor coming down. So much for Professor Jones "squibs" theory.

*That professor Jones selectively believes some CIA intelligence (that Bin Laden's original denial when we knew where he was in Afghanistan is real) but that his taking credit is not, is classic conspiracy theorist maneuver. This fill-in-the-blank-mentality is often used when facts don't add up for ideologues. Instead of summoning video and language experts to show us why the tape is a fake, Professor Jones and his cohorts simply ignore evidence that is not in there favor. In their minds if the administration is corrupt to its core (including every single member of the FBI and CIA), then anything that doesn't support their theories must be a lie.

Below are some informative links, including one's from credentialed experts who are in the overwhelming majority. I suggest that the Herald at least give these groups some equal print space instead trying to compete with the National Enquirer or the Weekly World News.


http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/defense/1227842.html?page=4&c=y
(Here is a critique of theories similar to Jones).

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/
(Go to "Deconstructing the Towers Collapse" and then scroll down to the last clip. You can see how the unique truss design could lead to the "squibs" that Dr. Jones thinks were caused by bombs. There is another video with an MIT engineer as well.).

Brigham Young University Ira Fulton College of Engineering Complete Statement:

"Fulton College Response to Professor Steven Jones's Statements Regarding Collapse of World Trade Center
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's 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's 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. The structural engineering faculty in the Fulton College of Engineering and Technology do not support the hypotheses of Professor Jones."

 

[Blotan Hunka]

http://www.et.byu.edu/news_jones_statement.htm

If you didnt believe the above.

 

[FearlessFreep]

Must really tick of BYU that Jones is not even a professor of aything close to anything relevent. Call him "Professor Jones" if you want, but he's a philosophy professor, so in anything regarding physics and mechanical engineering, 'Mr Jones' is all he deserves

 

[FearlessFreep]

Sorry, Fetzer is the philosophy guy. My bad