by Crockett Grabbe
PRESIDENT Barack Obama’s inaugural promise that “We will restore science to it rightful place…” sounds like good news. In our article “Science in the Bush: When Politics Replaces Physics,” published on the web in September of 2007 , Lenny Charles and I pointed out how scientific integrity had been placed well behind politics in analysis, not only in areas such as climate change caused by humans and public health issues, but also particularly in analysis of the attacks on the World Trade Center in 2001.
As we pointed out in the article, scientists who speak out publicly have been the main source of credible information on what science really portrays. The press in general selectively shows scientific results, often with errors in their stories because of their own scientific misunderstandings. Knowing their limitations, they often tend to shy away from controversial issues like the scientific facts and evidence... So when the government promotes ideas and conclusions that are not scientifically accurate, scientists provide the principal credible counter to these errors.
We described in some detail in the article how the physics in the NIST Committee analysis of what happened in the WTC collapses is wrong. A paragraph of it was quoted from our article by noted columnist Paul Craig Roberts in his September 11, 2007 editorial “9/11: 6 years later” :
"Physicists have raised unanswered questions about the official explanation’s neglect of the known laws of physics. Recently, Dr. Crockett Grabbe, a Caltech trained applied physicist at the University of Iowa, observed: “Applying two basic principles, conservation of energy and conservation of momentum, the government explanation quickly unravels. NIST conspicuously ignored these principles in their reports. NIST also ignored the observed twisting of the top 34 floors of the South Tower before it toppled down. This twisting clearly violates the conservation of both linear and angular momentum unless a large external force caused it. Where the massive amounts of energy came from that were needed to cause the complete collapse of the intact parts below for each tower, when their tops were in virtual free fall, is not answered in NIST’s numerous volumes of study.”
These scientific principles are a fatal flaw for the NIST Committee’s explanations for the building collapses, as expounded in my Letter [of] January 29, 2008 . Our government must correct all of the errors in their multiple studies of the collapse of these buildings. To do that, scientific integrity must be restored. [...][Notes and references at link]
Journal: The Environmentalist Publisher: Springer Netherlands (August 2008)
Abstract: Investigators monitoring air quality at the World Trade Center, after the September 11th attacks, found extremely high levels of volatile organic chemicals as well as unusual species that had never been seen before in structure fires. Data collected by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency indicate striking spikes in levels of benzene, styrene, and several other products of combustion. These spikes occurred on specific dates in October and November 2001, and February 2002. Additionally, data collected by researchers at the University of California Davis showed similar spikes in the levels of sulfur and silicon compounds, and certain metals, in aerosols. To better explain these data, as well as the unusual detection of 1,3-diphenylpropane, the presence of energetic nanocomposites in the pile at Ground Zero is hypothesized.
Keywords World Trade Center - EPA - 1,3-diphenylpropane - Aluminothermics - Energetic nanocomposites - Volatile organic chemicals / Read the full article here, courtesy of The Environmentalist: PDF (367.0 KB) Interview with Dr Jenkins at Democracy Now: "As Study Links 9/11 Debris to Cancer, Details Emerge on How Officials Downplayed Ground Zero Dangers" http://www.democracynow.org/2011/9/9/as_study_links_9_11_debris
"Both of the Twin Tower collapses exhibited remarkable symmetry, from start to finish. The centred collapses meant the falling mass followed the path of maximum resistance. That's the opposite of how we expect a structure to behave when it falls apart in any kind of natural process. Even if the towers were made out of clay, we wouldn't expect them to collapse in such a dead-centred fashion. It's all the more incredible that a steel structure would shred itself by falling into itself instead of falling over". http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/collapses/symmetry.html
"Today, our nation saw evil." George W. Bush, September 11, 2001
September 11 will not be a simple anniversary of an extraordinary day but the mythic return of a day that is now in the calendar of American civil religion.
American citizens will be urged to re-achieve the levels of patriotic fervour stimulated by the original event by flying the nation’s flag.
Pilgrimage to “Ground Zero” will thrive.
No one familiar with war and nationalism will be surprised by the religious aspects of these memorials and revisitings.
The homeland was violated. Blood sacrifice and murder were accomplished. The nation, after reeling from the blow, found a sense of meaning and direction only by setting off on its own path of blood sacrifice.
I will not discuss here the well known aspects of the path chosen -- the illegal invasions and torture abroad, the degrading of civil rights at home, and the parallel developments in other states...
My concerns in this essay are different. I am troubled by something else. I am troubled by the role the political parties, the corporate media and the universities have played, and are still playing, in the construction of the cult of 9/11.
I am bothered by the way they continue to set this day aside as if some sacredness protects it from all rational scrutiny and examination of evidence. Those of us who want to treat 9/11 like a historically important but otherwise ordinary day -- who want to examine the crime scene and found out who did it and how — are treated like heretics.
Glenn, you wrote some excellent pieces back at Salon.com about the anthrax attacks of 2001. I wondered if you are going to revisit the subject in light of the recent lawsuit filed by lead investigator, Richard Lambert against his former employer the FBI, claiming that evidence was withheld and that Ivins could not have been convicted had he lived. ‘In a lawsuit filed in federal court in Tennessee last Thursday, Mr. Lambert accused the bureau of trying “to railroad the prosecution of Ivins” and, after his suicide, creating “an elaborate perception management campaign” to bolster its claim that he was guilty.’ http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/09/us/ex-fbi-agent-claims-retaliation-for-dissent-in-anthrax-inquiry.html?_r=0
If you do, I hereby put in a request that you at least give fair mention of the work of Grahame MacQueen on this subject (linked below).
“This deeply troubling book should be read by all thinking Americans.” Denis J. Halliday, UN Assistant Secretary-General 1994-98
..........The anthrax issue is an interesting one, in that it is widely reported that the FBI case has basically imploded; and this is 'acceptable discourse' within the MSM and alt media. Yet anyone who looks at the case now, must quite quickly come to the realisation that it is intimately connected to 911 in multiple ways. A consequence could be that more of the 'skeptical' liberals might be forced by this story to actually consider the 911 evidence honestly and thoroughly -as so many of them have failed to do.
Supported videos include:
Create your own forum with Website Toolbox!