You are here: Home Forum
 
Media Lens Forum
Register Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 1 of 3      1   2   3   Next
margo

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 184
Reply with quote  #1 
From mechanical engineer Tony Szamboti:

"There is a new letter at the Journal of 911 Studies* which describes dishonest and unethical behavior by the Journal of Engineering Mechanics and its parent organization, the ASCE Journals and their Board of Governors, regarding their refusal to correct a clearly dishonest and fraudulent paper they published concerning the collapse of the WTC Towers in January 2011.

The letter can be found here http://www.journalof911studies.com/resources/Szamboti-and-Johns-Letter.pdf

This stonewalling behavior is similar to that observed of the NIST Director when confronted earlier this year with evidence that the NIST WTC 7 report omitted pertinent structural features from its analysis which would have made impossible the collapse initiation hypothesis presented in the report.

See the December 2013 letter by attorney William Pepper to the Dept. of Commerce Inspector General on this issue here

http://www.journalof911studies.com/resources/2014JanLetterPepper.pdf

Unfortunately, it seems clear that the previously respected institutions of NIST and the ASCE Journals are involved in a cover-up to prevent the truth of what actually occurred in NYC on Sept. 11, 2001 from being revealed. [...]

Whatever one thinks of the current situation in Iraq, with ISIS, one should remember that had Iraq not been invaded, and its government replaced and army disbanded by the Bush administration, there would be no ISIS.

It is known that the Bush administration used fraudulent means to justify its invasion of Iraq and this was only possible with the fear generated by the events of Sept. 11, 2001 and most prominently what happened in NYC on that day.

It is thus imperative to find out just who was involved in those events, since science has shown that the aircraft impacts and fires were not responsible for the complete failures and collapses of the three high rise buildings in NYC on that day.

http://911blogger.com/news/2014-09-13/why-are-asce-journals-being-dishonest-and-misleading-concerning-how-wtc-towers-collapsed

http://www.consensus911.org/mr-tony-szamboti-mechanical-engineer-joins-911-consensus-panel/

------- - -------- - --------- - ----------

* Sadly, smeared by Noam Chomsky:“There are submissions to the Journal of 9/11 Studies, but that’s about as convincing as submissions to the Journal of Intelligent Design Studies.” [alex at http://www.newleftproject.org/index.php/site/article_comments/why_conspiracy/]
margo

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 184
Reply with quote  #2 


White Paper on National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) Reports now complete.

25 Points: The End of the Road for NIST -- In recent years, credentialed  members of the AE911Truth team have been working on a white paper titled “Areas of Specific Concern in the NIST WTC Reports.”

Last month they completed the document. Its 25 concise points offer the most convincing proof that the reports produced by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) on the 2001 destruction of the three World Trade Centre buildings were unscientific and fraudulent.  The authors of "The 25 Points" designed the document to provide material that would compel the convening of a grand jury. 

Jump to the 25 POINTS: http://www.ae911truth.org/images/articles/2014/11/twenty-five-points-10-19-14-3.pdf

----------------------------

Reference:  Journal Publications / 911 Encyclopedia:

http://911encyclopedia.com/wiki/index.php/Journal_Publications

margo

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 184
Reply with quote  #3 
First in five-part series

"NIST Reports: Fantasy, Fiction and Fraud"

http://www.ae911truth.org/en/news-section/41-articles/927-nists-wtc-7-reports-filled-with-fantasy-fiction-and-fraud-intro.html

Introduction

The United States government's official investigator of the destruction of the three skyscrapers on September 11, 2001, is the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), an arm of the Department of Commerce. The agency became highly politicized during a Clinton-era restructuring. "In essence," recalls a NIST whistleblower, "we lost our scientific independence, and became little more than 'hired guns.'"

NIST has made many false written and oral statements about the collapses of the three World Trade Center buildings on 9/11 — statements that have now caused 2,300 architects and engineers to question the government investigator's credibility and veracity. One of its most implausible claims is that a high-rise steel structure in New York City was destroyed by fire alone.

wtc7 demolition comparisonNIST contends that the Twin Towers were brought down by the impact damage and consequent fires from the large airliner jets that hit them. But no jet struck WTC 7, and NIST claims that office fires alone demolished that building. The agency does admit that, if true, this would be the first and only time that an office fire brought down a steel skyscraper.

Ultimately, we are asked to accept on faith NIST's ever-changing, remarkable, and, frankly, suspect explanations for WTC 7's destruction.

Why "suspect"? Because NIST ignored the National Fire Protection Association protocol — specifically, the NFPA 921 Guide for Fire and Explosion Investigations — and refused to perform a forensic investigation. As a consequence, NIST has no physical proof to back up its unusual explanation for WTC 7's destruction.

Even more concerning, NIST bases its finding on computer models whose input data it refuses to release to either the scientific community or the general public. Thus, it is impossible to independently verify NIST's work and its startling conclusion. AE911Truth contends that NIST's methodology is contrary to every tenet of legitimate scientific inquiry. In this article, we seek to show how the supporting "evidence" put forward by NIST in the 13 years since that fateful day has been consistently and deliberately misleading.

We will review NIST's progression from its 2004 preliminary report to its 2008 final report — a progression that will reveal a pattern of omissions and distortions that appear designed to arrive at a preconceived conclusion.

We will show, step by step, that NIST's final hypothesis of scattered office fires producing the gravitational collapse of a 47-story steel structure is a classic case of "cover-up" — designed to obscure the fact that the implosion of Building 7 was the result of controlled demolition.

NIST's pattern of omissions and distortions: .... Read more at the link

see also:   "The Facts we have on WTC 7 are Enough"
http://911blogger.com/news/2014-11-13/we-were-lied-about-911-episode-11-thomas-drake#comment-262128



margo

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 184
Reply with quote  #4 

"9/11 in the Academic Community", directed by Canadian Adnan Zuberi and awarded for “Documentary Achievement” at the University of Toronto Film Festival, is now available for purchase through its website:
Preview and Press Release: http://911inacademia.com/2013/08/05/911-in-the-academic-community-preview-press-release/

It is recommended by:

Friedrich Steinhäusler
Professor of Physics at Salzburg University
Former Co-Director of the NATO ARW on Catastrophic Terrorism
Past Chairman, US/German Transatlantic Expert Group on Terrorism:

Quote:

Steinhäusler: "I hope that this material will be made available to the wider international academic community in order to foster a wider, fact-based discussion among researchers and students alike"



and

Dr. Roger W. Bowen

Served as General Secretary of the American Association of University Professors,
Professor of Political Science and President of the State University of New York:

Quote:

Bowen: "Academic freedom protects scholars who report inconvenient truths from the uninformed, but, as Adnan Zuberi reminds us, academic freedom is also the responsibility of scholars to pursue the truth".

 

 

margo

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 184
Reply with quote  #5 
Clear discussion of Newton's First and Third Laws with relation to WTC building performance,
accompanied by direct reference to relevant sections of NIST reports. A good resource.

margo

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 184
Reply with quote  #6 
Physics teacher David Chandler, who got NIST to make crucial scientific corrections to their reports, shares his knowledge, tools and findings in the latest post at his blog:

http://911speakout.org/?page_id=222

"Science Died at the WTC"

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/02/science-died-wtc.html
margo

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 184
Reply with quote  #7 

Science Died at the WTC
Kevin Ryan  / 15 February 2015

Quote:
"An excellent resource for those trying to inform the public of just how bad the science behind the official explanation is. As is the attitiude of mainstream science and media, in supporting NISTs politically-motivated conclusions."


Washington's Blog: http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/02/science-died-wtc.html

Dig Withinhttp://digwithin.net/2015/02/15/science-died-wtc/
Paul Craig Roberts: http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2015/02/17/guest-column-kevin-ryan-science-died-911/

Excerpt 1:

"From Lysenkoism through the examples given by Oreskes and Conway, politically motivated pseudoscience demonstrates a pattern of characteristics as follows.

  1. There is a lack of experiments.
  2. The results of experiments are ignored or contradicted in the conclusions.
  3. There is either no peer-review or peer-reviewer concerns are ignored.
  4. The findings cannot be replicated or falsified due to the withholding of data.
  5. False conclusions are supported by marketing or media propaganda.
  6. Hypotheses that are supported by the evidence are ignored.

 
"All six of these characteristics of pseudo-science are exhibited by the U.S. government investigation into what happened at the WTC in September, 2001.  That investigation was conducted by the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) and it had much in common with the examples given by Oreskes and Conway.

"As with the false science that supported tobacco use, millions of lives were lost as a result—in this case through the “War on Terror.” Like support for the Strategic Defense Initiative, the abuses were focused on supporting the military-industrial complex. And as with the environmental examples, NIST’s manipulations affect everyone on the planet because they prop up a never-ending war."

Excerpt 2

"The WTC reports produced by NIST represent the most obvious example of politically motivated pseudoscience in history.

* The physical experiments NIST performed did not support its conclusions.
* The reports were not peer-reviewed and public comments that challenged the findings were ignored.
* NIST will not share its computer models—the last supposed evidence that supports its conclusions—with the public and therefore its conclusions are not verifiable.

"These glaring facts should be readily recognizable by any scientist and, given the unprecedented impact of the resulting War on Terror, this abuse of science should be the basis for a global outcry from the scientific community.

"The fact that it is not—with even Oreskes and Conway ignoring this most obvious example—indicates that many scientists today still cannot recognize false science or cannot speak out about it for fear of social stigma.

"It’s possible that our society has not suffered enough to compel scientists to move out of their comfort zones and challenge such exploitation of their profession. If so, the abuse of science for political and commercial purposes will only get worse."

See also > "The Progressive Collapse of Science" > http://canadianspectator.ca/stuff/Seffen.html






 

 

margo

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 184
Reply with quote  #8 
from an engineer:

Quote:

"Just ignoring the physical impossibility of a fire destroying the foundational supports of a steel structured building is one thing, but to suggest that in a disordered system - such as an asymmetrical building collapse  - entropy will decrease, is to reverse the very laws of the universe.

"In classical thermodynamics, the concept of entropy is defined phenomenologically by the second law of thermodynamics, which states that the entropy of an isolated system always increases".

 

"So it is impossible for a system to go from disordered (asymmetrical collapse) to ordered (symmetrical collapse) without the second law of thermodynamics operating in reverse. Case closed."

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



"Slowly heated steel will result in dispersement of the heat throughout a skyscraper’s interconnected steel skeleton since heat always moves from the hotter region to the colder region. Heat does not move towards itself. It will only move away from itself, resulting in cooling. This dispersement will prevent major localized and simultaneous heat-related failures due to normal office fires"

Myers

Junior Member
Registered:
Posts: 18
Reply with quote  #9 
Great documentation of relevant and current links margo.
'Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence' is a phrase that comes to mind, the question being, 'Does the work of Ryan, Jones, Harrit, MacQueen, Szamboti and others constitute extraordinary evidence?' Who has the authority to answer that question?
I am perplexed. The writers at ML seem to be tacitly saying that they are not convinced by the evidence linked above, at least that they are less convinced than they are by the official accounts- I've not read them express even a doubt.

'Our aim is to raise awareness of the systemic failure of the corporate media to report the world honestly and accurately.' They say.
'Our aim is to increase rational awareness, critical thought and compassion...' a noble aim that I agree with.
Whatever the veracity of the critical perspectives on 911, can we say that ML have upheld their professed aims with regard to this issue? I say not, and I am perplexed by that. I suspect that in their minds that to point out the media bias would mean to risk being read as endorsers of an alternative account- of taking on that label.

I used to keep expecting to read somewhere on the web that there are rational answers to all these questions that I had somehow missed, linking to the debunking authority that lays to rest these persistent criticisms; that explains the anomalous evidence. But I have stopped expecting such, it does not exist, there is no debate, only ignorance, silence, assumptions, slurs, innuendo, taboo; the opposite of 'raising awareness' or 'critical thought'.

margo

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 184
Reply with quote  #10 
[1] Yet Another High-Rise Fails to Collapse After Fire (Dubai)

"No Collapse as Dubai "Torch Tower' is engulfed by flames"


http://911blogger.com/news/2015-03-10/no-collapse-dubais-torch-tower-engulfed-flames

CNN journalist challenged by readers to address this issue

[2] Yet Another High-Rise shows all the features of professional implosion (Hull)

"Watch as Hull's tallest building is reduced to rubble"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2986180/Watch-moment-Hull-s-tallest-building-reduced-rubble-make-way-new-shopping-centre.html

This building in Hull was taken down in eight seconds and exhibits many of the same features seen at World Trade Centre Building Seven, 2001 ie. (i) sudden onset; (ii) vertical plunge through path of greatest resistance; (iii) pyroclastic clouds.

Note: (i) (ii) (iii) are listed by http://www.ae911truth.org as hallmarks of demolition.


Note: Analysis of other skyscraper fires, compared to WTC fires  > http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/compare/fires.html

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

-- A 20-storey building in Hull pulverises in eight seconds.
(ie all supports suddenly and simultaneously removed) (professional demolition company claims responsibility)

-- A 47-storey building in New York pulverises in seven seconds
(ie all supports suddenly and simultaneously removed) (Govt agency says this is a gravity-driven event, due to fire on some floors).

-- Two 110-storey buildings in New York pulverise in 10 to 11 seconds each. 
(ie all supports suddenly and simultaneously removed) ( Structures stood firm for 50 to 80 minutes after planes penetrated the top 15% of structure; the lower 85% sections largely consisted of cold, hard steel) (Govt agency says it's a gravity-driven event, due to fire on some floors)

- - - - - - -  - - - -  - -  - -

How should we explain these phenomena to a classroom of high school physics students?
If thorough, vertical building implosions* can be effected by means of random fires alone, are demolition companies out of business?
* all support/resistance removed simultaneously
 


margo

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 184
Reply with quote  #11 
the collapse of western science

http://canadianspectator.ca/stuff/Seffen.html

pyroclastic flows

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/analysis/collapses/concrete.html

a very brief analysis of gravity and WTC, with respect to Newton's laws

http://readersupportednews.org/pm-section/145-145/8676-a-very-brief-analysis-of-gravity-and-wtc-127


margo

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 184
Reply with quote  #12 
Obama vs science and democracy

(English - Danish sub-titles)



Best visual compendium



Article from 2001: The buildings, the engineers, Hillary Clinton and recycled steel

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/12/25/nyregion/a-nation-challenged-the-towers-experts-urging-broader-inquiry-in-towers-fall.html?pagewanted=2
margo

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 184
Reply with quote  #13 

Like the BBC, Fox News had the official story scripted and ready to go before the third building in NY (WTC 7) imploded > see Building 7 standing - then descending smoothly - in this video...

The issues with this are:
(a) It is impossible to attain such a rapid demolition without pre-priming the building
(b) NIST prevent all FOIA requests to examine their computer modelling. While admitting there was no resistance, they still claim this symmetrical, textbook demolition was caused by asymmetrically-placed 'office fires' (sic) confined to a few floors

margo

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 184
Reply with quote  #14 
Architect Richard Gage and science professor Niels Harrit talk to Denmark's DOX TV interviewer

margo

Avatar / Picture

Senior Member
Registered:
Posts: 184
Reply with quote  #15 
The Guardian asserts that it gives us  "The Whole Picture", as part of its brand logo. In its reports on the terrorist-related structural failures in  2001 that served as casus belli for the War on Terror, The Whole includes a gaping hole. One part of the picture (scientific rebuttal from independent experts) is missing, dismissed as 'conspiracy nonsense', whilst the other part (government-paid experts and ivory tower academics who support the official narrative) is inflated. This latest Guardian feature (July 2015) continues the pattern: 'Guardian Science: 'Terrorism and Buildings Design: 911. Fire. Melt' > http://www.theguardian.com/science/video/2015/jul/16/terrorism-buildings-design-architecture-how-world-trade-collapse-911-fire-melt-video
[Note the video credit under Additional Material: "USA Military"]

What is of interest is that sceptical comments beneath this Guardian feature have not been deleted, as they usually are. They are worth a read.

Why does The Guardian choose not to feature whistle-blower Kevin Ryan's investigative journalism article on the subject: "Are Tall Buildings Safer Since 911?" [1] [2].
Why does The Guardian choose not to showcase the videos by physics teacher David Chandler that informed the landmark NIST concession to 'freefall acceleration" [3]

Why does The Guardian choose to showcase a video from an Australian university that looks at isolated features of building destruction, quoting a professor who seems not to realise the 'progressive collapse' theory's been discounted by NIST itself? Can this university team explain (in the first instance) how two quarter-mile high, heavily redundant steel structures  pulverise themselves to dust in less than 12 seconds, through the path of greatest resistance? [4]

Quote:
notes:

[1] 'Are tall buildings safer as a result of the NIST WTC Reports?'

http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2012/09/10/are-tall-buildings-safer-as-a-result-of-the-nist-wtc-reports/

[2] Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat: Are Tall Buildings Safer?

http://ctbuh.org/News/GlobalTallNews/tabid/468/EntryId/4500/Are-Tall-Buildings-Safer-After-NIST-WTC-Report.aspx

[3] David Chandler, member of American Association of Physics Teachers

http://911speakout.org/?page_id=8

[4]  'Evolution of the 911 Controversy: From Conspiracy Theories to Conspiracy Photographs'

A version of this paper was read to the 2015 Annual Gathering of American MENSA.


http://www.scribd.com/doc/270537536/Evolution-of-the-9-11-Controversy-From-Conspiracy-Theories-to-Conspiracy-Photographs



Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:


Create your own forum with Website Toolbox!

leftAll photos courtesy of the Creative Commons, a nonprofit organization that enables the sharing and use of creativity and knowledge through free legal tools..

Like, Tweet and Share...