Study concludes explosives used on 911

www.europhysicsnews.org...

A study of the attacks on September 11th, recently published in Europhysics Magazine, concluded that there's much evidence to indicate explosives were used to cause the collapse of the buildings. It's a great read and it goes into detail and refutes several claims NIST made about the building collapses after their study.

The article was authored by Steven Jones - a former professor of physics at Brigham Young University. Anthony Szamboti - a mechanical design engineer with over 25 years of structural design experience in the aerospace and communications industries. Ted Walter - the director of strategy and development for Architects & En- gineers for 9/11 Truth (AE911Truth), a nonprofit organization that today represents more than 2,500 architects and engineers. And Robert Korol - a professor emeritus of civil engineering at McMaster University in Ontario, Canada.

a reply to: DimensionalChange03

Thank you for posting this. From my own experience, many people just do not want to think/believe that it is even remotely possible that there could even be the slightest chance that something other than the "official version" of events took place that day. It is just easier, I think, and less scary to just blindly accept what the government proclaims as indisputable fact. My dad gives me the dirtiest look any time I even bring up the topic and he gets this tone of "how dare you" in his voice... needless to say, I don't discuss it with him anymore. Like many topics on ATS, I remain undecided due to my ignorance, but my gut tells me that yes, explosive were used- so many witnesses hearing/feeling/injured by some forceful energy impact before the planes even struck- at least according to some sources.

a reply to: seattlerat

Most definitely. And beyond the science, a massive amount of evidence also shows itself when looking into what happened before and after the events on 911.

Air Force drills were happening at the time making sure all fighter jets were flying over Alaska and Canada. Political figures were being warned not to travel. The CIA destroyed all their interrogation tapes of the alleged terrorist. The FBI took all the video tapes of the plane hitting the pentagon. Insider stock trading took place a week before the attack with American Airlines and United Airlines having over a one thousand percent increase in stock bets being put on the fact that their stock would crash. The Project for the New American Century's report called for a new Pearl Harbor to justify the advancement of military spending and Middle Eastern control. The pentagon announced they couldn't account for 2 trillion dollars of defense spending the day before 9/11 on the 10th, then the pentagons budget analyst offices that were investigating the missing 2 trillion happened to be destroyed the next day. The Defense Intelligence Agency destroyed two and half terabytes of data on an organization relating to terrorism known as Able Danger. Tons of documents of ongoing investigations into WorldCom and Enrons company fraud and corruption were coincidentally destroyed in one of the buildings. And of course, 911 was the justification for the never ending wars in the Middle East that brings billions of dollars to war profiteering oil companies and weapons contractors such as Hilliburton, Lockheed Martin, BAE Systems and Raytheon.

And then, as known by members here, the 1960s with the joint chiefs of staff of the military coming up with plans to literally carry out a massive "false flag" terror attack against innocent American citizens just like 911, all in the plan called operation northwoods that would have government intelligence agencies stage the hijacking of a jetliner and bomb buildings in different cities, then blaming it on non-existing Cuban terrorist all so they could justify invading Cuba, just as 911 let them invade several oil rich countries.

All in all, their analysis of the collapse of the buildings was well done.

Shouldn't this be in the 9/11 Forum. That place looked like ghost town last I checked.

a reply to: DimensionalChange03

Perhaps concerns about the potential collateral damage to the surrounding real estate in the event of an uncontrolled collapse, following the 1995 attack, lead to the surreptitious installation of a "self-destruct system"?

The next question would be;

Has the same type of system been retrofitted to any other buildings?

Of course, such a thing would never be disclosed.

For one thing, it would be impossible to insure a building pre-rigged to implode.

That third building collapsing was evidence enough
The rest is just filler

Doesn't surprise. There are terrorist everywhere, some wear tie's and get jobs in government, Does not mean government is evil. Means government has been penetrated by people that don't serve the interest of the people.

NOTE FROM THE EDITORS
This feature is somewhat different from our usual
purely scientific articles, in that it contains some
speculation. However, given the timing and the
importance of the issue, we consider that this
feature is sufficiently technical and interesting
to merit publication for our readers. Obviously,
the content of this article is the responsibility
of the authors

It is the same opinions that have been beaten to death. I just read the article. Once again the"experts" started with the conclusion that they wanted, then tried to speculate enough to "prove" their point.

There is not one piece of new information that was given.

originally posted by: Bhadhidar
a reply to: DimensionalChange03

Perhaps concerns about the potential collateral damage to the surrounding real estate in the event of an uncontrolled collapse, following the 1995 attack, lead to the surreptitious installation of a "self-destruct system"?

The next question would be;

Has the same type of system been retrofitted to any other buildings?

Of course, such a thing would never be disclosed.

For one thing, it would be impossible to insure a building pre-rigged to implode.

Where would you put all the explosives, blasting caps, wiring for detonation, the magic key to set it all off, and who would set it off.

You realize a current inducted by any source like radar can set a blasting cap off in a closed detonation circuit?

Awesome idea, they might blow this building up. Better added a few hundred shape changes just in case a terrorist sets one large bomb off. What could go wrong? And where would the controls be kept to insure access and reliability of a self destruct system during an attack.

How would you keep IT personal from discovering the wiring used to set off explosives? IT persons running wire, cat 5, T-10 line, some fiber-optic cable, oh look, twisted pair to a blasting cap and a shape charge....

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Shouldn't this be in the 9/11 Forum. That place looked like ghost town last I checked.

Possibly....although it could be like a game of cat and mouse waiting for the usual suspects to show up in full debunking mode....maybe there can be some discussion of the OP before that happens

a reply to: Bhadhidar

The Sears/Willis tower is probably fitted with explosives within the building materials.

originally posted by: Kester
a reply to: Bhadhidar

The Sears/Willis tower is probably fitted with explosives within the building materials.

You do realize explosives have an operational lifespan. As explosives age, oxidize, are exposed to ranges of temperatures and humidity, they lose reliability, the guarantee they will actuate, or even become unstable.

Or building maintenance that could sever detonation wiring or accidentally set of a charge.

Again. Who holds the magic key to detonate the sears tower. Do they under go a stress test and psychological testing? What if they went crazy. Would it not be easier for terrorists to use the implanted detonation system.

You have no idea how ridiculous the concept is, or you are great at sarcasm.

Architects, engineers and scientists can see it like night and day but just watching the event.. they don't even need any studies. (Like the studies that found that the white dust that blanketed the entire city that day consisted of mostly micro-spheres that can only be produced from a super-high temperature thermite reaction.)

a reply to: neutronflux

I guess you cannot control these things (thermite) wirelessly?

Actually in the movie Loose Change you can see sharp thin explosions blowing out the windows in a uniform line down the building, prior to each floor collapsing. This was also witnessed by many firemen. Seeing is believing.

a reply to: DimensionalChange03

Well there goes their credibility.

a reply to: DimensionalChange03

Funny because I live practically at the Langley Air force base and the jets were flying out of there at an amazing rate. Also even jets over Canada could respond to that sector of airspace. Planes were being hijacked all over they didn't know where they would be needed. Plus they are very very fast.. That's the weakest argument I've ever heard associated with this. Our planes were out to lunch.

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Kester
a reply to: Bhadhidar

The Sears/Willis tower is probably fitted with explosives within the building materials.

You do realize explosives have an operational lifespan. As explosives age, oxidize, are exposed to ranges of temperatures and humidity, they lose reliability, the guarantee they will actuate, or even become unstable.

Or building maintenance that could sever detonation wiring or accidentally set of a charge.

Again. Who holds the magic key to detonate the sears tower. Do they under go a stress test and psychological testing? What if they went crazy. Would it not be easier for terrorists to use the implanted detonation system.

You have no idea how ridiculous the concept is, or you are great at sarcasm.

What is ridiculous is your travesty of an attempt to debunk the possibility that the WTC towers were subject to controlled demolition. You make the false assumption that the explosives would have had to be in place for years. Not at all. They were in all probability added during the weekend before 9/11 when workers at the towers noticed teams of technicians entering, ostensibly to upgrade computer cables, during which the normal security measures were reported to have been reduced drastically. The whole point of pre-wiring a skyscraper during its construction is to avoid having to pay for demolition teams spending months drilling holes and running detonation cables all over the place. All that has to done when the decision is made to bring the building down is to insert explosive charges in the hidden, designated places (this would take only a few hours) and detonate them electronically. The fact that the pre-wired WTC7 was brought down by controlled demolition just a few hours after the other towers were blown up - far too short a time for the normal wiring procedures to be used - is evidence supporting this scenario. We have videos of firemen and police telling people to move away from the building because "it was about to blow". We also have the testimony of a Ground Zero EMT who reported that he was told that Building 7 was to be "pulled". He told Loose Change Dylan Avery that "The buildings were rigged, there is no question about it." (see here).

Are we still rehashing all this?

originally posted by: nOraKat
blowing out the windows in a uniform line down the building,

Where do you think the air contained within the building went during the collapse.....

a reply to: DimensionalChange03

Steve must be looking for a little more limelight and more donations from gullible fanboys after the laughable "primer paint is really thermite" paper fiasco. Of course, there is no evidence of explosives -- just more speculation by those who are forcing a conclusion that the suckers really want to believe. This will be an evergreen topic for Stevie and far more profitable than his "Jesus walked among the native Americans" paper.