Professor Steven Jones On Paid Leave For 9/11 Theory...

I'm surprised that this has sneaked under the radar.

www.ksl.com...

A controversy over words at BYU this morning. A professor is on paid leave for suggesting the government is responsible for the destruction of the World Trade Center.

The man on paid leave is Dr. Steven Jones. He's a physics professor involved in the so-called "9-11 Truth Movement."

Jones believes unnamed government agencies orchestrated the fall of the twin towers and he says there's evidence to back it up.

Further proof the mainstream media isn't interested in conspiracy theory, or those that subscribe to them... Recall the outrage in the mainstream media over Colorado Professor Ward Churchill? He was just a loud mouthed fraud, but Steven Jones has immersed himself in the depths of intrigue.

BYU made this statement last night.

"Physics Professor Steven Jones has made numerous statements about the collapse of the World Trade Center. BYU has repeatedly said that it does not endorse assertions made by individual faculty.

"We are, however, concerned about the increasingly speculative and accusatory nature of these statements by Dr. Jones."

The university added, "BYU remains concerned that Dr. Jones' works on this topic has not been published in appropriate scientific venues."

I wonder what "venue" would consider his work?

Originally posted by Mirthful Me
I'm surprised that this has sneaked under the radar.

it hasn't www.abovetopsecret.com...

Originally posted by solidshot
it hasn't www.abovetopsecret.com...

A local TV news station omline story, and an ATSNN article with two replies (and a 9/11 Conspiracies thread with what will now be two replies) certainly is under the radar.

It wouldn't surprise me to find this story has no "legs" at all.

This was a punishment for him publishing a paper here (just wait till next month when they release the testing of the steel samples verified by THREE university labs...):

www.journalof911studies.com...

They do not think it has been "properly peer reviewed"...

I suppose none of these doctors, professors, engineers or physicists count:

Alex Floum
Prof. Marcus Ford
Derrick Grimmer (Ph.D.)
Prof. Richard McGinn
Kimberly Moore
Robert Moore
Joseph Phelps (MS, PE)
Prof. Diana Ralph
Robert Stevens
Lon Waters (Ph.D.)
Prof. Paul Zarembka.

The really SAD thing is... all he is asking for is:

In writing this paper, I call for a serious investigation of the hypothesis that WTC7 and the Twin Towers were brought down, not just by impact damage and fires, but through the carefully planned use of explosives/incendiaries. I have presented ample evidence for the controlled-demolition hypothesis, which is scientifically testable and yet has not been seriously considered in any of the studies funded by the US government.

I wondered when this would happen. I'm sure BYU would rather replace Jones, as distinguished a scientist as he is, than lose funding for their engineering departments and who knows what else from a disapproving federal agency. Hopefully this will get something going in the consciences of other BYU faculty Jones spoke and worked with, like Prof. Kuttler, and possibly even people from within the engineering department itself.

BYU is concerned about GOVERNEMNT GRANT MONEY.

That is how you "shut up" a mouthy professor... threaten the University President with the loss of MILLIONS of dollars worth of government grants. End of story.

Its all good and everything to assume we know the answer about everthing! why did Jones place himself in a situation that at the time seemed innocent to him. I think the emotions of 911 moved him to present his position. I also wonder why he is on pay leave, normally there is a clash in management of a department. Maybe his boss is totally on the opposite view of what Jones has stated.
BYU is not just your everyday college mill, great instituation with great leaders with great ideas. In jones case his position of rank did not allow him to make statements as he has done. To assume something without evidence or scientific studies is considered a hasty generalization.
One thing there were no moleculer studies done to assume grain fragement under heat and stress. There were no electron scope applications to any such objects nor was there any one as a chemical engineers to tests for contaminates. I think jones maybe right on many areas that does not make my assumption any more correct then his nor does it prove he is wrong. It is a political world in grants and colleges, it called the musical chairs game, and jones is without a chair now.

Originally posted by mondegreen
In jones case his position of rank did not allow him to make statements as he has done.

This is not how academia in America is supposed to work... Many do not agree with gay studies or things like that... but they go on without complaint.

Originally posted by mondegreen
To assume something without evidence or scientific studies is considered a hasty generalization.

There is PLENTY of evidence to support his ONLY CLAIM: A new investigation MUST be opened and the evidence released.

Originally posted by mondegreen It is a political world in grants and colleges, it called the musical chairs game, and jones is without a chair now.

So, if that is the case... why not leave out the rest of this tripe and just agree with my post above?

Jones is a sensationalist:

… He has come forward claiming he has found unequivocal proof that the WTC were brought down by thermite / thermate.

The peer-review / appropriate-journal argument on this specific claim is moot at the moment because Jones has published absolutely no results and provided no evidence for these claims. Please correct me if I am wrong.

When countless experts (in the appropriate fields of study) back up the “official story” with proper scientific discourse, you dismiss their studies and their so-called evidence … some of you even take the extra step of calling them liars or murderers.

Why the double standard?

Originally posted by vor75
Jones is a sensationalist:

… He has come forward claiming he has found unequivocal proof that the WTC were brought down by thermite / thermate.

WRONG! He has come foreward pointing out 13 MAJOR issues with the governments story and has asked for a release of evidence and a new proper investigation. HE NEVER CLAIMS to have "unequivocal" proof of anything.

Originally posted by vor75
The peer-review / appropriate-journal argument on this specific claim is moot at the moment because Jones has published absolutely no results and provided no evidence for these claims. Please correct me if I am wrong.

I guess it depends on your definition of "evidence"... all he has is photos, videos and samples of slag. Since the NIST/FEMA/DoD wil not release ANYTHING, what do you suggest?

Originally posted by vor75
When countless experts (in the appropriate fields of study) back up the “official story” with proper scientific discourse, you dismiss their studies and their so-called evidence … some of you even take the extra step of calling them liars or murderers.

I have not seen hordes of engineers, scientists, etc. rushing to defend the gov'ts story as you claim. Only the ones that were paid to do so through salary and contracts. Sources?

Originally posted by vor75
Why the double standard?

It is easy to refute much of what your "countless experts" have to say. The government is hiding evidence, blocking investigations, LYING in MANY PROVEN CASES and will not answer questions...

Can the same be said for Jones?

[edit on 12-9-2006 by Slap Nuts]