Utah physics professor suggests explosives hypothesis to explain 9/11 collapses

international | sci-tech | other press Tuesday December 06, 2005 05:19 by Dr. Coilín Oscar ÓhAiseadha Máigh Nuad, Co. Cill Dara

Jones demands release of photographs and video footage for independent investigation

A physics professor at a university in Utah has written a scientific paper that undermines the hypothesis that fires caused the collapse of three buildings in the World Trade Center on 11 September, 2001. He lists many indicators of pre-positioned explosives as a more plausible hypothesis. This would neatly account for discrepancies, including the rapid, symmetrical and total collapse of building WTC-7, which was not struck by an aeroplane.

Jones’ analysis raises the level of scepticism about the official explanation for the events of 9/11 into the scientific domain. Jones’ distinguished academic career includes a PhD from Vanderbilt University, post-doctoral research at Cornell University and research for the US Department of Energy.

In his paper, Jones points out that the explosive demolition hypothesis cannot be dismissed out of hand as a “conspiracy theory”. Such thinking “departs from good science as well as from numerous historical precedents of empirical conspiracies”.

Contents:
1. News report
2. Jones’ CV
3. Scientific analysis


http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,635160132,00.html


****


CV of Professor Steven Earl Jones:
http://www.physics.byu.edu/faculty/bergeson/physics1/atomic/jones_cv.htm


****



Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse?
By Steven E. Jones
...
ABSTRACT
In writing this paper, I call for a serious investigation of the hypothesis that WTC 7 and the Twin Towers were brought down, not just by damage and fires, but through the use of pre-positioned explosives. I consider the official FEMA, NIST, and 9-11 Commission reports that fires plus damage alone caused complete collapses of all three buildings. And I present evidence for the explosive-demolition hypothesis, which is suggested by the available data, testable and falsifiable, and yet has not been analyzed in any of the reports funded by the US government.
...
http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html


****

Note: I know this story is a month old, but in view of the grave implications of Jones’ explosives hypothesis, I thought I should spend some time critically reading his analysis. I have also discussed the paper with an engineer, who was sceptical but ultimately unable to convince me that there was anything wrong with Jones’ reasoning.

I note that there has previously been debate about Jones and the explosives theory here on indymedia.ie, but that debate did not discuss the content of Jones’ paper at all.

Obviously, this is a very controversial issue. I suggest that the best way to resolve the controversy would be for the relevant federal agencies to submit to Jones’ demand to release 6,899 photographs and 6,977 segments of video footage to a cross-disciplinary, international team of scientists and engineers. This approach would facilitate a scientific consideration of the facts of the matter, free from political interference.

If the data disprove the explosives hypothesis, then there will be no more need to speculate as to who might have placed explosives in the buildings. But if the data are not released at all, then justified doubts about the official explanation will persist.

Pending the release of the photographs and video footage, it would be interesting to see comments from Irish scientists and engineers on the content of Jones’ paper. And perhaps the faculty or students at one of the universities would like to invite Jones to come over and debate the issue with his peers? Regardless of outcome, that would be certain to be a stimulating and educational debate for all present.