Scholars for 9/11 Truth collapse. Steven Jones gets the boot.

Did Steven Jones get kicked out of Scholars for 9/11 Truth? It appears to be so.

Poor homeless Steven Jones, abandoned by BYU.

Now his homies at Scholars for 9/11 Truth do not want Steven Jones anymore either; apparently he got kicked out of Scholars for 9/11 by Fetzer.

Scholars for 9/11 Truth has imploded.

Which means that their prestige among the 9/11 Denial Movement has been shattered. As one die-hard Truther laments:

Anyway we can say goodbye to the Scholars, or at least to the Scholars as the center piece for the “Truth Movement.” (source)

Click here to read the start of the major fight between Fetzer and Jones which caused the schism. It is so absurd, bizarre, conspiratorial, unprofessional, moronic and demonstrative of the extreme dysfunctional nature of the group and its star individuals that it comes as no surprise Scholars for 9/11 Truth have imploded. Or did the Government cause the schism and ultimate collapse using thermite?

Did I mention Jones work is to be published in a political opinion book and not a science journal? And when questioned about that reality he refused to answer and changed the subject.

Related post:
9/11 conspiratorialist Steven Jones on paid leave from BYU
Pattern of Secret Combinations in the Book of Mormon
Protec answers Steven Jones’ “Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Completely Collapse?”
Cultural Jihadists

Documentary – The Arab and Iranian Reaction to 9-11: Five Years Later
9/11 Conspiracy Cereal: A Few Nuts and a Bunch of Flakes
Wisconsin Instructor’s 9/11 Conspiracy Theories ill-serve Students
Feds challenge 9/11 conspiracies

9/11 Conspiracies

Related sites:
www.911myths.com
www.debunking911.com
www.debunking911myths.com

Related articles:
TIME: Why The 9/11 Conspiracies Won’t Go Away

The 9/11 Conspiracists and the Decline of the Anmerican Left

Manuel Garcia Jr, physicist and engineer, presents his three separate reports, undertaken for CounterPunch.

  1. Part One is his report on the Physics of 9/11.
  2. Part Two (published here for the first time) is his report on the Thermodynamics of 9/11.
  3. Part Three, “Dark Fire“, is his report on the collapse of the World Trade Center’s Building 7.

Technorati : , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

About these ads

Posted on November 30, 2006, in Conspiracy Theories. Bookmark the permalink. 20 Comments.

  1. Jones originally signed onto to the “9-11 truth” Al-Queada propaganda campaign because BYU profs just don’t get treated like rock stars with screaming fans lining up to have thier pictures taken and autographs books signed. Where is Jones going to go now to get his ego fix? What new levels of depravity is he going to sink to to get the attention of tin-foil turban wearing groupies?

    “Unlike the political opportunist, the true statesman values principle above popularity and works to create popularity for those political principles wich are wise and just.”
    - Ezra Taft Benson

    Jones placed his own popularity above the welfare of the nation and basic scientific methodology and ethics. Benson must be doing back-flips in his grave to see this treasonous, self-serving vermin being held as a role model by several mormons.

  2. Oh yeah, AAron, you are spot on. Jones is a false prophet guilty of priestcraft to be sure.

    Point of fact, in one video of him he points to himself and states, “You’re not following me, you are following Jesus, OK.” In other words, following me is the same as following Jesus, and I’m here to show you the way, the truth, and the light! Here is the video by ldscons:
    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6023596331085044923&q=steven+jones&hl=en

    Men preaching and setting themselves up for a light to the world that they may get gain and praise of the world; they do not seek the welfare of Zion (2 Ne. 26: 29).

    Feed the flock of God, not for filthy lucre, 1 Pet. 5: 2. Churches which are built up to get gain must be brought low, 1 Ne. 22: 23 (Morm. 8: 32-41). Because of priestcrafts and iniquities, Jesus will be crucified, 2 Ne. 10: 5. Were priestcraft to be enforced among this people it would prove their entire destruction, Alma 1: 12. The Gentiles shall be filled with all manner of priestcrafts, 3 Ne. 16: 10.

    http://scriptures.lds.org/en/gs/p/55

  3. Wow,
    I just heard the news: Bush’s Presidency Collapses-Rumsfield Given the Boot. The fact that Steven Jones has been kicked out of 9/11 scholars for truth does not invalidate what he has said nor does it invalidate the entire 9/11 truth movement, just as the fact the Rumsfield was given the boot form the Bu**sh** administration does not invalidate the entire movement. LDS Patriot, when you became the arbiter of the “absurd, bazaar”, and “conspiratorial” you could at least have learned how to spell bizarre. Mixing up homophones doesn’t look very professional.
    Science, that is true science, is often fraught with disagreements and squabbles which, hopefully, lead to more research. Dr. Jones was kicked out of Scholars for 9/11 Truth because he chose a rather conservative outlook on 9/11. He disagreed with some of the more extreme theories that were bing put forth. I would be worried if all of the researchers agreed. The only way to march lockstep in agreement with any theory, even the government’s official conspiracy theory, is to be a brainwashed moron who is not willing to look at any evidence.
    It has been 5 years since 9/11. Has our government found any of the people who supposedly masterminded the horrible events of that day. The FBI was directly implicated in the 1993 WTC bombing.
    Look here if you doubt me: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Center_bombing
    I am not naive enough to believe that our government tried to bring down the WTC in 1993 using a group of Islamic patsies, but was somehow morally averse to the idea in 2001. I’ve got one word for those who continue to overlook our government’s involvement in sponsoring terror: DUPES.

  4. No comment on Steven Jones claiming to be Jesus, Micheal?

  5. I haven’t seen it, but if he claims he’s Jesus then obviously that’s wrong. Haven’t had time to watch the video. From your description it doesn’t sound like he’s claiming to be Jesus. There were 2 objects in that sentence (me and Jesus). If a person pointed at himself and said “you’re not following me,” then I’d be inclined to say that he was adding emphasis to the “not following” part. To accept your interpretation then you’d have to say that he was really saying “I’m not me, I’m Jesus.” I understand you don’t like the man or what he says, but I’d say your evidence that he is claiming to be Jesus is pretty weak. He is a public figure and has been recorded numerous times. If he’s delusional enough to think he’s the Savior, then I’m surprised such statements haven’t been recorded multiple times.

    Wait, I just watched it, didn’t think it would be so early in the video. First, due to poor editing the sentence immediately preceding his statement about Christ was edited out, so we don’t know the full context. Second, in his statement Jones points to himself when he says “You’re not following me,” then he gestures upwards, away from himself, when he says “you’re following Jesus, OK.”

    I repeat my earlier statement, actually I’ll add to it. Your evidence was not just weak it was nonexistant. As a proponent of 9/11 truth, I can find some of Dr. Jones’ arguments that I disagree with and I could probably do a better job of being critical of him than you seem to be doing. I am not waffling or equivocating in any way when I say that your “evidence” is completely unconvincing.

    Please, hold back no longer, take the gloves off and discredit Dr. Jones. I’m sure you’re holding onto to some really damning evidence that you haven’t released yet.

    I have a fairly substantial understanding of the English language, but I’m starting to question your grasp of English, LDS Patriot and Aaron. I challenge you LDS Patriot to put up a poll, along with the video clip, asking readers to vote on whether or not Dr. Jones is claiming to be Christ. Let your readers decide.

    In the meantime, do some research and find some real evidence.

  6. michael, please use your English skills are read my post #2 again. He does not claim to be Jesus, he claims that to follow him (Jones) is the same as following Jesus; one-to-one relationship in his statement.

    As I said, “Point of fact, in one video of him he points to himself and states, “You’re not following me, you are following Jesus, OK.” In other words, following me is the same as following Jesus, and I’m here to show you the way, the truth, and the light!”

    Jones basically is reminding his audience and devoted disciples of the denial movement, as you spread my word and gospel (Jones word and gospel of “truth”), know that it is Jesus you are following. He equates his message and missionaries of “truth” as following Jesus!

    If that is not priestcraft, then nothing is! If that does not send shivers up your spine, then nothing will. I’ve often said Jones is a false prophet, a false teacher, leading LDS astray. Here is the proof. Here is the evidence.

    For the sake of their souls, LDS ought to avoid him like the plague, before they are deceived to the point of no return.

    St. Matthew 24:24 For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

  7. 1st, there only one man I know of whom to follow him is to follow The Savior. Jones ain’t him. And speaking of that man, how is your letter writing campaign to Pres. Hinckley to get Jones re-instated? Do you not find it odd that Jones was forced to resign in digrace from a paid position in the only church on earth run by an actual prophet of God? Funny how the churches leaders on the other side of the veil didn’t consider 9-11 twoofiness important enough to get thier mortal representative to intervene on Joneses behalf.
    2nd, bonus points in hypocrisy for the representative of the whacko cult that can’t even get a single grand jury empanelled let alone to hand out indictments who is demanding that WE suplly all the evidence.
    Ever heard the old legal saying; “You can indict a ham sandwich”? Your side can’t even do that, Sheik Bin-Micheal.

  8. LDS Patriot, I am pleased to see that you are not claiming that Jones claims to be Christ based on the evidence of the video. Apparently only Aaron is moronic enough to make such a statement.

    If you watch the video again you can see the Jones’ statement is not fully in context. His statement could be benign or horribly evil based on the context, which I don’t have, since his words immediately prior to the statement in question were edited out.
    As you should know, anyone can be made to look good, bad, or just plain dumb if their words are taken out of context. Heck, I don’t even have to take Aaron’s words out of context to make him look like an imbecile.

    I am not arguing whether or not Jones considers himself to be Christ since I don’t have enough evidence for either viewpoint. I’ll tell you, though, that one statement taken out of context followed by a list of assertions is not a valid argument. If you want to convince me then you’ll have to do a lot better than that.

    Sorry, LDS Patriot, that I keep conflating your views with those of Aaron, but he seems to latch onto your arguments pretty readily. I challenge you, though. Search the web. Watch the videos. Give me some real evidence that Dr. Jones is truly practicing priestcrafts. I’ll do my best to look at the evidence objectively.

    One other point before I go. There are literally millions of Americans who believe that 9/11 was an inside job. There are military officials, government officials, scientists and many others who have publicly given evidence of a government cover up. The point you fail to see is that the 9/11 truth movement is larger than one individual. Dr. Jones could fall into obscurity tomorrow and the 9/11 truth movement will still be flourishing.

    I do not hang my beliefs on Dr. Jones and his credibility or lack thereof, although I feel that he has sacrificed greatly to reveal what he believes to be true. I hang my beliefs on what can be shown to be true. 19 terrorists with box cutters were not capable of making our military perform preplanned terror drills on 9/11. These terror drills simulated what would happen if planes flew into the WTC towers. 19 terrorists with box cutters were not capable of making NORAD stand down from their normal intercept and shoot-down procedures. 19 terrorists with box cutters were not able, just prior to 9/11, of changing the military chain of command so that a civilian, Dick Cheney, was now in charge of the military and NORAD (this was unprecedented). 19 terrorists with box cutters were not capable of renovating a section of the pentagon so that the walls were reinforced and the section was mostly vacant on 9/11. That section just happens to be the section that was hit on 9/11.

    I am not stupid LDS Patriot. Neither are most Americans. Tell me, which of the above claims about 9/11 are untrue.

  9. Aaron,
    I’m glad you only have two points. You seem to have trouble once you get past two. I haven’t started a letter writing campaign to BYU or Pres. Hinckley. You seem to think that all 9/11 truthers act and think alike. That’s as idiotic as thinking all members of the church think and act alike. Read my above comment to LDS Patriot to see what I said about the 9/11 truth movement.
    As far as empanneling a grand jury, I don’t quite understand you Aaron. Please clarify what you mean. Also, a little pointer for you: Other people can’t hear what the voices in your head are saying, so unless you write it all down, it will appear very jumbled and illogical.

  10. AAron & michael, can we please raise the conversation up a notch and stay on topic and not devolve into endless ad hominem attacks. If not for yourself, for the children’s sake! :)

    I’ve got some commitments tonight so I can’t respond in full right this minute like I want to, but I’ll responds as soon as I can.

  11. I tried to debate Micheal with facts and evidence and all I got back was lies and declarations of special rules that I had to follow and he didn’t.

    BTW, Mikey… did you ever get around to reading the 134 page WTC7 document I linked for you? You know… the one I posted before you declared that I didn’t know anything about building seven and didn’t care what happened there?

    http://www.911myths.com/WTC7_Lies.pdf

  12. Aaron,

    First and foremost, there are no special rules you have to follow that I don’t have to follow. If I am guilty of logical fallacies, then you are welcome to call me on every instance. You haven’t yet, though. Instead, you glibly ignore or ridicule my illustrations of logical fallacies.
    The rules of logic and logical argumentation were created, starting with Aristotle, to allow us to distinguish logical from flawed arguments. When you mock those rules, you show that you do not depend upon logic, but rather upon rhetoric. Facts and evidence, in and of themselves are worthless, what gives facts and evidence power is the ability of the human mind to synthesize such facts and evidence into logical and meaningful conclusions.
    So, there are two ways to convince someone to agree with your views. You can focus on rhetoric, which involves the use of rhetorical tactics to persuade someone to accept your viewpoint, or you can focus on logic. The problem with rhetoric is that it often relies on invalid arguments to persuade. For instance, if I wanted to convince an individual that Person A’s viewpoint is wrong, I could convince them that Person A is associated with unsavory characters. That individual, if I am rhetorically successful, will decide that he or she doesn’t want to be associated with unsavory characters and will agree with me that Person A’s viewpoints are wrong, simply so they can avoid being associated with Person A.
    What I have done in the above situation circumvents the logical process. It is purely an appeal to emotion that creates a situation where the facts of an individual’s argument can be easily overlooked. Instead of examining Person A’s points, I can just cut to the chase and render him discredited. What I just illustrated was an example of the logical fallacy of guilt by association.
    The reason I am so averse to logical fallacies is that they prevent a true assessment of the evidence. When we avoid logical fallacies, we remove a smokescreen that prevents a true debate of the issues. That is not to say that I am immune to rhetoric. But, I do try to focus my arguments logically. So, Aaron, hopefully you understand better where I come from. I will continue to call you on the logical fallacies I see in your arguments, and I hope you will do the same for me.
    As for your link, it is just that. A link. By posting it, are you saying you agree wholeheartedly with its author or just some of his points? As you said earlier, I am not going to do your work for you. Pick out one of the author’s arguments and tell me why you agree with it and I’ll be happy to tell you if I agree or disagree and why. I will not examine an entire document and pick it apart piece by piece for you. I’m sure you don’t have the time to do the same for me.

    If we were to argue logically about a point, it might look like this:

    Michael: I don’t believe that terrorists committed 9/11 because their names did not appear on the original flight lists. By the way here are my sources (hopefully more than one source) for this claim.

    Aaron: I can show you that you are wrong. Here is the original flight manifest (source cited)

    Michael: OK, I agree that source seems legitimate and it is backed up by other sources -OR- I disagree. That is not an original source and it is refuted by this information (sources cited).

    Aaron: (continuing in the same vein).

    Anyway, I’ve spent enough time on this. I’ll be more than happy to continue this discussion later.

  13. Until you learn to practice what you preach, Micheal… no.

    I have little time, nor tolerance for someone with your lack of maturity and ethics.

    I do hope you enjoy that WTC7 document though, it’s quite devestating to the twoofer cult.

  14. http://www.americanthinker.com/2006/12/this_is_not_your_fathers_consp.html

    “September 11 conspiracy theories undermine our democratic nation’s war against the theocratic forces of radical, Jihadi-driven Islam, and could prove extremely dangerous in the long run.”

    ” These virulently anti-American conspiracy charges are leveled against the very government entrusted to defend our nation that remains under the threat of attack from radical Islam. And they are potentially dangerous in that many do not acknowledge the threat posed by radical Islam; in fact, many deny such a threat even exists.”

    ” September 11 conspiracy theorists, unlike the JFK assassination ones, are virulently anti-American and often found among an eclectic mixture of extreme right-wingers, neo-fascists, anti-Semites, unreconstructed Confederates, and various types of left-wingers, New Age-thinkers, and youthful, counter-cultural hipsters both of the 1970s-era UFO-cults and the later Internet generation. ”

    “When so-called scholars charge their government with complicity in an enormous crime that then leads to war overseas, the stage is set either for their dismissal as crackpots or an increasing erosion of public trust in the national leadership and institutions. In the latter, such cynicism ultimately leads to indifference, inaction, and a general decline in patriotism. During peacetime, this might be reflected in a reduction in civic participation and voter apathy. In wartime, this could be the difference between victory and defeat.”

    - Micheal Lopez-Calderon

  15. OK, Aaron,

    I tried to speak to you clearly and without animosity, but I now give up. Good luck. I’ll end with a quote from Ezra Taft Benson:

    The Founding Fathers did not invent this priceless boon of individual freedom and respect for the dignity of man. That great gift to mankind sprang from the Creator and not from government. But the Founding Fathers with superb genius, I believe, welded together certain safeguards which we must always protect to the very limit if we would preserve and strengthen the blessings of freedom.

    . . . They were guided by allegiance to basic principles. These principles must be kept in mind always by those who are here today and reaping the benefits and the blessings which they so wisely provided. We must be careful that we do not trade freedom for security. Whenever that is attempted, usually we lose both. There is always a tendency when nations become mature for the people to become more interested in preserving their luxuries and their comforts than in safeguarding the ideals and principles which made these comforts and luxuries possible. (“Responsibilities of Citizenship” 8; also in TETB 599-600)

  16. “I tried to speak to you clearly and without animosity,”

    Actually, you lied to me repeatedly and demanded that I follow special rules that you didn’t believe in applying to your own behavior.

    ” but I now give up.”

    Good, see if you can get the rest of your organization to do the same. They aren’t anywhere in the world that a member of the United States Marine Corps can’t be there in hours to accept said surrender.

  17. LDS Patriot,

    I took the gloves off when Aaron started calling me names like Osama Bin-Michael and saying that I support the enemy in time of war. Ignorance, particularly willful ignorance should not be condoned. I have never claimed that my arguments are logically perfect, as a matter of fact, I suggest that Aaron point out to me my logical inconsistencies when we are arguing. LDS Patriot, your arguments are often logically flawed as well. It is telling to me that you seem to think Aaron needs defending, though.

    LDS Patriot, if you met Steven Jones in a priesthood meeting would you call him a “quack (wacko, nutcase)?” Well, you have in your posts as well as calling him other equally disparaging names. Yet, as moderator, you seek to rise above the fray and make things aright. Your tone is a contributory element in the comments of your readers.

    Many times I have wished that you would deal directly with the ideas of those you oppose rather than spewing forth angry invectives and ad hominem attacks. Much like you, Aaron refuses to deal with ideas but instead relies on the trusty ad hominem to make his point for him. I have never claimed to be perfect, but you, sir, are far from it yourself.

  18. Have you read the book “None dare call it conspiracy”?
    What do you think?

  19. Look at the videos of how the Towers fell in under 10 seconds. By Physics and the formula 1/2 gt2 where g = 32 feet/sec/sec and t = time in seconds 16 X 100 = 1600 feet, much higher than the Towers. This is free fall and not “pancake” collapse which would have taken 90 seconds. Controlled demolition looks right whatever your opinion is. Facts are generally open to observation while opinions change. Look at who benefited from 9-11 and then criticise the opposition.

  20. @philport – Leslie Robertson, one of the engineers for the twin towers, disagrees with you. He said it fell exactly as expected with regard to the manner in which it fell as well as the timing in which it fell – and it was more like 13 or more seconds if you look at video that is not obstructed by the dust clouds – I’ve seen the 10-second video you’re probably referring to and I’ve also seen the 13-second video. I trust Mr. Robertson more than you or the scholars for truth as only two of them were engineers and one of those two believe that the U.S. is blowing up nukes on Jupiter and hasn’t written anything about 9/11 at all. The rest of the scholars are english, literature, math, physics and other professors who have no expertise in the field of structural engineering whatsoever. You can read my interactions with Professor Jones here on this very website under “9/11, Steven Jones, and Me” – a 4-part series. Also see http://www.911myths.com and http://www.debunking911.com for much more information and evidence that goes counter to the scholars’ guesses at what happened that day.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: