Professor Flapdoodle aka “Steven Jones” retires from BYU

Like I said before, right on!

Jones is an embarrassment to BYU & The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Good riddance, Professor Flapdoodle.

deseretnews.com: BYU professor in dispute over 9/11 will retire

PROVO – Professor Steven Jones and Brigham Young University finalized a retirement package Friday, six weeks after the school placed the physicist on paid leave to review his statements and research about the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center. …

… Jones submitted a letter to the editor of the Deseret Morning News via e-mail Friday afternoon. Written two weeks ago, the letter did not mention his decision to retire and avoided any reference to BYU. In it, Jones renounced the Iraqi War, questioned the official explanations of the collapses of the World Trade Center towers and expressed concern that a future terrorist attack might be blamed on Iran or Syria to justify American aggression against those nations.

“I stand firmly against the war in Iraq and any war of aggression,” Jones wrote. “I support scientific scrutiny of the events of 9/11/2001, a day which will live in infamy.”

BYU stripped Jones of two classes he was teaching when the university placed him on paid leave on Sept. 7 to review a paper he wrote about the physics behind the collapse of three towers on Sept. 11. He published a paper saying experiments he conducted at BYU on material from ground zero and other evidence led him to believe the towers fell because pre-set explosives were detonated throughout the buildings after the hijacked jets struck the Twin Towers.

BYU planned to review the paper to see if it met scientific standards of peer review. The university also expected to look at statements made by Jones at conferences and in the media and determine if Jones was appropriately distancing himself from BYU when he spoke about his explosives theory. …[Read more]

washingtonpost.com: 9/11 Conspiracy Theorist to Leave Brigham Young

PROVO, Utah, Oct. 21 — A Brigham Young University physics professor who suggested that the World Trade Center was brought down by explosives has resigned, six weeks after the school placed him on leave. …[Read more]

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


BYU professor on paid leave over controversial theories announces retirement
VIDEO: South Park Slams 9/11 Truthers
VIDEO: South Park Slams 9/11 Truthers
Professors of Paranoia?
NYPOST: NUTTY 9/11 PROF QUITS
BYU Scholar, Sept. 11 Theorist, Resigns
Extremist lectures harmful to UW education
9/11 Truther Behind NFL Dirty Bomb Scare
BYU’s Jones denies bias
Banner supports BYU’s Jones
Bill O’Reilly is giving distorted lessons on higher education
BYU NewsNet: Controversial Physics Professor on Paid Leave
InsideHigerEd: 9/11 Skeptic Will Leave Post at Brigham Young


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

Advertisements

Posted on October 22, 2006, in Islamism, Mormonism/LDS Church, News and politics. Bookmark the permalink. 39 Comments.

  1. LDS”Patriot”,

    I do not appreciate your comments about Dr. Jones. Labeling Jones as a disgrace to BYU and the Church show your ignorance on the subject at large as well as Jones’ personality.

    Have you ever met Dr. Jones? Have you ever interacted with him on a personal basis? Or are you leeching off of the media’s soundbytes and video clips to foster your perception of his personality?

    When I first came across your blog, I was pleased to see a fellow LDS patriot. However, I quickly grew disappointed with your opinions and perspectives, disagreeing with your stances on many of them. It seems to me that you ignore the counsel and inspiration of modern prophets in assessing who the real threat to our liberty is, what is going on behind the scenes, and who truly compose the secret combinations in our day.

    Far from a “good riddance”, expect to hear more in the future from Dr. Jones. While you see him as an embarassment to BYU and the Church, I see you as an embarassment to true patriotism.

    Peace,
    Connor

  2. For shame! “Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you and persecute you.”

    May God be with him, we wish him the best!

  3. Hey, LDS Patriot. I believe I’ve requested numerous times that you actually investigate Dr. Jones’ claims yet you still haven’t done so. You still resort to ad hominem attacks against him and don’t address what he has said. I’m beginning to question your motivation here. Do you believe that the evidence shows that 9/11 was not an inside job or do you question Dr. Jones because you don’t believe the government is capable or committing such an atrocious act? Did you earn a failing grade in one of Dr. Jones’ physics classes? Please enlighten me as to the source of your animosity. Your animosity without evidence is wearing thin as evidenced by all 3 previous comments. Please respond since I’m sure we’re all waiting for for enlightenment.

  4. I have investigated Professor Jones’ claims – including the 13 points in his paper. I have had email correspondence with him directly and attempted to give him firemen testimony and evidence that disproves many of his assertions and he rejected the evidence right to my face. I have been to one of his presentations and they wouldn’t read my question to him – it contained some of the evidence that proved him wrong. I also went through his powerpoint presentation with him and tried to convince him to remove some of the already debunked material he included so as to increase his credibility but he wouldn’t remove it even though I repeatedly gave him evidence to refute it. In my opinion, only 2 of his 13 points in his paper are in his area of expertise – the rest are structural engineering questions or are political assumptions with no proof or are assumptions made in complete ignorance about photographic evidence that has already been explained to be other than what he asserts. In the two points that fall within his area of expertise, there are chain of custody issues dealing with the samples he has obtained – he didn’t prove that they in fact came from ground zero because the chain of custody was not documented. In my dealings with him, I have found him to be a kind man, however, I wasn’t impressed with his research nor his overreaching assertions nor his ignoring of any evidence that went contrary to his predetermined theory.

  5. Sorry to break up your 3-on-1 gang bang, bretheren. But I’m afraid that the good professor “Flapdoodle” is quite full of camel $#!+.

    “I think without exception, the structural engineering professors in our department are not in agreement with the claims made by Jones in his paper, and they don’t think there is accuracy and validity to these claims”.
    – Dr. A. Woodruff Miller, chair of BYU Civil Engineering faculty

    Taking the opinion of ONE reality challenged physicist over that of an entire faculty of engineers on an issue specifically related to engineering is like letting a gynecologist cut your skull open over the objections of a dozen brain surgeons.

    What’s worse is that Jones KNOWS that he is wrong:

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4997804576359751731&q=collapse&hl=en

    Jones not only knows he is wrong, but on some level he must also be aware that his psuedo-science can only have a negitive impact on the morale of US and allied forces and embolden the enemy.

    LDS servicemen from both the US and Canada have given thier lives in this war. May thier families never learn that they were betrayed by one they called “Brother”.

  6. Wow, Aaron, did you notice that Dr. Miller’s quote refers to his thought rather than an actual poll of structural engineering professors. And even if it was true that the entire faculty of BYU’s engineering department do not agree with the claims made by Dr. Jones in his paper, not one of them has published a paper refuting his claims.

    At one point in man’s history it would have been possible to find entire faculties of acadmic types who opposed the idea that the Earth is round or who opposed the idea that the Earth revolves around the Sun. According to you they must have been right because they were members of entire groups that agreed.

    According to a recent CBS New York Times poll only 16 percent of American’s still believe the government’s story about what happened on 9/11. As an American I will fight for your right to remain ignorant along with your 16 percent minority, but that doen’t mean I need to let ignorant and unreasoned belief motivate me into supporting an immoral and unrighteous war.

    Part of the peer review process involves getting your paper accepted for publication. In our highly charged political climate, I seriously doubt Dr. Jones can get reputable journals to even consider publishing his work. Having your work accepted by peers is as much a political process as it is an academic process and you are incredibly naive to believe otherwise. In cases like this it is crucial to examine evidence, rather than simply looking for approval from those who hold higher positions.

    You, Aaron, are guilty of the fallacious Appeal to Authority. Authority figures can give us some guidance, but we cannot let them usurp our right to examine and weigh the evidence, as you seem to have done.

  7. So you won’t take the word of Dr. Miller unless you see a formal poll and sworn affidavits from the entire BYU engineering faculty? Why don’t you just come right out and call Brother Miller a liar? If he’s running around saying things he knows aren’t true, then you KNOW that he’s gotta have his temple reccomend and along with it, his job at BYU “pulled”. If spreading enemy propaganda over the graves of fallen ‘stripling warriors’ is your thing, then I’m sure that stabbing living priesthood holders in the back won’t be much of a stretch for you.

    You lied about the CBS/NYT poll. What the poll found was that 69% of the public believe that the Bush administration is mostly telling the truth about 9-11 and only 28% believe the administration is mostly lying. What is YOUR bishops phone number?

    Taking pot-shots at Pres. Bush in todays political environmentis even more popular than fly-fishing. In 1996, NYU physics professor Dr. Alan Sokal deliberately wrote a paper filled with wall-to-wall left-wing gibberish and submitted it to a Duke university scientific journal for publishing, wich it did. On the day it was published, Sokal announced his “experiment” as proof of left wing bias at various scientific journals and that they’ll publish the most nonsensical garbage if it appeals to thier biases. Getting “scientific” paper accusing Bush of being a mass murderer published is easier than getting jell-o salad at a ward picnic.

    Jihadistan Jones knows this, but is still AFRAID to submit his work. Gee… I wonder why?

    YOU are guilty of the “appeal to authority” that you hypocritically accuse me of. “Appeal to authority” fallacy is when you ask an economist, a theologian and a philosophy professor about a subject they know nothing about. Quoting an engineer in support of a position in the field of engineering is neither fallacious, nor illogical. You dishonestly attempt to put your behavior onto me becuase you don’t have the real authority on your side that I have on mine.

  8. Hey Aaron,

    Check out the link to determine who is lying. http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/13469 .

    Maybe you should keep up to date on the polls. And by the way Dr. Jones does not assert the Pres. Bush is a mass murderer, he asserts that fire alone could not have brought down the twin towers and could not possibly explain such evidence as molten metal in the basements of all 3 (yes 3) collapsed trade buildings. By the way Dr. Jones is not the only person to make such assertions. Literally hundereds of others have, but you won’t find that information on mainstream media sources.

    By the way Aaron, I like your writing. It is descriptive and colorful, but somewhat lacking in substance. Like many others you are eager to resort to empty and baseless rhetoric, but unable or unwilling to engage in substantive debate. If you choose to respond to me please be so kind as to define one (lets start small here) of Dr. Jones’ assertions with which you disagree. By assertions I mean one of his points as outlined in his paper. If you can’t find his paper, you’ll find a link here: http://www.journalof911studies.com/ .

    By the way, it is quite possible for two members of the church to honestly disagree and to keep their temple recommends. You also need to check out exactly what the logical fallacy appeal to authority is. When appealing to authority, something is claimed to be true based on the expertise of an authority rather than objective facts. You claim Dr. Jones is lying because Dr. Miller doen’t agree with him. That is not evidence of the verity of Dr. Jones’ claims, it is merely an appeal to authority. If you would like to examine the facts, I would enjoy a substantive debate. If you don’t care to discover the facts then you are simply blowing hot air.

    By the way this is a blatant example of appeal to authority: “You dishonestly attempt to put your behavior onto me becuase you don’t have the real authority on your side that I have on mine.”

    There are many authorities who will give differing opinions of 9/11, but I will not fall to your level of absurdity by naming them. Rather, I ask you to appeal to the facts. I understand that might take a little more effort on your part, but we could all benefit from a little education. If you don’t bother to answer with any facts then I probably won’t respond. Happy Thanksgiving.

  9. Abdullah bin-Micheal said: “Check out the link to determine who is lying. http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/13469
    I did. In fact, I read that exact same article just before I posted because I didn’t want to accuse another LDS of lying without knowing for certain. I actually expected to have to post the link myself, I didn’t expect you to be so blatant about it.
    Look again at the poll question:
    “When it comes to what they knew prior to September 11th, 2001, about possible terrorist attacks against the United States, do you think members of the Bush Administration are telling the truth, are MOSTLY TELLING THE TRUTH but hiding something, or are they mostly lying?”
    (My own emphasis added)
    So the numbers come out 16% telling the truth and 53% mostly telling the truth and that gives us 69% who reject your islamo-fascist pap. But you already read the article and knew that when you first posted.
    Are you honest in your dealings with your fellow man, Brother bin-Micheal?
    I’m going to ignore most of the rest of your emotional hysterics as you seem to be stuck on the idea that an economist (Reynolds), a philosophy professor (Fetzer), a theologian (Griffin) and a brain damaged tooth expert (Judy Woods, who spent SIX YEARS in a coma) somehow know structural engineering better than the entire BYU engineering faculty. Your cries of appeal to authority are just a smokescreen designed to hide the fact that you don’t have ANY structural engineers to back up your bin-Ladenist bilge.
    Ms. Woods has a new paper out claiming that holographic airplanes and lasers from space were used to destroy the WTC. Her work has been endorsed by Fetzer and Reynolds leading to a lovers quarrel between Jones and Fetzer. No… I am not kidding.
    By the way, thermite only flows downward. It can’t be used to cut a vertical beam. Not only does he not know engineering, he doesn’t know 3rd grade science either. No wonder he once claimed that he could build a nuclear weapon out of kitchen utensils (though he did succeed in blowing up his own credibility).
    And I’m sorry if it busts up your man-crush on Jones, but the man is lying like a democrat. Not only can he not answer a stright “yes or no” question (see my 1st post), but in one of this papers he takes a quote from an EPA report about diphenylpropane found at ground zero and claims it proves his thermate nonsense. Only he deliberately cut off the full quite wherein the EPA stated that diphenylpropane comes from burning computer monitors.
    When do you think that Jones was going to tell you about the real source of the diphenylpropane?
    In a PDF file wich he used to have hosted on church paid for webservers, Jones gave free advertising to a real live cross-burning, swastika-swinging, hitler-hieling NAZI who was writing a critique of the idea that jews weren’t responsible for 9-11.
    The specific quotes taken from RicKKK Ratjers 911myths rebuttal dealt with Larry Silverstein’s insurance payouts. How can a member who is true to his faith honestly believe that a freak-boy in a white dress (with a lovely matching pointed hood) and no training, education or experience in forensic accounting is an appropriate judge as to wether a jew is guilty of insurance fraud?
    Jones PDF is here (Herr Ratjer is on page 36, diphenylpropane on 102):
    http://www.journalof911studies.com/JonesAnswersQuestionsWorldTradeCenter.pdf
    Reichsfurher Ratjer expressing his opinion on jews here : http://www.crescentandcross.com/
    (WARNING, extremely graphic photos, extreme hate content, various links to other hate materials)
    If Jones is somehow blissfully unaware that RicKKK Ratjer is a nazi, what does that say about his research skills? If Jones was aware of Herr Ratjers naziism, and he used church owned webservers to promote his work anyway, what does it say about Jones character?

  10. On second thought, you probably shouldn’t click that second link. Dr. Joneses ability to choose friends who like to masturbate over pictures of exploded human heads is quite impressive.

    Here is the quote from the front page of Joneses pet nazi’s site:

    “These were the words spoken by Jesus of Nazareth, who spent 3 years of his life warring against the leaders of what was at that time the Jewish agenda. When asked by his followers what the signs would be that would usher in the final battle between good and evil, he warned of the ‘abomination of desolation’ sitting in the ‘holy place’. What could be more of an abomination than this creature known as the state of Israel and all the evil it has caused since its inception a century ago? What could be more of an affront to the goodness of God than that the evil, inhuman and vicious ideology known as Judaism take root in the land that was made holy by the life, death and resurrection of this innocent man named Jesus of Nazareth? Every day, innocent men, women and children in places such as Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq and Afghanistan (such as this little Palestinian girl pictured above who had her brains blown out by the Jews of Israel who fashion themselves as God’s chosen people) must pay the ultimate sacrifice in continuing this battle that was begun by this man named Jesus of Nazareth, and yet, short of a few souls who are awake to this reality, the Christian world continues on in its slumber and in its slavish obedience to the Devil himself in giving the Pharisees of today everything that they demand.”

    – Grand Cyclops RicKKK Ratjer, student member of the Al-Queada propaganda cell “Scholars for Truth”

    You can still click that link if you really don’t trust that I’ve copied the quote correctly. But I’m not the one lying about poll results or who has a hard time telling the difference between nazis and structural engineers. 😛

  11. Oh, forgive me Aaron when I assume the phrase “hiding something” means lying, since 28 percent of respondents believed that the government is lying outright and 53% percent believed that the government is hiding something. Maybe your standards fot the government and yourself are different, but I don’t believe a temple recommend is issued if you are mostly honest in your dealings with your fellow men but “hiding something”. I am a parent and I don’t consider my chilren honest if they are “hiding something” from me.

    Second, you show that you have never taken an elementary logic course or that if you did you didn’t learn well, as your arguments are full of logical fallacies. Where do I start? Your first and most blatant fallacy in the previous two posts is Guilt by Association. Guilt by Association is a fallacy in which a person rejects a claim simply because it is pointed out that people he dislikes accept the claim. There are many people in the 9/11 truth movement, just like there are many individuals who join any popular movement. Yes, some of these individuals and their viewpoints may be unsavory, but if we are to judge all movements and groups by fringe elements within them that we could never get beyond the charge of polygamy while discussing our church.

    There are many individuals who argue that the government was either complicit in or has been trying to cover up the real events of 9/11. Many of these people put forth arguments with which I do not agree. To lump all theories and theorists together is simply ludicrous.

    I suggest try another approach, called refuting the evidence.

    Another logical fallacy you seem to cling to is the Ad Hominem attack. An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of person making the claim, her circumstances, or her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting).

    If you care to look, my source for the definitions of these logical fallacies is: http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ .

    When it comes down to it, most of your argument is based upon logical fallacies, there is still very little substance to what you say. Artfully calling me Abdullah bin-Micheal is simply an ad hominum attack that weakens any point you were trying to make.

    Dr. Jones asserts that some sort of explosive incendiary device was used to bring down towers 1, 2 and 7. He suggests that it was probably thermate since that would explain the large pools of molten metal found in the basement areas of all 3 buildings and the explosions observed by many witnesses. If he is wrong about the use of thermate, what could have caused the rather large pools of molten metal? Remember a jet fuel fire, even fully oxygenated, is not capable of generating the heat needed to melt steel.

    One of the problems with Dr. Jones research is that he has tested samples of steel that he claims came from the twin towers and found traces of thermate, but there is no way to verify the authenticity of his source. That is a problem, but a problem that is largely the result of the wholesale destruction of the evidence by our government. An editorial in the January 2002 issue of Fire Engineering Magazine explains the situation clearly:

    “A signed editorial in the January issue of Fire Engineering magazine says the current investigation is “a half-baked farce.” The piece by Bill Manning, editor of the 125-year-old monthly that frequently publishes technical studies of major fires, also says the steel from the site should be preserved so investigators can examine what caused the collapse. “Did they throw away the locked doors from the Triangle Shirtwaist fire? Did they throw away the gas can used at the Happy Land social club fire? … That’s what they’re doing at the World Trade Center,” the editorial says. “The destruction and removal of evidence must stop immediately.” Fire Engineering counted FDNY Deputy Chief Raymond Downey, the department’s chief structural expert, among its senior advisers. Downey was killed in the Sept. 11 attack. John Jay College’s fire engineering expert, Prof. Glenn Corbett, serves as the magazine’s technical editor.

    A group of engineers from the American Society of Civil Engineers, with backing from the Federal Emergency Management Agency, has been studying some aspects of the collapse. But Manning and others say that probe has not looked at all aspects of the disaster and has had limited access to documents and other evidence. A growing number of fire protection engineers have theorized that “the structural damage from the planes and the explosive ignition of jet fuel in themselves were not enough to bring down the towers,” the editorial stated.”

    Look here for source: http://www.rense.com/general18/firefighter.htm

    This and many other reasons are why most Americans either think the government is either hiding something or lying. I don’t really care if Jones once gave advertising to anti-Mormon abortionists. I care that he is trying to make sense of the events that have been used to justify multiple wars in the Middle East and a War on Terror that has been used to limit the freedom of Americans.

    I once considered myself a staunch Republican, but thanks to our current administration, I now consider myself a Constitutionalist. I could cite many sources for distrusting our government’s account of 9/11, but I think Demosthenes says it best “There is one safeguard known generally to the wise, which is an advantage and security to all, but especially to democracies as against despots. What is it? Distrust.”

  12. Hey Mikey, can you do me a favor? Can you find me someone to critisize my arguments who doesn’t accuse the chair of the BYU engineering faculty of either incompetence or lying because his professional opinion doesn’t match your political biases? I tend to respond to criticism alot better when they aren’t brought before me by a giant lying hypocrite.

    And while you’re looking for that, you might also wanna find a structural engineer who will rubber stamp your pseudo-scientific garbage. The temperature at wich steel looses it’s strength is neither republican, democrat nor islamo-fascist. Some tinfoil turban wearer who gets his knowledge of engineering from the voices of the sponge demons that live in his walls is not an appropriate source of engineering expertise.

    I was going to make an attempt to explain why we as members whould be concerned at a BYU professor who takes his cues from nazis… until you provided your own links to Jeff Renses site. I’m not going to waste my time arguing with someone who gets his material from racist hate-sites.

    Our prophet, Ezra Taft Benson once prophesied “If American freedom is lost, if America is destroyed, if our blood-bought freedom is surrendered, it will be because of Americans.” Today, we face a “secret combination that seeks to overthrow the freedom of all lands, nations, and countries”. One made up of all of Americas worst enemies, communists, islamo-fascists and the UN and Americans like you are siding with the enemy in tragic fulfillment of this prophecy.

  13. I’m in a state of shock here, Micheal.

    http://rense.com/general51/strange.htm

    How do you reconcile reading this garbage with your membership in the church?

  14. Once again your post is full of logical fallacies. You don’t seem to learn very quickly. Once again its guilt by association, ad hominum attacks, and now a new one, begging the question. When you argue using logical fallacies, you don’t make your point. Rather you only illuminate your own ignorance.

    So, according to your logic or lack thereof, the fact that I pulled the info about the Fire Engineering article from the Rense website invalidates the article and what it says. I bet there would still be an article in Fire Engineering magazine even if it wasn’t discussed on the Rense website.Conveniently enough, though, if you engage in
    Guilt by Association it makes it easy to completely ignore the original source.

    Check out this link to see if Rense is lying: http://fe.pennnet.com/Articles/Article_Display.cfm?Section=OnlineArticles&SubSe%20ction=Display&PUBLICATION_ID=25&ARTICLE_ID=131225

    Next, I’m going to tell you something you may not like. Weakened steel was not the cause of the WTC collapses. Even NIST, thats the National Institute of Standards and Technology, agrees with me:

    http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=38326&Disp=10

    Before you start your usual idiocy of refuting the article by deriding the place it is posted, be aware that I tried to find the article from the original ABC affiliate that generated it, but it is no longer stored on their archives.

    As far as a possible cover up of 9/11 goes, could you please explain the following 5 problems with 9/11:

    1. A building constructed over a highly sensitive, highly dangerous, highly expensive industrial site will be engineered and constructed that much stronger. Logical and rational, right? WTC-7 was engineered to be stronger, not weaker, than other buildings surrounding it, simply because it enclosed an electrical power station. But WTC-7 fell at near free fall speed. Logical deduction would conclude building 7 was purposely demolished at the end of the day on September 11, 2001, most likely to destroy evidence of arson and to clear the WTC site entirely.

    2. Fuel fires burn intensely for short periods of time. Fuel fires also burn at well-known scientific temperatures. Scientifically, and thus logically, fuel fires cannot melt steel, which requires blast furnace conditions. Melted pools of steel were discovered, observed and recorded in the debris of three steel skyscrapers long after September 11, 2001. Logically then, fuel fires alone did not destroy the World Trade Center. Logically then, some other, far more powerful substance that could melt steel must have.

    3. Passengers on commercial jets are required to check in at the desk and present their ticket and boarding pass. No passenger is allowed to board a major commercial carrier without first being logged onto a computer today. This list of passengers is called a flight manifest. This list of passengers is available to airline personnel within minutes. Logically then, the names of ALL hijackers should have appeared in the mainstream media hours (and days) after the flights crashed. They did not. Either there never were any hijackers or they boarded through the complicity of airline personnel, thus indicating a greater conspiracy. Logical.

    4. When the chief of security of one government gives $100,000 to an alleged terrorist mastermind, and then meets with the security heads of the government to be attacked on the exact day of the attack, logically, some complicity is suspected. In the days before September 11, 2001 the head of Pakistani Intelligence, General Mahmoud Ahmed, wired $100,000 to the lead hijacker, Mohammed Atta. Ahmed then attended breakfast on the morning of 9-11 with Porter Goss, the head of the House Intelligence Committee (and the next head of the CIA) and Florida Senator Bob Graham. Coincidentally, Florida was home base to most of the alleged hijackers. According to the FBI, Indian Intelligence and several press reports, General Mahmoud Ahmad, the alleged “money-man” (to use the FBI expression), allegedly ordered the bank transfer of $100,000 to the accused 9/11 ring-leader, Mohamed Atta, and then met on the morning of the attack with a trio of US lawmakers and top intelligence insiders, Bob Graham, Porter Goss and Jon Kyl for a friendly breakfast. What exactly did they discuss? Logically then, one could conclude a huge conflict of interests. Logically one could conclude a vast government conspiracy. As if to confirm a government conspiracy between the two security states, $8 billion in US aid was funneled to Pakistan between 2002 and 2006, ostensibly to fight the war on terror. No word where that $100,000 came from (US taxpayers?), money that was wired to mastermind Atta to attack America.

    5. Airplane parts are easily traceable. Airplane parts are stamped with serial numbers. Machined airplane parts are made to exact specifications. Logically an aviation expert could take any large, machined part from any of the 911 attack sites and say, yes or no, this part originated from a Boeing 757. Or did NOT originate from a Boeing 757, as Jon Carlson claims. Scientific study of the engine parts alone could have demolished any and all 911 conspiracies. Logical, correct? But because no such investigations were permitted or conducted, a huge government conspiracy appears likely. Logically then, one could conclude the conspirators had something to hide.

    I can tell you ahead of time that you will ignore most of this information. You won’t bother to look for original flight manifests or even autopsy reports that show that no arabs were on those flights. You won’t bother to try to figure out why the 9/11 comission and the NIST reports ignore the collapse of building 7. You won’t bother to determine why General Mahmoud Ahmad met with U.S. lawmakers on 9/11 after wiring 100K to Mohammad Atta. You won’t bother to find out why we couldn’t find the black boxes of the planes that hit the towers or how our government supposedly identified the terrorists using DNA, unless we had previously gathered DNA samples form all of the terrorists. You won’t bother to find out why several of the terrorists listed as their residence a U.S. naval flight training facility. You won’t bother to listen to Norman Mineta’s 9/11 Commission testimony of what could only have been an order to stand down in relation to the plane that hit the Pentagon. You won’t bother to determine why a fire in 1975 that burned much longer and hotter than the 9/11 fires did not collapse the tower or even result in noticable weakening of the structural steel.

    There’s so much more than this information that you won’t bother to look at. I’m sure you’re safe and warm in your ignorance. You wear it well.

  15. Logical fallacies…

    Ad Hominem – This is when you accuse someone of failing a physics class and lashing out in petty vengeance when you can’t back your own crap up. Or accusing an engineer of lying or incompetence because his professional opinion doesn’t match your poltical biases.

    Appeal to Authority – This is the exact opposite of quoting a faculty full of engineering profs on an engineering issue. The relevant heading from the nikzor project link you provided states: “This fallacy is committed when the person in question is not a legitimate authority on the subject…this sort of reasoning is fallacious only when the person is not a legitimate authority in a particular context”. The page YOU linked to says YOU are guilty and I am not. Way to shoot yourself in the foot, pal.

    Guilt by Association – Steven “Jihadistan” Jones is guilty of associating with violent racist sociopaths. You may absolutely positive that this one cuts in your favor, but no… it doesn’t. Gods laws of morality aren’t subject to any rules written by men. And the plain truth is that any LDS who rubber stamps the most wretchedly hateful vermin to slither upon the earth has a serious problem that vastly overshadows any minor quibbling over purely scientific or technical issues. If Jones had fallen into the jury pool of a jewish or black criminal defendant, his nazi friends and the public complaints brought against him by the Jewish Anti-Defamation League would be more than enough cause to get him tossed during voire dire simply because the stakes are too high to take the risk that this filth may have tainted his thinking. And that’s just a “regular” criminal proceeding. any trial of 9-11 conspirators, be they the reality-based islamo-fascist variety or the servants of the invisible robot fish that the sponge demons warned you about would be carried out sans Jones psuedo-expert testimony because no sane attorney would risk putting him on the stand and possibly have his nazi links brought up in court.

    It takes an average joe just a few minutes on the net to turn up the swastika armbands in Jihadistan Joneses closet. It’s almost certainty that the BYU review board that oversaw his case also knew about Joneses piss poor taste in friends and that is what caused him to resign in disgrace.

    What kind of “evidence” would have been inside WTC7 that it couldn’t have been destroyed by a paper/compact disc shredder and instead had to have a 47 storey building dropped on it thus exposing it to risk of discovery by rescue and clean up crews? And if it wasn’t the shreddable kind of evidence why couldn’t the same black ops team that broke the world record for demolition the third time in a single day with a completely untested technology (jihadistan Joneses mythical lateral thermite sprayers) simply have loaded into trucks and drove off?

    Here’s another 134 nails in your paranoid WTC fantasy’s coffin (please right click the link and select “save as”, I will be referring to it frequently as I intellectually brutalize what passes for a belief system in your parallel universe):

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

    Pages 91, 92 and 93 have pictures of the heat warped steel structural members that in your ignorance, you claim can’t exist.

    Fires DO cause steel framed buildings to collapse. Here is a toilet paper factory in england:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/hereford/worcs/6105942.stm

    That feeling of humiliation and embarrasment you are feeling right now is referred to by 13 year old boys on video game forums as “OMGWTFPWNED!!!!!”

    My home teacher is a firefighter, I asked him and he told me straight to my face that home fires can reach as high as 1700 degrees (structural steel looses 90% of it’s strength at 1800). No jet impacts, no 80 thousand pounds of jet fuel. Just tables, chairs, couches, desks, consumer electronics, carpets, electrical insulation, appliances, fabrics and various miscellaneous polymers… exactly the same things you find in office buildings often at much higher densities. Don’t bother responding to this point, I’ll just inform my bishop that some unnamed enemy sympathizer from heaven knows where who reads racist websites says brother G. (I don’t feel comfortable revealing full names to possible Al-Queada agents) is lying and needs to have his temple reccomend “pulled”.

    Passenger manifests…

    You are “PWNED” again, sir.

    Airplane parts at the Pentagon…
    http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0265.shtml

    Are you still here? By the time Hitler was beaten this badly, he had eaten his own luger.

    Feel free to continue acting retarded. I’ll be back again to slap more sense into you later.

  16. Hey Aaron,
    You need to get a grip bud, or at least learn to read. I accused you of not taking an elementary logic course, not of failing a physics course. If you can’t tell the difference between the two you’re worse off than I thought.

    Congratulations on having a firefighter home teacher, you’re in luck if you need CPR during a home teaching visit. Your firefighter buddy is right by the way, a house fire could get to 1700 degrees Fahrenheit, though most often they max out at about 1200 to 1300 degrees Fahrenheit.

    You also might be interested to hear that Dr. Thomas Eagar, a professor of materials engineering at MIT and a proponent of the government’s position on 9/11, says that steel used in buildings must be able to bear five times its normal load and that steel in the towers could have collapsed only if heated to the point where it “lost 80 percent of its strength, ” around 1,300 degrees Fahrenheit. He’s the expert so he must be right. Right?

    So now all we have to do is to prove that the fires in the towers reached 1300 degrees Fahrenheit. Should be easy, huh? There’s only one problem though. The NIST, that’s the National Institute of Standards and Technology, was able to get several samples of burned structural steel from the Twin Towers. They tested the samples and determined that they reached between 400 and 600 degrees Fahrenheit. But don’t believe me on that point, go to the NIST report and have your home teacher read it to you, since you seem to be somewhat deficient in that area (reading, that is).

    If you need another witness as to the temperature of the fires, do a search of images that were recorded on 9/11. You’ll find this one:

    Please explain to me how this woman, filmed from by at least 2 different individuals on 9/11 was alive and able to stand at the impact spot with no visible flames. Surely the fire there should have been very intense in order to heat that steel to 1300 degrees Fahrenheit.

    You also fail to understand one very important characteristic of steel. Steel, like other metals, is capable of conducting heat. You know this if you have ever tried to grab the handle of an iron skillet that has been heating on the stove for a while. In order to get steel to heat to 1300 degrees Fahrenheit you have to heat it to 1300 degrees Fahrenheit. That takes time. That is very problematic with a small fire since steel is very thermally conductive and the steel beams in a steel framed structure will tend to wick the heat away from the site of the fire.

    To understand this principle, it is helpful to understand that heat moves predictably from warm areas of a material to cooler ones. The towers were framed with many tons of interconnecting steel girders that were capable of wicking away enormous amounts of heat. So if the steel wicked away heat and wasn’t heated over 600 degrees Fahrenheit (NIST’s words, not mine), how in the heck was it able to get hot enough to fail (that’s 1300 degrees) in fires that lasted from an hour to an hour and a half? Why don’t we ask the woman in the picture how hot it was? Oh, that’s right. She died when the 400 to 600 degree steel (NIST’s observation, not mine) in the tower collapsed.

    And now for the final witness of this installment: In 1975 a fire burned for 3 hours in the North Tower of the WTC complex. It spread to multiple floors and started on the 11th floor. What burned in that fire was probably those same office materials you bemoaned earlier. Also, a lot of the building’s weight was above this fire. So in 1975 we had a longer burning fire in Tower One, on a floor that supported a lot more weight. Why was there no collapse? You didn’t even bother to address the previous fire problem in you last comments. I know, it is easy to overlook evidence that does not support our position, isn’t it?

    So there you have it: NIST says the steel wasn’t hot enough to fail, we have photos of a woman standing at the impact site with no sign of high temperatures, steel is an excellent thermal conductor making it incredibly hard to heat a large heat-sink like the towers to high temps. (I can show you the research, but the numbers would hurt your head), and we have a previous example of a fire that burned longer even lower in one of the towers that did not result in collapse or even a discussion of weakend steel.

    Anyway I’ve said enough here today. You can get back to your video games now. It’s important to have some accomplishments in life.

  17. 1st, you accused Patriot of failing Jones class. Did you forget or were you deliberately trying to misrepresent the facts again?

    2nd, the test you are referring to only measures temperatures up to a maximum of 600 degrees by testing the paint or other covering on the steel beams. Anything higher and the paint peels away completely. To measure higher temps they have to move onto something else or guesstimate using other known variables.

    3rd, like the rest of the Al-Queada apologist community, you vastly over estimate the ability o the steel in the WTC to carry heat away from the hot zone. You also forget that much of the fireproofing was blasted away by the impacts and may not have been properly applied in the first place due to mafia corruption in the NYC construction industry. Here’s an experiment for you to try. Hold an all metal table knife/spoon/fork/whatever in contact with the burner or hot plate on top of your stove for 60 seconds with your bare hand. After 60 seconds, pull the utensil away and tap the back of your other hand with it. One end will be painful to touch, but you will still be holding the other comfortably with your fingers. That is just one tiny 9 inch peice of stainless steel. The WTC steel would have wicked away the heat any more efficiently. There IS a reason why that fireproofing the mafia installed so poorly was required by law.

    If you do this little experiment, don’t bother lying about the results. I just did it myself and already know the answer.

    3rd, the womans name was Edna Cintron, you insensitive ass.

    4th, can you PROVE that she wasn’t covered in 1st or 2nd degree burns from exposure to a major fire? No, all you see is her waving to try and get help. Not only that, I can’t imagine anyone I know getting into that hole and standing on that micro-ledge almost 1000 feet up unless it’s the only place they can go to get away from a 1700 degree fire.

    5th, since all your kind knows is what they learn from youtube or picture books, here’s a photograph of a man wearing a T-shirt and gloves while standing 6 feet from a 2900 degree heat source:

    http://encarta.msn.com/media_461538396/Indiana_Steel_Foundry.html

    6th, you’re an idiot.

    7th, firefighters were able to reach the 1975 fire and fought it continuously thoughout the incident. The while the 1975 fire spread to more than one floor, it was not instantly ignited simultaneously across the entirety of multiple floors by a 140 ton mother-of-all-molotov cocktails impacting at 500+ mph.

    The 9-11 fires were unique and extraordinary. Comparing them with any other fire is retarded.

    8th, there is no 8th.

    9th, the NIST did NOT say the steel wasn’t hot enough to fail, you bombastic simpleton. You have no idea what the NIST said. You just read garbage from your racist websites and take what they say as gospel. Here is what the NIST really said on thier “we-had-to-write-this-FAQ-cuz-you-people-are-retarded” page:

    ” Normal building fires and hydrocarbon (e.g., jet fuel) fires generate temperatures up to about 1,100 degrees Celsius (2,000 degrees Fahrenheit). NIST reported maximum upper layer air temperatures of about 1,000 degrees Celsius (1,800 degrees Fahrenheit) in the WTC towers (for example, see NCSTAR 1, Figure 6-36). ”

    – NIST, http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm

    10th, you’re a mental midget.

    Now go away or I shall taunt you a second time, you silly english kuh-niggit.

  18. I had a sneaking suspicion that Aaron was just a pseudonym for LDS Patriot and your behavior seems to be supporting my suspicions. Why would you be so upset that I asked LDS Patriot if he failed one of Dr. Jones’ physics classes, unless you were, in fact, LDS Patriot. Why is it that LDS Patriot does not respond to my comments anymore, but you do? The personality of Aaron also seems a little too contrived and immature, perhaps put on a little too strongly.

    1. Hey McFly, I’m talkin’ to you, not LDS Patriot. That is, unless you are the same person. If LDS Patriot wants to complain about comments I made about him more than a month ago, then he can be a man and do so without using a pseudonym. You are having too much trouble defending your own nonsense to try and defend someone else.

    2. NIST has samples of steel from the collapsed towers. First of all, of the samples of steel they examined they found that less than 2% of the steel even reached 250 degrees Celsius (that’s 482 degrees Fahrenheit). I have not read anywhere that paint deformation tests are ineffective above 600 degrees. Please tell me your source for this information, since I didn’t see it in the NIST report. NIST were paid 2 million dollars to study what caused the buildings to collapse. If paint deformation tests are ineffective (assuming you are telling the truth) above a certain temperature, why the hell didn’t they use a different testing method? If paint deformation tests are ineffective above 600 degrees, why would the NIST use that testing method since they were probably expecting higher temps. I really do want you to give me your source for your assertion that paint deformation tests are ineffective above 600 degrees.

    3. Your little experiment was ingenious. It proved that steel has a low specific heat and that you can hold a utensil and heat the other end at the same time. Wow! Apparently you don’t understand much about science. Your experiment might really help individuals burned by hot utensils on 9/11 but it doesn’t say anything about why the towers collapsed. You even help to make my point here: “The WTC steel would have wicked away the heat any more efficiently.” If you apply fire directly to steel it will get hot. So how directly was the fire applied to the WTC steel, and for how long? Apparently not long enough to get over 482 degrees in almost all cases (the NIST’s data, not mine). If you are interested you might see how the NIST tried to show that most of the fireproofing was dislodged. It was such shoddy science that they buried it at the back of their report.

    Why in the world did you have two 3rd points?

    3. I know the woman’s name was Edna Cintron and you dishonor her and the others like her who died on 9/11 by refusing to question the government’s obvious lies about 9/11.

    4. I can’t PROVE that she wasn’t covered by first and second degree burns any more than you can PROVE she was. I can say by looking at the photos that her clothes do not look burned, nor do I see fires raging around her. It is also just a likely that she, like many others, was trapped by debris and went to the opening so that people could see that there were people trapped up there.

    5. In most cases when someone is standing beside a heat source you can see the heat source. Not only do I not see a heat source in the photo of Edna Cintron, I don’t even see any smoke. Where there’s smoke there’s fire, right?

    6. You never bothered to explain why the neither high-jacker’s names or any other Arabic names were listed on the passenger manifests for the 9/11 flights. Also, why didn’t their names turn up on any of the autopsies (and I’m the idiot). Are you afraid to find out the truth?

    7. The 1975 WTC fire burned for three hours and got to extremely high temperatures. See this comment from a fireman: “”It was like fighting a blow torch” according to Captain Harold Kull of Engine Co. 6. In the 1975 fire flames could be seen pouring out of 11th floor windows on the east side of the building. In order for flames to destroy windows, the fire has to be over 700 degrees Celsius, it was in 1975, but not on 9/11. Most people, even proponents of the government’s 9/11 lies, agree that most of the jet fuel in both crashes was burned up on the outside of the building.

    Radio transmissions from firefighters in the towers before the collapse show that trained firefighters thought that the fires could be easily extinguished. Just prior to the collapse, firefighters reported two isolated pockets of fire.

    See link: http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/firefighter-tape-excerpts.htm

    How is it the steel got so hot and the building collapsed from two isolated pockets of fire?
    Though the 9/11 attacks were unprecedented they must be compared to other fires in order to determine why the buildings collapsed. That is what fire investigators do, they compare fires and that is, in part, what NIST tried to do, you moron.

    8. Why did WTC 7 collapse? You don’t know do you? I bet you don’t even care.

    9. “The NIST did NOT say the steel wasn’t hot enough to fail, you bombastic simpleton.” Your right, the NIST said that the steel samples they tested didn’t get over 600 degrees, most well under 600, and I believed them. Then I used my brains and a little information to determine that 600 degrees is not a hot enough temperature for steel to fail. A pity you don’t have as much mental ability as I do. I call it talent on loan from God. We don’t all have the ability to think clearly, but I still have hope for you.

    “Normal building fires and hydrocarbon (e.g., jet fuel) fires generate temperatures up to about 1,100 degrees Celsius (2,000 degrees Fahrenheit). NIST reported maximum upper layer air temperatures of about 1,000 degrees Celsius (1,800 degrees Fahrenheit) in the WTC towers (for example, see NCSTAR 1, Figure 6-36). ”
    Nice quote from NIST, but their data doesn’t show that the steel was hot enough to fail. NIST doesn’t have data on the actual air temperature in the towers so they did an experiment to determine the air temperature. In their experiment they aerosolized the fuel for optimal burning, a condition that did not exist on 9/11.

    Hey McFly, sorry to have to point out the obvious here, but the NIST is a government organization. If the government had any part in covering up 9/11 then the NIST is probably helping to perpetuate that cover up. That explains why the NIST report doesn’t explain why WTC 7 collapsed. That also explains why it is full of shoddy science. For all it purports to do, the NIST report stops just prior to the initiation of the collapse of the towers. Why would that be? Because if the steel in one section of one of the towers failed that would lead to only partial collapses of the towers. The NIST report stops short because they know they can’t explain away a physical impossibility.

    Please don’t research the hundreds of individuals, some firefighters and policemen, who described what appeared to be bomb blasts well before the towers collapsed, it might hurt your ignorance.

    10. LDS Patriot, uh, I mean Aaron, you’re fighting a losing battle here. Every day more and more Americans are waking up to the realization that there is something very, very wrong with the government’s account of 9/11. The 9/11 widows from New Jersey had to hound members of congress for quite a while before the 9/11 commission was started. These women were instrumental in removing Henry Kissinger from chairing the 9/11 Commission since they revealed many blatant conflicts of interest. So Bush appointed Philip Zelikow, a former member of the National Security council under Bush Sr. and a pal of Condy Rice, to head the 9/11 commission. It was hardly an impartial commission. Bush and Cheney were allowed to testify together in secret and not under oath. After the commission ruled, several members expressed feeling that they were kept in the dark about rather important matters.
    I’m not asking you to buy wholeheartedly any specific 9/11 cover up theory. Rather, I am asking you to support the creation of a truly impartial 9/11 commission. The truth, is that too much to ask.

  19. michael, old friend, how goes it?

    Look, I don’t believe in the conspiracy theories and I don’t practice any either. Aaron is Aaron, and I am me, and me isn’t Aaron.

  20. michael, since you and Aaron were exchanging comments I did not want to interrupt you.

    You ask, “Why is it that LDS Patriot does not respond to my comments anymore.” First, I read everything you post. Sometimes I have nothing more to add than what I’ve already said. You asked me to look into Dr. Jones work. I did. Thoroughly; top to bottom, then back again, and found it seriously lacking credibility; a joke really.

    I then told you that IMHO Protec’s report smashed Jones work to ashes. You immediately mocked Protec’s report (leading world experts in demolitions and building collapses) and choose to believe a pseudo scientist who is unqualified to offer expert analysis.

    michael, I like you. However, you are a broken record. Your tactics and illogicality are are akin to that of anti-Mormon use of incestuous amplification (n. The reinforcement of set beliefs among like-minded people, leading to miscalculations and errors in judgment.)

    You believe that if you repeat something enough, no matter how seriously flawed it is, overtime enough people will buy it as truth. You know, the same thing anti’s do daily…if only you looked at the real Joseph Smith, you’d see he is a false prophet…if you really researched the “truth” and looked at the true history and not the “official” version, then you’d know the LDS faith is bogus…Mormons are not Christians…Mormons worship the devil as evidence of the pentagrams on their temples…Mormons … … … … … … … … …

    Jones is a fraud, a false teacher, a false prophet, and believing in his work is to believe a lie.

  21. Micheal you lying [bleep]!

    This is the SECOND time I posted the above link (the passenger manifest from AA11 with the names of Mohammad Attah, Abdul Al-amari, Satam Al-Suqami and the Al-shehri brothers clearly listed).
    And what do you do? You can’t handle the truth so you blatantly LIE, claiming that I never addressed the passenger manifests.
    You’re just a self-centered egomaniacal lying sack of @#$% and I’m done with you.
    Enjoy the Telestial Kingdom, [edit].

  22. Patriot has appearantly seen fit to edit some of my comments from my last post, and in hindsight he was probably right to do so. I’m not going to attempt to sneak them back in under his radar through clever re-wording.

    But I will restate that it speaks ill of your character that you have to lie so bltantly about something that was posted a mre 1/2 page up in order to gain a temporary boost for your weak position.

    And no, I don’t feel it necessary to waste my time responding to the rest of your drivel (much of it the second time) when you’ve established that you will lie about it the following day.

  23. Aaron,
    Where is your source for the “passenger manifest”. How do it wasn’t photoshopped together?

    Here are some media lists: http://911review.org/brad.com/Holmgren/fake_passenger_lists.html

  24. http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO408B.html

    More holes in the 9/11 official conspiracy theory.

  25. Aaron, I love you, man. Here’s how much:

    http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/

  26. I said I’m done with you. You blew your chance with your lies and hypocrisy.

    You said earlier you intend to fight for my right to disagree with you, well your empty self-serving rhetoric is neither appreciated nor is it reciprocated.

    I intend to fight for the right of my sisters four year old girl to sing “Jesus wants me for a sunbeam” instead of “Allah wants me for a punching bag”. Any protection your rights recive in this fight is an unintended side effect.

  27. Aaron,

    What was your source for the passenger mansifest? I really think it is amazing that you can’t stand to argue the facts. You question my information, not on a factual basis, but rather on the basis of who advertised on their web site once. You can’t argue facts and I can tell its hurting you. It really amazes some sheeple that others don’t fall in line when they repeat the same mainstream drivel. I will not fall for your lack of logic or your infantile name calling. You can’t hang because I can refute you point for point. You see, when you argue points with me I actually take time to research. I don’t just spew nonsense because I found it somewhere on the web. Thanks to you I know alot more about structural steel and the burning temperature of jet fuel. I understand I’m not always right, but I take time to find several source for most of my points. When you grow up and stop thinking like an indoctrinated child maybe you’ll be able to talk to me. Maybe you should spend your time arguing on gaming websites. After all you should drink milk if you can’t handle the meat.

  28. Steven Jones: Quasi-intentioned, erstwhile professor seeking post-tenure employment in conspiracy theorist network. Will deny reality for food.

  29. Anyone who still believes that there was a US Government of Bush administration conspiracy to bring down the twin towers is a fool. There is overwhelming evidence as to why they collapsed. It is a fact, that the blast from the impact of the airliners blew the fire protection from the supporting steel structure in the critical area. Furthermore, the construction code for the use of such things like the spray on rock wool that helps to protect steel from extreme heat has been raised since the 1970’s when the twin towers went up. When these cractpots assertions are placed under any amount of scrutiny, they fall apart. In the light of day, all reasonable people know that the extreme heat from the fire did cause the steel to warp and it gave way at the connecting joints. Any one who has ever watched any discovery channel or history channel special, can see what caused the towers to fall.

    If there were explosive set in the twin towers, when they were secretly placed. How many witnesses had to be silenced (permanently) for this grand conspiracy.

    Come on, use you God given reason. It is what it is. The only conspiracy was the one planned and carried out by the terrorists. I don’t know this good professor, but he was a fool to put forth such a quasi intellectual report. He has to be a little bit of a nut to believe his own theory. In case you were wondering, JFK was killed by Lee Harvy Oswald, the grassy knoll nonsense has been totally debunked, but people still want to believe it was a grand CIA, Mob conspiracy. I’ll bet you “believers” still think OJ Simpson is innocent too.

    BYU is still allowed to hire or fire who they want. There is no freedom of speach without responsibility and accountability for your words. That is a fact, and BYU is still allowed to fire faculty for making outrageous comments. I just wish more universities around this country had the backbone to dismiss some of their nut-job professors.

  30. Occam’s razor “it is vain to do with more, what can be done with fewer” (in other words the fewer possible assumptions should be made in explaining a thing…) re: Oxford Reference Dictionary. That means that the most likely explanation is usually the truth.

    I ivite you conspiracy “believers” to return to reality.

  31. Hey Brad,

    “That means that the most likely explanation is usually the truth.” What a load of garbage! Here’s what Wikipedia says about Occam’s razor:

    “Occam’s razor states that the explanation of any phenomenon should make as few assumptions as possible, eliminating, or “shaving off”, those that make no difference in the observable predictions of the explanatory hypothesis or theory. In short, when given two equally valid explanations for a phenomenon, one should embrace the less complicated formulation.”

    I love the way you translated Occam’s razor into a logical fallacy. Occam’s razor says nothing about the phrase “likely explanations,” rather it focuses on simple explanations for observed phenomena. I happen to believe that it is more likely that our government carried out a false flag terror attack against its own citizens than it is likely that 19 Islamic terrorists all managed to board domestic airlines flights despite all of the prescreening protocols and managed to successfully hijack all 4 planes with box cutters and fly them into a major commercial target and the top military target in the U.S, all without being intercepted by military jets.

    There is one major difficulty in using Occam’s razor to contrast the two different views that we seem to have. The crux of the issue is that the proper use of Occam’s razor requires two equally valid explanations for a situation and I believe, rather strongly, that the official government conspiracy theory of 9/11 is not a valid explanation for the events of 9/11. The government’s official conspiracy theory is not valid because accepting it involves disregarding numerous facts and much evidence to the contrary.

    I believe that our government was complicit in the 9/11 attacks and if you compare our contradictory beliefs, I think my particular viewpoint does a much better job of explaining all of the observed events of 9/11. I also want to clarify a basic and crucial point for the purposes of this discussion. There are a number of different theories about the events of 9/11. Many people try to present a false dichotomy when they argue against 9/11 “conspiracy theories.” This false dichotomy involves acceptance of the idea that there are only 2 given explanations for 9/11, which is completely untrue. Depending on which part of 9/11 we are discussing, whether it be the hijacking or the collapse of the WTC buildings, even the government has put forth multiple explanations and theories of what happened on 9/11. Similarly, there is not one blanket “conspiracy theory” that encompasses all who do not believe the government’s official account.

    I think it is important for you to understand what I mean when I say that I think that 9/11 was a false flag attack. A false flag attack is defined by Wikipedia as: “covert operations conducted by governments, corporations, or other organizations, which are designed to appear as if they are being carried out by other entities. The name is derived from the military concept of flying false colors; that is, flying the flag of a country other than one’s own.”

    One often cited example of a false flag attack was Hitler’s attack on his own Reichstag parliament building in 1933. This incident was revealed in Nazi documents to be the preplanned pretext for the elimination of the Communist party in Germany and for the passage of Hitler’ infamous Enabling Acts. For a more complete examination of the issue see A. Bahar and W. Kugel’s book Der Reichtagsbrand .

    So the Germans were capable of false flag attacks, but what about our own government? In the late 40’s the director of our CIA, Allen Dulles, helped set up and fund a group of operatives in Italy. This group was tasked with preventing a Communist invasion of Italy. The CIA in conjunction with Britain trained over 600 operatives and provided them with funding and weapons. Operation Gladio was run for a number of years and has been implicated in a number of false flag terror attacks including a string of bombings that occurred between 1969 and 1984 that were blamed on neo fascists. For more information on Operation Gladio see: http://users.westnet.gr/~cgian/gladio.htm

    Another example of false flag attacks committed by our government is Operation Ajax. In the early 50’s the democratically elected leader of Iran, Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh, declared that he would nationalize the Iranian petroleum industry. This did not make British petroleum interests happy since they had control of most of Iran’s petroleum industry. So Britain asked the U.S. to intervene in their behalf. Our CIA launched Operation Ajax in an effort to overthrow Mossadegh by blaming a series of false flag attacks on him. The end result of Operation Ajax was the ascendancy of the Shah of Iran and one of the bloodiest regimes in recent history. Source: http://www.apfn.net/Messageboard/10-15-06/discussion.cgi.15.html . If you doubt these claims, just read Countercoup by Kermit Roosevelt Jr. Roosevelt was senior officer in the CIA’s Middle Eastern division and the mastermind of Operation Ajax.

    I can hear you saying: “The U.S. may sponsor false flag attacks on foreign soil, but we wouldn’t harm our own citizens.” Unfortunately, you’d be wrong. The U.S. had cracked Japan’s secret coding system and was able to decipher Japanese military transmissions in advance of the Pearl Harbor attack in 1941, yet FDR stationed a large contingent of U.S. soldiers in Hawaii in harms way and did not warn them of the impending attack by the Japanese. The Pearl Harbor attack gave FDR the excuse to enter WWII, even though he had originally campaigned promising neutrality. Much of this info can be found in a book titled Day of Deceit by Robert Stinnett. Much of his information was gathered from government documents gathered through the Freedom of Information Act.

    I understand that these examples do not prove government involvement in 9/11, but they help lay the groundwork for an understanding that our government is capable of false flag terror attacks and that such large conspiracies can and have been covered up, often for many decades. I don’t know how many people it takes to plant explosives in buildings, but I do know that there are a number of munitions experts in our government and in others to do the job. After all, we spend TRILLIONS of dollars training people to kill people and break things and they are always expected to keep quiet about it. In my next comments I’ll go into more specifics about evidence that our government was complicit in the 9/11 attacks. I just wanted to set the groundwork here.

    • Thank you for your thoughtful and logical insights. Your explanations are well-worded and your methods of reasoning and argument are perfectly acceptable.

  32. I’m not sure how old you guys are, but you (Michael) and your little friend (Aaron) are the two worst examples of people trying to make a point of an argument. Your personal attacks on each other is so embarrasing for this website (and if a non-LDS ever bothers to read it, to the Church) that I had to interject. I understand the internet gives you a platform to argue without having to look in each others’ eyes, but come on… Get off your high horses!… In my -very rarely -humble opinion life is too short to worry too much about the truths or falsehoods of conspiracy theories, but if you must, please make a point without embarrasing yourselves by putting the other one down. You make us all look bad! with Respect: stiggy.

  33. the Stig,

    I disagree that “life is too short to worry too much about the truths or falsehoods of conspiracy theories.” If our government is so corrupt that they are complicit in the killing of 3000 Americans, then I think thats a pretty important thing to argue about. I’d rather be valiant in pursuing the truth about government corruption than complacent in accepting whatever the government tells me to accept as truth. You are correct in your assessment that life is short, but the battle between good and evil exists as much on ths side of the veil as it does the other side.

  34. Good for you michael. Human nature is such that the only way you’ll progress if you ask questions, that’s true! I learned in life that there is really only one question that needs to be asked: WHERE IS THE INCENTIVE?

    As per 3,000 american soldiers, bravely giving up their lives: that is actually a pretty low number for a 3-4 year war, in comparison with other conflicts (especially if we are talking about potential scale of impact).

    And as someone, who has lived under many different types of political setups and goverments in various countries, please take it from me: the U.S. government (while not spotless) is not corrupt! Corroded? yes! Because of the political system is such that individuals have to compromise their ideals and personal integrity so much that they sometimes lose sight of why their got into politics the first place… but I still believe that God continues to bless America far more with a decent lot of politicians (R & D) than any other country in the World, taken for granted by most U.S. citizens.

    • Jean-Paul TRAN

      “19 For the Lord worketh not in secret combinations, neither doth he will that man should shed blood, but in all things hath forbidden it, from the beginning of man.
      20 And now I, Moroni, do not write the manner of their oaths and combinations, for it hath been made known unto me that they are had aamong all people, and they are had among the Lamanites.
      21 And they have caused the adestruction of this people of whom I am now speaking, and also the destruction of the people of Nephi.
      22 And whatsoever nation shall uphold such secret combinations, to get power and gain, until they shall spread over the nation, behold, they shall be destroyed; for the Lord will not suffer that the blood of his saints, which shall be shed by them, shall always cry unto him from the ground for cvengeance upon them and yet he avenge them not.
      23 Wherefore, O ye Gentiles, it is wisdom in God that these things should be shown unto you, that thereby ye may repent of your sins, and suffer not that these murderous combinations shall get above you, which are built up to get apower and gain—and the work, yea, even the work of bdestruction come upon you, yea, even the sword of the justice of the Eternal God shall fall upon you, to your overthrow and destruction if ye shall suffer these things to be.
      24 Wherefore, the Lord commandeth you, when ye shall see these things come among you that ye shall awake to a sense of your awful situation, because of this asecret combination which shall be among you; or wo be unto it, because of the blood of them who have been slain; for they cry from the dust for vengeance upon it, and also upon those who built it up.
      25 For it cometh to pass that whoso buildeth it up seeketh to overthrow the afreedom of all lands, nations, and countries; and it bringeth to pass the destruction of all people, for it is built up by the devil, who is the father of all lies; even that same liar who bbeguiled our first parents, yea, even that same liar who hath caused man to commit murder from the beginning; who hath chardened the hearts of men that they have dmurdered the prophets, and stoned them, and cast them out from the beginning.
      26 Wherefore, I, Moroni, am commanded to write these things that evil may be done away, and that the time may come that Satan may have ano power upon the hearts of the children of men, but that they may be bpersuaded to do good continually, that they may come unto the fountain of all crighteousness and be saved.”

      Ether 8:19-28

  35. I agree with Professor Steven Jones. I am a member of the Church, and I think Professor Jones is an inspiration to us all. He has to the fortitude to say what many will not say about 9/11. People need to read his essay and examine his experiment. There are hundreds of physicists architects, engineers, and countless of scientists that agree that there was Therm ate, Thermite and Nano-thermite in the rubble at grown zero. This is proof of highly explosive devices that were used in the buildings that brought the three wtc towers down. Look at the fact that these buildings came down straight into their own foot prints at free fall speed. There are paid government specialists that say the fires, the impact of the planes melted the perimeter columns and the tower bowed. These people are paid to lie. The towers did not bow. The buildings made of steel in Singapore had steel that was a lot thinner and fell asymmetrically. The wtc towers fell symmetrically 50 minutes after the plans hit. Black smoke was coming out of the towers clearly indicating that the the fires were cooling. The initial fuel from the jets blew up in the initial fireball upon impact. Trust me! The official story is not true and is a complete whitewash. Look for yourself and come to your own conclusion.

  36. You don’t need a degree in pysics or any other type of degree (I don’t).
    All you need to do is look at any of the images of the twin towers (& tower 7) falling down!
    Let the critics of Professor Jones stop talking & look at the pictures!
    It is impossible enough that the towers behaved according to the Government description. Look at the pictures for Heaven’s sake!

  1. Pingback: Scholars for 9/11 Truth collapse. Steven Jones gets the boot. « LDS Patriot

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

%d bloggers like this: