Title: 9/11 Truth: Steven Jones on WTC 7 and Controlled Demolition Source:
9/11 Truth conference URL Source:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pJQ2yZfTY0 Published:Feb 20, 2007 Author:Steven Jones Post Date:2007-02-20 00:41:08 by robin Ping List:*9-11*Subscribe to *9-11* Keywords:None Views:13756 Comments:230
From Halifaxion
Steven Jones speaks at the Chicago 9/11 Steven Jones speaks at the Chicago 9/11 Truth conference (June 2006) about World Trade Center Building 7 and the case for controlled demolition of all three towers. This is just ten minutes from a longer lecture that you can find in its entirety on Google Video here:
There were 3 buildings, the times are slightly different. They all fell close to free fall.
That is untrue. WTC 1 and WTC 2 did NOT collapse at *close* to free fall velocity. In fact, at free fall velocities, towers more than twice as high could have collapsed in the same amount of time as the observed collapse.
Let's dissect this right quick...
The claim was made that 3 buildings fell, all at close to free fall velocity. YOU claim this is a lie, citing 1 and 2 did NOT collapse at close to free fall velocity - BUT apparently do not dispute that building 7 did. If in fact 7 fell at close to free fall velocity - at a little less than half the height of the other 2, and at a time of roughly 7 seconds, that would put the free fall time of the other 2 at roughly 14 seconds (and by your own admissions elsewhere the time was about 15 seconds).
You then go on to claim that towers in pure free fall more than twice as tall could have collapsed in the same amount of time...
Apparently you didn't do so good in high school math did you?
No matter how noble the objectives of a government; if it blurs decency and kindness, cheapens human life, and breeds ill will and suspicion - it is an EVIL government. Eric Hoffer
You then go on to claim that towers in pure free fall more than twice as tall could have collapsed in the same amount of time...
Apparently you didn't do so good in high school math did you?
You are right he is wrong, but not by much. It would take approx. 16.31 seconds for a building as twice as tall as the WTC to freefall with no resistance to its fall.
God is always good! "It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]
I have told you several times the qualifications I have that allow me to speak with some reasonable sense concerning the topic.
I don't find that very convincing given the number of times I have had to correct you about basic engineering principles and the facts in this case.
I have designed and built buildings which have proven to be far superior to elements in the area compared to ones designed by "structural engineers"...
Suuuuurrre, you have.
I have qualifications in metalwork, including structural steel.
Yet you appear to have thought the strength of steel structural elements in compression is higher than in tension. Go figure...
Then why is only one demolition expert on record saying that ... and only after being led by the nose by a dishonest conspiracist as we saw in that video?
The demolitions WTC1 and WTC2 had enormous explosions with recorded seismic spikes.
No they didn't. And the folks with the education and experience to interpret seismic records categorically state that the records don't show a controlled demolition.
Weeks aferward there was hot molten steel, and evidence of thermite involved.
If in fact 7 fell at close to free fall velocity - at a little less than half the height of the other 2, and at a time of roughly 7 seconds, that would put the free fall time of the other 2 at roughly 14 seconds (and by your own admissions elsewhere the time was about 15 seconds). You then go on to claim that towers in pure free fall more than twice as tall could have collapsed in the same amount of time... Apparently you didn't do so good in high school math did you?
innieway to BeAChooser - You then go on to claim that towers in pure free fall more than twice as tall could have collapsed in the same amount of time...
innieway to BeAChooser - Apparently you didn't do so good in high school math did you?
RickyJ to innieway - You are right he is wrong, but not by much. It would take approx. 16.31 seconds for a building as twice as tall as the WTC to freefall with no resistance to its fall.
Romero is a former director of the Energetic Materials Research and Testing Center at Tech, which studies explosive materials and the effects of explosions on buildings, aircraft and other structures.
Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is. ~George W. Bush (About the quote: Speaking on the war in Kosovo.)
Romero is a former director of the Energetic Materials Research and Testing Center at Tech, which studies explosive materials and the effects of explosions on buildings, aircraft and other structures.
Sure, the center does study those things. But Romero didn't. I posted HIS OWN resume, robin. Show me ANYWHERE in that resume experience in the effects of explosions on structures. You lose, try again.
By the way, you are only embarrassing yourself with this.
* Graduate and undergraduate courses in Solid State Physics and Particle Physics for the Physics Department
* Course in Explosives Surety for the Chemical Engineering Department
From your own info on Van Romero.
Obviously, if he teaches these courses, he is an expert.
You lose, try again.
Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is. ~George W. Bush (About the quote: Speaking on the war in Kosovo.)
Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is. ~George W. Bush (About the quote: Speaking on the war in Kosovo.)
New Mexico Tech Vice President Romero Named a Top Lobbyist
by George Zamora
SOCORRO, N.M., Dec. 18, 2003 – New Mexico Tech Vice President Van Romero has been tapped as one of “six lobbyists who made an impact in 2003” in an article featured in this month’s issue of Influence magazine.
Romero, who is in charge of research and economic development at the research university in Socorro, was profiled in “The Players,” a special year-end feature in the national magazine which identifies a handful of prominent Washington, D.C. lobbyists who made a mark in 2003.
“From his perch 2,000 miles outside of the Beltway, this physics Ph.D. understands exactly how Washington works,” the article states. “A major chunk of his job involves lobbying for federal government funding, and if the 2003 fiscal year was any indication, Romero is a superstar.”
Romero is credited in the article with being instrumental in procuring about $56 million worth of appropriations for New Mexico Tech for the current fiscal year. This notable achievement also recently caught the eye of editors at The Chronicle of Higher Education as they ranked the university first in the nation among institutions of higher education that receive federal earmarks.
In the article, Stephen Traver, a legislative aide for U.S. Senator Pete Domenici (R-N.M.), credits Romero’s success in Washington with his having adopted a lobbying approach where “he starts with a problem that the federal government has as a priority, and then looks for solutions to that problem.”
The article in Influence also points out that “Van Romero is proof that the client can be the best lobbyist.”
"First they ignore you. Then they ridicule you. Then they fight you. Then you win." --Mahatma K. Gandhi
PM quotes Romero denying that his retraction was bought: "Conspiracy theorists came out saying that the government got to me. That is the farthest thing from the truth. This has been an albatross around my neck for three years."
PM fails to mention that Van Romero was named chairman of the Domestic Preparedness Consortium in January 2001, that his Institute received $15 million for an anti-terrorism program in 2002, or that Influence Magazine tapped him as one of six top lobbyists in 2003, having secured $56 million for New Mexico Tech. [19] [20] [21] [22]
Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is. ~George W. Bush (About the quote: Speaking on the war in Kosovo.)
* Ph.D., Physics, State University of New York, 1991 * M.S., Physics, New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, 1979 * B.S., Physics, New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, 1977
Here is a description of the class in Explosive Surety that Romero teaches:
ChE 475, Explosives Surety, 3 cr, 3 cl hrs Prerequisite: Upper-class standing or consent of instructor Offered spring semester An introduction to explosives and other energetic materials. The basic chemical compositions, properties and environmental effects of commercial, military, and improvised (terrorist) explosives and some pyrotechnics will be compared. The basic physics of shock waves and detonation. Explosive effects, blast detection, tagging and environmental issues. Case studies or recent bombings will be used to describe a variety of terrorist approaches. Safety in handling of explosive materials and classifications for transportation and storage.
You lose, try again.
Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is. ~George W. Bush (About the quote: Speaking on the war in Kosovo.)
Van Romero changed his mind real quick. He knows who pays his salary.
Steven Jones on the other hand is sticking to his story even after being effectively forced from his job. True patriots are few and far between, I think Jones is one of them.
God is always good! "It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]
And Christopher Bollyn, who is being hounded, is not wavering.
Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is. ~George W. Bush (About the quote: Speaking on the war in Kosovo.)
I have designed and built buildings which have proven to be far superior to elements in the area compared to ones designed by "structural engineers"...
Suuuuurrre, you have.
Tell ya what. I'll design and build a building, and you design and build one. A real life practical building. I've done it. READY???????? (Don't forget, you get to build it too)
I have qualifications in metalwork, including structural steel.
Yet you appear to have thought the strength of steel structural elements in compression is higher than in tension. Go figure...
YOU have PAPER..... I have and work with steel everyday.
No matter how noble the objectives of a government; if it blurs decency and kindness, cheapens human life, and breeds ill will and suspicion - it is an EVIL government. Eric Hoffer
No BAC, you just goofed up there. Just like I goofed up in the first calculation I did. You were trying to make fun of my goof up yet goofed up in the same post to do that. Really pitiful.
God is always good! "It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]
The semi-vacuum was created by the explosives clearing the way for the building to fall in the time it did. Both of the towers exploded from top down. There must of been tons of explosives in it. Not a normal controlled demolition at all. The show factor for the cameras they knew would be there was apparent.
God is always good! "It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]
I'll mark you down as a vote for shill. (post #83)
I think it's quite possible that he is a shill, that we are supporting him with our tax dollars, although if that is the case I don't understand why they don't plant him at a larger forum such as democratic underground, though possibly one of his co-workers is already stationed there.
Or he could just be some weird guy, it's hard to say.
Are you saying you don't know the difference between a PhD in philosophy and a PhD in mathematics?
Not at all ... I'm saying from the dumbest to the smartest of our society ... ignorance rules the day.
This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
ROTFLOL! I hate to tell you, robin, but Mr Jowenko has specifically stated that the collapse of WTC 1 and WTC 2 were clearly NOT controlled demolitions. because Jowenko appears to have some rather kooky ideas.
because Jowenko appears to have some rather kooky ideas.
The guy then went on the record saying that he thinks that "due to the intelligence operations housed in that building it was brought down by a controlled demolition"
Sounds reasonable to me.
God is always good! "It was an interesting day." - President Bush, recalling 9/11 [White House, 1/5/02]
