by

November 23, 2011

Do you like this?

An independent investigation should be formed to look at the circumstances surrounding the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings that occurred after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, according to a panel at the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga.

The occasion was a Nov. 15, 2011 screening of a shortened version of the film “9/11: Explosive Evidence, Experts Speak Out”, produced by the nonprofit, nonpartisan organization Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth. Formed in 2006 in San Francisco by architect Richard Gage, the organization’s members believe there is sufficient evidence that the twin towers (along with another building about 350 feet away known as World Trade Center 7), collapsed as a result of controlled demolition.

In other words, someone intentionally blew them up.

More than 1,600 architects and engineers, as well as nearly 14,000 other supporters have signed a petition demanding an investigation, according to the Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth website.

The UTC program, called “The Science of 9-11”, did not focus on conspiracy theories, and, in fact, no one on the panel speculated exactly how the buildings might have been blown up or who might have been responsible.

However, as one audience member implied during the Q &A that followed, it’s impossible to separate the two: If the group’s theory is correct, there had to have been many more people involved than just the 19 hijackers. Controlled demolitions, it was pointed out, take a lot of planning, time and expertise to set up, and a lot of explosives.

While about half of the film focuses on WTC 7, the group disputes the official investigation by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, which concluded that all three buildings fell because the supporting steel framing was weakened by fire and could no longer support the buildings’ weight.

Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth says NIST investigators didn’t consider key evidence, such as eyewitness testimony that there were numerous explosions, and that it won’t make its computer simulations of the WTC 7’s collapse available to the public, among many other problems. Members also believe a steel-framed high-rise building has never before collapsed from a normal fire, and that evidence of the incendiary thermite has been found in dust from the World Trade Center, along with iron spheroids, which are produced by molten iron.

The evidence of thermite, pushed hard by the organization, but brushed off by NIST, was only briefly mentioned at the UTC forum.

“I think there should have been an independent investigation, with a panel of citizens,” said panelist Jim Hall, former director of the National Transportation Safety Board. He added a little intrigue when he said the NTSB, which investigates all plane crashes, never found the flight data boxes from either plane, which is very unusual.

“The loss of that information was very difficult to deal with because we’ll never really know,” Hall said.

Hall said government investigations are difficult to put together and experts don’t always agree when faced with the same evidence. He said it’s not likely NIST was engaged in a cover-up, but it’s also likely the investigation was performed hastily.

“I think the government ought to try to address the questions in a responsible fashion,” Hall said.

The Twin Towers were hit by airliners that were full of jet fuel. However, WTC 7, a 47-story structure, was hit by falling debris from one of the other towers, igniting fires, and it fell at 5:20 p.m. The building had been evacuated, so no one died.

Architects and Engineers for 9-11 Truth, using largely video evidence from news organizations and other sources, says the way WTC 7 collapsed—essentially straight down, in a freefall with no resistance, into its own footprint—looks to be a classic case of controlled demolition. The film features a parade of experts, including numerous civil engineers and architects, and a buildings demolition expert.

by

November 23, 2011

Comments (3)

Comment Feed

9/11 is actually very simpe...

Even assuming the official 9/11 narrative would be true, the existence of a conspiracy would be evident: www.911censorship.com explains it all

Daniel Noel more than 2 years ago

AE911Truth event at UTC

I was at the event. I was pleased to find that most people were willing to listen to new information.
I only wished that Panelist Edwin Foster, professor emeritus of civil engineering at UTC, had done his homework before coming to the event. I said that to myself on 6 separate occasions in response to his statements. At least he was man enough to say he didn't know something when asked a question he could not answer. But he was reaching at straws for the most part. If he had only taken the time to look at the evidence page at ae911truth.org, he would have come across as way more professional.
I want to thank him and all the other panelists for coming and I 'd also like to thank all the people who worked to make the presentation happen.

TN Truther more than 2 years ago

Peer Reviewed Evidence of Explosive Nano-Thermite

After 10 years, Universities say it's OK to ask the hard questions about September 11.

University faculty are openly questioning the official version of what happened to the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001.

On November 16 at Indiana University in Bloomington, Dr. Niels H. Harrit of Copenhagen University (Denmark) spoke about the collapse of the World Trade Center Twin Towers and Building 7. His lecture contrasted the official government story with conflicting evidence developed by independent research scientists.

These independent researchers contend the buildings were brought down with the use of explosives. They base their conclusions on evidence in the World Trade Center dust that the official government report completely disregards. Every sample the team analyzed contained unreacted nano-thermite (also called “super thermite”) -- a substance that can be used to destroy steel structures. The dust also contained previously molten iron droplets caused by very high temperatures that could not have been caused by jet fuel or office fires.

The findings, published in the April 2009 edition of the Open Chemical Physics Journal, have never been challenged. "This stands as an indictment of the official story of 9/11," says Dr. Steven E. Jones, professor emeritus of physics from Brigham Young University.

Dr. Jones notes that the laws of chemistry and physics are not influenced by political or cultural pressures. He commented that the "red-grey chips" found in independently collected samples of the World Trade Center dust undergo a thermitic reaction. Before ignition, iron oxide and aluminum are present in the chips. After ignition, elemental iron spheres are present. The iron has been "reduced" in chemical terms.

"This means, it does not suggest..., it MEANS that a thermite reaction has occurred", he said.

Their peer reviewed published paper is online.

http://www.benthamscience.com/open/tocpj/articles/V002/7TOCPJ.pdf

A non-technical pdf summary of the paper may be viewed at

http://911review.com/energeticmaterials09/911research/thermitics_made_simple.pdf

An engineering faculty member from the University of Tennessee at Knoxville commented he does not know how the material was present in the dust but “Certainly does not belong in any office building.”

The evening before, at the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, a documentary showed the testimony of experts ranging from chemical and structural engineers to physicists and architects talking about why the official findings are flawed.

The trailer of the video can be viewed online:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIOC1J44RYw&feature=youtu.be

An independent film, The Science of September 11 is also available at:

http://youtu.be/QXuzq8xIVmk

While the protocol of science involves peer review and reproducibility, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has refused to release the computer modeling data it used.

M. Hine more than 2 years ago

Current Issue

Friday

April 18, 2014

Saturday

April 19, 2014

Sunday

April 20, 2014

Monday

April 21, 2014

Tuesday

April 22, 2014

Wednesday

April 23, 2014

Thursday

April 24, 2014