911blogger.com seeks to cover a broad spectrum of news. Blog posts are the responsibility of the poster. Readers are encouraged to check the facts, debate, and form their own conclusions.
In discussing my measurement of the freefall of Building 7 with one (reluctant) physics professor, the professor at one point protested, “I’ll take your word for it, for the sake of argument, but I have no way to confirm your claims for myself.”
That comment astounded me because I see the motion of the building as such a straightforward measurement. But upon reflection I recalled all the time and energy and collaboration that went into gathering all the necessary materials and information for the measurement: a suitable video, an appropriate software tool to make measurements on the video, calibration data, knowledge of video formats, etc. I realized that even with the requisite knowledge base and skill set, it would take a very motivated person to reproduce my measurements. I therefore collected together all the bits and pieces that went into my measurement and present them here as a kit that can be used by a physics teacher or handed to a motivated physics student as a lab assignment (or performed by a science-literate layman). The skills that will be learned in the process will serve a physics student well for other projects that might involve using video as a measuring tool.
Links to a zip file with the lab materials and links to the necessary software can be found at http://911speakout.org/?page_id=222
I have been reluctant to enter into mudwrestling events with debunkers and propagandists for what I see as blatant disinformation. I don't see these debates as productive. They are not about deepening the inquiry into events but rather fending off ever-morphing attacks by people who engage in deceptive argumentation. I have better uses for my time. I find that ignoring them works just as well and allows me to get on with my life.
However one hit piece by Dave Thomas has been the source of repeated questions in my in-box from people who sense something is wrong with his analysis but are not confident enough of their grasp of the physics to be sure. Rather than continuing to write individual explanations in email responses I have now posted a refutation of the attack on the http://911SpeakOut.org "Articles and Links" page here: http://911speakout.org/wp-content/uploads/Response-to-Dave-Thomas.pdf.
I hope this helps.
[Also posted here: http://911speakout.org/wp-content/uploads/911-so-what.pdf ]
The evidence that we were lied to about 9/11 is straightforward and blatant. It has been researched, verified, and laid on the table for all to see. It is really not hard to convince most honest, open minded people who are not in denial, if you focus on the evidence. But where can they go from there? They can sign a petition, sure, but that is not enough.
The other side of the coin is another big question: what do we have to do to "win" on 9/11? Is it a matter of convincing a large number of people, or certain key people, or winning court battles, or politically maneuvering to bring pressure on the government to open a new investigation? All of these are worthy goals, but how likely is it, really, that a new investigation would not be just another whitewash, or that Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld will ever go to prison or flee to Paraguay? The larger question is, would such a victory really bring resolution to 9/11? I don't think so.
9/11 did not just happen. 9/11 was a premeditated shock and awe event that was instrumental in a larger plan. It allowed the administration to immobilize the population through fear and manipulate their outrage displaced toward the designated enemy. 9/11 provided cover for a protracted attack on our democratic values and an orgy of outrageous national behavior that defined the entire Bush administration, much of which continues today. 9/11 brought us the fiction of "preemptive" wars as a fig leaf for naked military aggression, the fiction of "illegal enemy combatants," to pretend the Geneva Conventions did not apply, and the fiction of "enhanced interrogation" as though that were any different from torture pure and simple. It brought us routine drone assassinations, the expansion of secrecy, the unleashing of the NSA to conduct universal surveillance, the destruction of nearly every one of our civil liberties, attacks on journalism and the murder of journalists, paranoid fear of immigrants in general and Arabs in particular, and the demonization of Islam as a uniquely violent religion. This list is far from complete.
The 9/11 Truth Movement has uncovered overwhelming evidence that the destruction of the World Trade Center was a crime that required long-term inside access to the buildings, access to military-grade demolition materials, and the ability to coordinate the demolitions with the hijacker scenario, the elaborately staged fumbling of what should have been routine interceptions, and a massive cover-up that began on the day of 9/11. Uncovering the evidence for all this has been a remarkable achievement of the 9/11 Truth Movement, but to address 9/11 fully, we must look beyond the mere fact of government involvement and look at the crimes against democracy that were begun on that day.
This brings us back to the original question. Once people become conscious of the fact that 9/11 was a lie, how can they channel their response? Their essential response must be to demand our democracy back. This can take a thousand forms. We must call for an end to the war on terror, which is in reality an endless reign of terror. We must call for the end of drone assassinations. We must work to end the death-grip of the military industrial complex on our society. We must work to end the dominance of the fossil fuel industry over our government. We must work to end economic polarization of the nation and the influence of money on politics. All of these, and many more areas of potential activism, are responses to the larger crimes against democracy that were launched on 9/11. All of these can be energized by people who have become conscious of the truth of 9/11. Consciousness of the truth, is empowering. It changes who we are and how we understand and interact with the world. As we raise consciousness of the truth we incrementally change the social and political landscape. That is why we must continue to speak out.
Jeff King, an early scientific voice in the 9/11 Truth Movement, died on June 19 after a lengthy battle with amyloidosis and multple myeloma. He studied physics and engineering at MIT, left for a number of years, then re-enrolled, finished with a degree in Biology (with a combined course of study later labeled Biomedical Engineering), then went on to medical school and became a physician.
Jeff was a neighbor and a good friend. You may know of him through his online name, Plague Puppy (http://www.plaguepuppy.net/). Some of his thinking about 9/11 was speculative and out of the mainstream of the 9/11 Truth Movement, but I knew him to be extremely inquisitive, well read, independent in his thinking, and non-dogmatic. He was one of the early influences in my getting involved with the 9/11 Truth Movement. He was a gentle and caring person, beloved by his patients.
He is probably best know for the talk shown here: http://www.plaguepuppy.net/public_html/Confronting%20the%20Evidence/
He will be missed.
I have uploaded to YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvw0_i1rGns) an analysis of the acceleration of a projectile that races ahead of the surrounding falling debris. I had discussed this object before but due to the difficulty caused by a moving camera I had not previously measured the motion directly.
The object (apparently a perimeter wall unit) raced ahead of its neighboring debris, but its acceleration was about 1/3 of gravity. This is an indication that it was kicked downward initially by an explosion, after which the air resistance partially canceled the effect of gravity as it approached terminal velocity. As it fell, however, there was an outburst of white smoke, at which point the projectile changed directions, slightly, and accelerated downward for about a half second at 1.5 times gravity. It then fell back to continued acceleration a little under 1 g.
The acceleration of the projectile is unambiguous proof that very energetic material was applied to the wall unit. What I found particularly surprising is that the ignition of the material in an unconfined space where it was free to expand three dimensionally would provide sufficient thrust due to expanding gasses alone to cause what was probably a 4-ton wall unit to accelerate 50% faster than gravity. The fact that the unit continued to accelerate close to freefall thereafter is an indication of an ongoing thrust capable of largely canceling the effect of air resistance.
Overwhelming Evidence of Insider Complicity on 9/11
If you watch our videos and read the links on our site (http://www.911speakout.org) you will understand why we assert that the weight of the evidence points to the fact that 9/11 was orchestrated by insiders…
* with access to high tech military-grade nano-energetic materials (aka nano-thermite)
* with access to the infrastructure of some of the most highly secure buildings in New York over an extended period of time
* with the expertise to accomplish the most difficult demolitions in history
* with the ability to manage public perception of the event despite numerous contrary contemporaneous eyewitness reports
* with the ability to coordinate the take-downs of the twin towers with the airplane flights
* with the ability to coordinate with the military to not intercept the airplane flights
* with the ability to stage a highly coordinated cover-up, starting on the day of 9/11 itself
* with the ability to prevent ANY investigation for many months
The new DVD, "9/11 Analysis with David Chandler" is completed and will start shipping on Monday Jan 3. It can be ordered at http://www.911speakout.org. It is available as a single DVD in a standard DVD case or in inexpensively priced bulk packs (in sleeves) in quantities of 25, 50, and 100 for mass distribution (marked "Not For Resale for Profit"). Contact firstname.lastname@example.org if you would like to order in wholesale quantities for resale or if you would like to feature the DVD on your web site.
The DVD is based on the many short analysis videos David Chandler has posted on the internet over the last several years. On the DVD these are woven together with an explanatory narrative (and at one point a little physics "chalk talk" is thrown in). This DVD is accessible to the general public, but it also has the potential to arouse interest in and address the questions of the science-educated segment of the public.
Production team: David Chandler (producer, narrator), John Parulis (videographer, editor), Laurel Burik (publicity), Steve Wilson (business manager)
1. I have completed a video showing the analysis of the Balzac-Vitry controlled demolition that used hydrolics rather than explosives to initiate a total demolition. This analysis shows deceleration upon collision, as predicted in the paper, "The Missing Jolt: A Simple Refutation of the NIST-Bazant Collapse Hypothesis," by Graeme MacQueen and Tony Szamboti. It also illustrates the symmetry of destruction, contrary to the "crush down" followed by "crush up" scenario propounded by Zdenek Bazant. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiHeCjZlkr8
On July 19, while I was in Portland to speak at the American Association of Physics Teachers conference I was interviewed by former KPFA programmer Sue Supriano, who now lives in Portland and does radio and podcast interviews for a show called "Stepping Out of Babylon." The interview can be downloaded as an mp3 file and is available here:
(Written and narrated by David Chandler / Edited by Debora Blake)
Craig Bartmer, an NYPD officer who was present at the destruction of World Trade Center Building 7, testifies that he heard a series of explosions, "Thum, thum, thum, thum, thum" preceding the fall of the building. At the same time a TV interview is being conducted down the street, far from the building. The microphone picks up the same series of sharp, percussive sounds, confirming Bartmer's description. NIST artificially ruled out all such testimony by setting up a hypothetical loudness threshold for sounds it considered to be capable of destroying columns in the building. The video goes on to question NIST's computed loudness threshold below which they would not investigate explosions.
I have revisited and extended some of my early measurements of high speed massive projectiles from the World Trade Center on 9/11. The results for the three projectiles measured: 55 mi/hr, 45 mi/hr, and 78 mi/hr. I don't claim this is smoking-gun evidence of explosive demolition all by itself, but it is part of the puzzle and it is more compatible with the explosive demolition hypothesis than simple gravitational collapse.
(On a technical note, if you are looking at the numbers in the three measurements, the third measurement is taken while the video was zoomed in, relative to the calibration frame. The numbers shown have to be scaled down by a factor of 1.701 to give the stated results.)
Where to find my videos:
I have moved my videos from the AE911Truth YouTube site to http://youtube.com/user/DavidChandler911. Please update any links or embeds you may have had in your web pages. The AE911Truth YouTube page (http://youtube.com/user/ae911truth) has playlists with links to these videos. Sorry for the disruption.
This is a study of the overall downward acceleration of WTC1, the North Tower of the World Trade Center. During this investigation it was discovered that the one feature that kept pace with the original acceleration of the roofline was the leading wave of ejections on the west wall.
[This is an updated version of the video to correct some errors in the characterization of the corner columns and to generally improve the information content. Rather than simply delete the old YouTube video I've added a link to go from it to the new one. This should cover those who have already embedded or linked to the old version. Sorry for the hassle, and thank you members of the AE911Truth team who caught the error. -- DSC]