Steven Jones February 1st Public Lecture - MP3 Download

911 Truth Seekers has posted an MP3 of Steven Jones's presentation in Orem, Utah on February 1st. The MP3 weighs in at just over 2 hours and just over 63MB.

Be sure to check it out, and perhaps with some luck a video will surface soon as well.

Glad to see people were out there at the presentation recording! Special thanks to for getting the MP3 out there so quick!

(p.s. We have hosted a mirror here as well.)

NOTE: The slides of the presentation can now be found here.

Can anyone set up a torrent

Can anyone set up a torrent for this?


February 3, 2006

February 3, 2006 article:
...Mr Bush told Mr Blair that the US was so worried about the failure to find hard evidence against Saddam that it thought of "flying U2 reconnaissance aircraft planes with fighter cover over Iraq, painted in UN colours". Mr Bush added: "If Saddam fired on them, he would be in breach [of UN resolutions]".,,1700879,00.html

Hey all, vote in this poll

Hey all, vote in this poll at CNN:

"How would you describe the Patriot Act as a tool in the war on terror?"

Useless is winning!!!

I look forward to listening

I look forward to listening to this. Thanks..

I'm on my third listening.

I'm on my third listening. Mr. Jones is a very shy non threatening soul.

I want to hug the guy. I want him have dinner with my Mom and Dad.

He is a very good messenger for doubters. Keep that in mind. He's not angry, he just wants the story to make sense and it doesn't.

Voted in the CNN poll

Voted in the CNN poll mentioned. Man I hate the phrase, "The War on Terror".

"The War on Rock Climbing"

I read that teen age drivers kill around 10,000 people a year.

Shouldn't we have:

"The War on Teen Age Drivers"

You're not safe, as long as they are on the road. We'll pass a bill called the "Driver's Education Act" that would allow our government to spy on Greenpeace.

I'm ranting. Thank you for allowing me to. I've dedicated my home page to loose change 2. You can watch the movie which is hosted by Google.

Grade: C- Not what I was

Grade: C- Not what I was hoping for from a physics prof - very disappointed. It's what we've all heard again and again. I was hoping for an intellectual and scientific presentation on the finding's of his peer reviewed paper. I've yet to hear the question and answer period so perhaps there was some actual scientific discussion that took place there.

EVERYONE please send this

EVERYONE please send this around.

Note: This file is also

Note: This file is also mirrored at ARG if an alternate download is required.

A. Thanks for serving the

A. Thanks for serving the audio, dz.

B. If Dr. Jones can get "controlled demolition" or the "fake Osama confession video" to break through the news blackout, I'll like that.

C. Taylor's comments are pretty much spot on the mark, but

D. I noted numerous examples of government-favorable gatekeeping/propaganda, some of which I feel are worthy of mention here:

1. I always have to think about how I refer to the "plane" crashes but Dr. Jones came across as a devout plane-hugger, same as his "friend Jim Hoffman". He repeatedly insinuates the existence of the government-claimed flights at the impact sites. (70:19 says flight recorders not released, which presumes they exist[ed].) It's subtle and effective in reinforcing that aspect to the government version of events. It's not, however, very scientific.

2. Thermite fixation. He ducked, dodged, and weaved pretty good regarding how "termite" could account for molten metal being found weeks (in fact, at 47:29, someone from the audience had to remind him about the "weeks later" part of the molten metal story) later (and then some unconvincing muttering about "insulation" during the Q&A session). He also seemed to contradict himself a little when he pointed out the difference between a fire getting hot enough to melt steel and actually getting steel up to that temperature, yet he didn't seem to mind blowing past his audience how a reaction hot enough to vaporize steel would actually raise steel to such elevated temperatures.


3. As a student and amateur

3. As a student and amateur (ie, unpaid) professor of physics, I found it rather curious that Professor Dr. Jones seemed to equate circumstantial institutional/geopolitical evidence with hard physical evidence, in terms of "puzzle pieces".

4. Dr. Jones continues to stonewall (looking into) and divert attention from the possibility of unconventional explanations for what became of the towers (the puzzle pieces of incredibly small size of the dust particles, the fires which blazed for 99 days despite constant dousing with water, the phenomenal pyroclastic dust/debris clouds -- these all suggest a horse [heat source] of a far different color than "thermite"!).

5. Dr. Jones contributed to another sinister aspect to the limited-hangout disinfo campaign in which the entire 9/11 truth movement is immersed, by butchering facts in presenting his version of Bush's incriminating 9/11 witness statements. He joins the list of those within the 911 truth movement, including Mike Rivero (, Paul Thompson (, Barrie Zwicker, Phil Berg, thewebfairy, and emperors-clothes, who seem to go out of their way to obfuscate this evidence and let Bush off the hook by helping leave his remarkable statements unexamined. 97:29 "so maybe he [Bush] made a mistake there" - 'Maybe' he didn't, Professor Jones, but in that minute of your presentation you made more than one! (I wonder, why would a physics professor stray so far outside his field of expertise to make repeated cause-harming silly(?) mistakes(?) like that? Is it just a coincidence that so many of the "leaders" and leading champions and web sites within the 911 truth community cloud and shroud this simple powerful incriminating well-documented repeated evidence of prior knowledge?)

6. 83m ~ 86m Again, Doctor Jones strays from his field to support the notion that we can blame 9/11 on Muslim hijackers, by acting as a bit of a cheerleader for Weldon's "Able Danger" disinfo (the one which insinuates we can blame 9/11 on Atta, and that we'd all be safer if only Big Brother had more comprehensive domestic surveillance capabilities) campaign.

911blimp, your critics are

911blimp, your critics are very exxagerate, in my opinion.
You can't claim that Prof Jones wouldnt committ some errors after speaking for 2 hours, he isnt some sort of divinity..
It seems that there are some "911 activists" that just spend their time to create divisions into the movement.
Spend your time to spread the truth - your vision of it, of course - to the masses, and stop criticising everything.

OK, I thought that 6 points

OK, I thought that 6 points might be too many, so I'll simplify it (though point 5 remains crucial!):

On one hand, Dr. Jones tries to advance the claim that the collapses of the towers cannot be attributed to airplanes/collisions/fires.

But on the other hand, Dr. Jones supports and still tries to advance the core lie of 9/11 that it's OK to blame Muslim hijackers (ie, airplanes).

Beyond that serious logical disconnect, it's not a scientifically robust claim he presents; if he's wrong about "thermite" -- which does not come even close to accounting for the more remarkable aspects of the event -- then will the mainstream media act as if it's vindicated and justified in dismissing all other "controlled demolition" claims?