Dr. Steven E. Jones Is Dr. Jim Fetzer's Guest on Jim's RBN Radio Show

Dr. Steven E. Jones was Dr. Jim Fetzer's special guest on Jim's internationally-syndicated RBN radio show on Saturday night (last night, November 4th).

Jim Fetzer's show from last night is now archived for your listening pleasure at http://mp3.rbnlive.com/Fetzer/0611/20061104_Sat_Fetzer1.mp3 (Hour #1) and http://mp3.rbnlive.com/Fetzer/0611/20061104_Sat_Fetzer2.mp3 (Hour #2).

Dr. Fetzer's special guest for his next Saturday show will be Dr. Judy Wood. You can listen live to the show from 7:00pm to 9:00pm Eastern Time on Saturday, November 11th by clicking on one of the "listen live" links at www.rbnlive.com/listen.html.

After you listen to Jim Fetzer's show with Steve Jones, let's discuss it below.

Jim & Steve clear up important questions about GZ samples

One of the questions that Jim Fetzer & Steve Jones cleared up in Jim's interview of Steve on Saturday night is the issue about the source & chain of custody for Steve's Ground Zero test samples (which tested positive for Thermite/Thermate-type substances).  Jim asked Steve a question about this about 30 minutes into the second hour.

As Steve indicated on Saturday, the answer is in Steve's new version of his article posted at his Journal of 9/11 Studies site (page 13 of the September Journal):

"The provenience of the WTC dust sample is an apartment at 113 Cedar Street in New York City, NY. A memorial constructed from structural steel from the WTC Towers located at Clarkson University in Potsdam, New York, is the source of previously-molten metal samples."

This information is not in the older versions of Steve's article, and there is no table of changes at the beginning of the new version of the article.  Thus, the reason that some (including yours truly) continued to have questions about sourcing & chain of custody may have been understandable.

Was Thermite Used for Ground Zero Clean-Up?

Well, well, well. So, Professor Jones has now cleared up SOME of the question about his sources for and chains of custody on his Ground Zero test samples. It's about time. Many people have been asking these questions for months and months. Why did he take so long to answer these important questions?

Nevertheless, Jones still has not cleared up the question about whether thermite or thermate was used for clean-up of the Ground Zero debris pile. Jones says "A memorial constructed from structural steel from the WTC Towers located at Clarkson University in Potsdam, New York, is the source of previously-molten metal samples."

Following is a picture of Ground Zero clean-up -- arguably using Thermite. Maybe we should ask more of the Ground Zero clean-up workers whether they used Thermite at Ground Zero for clean-up purposes -- if these clean-up workers are still alive.

If Thermite was used for Ground Zero clean-up, then what does this do to to the Jones hypothesis that Thermite/Thermate was used to explode, pulverize & disintegrate most of the steel, concrete, and building contents of the WTC towers? Although Jones has speculated about other exotic explosives being used to achieve this result, has he EVER shown any evidence for these speculations?

Neither Thermite nor Thermate is an explosive. Thermite cuts steel by MELTING it. Thermite does NOT turn steel into 100-micron-particle-sized dust. Jones has now begun to speculate that a new type of Thermate (which he calls "Nano-Thermate") COULD have been made to be explosive. However, he offers no real evidence for his speculations (much less any evidence for Nano-Thermate being able to pulverize concrete & steel into talcum-powder-sized dust).

If Thermite & Thermate could NOT have pulverized & disintegrated all of the steel and concrete in the WTC towers, then what did? Inquiring minds want to know...

Dr Steven Jones a Government Plant to Discredit Cold Fusion???

Jones certainly sounds like a nice caring guy in the interview with Jim Fetzer, but what about the info given in the following 15MB MP3???


No Proof that Professor Jones Is a Government Agent

Although Fintan Dunne does allege that Professor Steven E. Jones is "Cold Fusion's CIA Mole," he provides little or no evidence that this is true. See www.breakfornews.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=26&start=270#2435 for the text that accompanies the audio file about which you speak.

In fact, the evidence in the above text and audio files proves that Morgan Reynolds and Judy Wood were WRONG when they said that Cold Fusion is a sham. For this reason alone, the text and audio may be worth some attention.

There are two (2) types of Cold Fusion: (1) The high-dollar Cold Fusion on which Professor Steven E. Jones works; and (2) The low-cost Cold Fusion of Pons & Fleischman which Professor Jones partially discredited in 1989. Unlike what Reynolds & Wood said, both types of Cold Fusion are real.

If anything, Professor Jones was defending his type of Cold Fusion against a different type of Cold Fusion (from Pons & Fleischman), which is still being studied and developed today. For proof, check out the files.

Hasn't Professor Jones answered all those questions?

Thank you for the links to some interesting but disturbing information.

Professor Jones has gotten more mainstream media attention for the science of the 9/11 Truth Movement than any other 9/11 scientist, especially his appearance on C-SPAN. We need to remember that, and we should be grateful to him.

Hasn't Professor Jones answered all of those criticisms from those links in the past? If Dr. Jones answered these questions, then would someone please point me to the links to his answers???

Fetzer interview of Judy Wood to include Beam Weapons article

The primary topic of Dr. Jim Fetzer's interview of Dr. Judy Wood on his Saturday 7pm-9pmET RBN radio broadcast will be her new scientific article (with Dr. Morgan Reynolds), entitled "The WTC Bathtub and the Star Wars Beam Weapon," beginning at http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/StarWarsBeam1.html

Dr. Jim Fetzer & Dr. Steve Jones have now featured all six (6) pages of the Wood & Reynolds "9/11 Beam Weapons" article at two (2) different places on the front page of the website of Scholars for 9/11 Truth (www.ST911.org).  This may bode well for an increase in the acceptance of sincere 9/11 science and for a decrease in the counerproductive ad hominem atttacks that have sometimes marred 9/11 scientific debates & discussions in the past.

As for Dr. Jones' answers to the "interesting but disturbing" questions raised above, Steve's answers to some of these questions are at www.st911.org.

Steven Jones' "disturbing" work is very.... disturbing....

As for Dr. Jones' answers to the "interesting but disturbing" questions raised above, Steve's answers to some of these questions are at www.st911.org.


I don't believe Jones explained anything mentioned in the links I gave in my post above. For example, he did not explain why he altered the colors of a picture to make it appear to be molten metal: http://www.911blogger.com/node/4000


Thomas: Judy and Morgan's paper was renamed "The Star Wars Beam Weapon"

you're just wrong

You no planers love to point out that one pic. That pic is a still from the video we've all seen which clearly shows that it is a orange/yellow hot liquid, i.e. molten steel, pouring out of the south tower. It is obvious that you are a part of an effort to discredit real valuable research and promote ridiculous theories instead. This is how you hope to stall or derail the growing awareness of the truth. No one outside of your clique of shills is going for it pal. People in the street are just now learning about building 7, which no plane, real or one of your holograms, hit. That is what people care about--they are not going to believe for a second that all the hooplah they see and hear is about holographic planes. Give it UP!


Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero

WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force


Real Truther: TV-Fakery is based on solid physics.

Stop your slanderous remarks; you're only making yourself look silly and simpleminded.


Jones has already proved himself to be nothing more than a fraud.

 You say that pic is from a video? Where?


Perhaps they could aslo do an investigation into the experiments of Nicola Tesla where he said he could destroy any structure using vibration.

this could explain the unusual sounds coming from the 34th floor?

the vibration method could also explain the pulverized materials

no one reported hearing or feeling the level of vibration

that would be required. I think the 34th floor (the one that Willie R skipped and was known to be empty) was used as the entry point into the core, from which multiple floors could have been wired for demolition without a trace. This may have been the work Securacom/Stratasec (Marvin Bush) hired the Mossa--er, the special team to perform. I honestly don't think any American would have been willing to secretly rig a building for implosion on top of other Americans.

Steve Forbes reported noises in the upper floors too, which may (I'd have to check specifically which floors he mentions) have been where they preapred the exterior colums to crack the top and send it down as explosions blew the core. I think with the core falling and the exterior cracked on one floor, gravity could have done the rest.

The key here is that an illusion was created. Figure out what illusion and how and you have your demolition plan. Planes causing fir causing weakening causing collapse... not too complicated!


Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero

WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force


Tesla-tech-type weapons MAY have been used on 9/11

Tesla-tech-type weapons MAY have been used on 9/11 to pulverize & disintegrate the WTC towers.

Tesla-type, vibration-based weaponry is probably NOT the type of weaponry that was used (for the reasons that Real Truther rightly states and for others). 

Vibration-based weaponry is not the only type of Tesla-type weaponry that was probably developed by the Nazis, the U.S., the Russians & others.  There is little information about Tesla's high-voltage electrical weaponry on the internet.  According to one source of mine, this type of Tesla-tech weaponry might produce some of the disintegrating & pulverizing effects that we saw on 9/11 at the WTC towers site & others (i.e., effects that thermite & explosives CANNOT achieve).  I am still checking on this.

Although Wood & Reynolds offer some interesting new evidence and new hypotheses in their new article, they are not necessarily correct in all that they say.  Time and good science will tell.

You can tune in and call in to ask any pertinent questions of Dr. Jim Fetzer and Dr. Judy Wood during Jim's Saturday 7pm-9pmET radio show.  There is a live link at www.RBNlive.com.

Thermite / Thermate

I don't think the thermite / thermate need be explosive.... they simply may have been used to weaken the structure or heat the steel to temps which would have allowed the explosives to be more effective.

the thermite could have been inserted into the center of the square columns by cutting a 3 to 4 inch diameter hole in a strategic location then inserting the material.... there are explosive packaging which looks like large sausages all strung together.... when ignited this would not explode but it would burn and travel down the core of the columns and cause damage at the connecting points of the columns.... the massive heat would melt the steel at strategig structural points then melt through and fall to the next structural connection. The thermite / thermate reaction would have not been visible unless it somehow fully penetrated the columns.... you can see the thermite / thermate in the one video where the exterior column was buckled.... the thermite / thermate was leaking out of the column and falling where the reaction was very visable.

they would have only meeded to place these thermite / thermate charges at every 20 floors.... or whatever was determinted but the charges would only need to be symmetrically placed so that the thermite / thermate did equal damage to the structure....

when the structure began to fail from the thermite / thermate then they would simply need to pull the trigger and have the explosives do the rest of the job.

As far as Thermate and the technology which would make it much more powerful.... there is the ability to ionize the necesary metalic materials creating a much more efficient product.... which would allow much less material.... making the charges much more compact thus having less mass making them easier to transport as well as place in inconspicuous places. The smaller particles create a more cohesive mix which amplifies the reaction.


If you are going to drop negative points on me... please at least offer explaination for your rating.... if there is something you are at odds with... perhaps we could further discuss

Home comes this "theory"

Home comes this "theory" gets "airplay" un-moderated?

It appears you can say anything on this board except that the airplanes were faked videographically. Which they were.