9/11 Debunkers Hide From Slam Dunk Evidence Of Controlled Demolition

9/11 Debunkers Hide From Slam Dunk Evidence Of Controlled Demolition - prisonplanet.com

Electron microscope analysis of steel spheres from WTC site proves thermate, proves collapse of twin towers was an act of deliberate arson

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet
Tuesday, May 22, 2007

Professor Steven Jones presented brand new and compelling evidence for the controlled demolition of the twin towers and WTC 7 recently, but the 9/11 debunkers and the corporate media are loathe to tackle it because it represents a slam dunk on proving the collapse of the buildings was a deliberate act of arson.

During a talk at the Rebuilding America's Senses event at the University of Texas last month, Jones laid out facts about steel samples recovered from the WTC site that Popular Mechanics dare not even attempt to debate. Debunkers are scared to even get near this information because the science behind it fundamentally contradicts the official story of what happened on 9/11.

Jones detailed his lab experiments in which he attempted to replicate NIST's conclusion that the lava like orange material flowing out of the south tower is aluminum from Flight 175, the plane that hit the building. Jones clearly documents the fact that liquid aluminum is silver and not orange as is seen in the video of the south tower, therefore the material cannot be aluminum. Jones then explains that the material is in fact a compound that can cut through steel like a hot knife through butter, thermite with sulphur added to make thermate.

The crux of the fresh evidence revolves around newly uncovered globules or spheres that were discovered at the WTC site that Professor Jones was able to obtain and run a electron microscope analysis on.

The spheres contained iron and aluminum, which would be expected in any steel sample, but also sulphur which is a by-product of a thermate reaction.

So having moved from a hypothesis that thermate was used to bring down the towers from using video footage and debunking the aluminum explanation of NIST, Jones now has empirical scientific proof, undertaken under laboratory conditions, that thermate was indeed used as an artificial explosive at the World Trade Center.

It has now been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that the collapse of the twin towers and WTC 7 was an act of deliberate arson and not as a result of fires from crashing planes.

Jones' evidence offers no other conclusion that insiders planted thermite devices within the buildings to literally pulverize the supporting columns and cause the collapse of the towers and also WTC 7. Debunkers have uniformly failed to address the existence of thermite and also molten metal at the ground zero site because they cannot dismiss the scientific proof, and are forced to resort to ad hominem insults and smears.

We are issuing a challenge to Popular Mechanics to rebut Professor Jones' analysis of the sphere samples and the clear evidence of thermate at the World Trade Center. Address the focused scientific proof without resorting to ad hominem attacks or straying off topic.

We don't expect the progenitors of yellow journalism to have any answers for what constitutes the smoking gun of controlled demolition.

Great post, but...

Great post, but it's kind of lame how you have to "subscribe" to prisonplanet in order to view his presentation.

I think this is very important information and should be free for everyone to see.

I agree. Here it is...

PNAC Rebuilding America's Senses Steven Jones Lecture


"If I had just paid $20 million for the NIST report, I'd be asking for a refund!"
-Dr. Frank Greening

thanks man!

thanks man!

Show "false photos of thermite evidence" by axehandle

I'm not an expert by any means, but...

I'm not an expert by any means, but I do know that the shortest distance between 2 points is a straight line. Why would the welders cut so many columns diagonally creating more work for themselves?

Extremely good point, Dustin.

Diagonal line would be more cutting/work. Also, cutting straight might be more favorable as you could control the release of the cut of portion easier. Now with CD, the linear shaped charges have to be at an angle to let the segment of steel "pop" out and let the building fall.
"Peace comes from within. Do not seek it without." - Buddha
"What you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that you do it." - Gandhi
"The Sun never shined on a cause of greater worth." - Thomas Paine


because they need to inflict a diagonal cut in the metal steal so it can "walk" away (slide, move) from the place it was. It's well described in 911mysteries by a professional CD.

You can't hide a lie for long. Truth shall come out.


They cut it diagonally so that it will slide off and fall over easier. The famous picture of the fireman standing in front of the cut steel beam is moot. I've seen the pictures of them cutting that beam with an oxyacetylene torch. No doubt it was a CD, but we need to make sure that all of our evidence is solid, and some of those photos should not be used.

Justin A. Martell

In a soldier's stance, I aimed my hand at the mongrel dogs who teach! Fearing not that I'd become my enemy in the instant that I preach! My pathway led by confusion boats...mutiny from stern to bow!


I was at Barnes & Noble one day and I saw a photo book about 9/11and I saw pictures of iron workers making these diagonal cuts.

What book?

What book?

It just doesn't make sense to me why they would spend so much extra time making diagonal cuts like the one seen in the middle of this picture here and make them precise cuts when they had such a huge task in front of them.

This picture looks like he is making straight cuts... so does this one (notice the previous cut to the right of the blow torch)

I'm not saying this is solid evidence at all and it isn't in my film, but please explain why the shortest distance between 2 points is a diagonal cut...

Again.. I'm not an expert :-)

I wish I could remember....

I was thumbing through it looking for pictures that supported CD and I came across a few photos in it that showed iron workers making these cuts. I am an idiot for not buying it. I believe it was a photo album type book that just had photos. It could have been the TIME mag photo album, but I am not sure. It was a big book of photos. This was about a year ago and it was on the bargain rack at the local Barnes & Noble in my neighborhood. Whenever I have visited there since, I have always looked for it so I can buy it this time.

Keep in mind that I support CD. Also keep in mind that I DO NOT support DEW's. I support Dr. Jones' work.

P.S. I love your new version of your movie Dustin and I plan on buying a few copies. The first version is the film that I gave my pastor when I tried to convince him to orginize a showing. See here: http://911blogger.com/node/3265

It wasn't successful but I plan on following up again. Thanks again.

That is a great idea!

That is a great idea! Hopefully next time your pastor will be more receptive to this information.

I would love to see those pics you are talking about. If you do ever find it again please let me know what it's called :-)

Thanks for being proactive and for the nice comments!

On a mission....

I am going to actively try and find this book. I will let everyone know if I find it. The photos I am refering to are not the photos the debunkers use and I don't believe I have seen them online. I feel it is very important to make sure the claims we are making are 100% correct and, when possible, avoid speculation.

That would be cool if you

That would be cool if you are able to find it!

I'm not saying they weren't cut though, I'm just saying to me as an ironworker layman, it would seem like the quicket distance from point A to point B is a straight line or even a slight angle.

To clarify...

See below

To clarify...

In regards to the "famous" photo of the diagonally cut core column with the firefighter in the foreground, I have no opinion one way or the other as to what caused this. I wish we had the date it was taken and knew what tower it was from. It looks like the South Tower to me, due to the lack of core that remains. The North Tower had about 4-5 stories of sections of the core still standing. It's one big mystery wrapped inside an INSIDE JOB!!!

??As far as the cutting goes


What Dr. Jones is trying to prove... (something that could easily be demonstrated with the proper resources).... is that the remnant metalic spheres, due to their minute size and frequency, could have only been created in a more explosive type of reaction with the structural steel members.

While some of these of spheres could be created during clean-up of the site..... they would not appear to the frequency and size that they currently appear in the debris.

The supposed application of the thermite which is being proposed by Dr. Jones would create an almost explosive spray. The thermite reation would be forced through a device with a thin channel creating a very powerful cutting spray. These devices would be applied to the outside of the columns with a powerful magnet.

I am supposing that they used this type of application on three sides of the main core support columns and they left the fourth to be blown using explosives. The thermite cuts were made slightly below the location of the explosive charge. The fourth un-affected side would maintain the position of the column untill the explosive charge made the "Final Cut". The columns while being severely compromised would remain in place and would support the building due to the other surrounding structure aiding in it's integrity. The intact side would act like a splint to the compromised column. With the three sides cut the column would slump but it would be supported by the column below. Only failing completely with the explosive "Final Cut".

These core columns may have been the only ones to recieve this precise treatment. In other areas the structure could have been compromised using only thermite or only explosives. Thermite would have been a very quiet means of aquiring the desired result.

Needless to say that the remnants that Jones is finding is not a result of the clean-up. Wouldn't it have been nice if we had access to the evidence directly after the event and the reaminder hadn't been buried under a mix of concrete.
Together in Truth!

I believe the book you are referring to is 'Aftermath'

by Joel Meyerowitz. I bought myself a copy for christmas. There are pictures of iron workers cutting columns, but I don't recall seeing any pictures that clearly show anyone making angle cuts.


probably AFTERMATH by Joel Meyerowitz

It's a huge picture book and I had the same idea--to buy it and scour it for evidence. Warning--it's like $100. I found good hi res pics of the steel structure that embedded itself into the Amex Building (World Fianncial Center I think) but not much else worth noting.

The pics that include column cutting with torches are far from conclusive as to the type of cut they were making, btw. You would think that it wouldn't be that hard to prove that in fact someone DID make that diagonal cut in the huge column there. Do we even know the date of that famous pic?


Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero

WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force


So much extra time?

It wouldn't take that much exstra time. A matter of a few inches. Also, cutting obviously allows you to control the fall of the beam being cut.

Can't Stop 9/11 Fever

To me, according to the

To me, according to the angle, it looks like it would take twice as long as just cutting it without the angle or with a slight angle... like they did with a lot of other columns.

I don't think it's a quick task to cut through thick steel, but then again I'm not an ironworker either :-)

Simple geometry/trigonometry

Yes, a 45 degree cut is considerably longer. If a straight cut were, let's say 10 inches, a 45 degree cut would be 10*(sqrt2) inches. I can't remember what root 2 approximates to 1.415? So whereas a straight cut across would be 10 inches (for example) a 45 degree cut would be 14.15 inches. Multiply that by the thousands of cuts made at Ground Zero... TONS of wasted cutting fuel. Wouldn't make economic OR time-saving sense to do diagonal cuts.

"Peace comes from within. Do not seek it without." - Buddha
"What you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that you do it." - Gandhi
"The Sun never shined on a cause of greater worth." - Thomas Paine

nice try

do you really believe welders are underneath these huge steel beams cutting them like a tree to fall?? theres enough straw in that strawman for me to feed the herd for a month. angled cuts, for the purpose of debris removal makes absolutely no sense. I'm not saying its not possible, but what purpose, other than to be a huge waste of time, would it serve? And dont say "to control the fall" - thats proposterous. Angled cuts to control "fall" is an earmark of CD, however.

Also, regarding the pic with the firefighter and the angled cut, and when the pic is from: well, I dont know the date for sure but one would have to conclude that if there are firefighters in full firefighting gear on top of the pile, the pic cant be more than a day or two after the event. If it was taken long after the event where enough time has passed for the clean-up to yield these angled cuts I doubt any firefighters would be present in full firefighting gear.

just some thoughts

Physics/Science/Mathematics do not lie, only people do.
9/11 was an INSIDE JOB

I dunno...

this week, when I was truthing at the local university, some guy told me his dad was a structural engineer and angled cuts were routinely applied in debris removal. Now I don't know if he was full of it and to me, it makes little sense -- but it would be worthwhile to get to the bottom of this. Erin, can you give us some insights?

interns < internets

You do realise.....

that WTC 7 was a 47 story skyscraper, right? You do realise the rubble pile was about 5 stories high, right? Do controlled demos of 47 story highrises fall EXACTLY within the footprint or can there be some spill-over? Do you get my point?

Not to mention

that they do not even need to be that careful... their whole point was to demolish the building.



Help me shout 9/11 articles on:


Calling Erin S. Meyer...

Please weigh in on this discussion, as I believe that you possess the skills and knowledge to speak authoritatively!

"But truthfully, I don't really know. We've had trouble getting a handle on Building No. 7."
~~ Dr. Shyam Sunder - Acting Director Building and Fire Research Laboratory (NIST)

Are these photos false?

Are these photos false?


If anyone has not seen Appendix C of the FEMA 403 report, I urge all of you to look at it, this in combination with Jones research is the SMOKING GUN!

Section C.6 1st 2 Sentences:

The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified.

Looks like Jones Identified it!

some people have argued that diesel fuel contains sulfur

do we have a rebuttal for that?


Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero

WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force


Diesel Fuel does contain sulfur...


Doesn't the FEMA report say that the sulfur and corrosion is one of the biggest mysteries? I would think that they would pick up on the sulfur in the diesel fuel if this was the source. Why would they miss it and call it a mystery? I would think a few experiments with diesel fuel, steel, office contents and fire would get to the bottom of this.

Yeah, experiments.

Experiments would be the last word, if we had to debunk diesel as the source of the sulfur. But we don't. Something had to melt the steel. As we know, hydrocarbon fires won't do this. For sulfer to form a eutectic it has to mix with the alloy, which doesn't happen (on a noticeable level) unless something is melting the steel. The eutectic is essentially a new compound made up of the melted steel and sulfer. Elements and compounds used in practical applications like building cannot be highly reactive with other common elements, for obvious reasons. In order to get the steel to loosen its chemical bonds and react with the sulfur you need either something like a VERY strong acid to be present, or teperatures high enough to liquify the steel. Let me put it this way: THERE IS NO POSSIBLE EXPLANATION FOR MELTED STEEL IN THESE COLLAPSES OTHER THAN EXPLOSIVES / INCENDIARIES.

RT is right, we need to get out of this endless debate. There is plenty of completely irrefutable proof already, for those who want to rub the sleep out of their eyes. I think maybe one or two more comprehensive books could be written to really bring the whole picture into focus, but those of us who are not authors should start putting all our energy into spreading the info far and wide.

"Peace comes from within. Do not seek it without." - Buddha
"What you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that you do it." - Gandhi
"The Sun never shined on a cause of greater worth." - Thomas Paine

The Towers........

I believe sulfur was found by Dr. Jones in the dust sample molten iron spheres. No diesel was in the Towers. I believe sulfur is not an ingredient in jet fuel, as far as I can tell. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jet_fuel

yeah, the very last paragraph

says it all. I do believe Jones has seen all of the official reports.

Physics/Science/Mathematics do not lie, only people do.
9/11 was an INSIDE JOB


BEWARE of crooksandliars.com

The site http://www.crooksandliars.com censors any information regarding 911. I tried to post this information on Michelle Malkin of FOX NEWS questioning 911 in reference to a blog on Bin Laden and they deleted my comments twice saying it was "off topic".

BEWARE: These people are left-gatekeepers!


I have been banned several times....

by mentioning anything having to do with 9/11 on Crooks & Liars. Screw them.

"A patriot must be ready to defend his country against his government" - Edward Abbey

Show "PNAC myths moved forward" by axehandle

Pearl Harbor or not.

Axehandle you are defending an organization that there policy responsible for getting us into three wars. Kosovo Afghanistan Iraq and possibly Iran. And with that policy PNAC is directly responsible for Thousands of souls being murdered based upon a lie. No matter How you look at it we should have never have gone into Iraq Pearl Harbor or not..


Wrote that rebuttle obviously never bothered reading the document. I read the first "rebuttle", and saw blatant lies.

The invasions of these two countries, however, are nowhere mentioned in the PNAC document, they are not even vaguely alluded to. It exists purely in the imagination of the person writing this paper. In fact the only time the paper mentions Iraqi policy at all, is in regards to continuing the containment policy around Iraq with regards to the no-fly zones, not in invading it.


"While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein."

Let's not forget their letter to President Clinton in 1998 that called for, "the removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime from power."

I'm not going to bother reading the rest. The "process of transformation" was mentioned 27 times in that document. Do you think it's something they really really really wanted to see? Do you think it's something they realized they wouldn't be able to get without a "paralyzing and catalytic event like a new Pearl Harbor?"

I do.

It's Not The Crime That Kills You, But The Cover-Up


kind midas strikes again...

Also, when Steven Jones spoke in AZ I believe he mentioned that his experiments have also now been replicated in other labs. Why no mention of that in this article?

Thats not what he said

He said he has given a sample to another scientist to do independent testing. Those tests may not be complete yet.

Physics/Science/Mathematics do not lie, only people do.
9/11 was an INSIDE JOB

Tony Blair himself hinted at

Tony Blair himself hinted at this when he said to the Commons liaison committee: "To be truthful about it, there was no way we could have got the public consent to have suddenly launched a campaign on Afghanistan but for what happened on September 11" (Times, July 17 2002).

"The United States has for decades sought to play a more permanent role in Gulf regional security. While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification, the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein."

Lots of use of permanent in the PNAC document.

Fukuyama: "Sept. 11 was a godsend [for neocons]"

It's not...

Hard finding information that says this Government/administration wanted war. It's also not hard to find information that said 9/11 was a "gift" for this administration, nor is it hard to find information that says they wouldn't have been able to invade anywhere without 9/11.

Why then is it hard for some people to see it?

It's Not The Crime That Kills You, But The Cover-Up

Good post Jon

And let's not forget the Israeli policy paper "Clean Break" that preceded the formation of the PNAC by just a couple of years:

Israel's "Clean Break" + PNAC's "Rebuilding America's Defenses" = 9/11?

"If I had just paid $20 million for the NIST report, I'd be asking for a refund!"
-Dr. Frank Greening

There's a third lesser know paper

that goes with the PNAC's 'Rebuilding America's Defenses' and 'Clean Break'.



This paper was put out before 9/11 (can't find exact date) by none other then the James A Baker III Institute for Public Policy. It goes hand in hand with the other two and is probably very closely related in terms of content and participants to the Cheney Energy Task Force work, that they continue to refuse to release.

The latest troll

axehandle has been registered to the blog for all of 11 hours, and judging from the posts so far in this and other threads, shows all the indications of being a troll.

No audio in file?

I can hardly hear anything on that Google video

Audio is better on YouTube...

There was a high quality version that was on Google that has since disappeared, blogger "sector" uploaded.

Anyway, here's a YouTube playlist to save messing around.


Hope this helps, some great evidence presented.

Best wishes

Excellent video...

Thanks for uploading that. I can hardly wait to see what the dubunker responses will be. They're going to have to dig REALLY deep on this one.

Show "This is a con job: he has no proof of thermite!" by Jim Fetzer

you live in a fantasy world

and you have no proof of plasmoids or laser beams.

go back to proving how the zapruder film is fake and take "dr" wood with you. so i must insist, please go away. youve tarnished a legitimate citizens movement with your disinfo. you are not the movement. steven jones is not the movement.

most of us here do not support the uncle fetzer-reynolds-wood trifecta. theres a good reason for that.

once again, please refrain from spreading disinfo on these pages, as the server already has enough of a strain.
Morgantown 9/11 Truth
The Eleventh Day of Every Month

The beauty of science

is that scientific hypothesis can be falsified. In fact, if a theory is not capable of being falsified, it is not a scientific theory (K. Popper). So instead of ad hominem attacks and blanket statements like "this is a con job", falsify Prof. Jone's theory. If it is indeed "a con job" it should be quite easy to do. Come up with a plausible alternative explanation for the micron sized spheres of steel -- i.e., show how they could be formed in the absence CD. Alternatively, show that CD would not or could not produce such spheres.

The floor is yours, professor. We are all waiting to be dazzled.

Been there, done that . . .

My mistake. I thought those involved here were familiar with the exchanges between me and Steve, which are archived on 911scholars.org under "The Science of 9/11". Insofar as this thread is a discussion of a paper in which I explain some of the problems with his research, I suppose I am entitled to presume you are or should be famiiar with what I have said, at least in the piece at the start:


where the most important discussion of Steve's latest paper occurs in sections 5-8. You need to note that he does not actually claim to have proven that thermite was used, but only that its use is "consistent with" the small iron balls he has discovered in the miniscule dust samples he has been studying. That dust samples include iron balls indicates that the steel, which is principally constituted of iron, was turned into dust! It does not prove that thermite was the mechanism. In fact, other indications of the use of thermite are absent. The data is consistent with any source of energy that would have produced such effects, including lasers, masers, plasmoids, or other devices. These could have been part of a "controlled demolition", which means a demolition that is planned and executed under supervision and control. I am not saying that thermite was not used, but only that, for all of the efforts (which have been ongoing since I invited him to join me as co-chair of Scholars) he has been pursuing since December 2005, I have seen no new experiemnts, no new hypotheses, no new discoveries, suggesting that he is involved in (what Imre Lakatos would call) a degenerating research program. The claim that his work is a "slam dunk" could only be made by someone who doesn't understand either the paper, the issues, or the science. Take a look. If the 9/11 community puts its faith in shoddy research and attempts to take legal action on that basis, we are going to lose all credibility. That is the outcome I would like to forestall. We are just beginning to figure out how all of this was done. There is no need to rush it. Certainly, Jones has not proven his own case! Thanks for asking, though. I took for granted that you would be familiar with our past exchanges. Certainly you should have read the paper you are commenting on. But commenting without reading, much less understanding, is the rule here, not the exception. If I had done no more than brief remarks on threads like this one, your ad hominem complaint would be well-founded. But whenever I post here, my comments are immediatey buried by the praetorian guard enforcing group think, which I also address in my piece on the manipulation of the 9/11 community above, where 9/11bogger is in the vanguard, in case you have not noticed. So I have resorted to brief comments in the subject line that can't be buried! I find very little here that is serious and quite a lot of pablum. Your post was refreshing, even if you should have known better! (My first book was dedicated to Karl Popper!) It at least suggests that you care about the issues, which is untrue of most of those who attack without understanding. The latest serious science on these subjects may be found at drjudywood.com, by the way. Good luck in pursuing the study of the greatest mass murder mystery in history.


share it

Prison planet is a great resource and yes, the Jones presentation should be shared readily without any strings

free links...

Jon here, co-founder of PNAC. Anyway, just wanted to direct everyone to this video's location on youtube; it's the footage that we shot. Hopefully it will be up on our www.pnacitizen.org site, but for now youtube will do...warning, long link here:


Glad everyone likes the footage!


Show "A "slam dunk", just like the war in Iraq!" by Jim Fetzer

What happened to the Digg icon?

I refreshed this page a few times, and it went from 600 Diggs to about 620 in two minutes. Now the Digg icon is gone, and there is just an "info" icon. Hope they're not tampering with it!!!!!!!!
"Peace comes from within. Do not seek it without." - Buddha
"What you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that you do it." - Gandhi
"The Sun never shined on a cause of greater worth." - Thomas Paine

it's still there for me..

it's still there for me.. and up to 675 diggs


It's back.
"Peace comes from within. Do not seek it without." - Buddha
"What you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that you do it." - Gandhi
"The Sun never shined on a cause of greater worth." - Thomas Paine

This is the slam dunk indeed!

Think of his work as analogous to DNA evidence....

How could a building collapse into dust full of microscopic perfect *SPHERES* (dust is generally irregularly shaped). The spheres are the condensate produced by thermate.

How could these spheres have *exactly* the elements produced by thermate?

This is indeed court-quality evidence for demolition using thermate.

These spheres are even seen in micrographs in government reports (as Jones says), but of course they did not analyze them.

The dust went everywhere. Thus the thermate evidence went everywhere with it, and is just waiting for analysis of any (and probably all) dust samples. (If anyone knows of more dust samples please contact Jones.)

We have the smoking gun, folks. There is no room left to refute this evidence, and irrational denial is now all that they have left.

I agree... but

I am reminded of the OJ trial, where the DNA evidence showed a 6 billion to one chance that anyone other than OJ did it. We all know what happened there. At this stage, it would be nice to at least GET a trial. Lets hope that when we do it doesn't turn into the same made-for-tv farse.

I rack my brain daily trying to figure out what could possibly be keeping the majority of the population happily asleep in their American Idol fantasy worlds, while th NWO is ushered in all around us.

Folks, let's not get carried away.

First of all, here's a link to the paper in question. I'm not sure why this post or the Prison Planet story didn't link to it.

"Revisiting 9/11/2001 -- Applying the Scientific Method "

And this is his basic conclusion:

"I will simply say in this paper that iron-aluminum rich spheres are seen in both the WTC dust
and in spherules produced in thermite-control reactions. Details of the spherules and comparisons are
beyond the scope of this paper but are available to me and our team of researchers, and will appear in a
forthcoming paper. We consider the information borne by these previously-molten microspheres
found in large numbers in the WTC dust, for they tell us much about what took place that remarkable
day in history."

In other words, Steven Jones is making no final conclusions, because as he makes clear, further study is required. This paper is presented as a preliminary examination of the evidence. While it is compelling, it is hardly a slam dunk, and isn't meant to be taken as such.

I know how difficult it can be to be patient. But this presentation should be really encouraging to us all that Steven Jones is getting close to writing a paper that might very well be the slam dunk we are all hoping for. The scientific process can be slow. But it is the care with which the evidence is examined that determines the strength of the conclusions that can be drawn. Its this very process that gives Steven Jones his authority on this matter.

Drawing conclusions from his preliminary findings may be unwise.

International Truth Movement

Professor Jones does offer at lease some "proof"

At 30:11 into his lecture, he has a brief humorous exchange with an audience member regarding the fact that "thermite" was used "on us" in the demolition of the WTC Towers on 9/11.

While I understand your caution that we be patient, his use of the word "proof" indicates that he has drawn at least "some conclusions". I'm listening now so I can't wait to hear what they are.

BTW, I don't know about anyone else, but quite frankly, my patience has just about run out...
"Cogito ergo sum"


Sure enough, Professor Jones offers some pretty strong "conclusions" at 31:45...

Re: Thermite, professor Jones states... "an insider... right, that got inside the building, and planted this material."

and at 49:12 he says...

"Now we have what I consider another smoking gun... sulphur and aluminum, that's the signature for thermate..."

That sounds pretty conclusive and "slam dunk" worthy to me my friend. Professor Jones goes on to explain that it is typical for scientist to talk about their data prior to actually publishing it. So this is the CONCLUSIVE data that will be officially published in his forthcoming empirical study.

I'm just saying... go on and get carried away, if you want to!

"Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free!"
-Jesus Christ
"Cogito ergo sum"


I was just officially stating that position. Its responsible and boring. I recognize that there are conclusions to be drawn from the preliminary findings, and I'm as ready to burst as any of us. Hey, its not like we're wrong on this. There is already ample analysis suggesting the very high likelihood, and even near certainty, of a controlled demolition.

But that research and the paper that they are still working on hold the promise of being a promotional bonanza on the order of LCFC. These new finding are very provocative, and certainly lend more credibility to the theory. But that paper really could shift the whole playing field in our favor. I can't wait to hear Gerald Posner talking about how the compression of the towers during collapse created high temperatures capable of melting the steel? And can you image for a minute someone of FOX News trying to make Jones and Janette look bad? They are just about the sweetest people in the world.

So I'm cheering for everything here. But I think that people should read his paper as I did, and would like to remind everyone that journalistic candor suggests that it is responsible to cite someone's work when offering an endorsement or critique. Sorry, had to get responsible and boring again there for a second. :)

International Truth Movement

Thermite Destruction Replicated in My Proposal

All the more reason to email All concerned parties to support my art project at Burning Man which will attempt to replicate the use of thermate to bring down large diameter steel frame support columns. Evidence from our TruthBurn project can then be compared to Dr. Jones' samples.

Glad to see you are still

Glad to see you are still planning on this project!
When is Burning Man anyway?

Don't shoot yourself in the foot.

I'm pretty sure we're talking about thermite/thermate in some combinations with other explosives. "Cutter charges", RDX... I'm not an expert on these things of course, but don't expect thermate alone to produce the desired result. There would have DEFINITELY been shaped charges used to produce what we saw at the WTC.
"Peace comes from within. Do not seek it without." - Buddha
"What you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that you do it." - Gandhi
"The Sun never shined on a cause of greater worth." - Thomas Paine

Show ""Consistent with" allows for ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATIONS!" by Jim Fetzer
Show "Fetzer...you're my favorite" by card51short
Show "His work is unscientific and undermines the search for truth!" by Jim Fetzer

NOT my favourite!

Fetzer...IMO, you have been exposed beyond a reasonable doubt to be a spy and saboteur. As this movement heats up, you might wish to reconsider the wisdom of continuing to hang around truthers.

@ Fetzer: For a bunch of people

that are too stupid to comprehend anything, as you like to paint all of us here, you do spend an astonishing amount of energy and time here trying to convince all of us that the Jones research is completely wrong, and that baseless theories provided by Wood are somehow more feasible than that which has physical evidence behind it. If we are so stupid then please leave. Why bother with us cretins?

for someone concerned with science and logic you really do make yourself sound like an idiot

And by the way: Nice interview with Killtown yesterday, you two take the cake for people who clearly have NO UNDERSTANDING of compressed digital video, and the anomolies contained within, with such anomolies being variable from viewpoint to viewpoint via differing sources. EVERYTHING killtown showed you has SIMPLE explanations in either digital video compression anomolies, and/or the processes of video editing techniques.

but you dont care about that, you care about sabotaging this movement with disinfo

Physics/Science/Mathematics do not lie, only people do.
9/11 was an INSIDE JOB

Al is not in steel....

"The spheres contained iron and aluminum, which would be expected in any steel sample......"

This statement is not true in any pragmatatic sense. 'Al' may be present in trace quantities --- NIST in NCSTAR1-3E chapter 4 has tables full of the chemical constituents of the steel from the towers (and they are in general agreement with what is expected in carbon steels). The HIGHEST concentration of Al in any of the steel analyzed is .12%, and the majority of the analyzed steel is < .05% for sure. Since steel is like >98% iron, then Al/Fe<< .12% for the steel in the WTC towers (at least those sampled by NIST).

From the two metallic spheres which have been publicly reported by Jones show Al/Fe ~ 20% and 40%. A specific test burn of thermate showed Al/Fe ~ 10% (changes in stoichiometry as well as spatial variances during a burn can/will change the relative abundances of Al & Fe proportions from sphere to sphere and sample vs control).

The need for more data is clear. Right now, the results are definitely compelling enough to further investigate, but the reported sampling size is *way* too small to be jumping to conclusions --- I really have no idea how much data he is currently sitting on. I know as an experimentalist, I guard my data with my life, literally --- reputations can be squashed by publicly releasing results without thoroughly verifying results. If it were me, I would not have even released the results he has already released until publication in a mainstream scientific journal especially considering the social environment surrounding 9/11.... so I can certainly understand why he may not be releasing *more* data 'hot off the press', so to speak.

An appreciable amount of Al content in a statistically significant number of samples is necessary to reasonably show that prozaic sources may not be plausible for the melting of significant quantities of steel ----

By the way, the Sulfur content is appreciable for sure: in the thermate (control) burn, S/Fe ~ 2.5%. Both measured spheres show S/Fe ~ 1.2%. NIST steel samples all show S/Fe<.04%.


by Chris Rose

What... I get voted down for changing my mind?

That's kinda funny!
"Cogito ergo sum"


New Poll has 9/11 truth related question:


From Pew Research:

"Yet only one in four consider the U.S. war on terrorism a sincere attempt to curtail international terror. Only 40 percent said they believe Arab men carried out the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001."

Not polling all of us

It appears from the article that that poll dealt solely with the views of U.S. Muslims.

Mr. Jones

Lots of respect for this man.

Thermite Cutters

I'm very interested in these things...

Made by these guys...

Bush Authorizes New Covert Action Against Iran

Controlled Demolition

I don't know what the argument is. It is obvious that controlled demolition was used. You can see that the Towers were brought down by some sort of explosive devices. You can easily see the flashes as the explosives go off. Just check out any videos of the towers as they collapse. For me it is a dead issue. It has been resolved years ago in my mind.

You are right

It's fine for Jones to do this research but it should be treated very carefully by the truthing community. There is really no need to prove CD with this level of detail, since the facts are pretty obvious. Common sense is really all you need, unless you're Noam Chomsky in which case you might need to study civil engineering for two years. For truthers to promote science that they don't understand completely is very dangerous because any errors or misinterpretations however benign can be used to accuse truthers of not knowing what they're talking about. There's an old rule of thumb in chess--when you are ahead, simplify, when you are behind, complicate. Since we are way ahead on all manner of facts we really should keep it simple. Don't think for one second that this movement depends on or needs Steven Jones. Any honest person can see what happened to those buildings. To raise the issue to the level of microspheres and what not is to needlessly complicate our case. I am not ripping on him personally, professionally, or in any other way. I am saying that these studies should for now be taken with a grain of salt--the key issue now is to spread a simple and powerful message that resonates with people's common sense. The speed, the huge dust clouds starting from the top (i.e. not enough gravitational energy yet) and the molten steel are perfectly simple concepts that most people will grasp--believe me, the average person on the street is quite capable of this level of critical thinking (unless they don't want to be).

On a more general point, ALWAYS beware of efforts to lead us in a certain direction or down a certain path. It doesn't matter how trustworthy you think someone is--they could be wrong. Alex Jones in fact HAS been wrong so it's not even an argument about his intentions. Be your own truther! Don't follow anyone anywhere. See where people want to lead you, consider all options, then make up your own mind. Every movement in history has been infiltrated and usually neutralized by means of false leaders preaching unity, peer pressure, and all manner of manipulation. I don't mean be a hermit and contrarian all the time, just keep that BS detector on HIGH at all times, and strive to think as independently as possible. Don't let anyone twist your arm--if someone puts pressure on you--ask yourself WHY they might be doing it.


Real Truther a.k.a. Verdadero Verdadero

WTCdemolition.com - Harvard Task Force


I agree with Real Truther 100%

Lets keep it simple and lets not put all our eggs in one basket. 9/11 has so many smoking guns they could fill all of ground zero with them. The way I see it we should concentrate on convincing the sleep-walking general public (who have been brainwashed for years by the media) to look into the matter with open minds. This is the hard part. Last night I listened to the Mike Malloy show on Nova radio. Mike was sick so someone else took his place. I can't remember his name but he had a woman named Sophia from 9/11 mysteries on as a guest. The whole show was devoted to 9/11 truth! Everyone who called in doubted the official story. To a person, they all considered 9/11 an inside job. The main thing they talked about was the denial quite a few Americans have about 9/11. It is so hard for the average person to accept the truth. It destroys their entire belief system. I know this to be true in my case. I was sick for a week when I found out. It meant I had to throw out everything I believed in all my life. It wasn't easy but I got through it and if I can do it so can anyone else. We have our work cut out for us but we must continue spreading the truth. The future of this planet depends on it. By the way here is a link to 9/11 mysteries. http://www.911weknow.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&...

This isn't "proof"

Once again, the Alex Jones camp is getting ahead of itself.

Every time a new revelation comes forward, they leap on it a little too enthusiastically.

Don't get me wrong, this is great stuff and I'm looking forward to seeing where it leads, but I wish PrisonPlanet would stop getting my hopes up with these types of sensationalist headlines.

Show "Shouldn't ignore Wood/Fetzer criticism" by dogster

It will be on youtube /

It will be on youtube / google soon if it isn't already. Prisonplanet uploads most of their material there for free, but it is lower quality than the files available via subscription. It's 6 bucks a month, well worth it for all the video and audio highlights there.


A flaming battle has erupted on Shoutwire.com when this article got shouted to frontpage:


Feel free to come to the discussion.




Help me shout 9/11 articles on:


Sorry for my ADD...

This may have been explained earlier. But why would workers be cutting steel beams at an angle to load up and ship off on trucks after the "collapse"?

Seems to me, that these diagonal cuts are the result of planned CD prior to the collapse.

"A patriot must be ready to defend his country against his government" - Edward Abbey