9/11 Soiree in LA with McKinney, Gage and Jones; plus some notes

A great event came together very well Saturday evening, 23 Feb 2008, under the able leadership of Julia and Kristine (sp?) of KPFK - LA. Julia provided introductions followed by Richard Gage for about 35 minutes, then I spoke for about an hour, followed by Richard once more... Then Cynthia McKinney gave a powerful, motivating talk -- she is running for US President in the Green Party (USA). She is very 9/11-savvy. Finally, Q&A. It was fun -- a lot of energy at the meeting.

I presented new SEM/EDS data on the red/gray chips -- and explained further research that is being planned and done to finish this up. (Hopefully the video will be available soon.) I also spoke about areas where I/we actually agree with NIST scientists and engineers, e.g.,

1. The "pancake theory of collapse" -- has been analyzed and dismissed by NIST in their reports. For example, in an FAQ released by NIST in Aug 2006, they write:

"NIST's findings do not support the "pancake theory" of collapse, which is premised on a progressive failure of the floor systems in the WTC towers."

2. NIST rejected the false idea that the Towers were "hollow tubes" with the weight of the floors supported only by the perimeter columns. Quoting again from NIST:

NIST: "The core columns were designed to support approximately 50% of the gravity loads." [NIST, 2005] "The hat-truss tied the core to the perimeter walls of the towers, and thus allowed the building to withstand the effects of the aircraft impact and subsequent fires for a much longer time—enabling large numbers of building occupants to evacuate safely." [Sunder, 2006]
"The core of the building, which carried primarily gravity loads, was made up of a mixture of massive box columns made from three-story long plates, and heavy rolled wide-flange shapes." [JoM, 2007]

3. NIST also rejected the notion that the WTC fires melted structural steel:
"In no instance did NIST report that steel in the WTC towers melted due to the fires. The melting point of steel is about 1,500 degrees Celsius (2,800 degrees Fahrenheit). Normal building fires and hydrocarbon (e.g., jet fuel) fires generate temperatures up to about 1,100 degrees Celsius (2,000 degrees Fahrenheit). NIST reported maximum upper layer air temperatures of about 1,000 degrees Celsius (1,800 degrees Fahrenheit) in the WTC towers (for example, see NCSTAR 1, figure 6-36)." [NIST, 2006]
"The initial jet fuel fires themselves lasted at most a few minutes". [NIST, 2005; p. 179] "At any given location, the duration of [air, not steel] temperatures near 1,000 C was about 15 min to 20 min. The rest of the time, the calculated temperatures were near 500C or below." [NIST, 2005, p. 127]

4. NIST: "This letter is in response to your April 12, 2007 request for correction… we are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse." (Letter from NIST to us, pub'd in the Journal of 9/11 Studies.)
Shows remarkable and commendable candor!

I urged NIST to "open the door" and actually LOOK for residues of explosives/cutter charges (especially nano-thermite) -- as we have done.

I think there is an opportunity here -- Congress charged NIST to determine "why and how" the Towers AND WTC 7 collapsed. If NIST and Congress will just do their jobs -- and we stand ready to help! (See, e.g., Journalof911Studies.com .) At the same time, we're not holding our breaths -- our independent investigation of the causes of the WTC destructions is proceeding quite well (thank you!).

There is more, of course. (For example, I made brief mention of "Speculating Hecklers" and while I was thinking of certain posters at JREF in particular when I did that slide, I did not mention any names... just a warning about such types.)

A sad added note: I have looked very much forward to going to the 9/11 Conferences in Australia in a few weeks, but my wife's back and leg condition following a car accident some time ago has significantly worsened lately and it is unlikely that we (or I) will go to Australia. Medical advice is that she take it very easy on her leg and back for a while (at least). However, I told the organizers (great group of people) that I will prepare a video that will take attendees into our laboratories where we do studies on the WTC dust (etc.). I expect a very successful conference in Australia.

Thanks For the Update, Dr Jones

I had the good fortune some years ago to briefly speak with Cynthia McKinney. She is a very intelligent woman and will bring much to 9/11 issues.

I was curious about what speed were the steel columns/beams that are visible in videos being ejected from the imploding towers were moving at? Is it possible for gravity to generate sufficient force to propel them insuch a fashion?

Thank You Prof Jones for the

Thank You Prof Jones for the update. Please tell your wife we wish her a speedy recovery, when back and leg goes out at the same time that hurts, most of us have been there now and then.

We can't wait to see

the latest info on the red/gray chips. Best of luck with that research.

Glad to see

that you are recognizing some of the good work of NIST, seeing that the American taxpayer paid out the gazoo for all that work. The pressure you are applying to them is rescuing some of that investment from the dustbin of history.

As far as the steel columns are concerned, if it is any use, I took a few pictures of the deformed steel beams that are part of the 9-11 exhibit at the New York State Museum in Albany. You can see them at www.petersnewyork.com.

building 7

I am very anxious to see how the building 7 report comes out; will scientific accuracy or political correctness win? I imagine there will just be infinite delays.

I hope you post your video on 911 blogger so we can all enjoy it.

Thanks for comments. The

Thanks for comments.
The horizontal speed of the beams is particularly interesting -- sufficient to reach the Deutsche Bank bldg for instance. Don't have that I my fingertips... I think Dr. Grabbe calculated; see his papers in the Journalof911Studies.com.

Whatever NIST does with WTC 7, you can be assured we will be watching. NIST had a great deal of criticism for their Towers report, from the 911 fact-seeking movement and from others.