New article at the Journal of 9/11 Studies

A new article published by the Journal of 9/11 Studies argues that the evidence supporting the official story of the destruction of the World Trade Center is so weak that the standards for expert testimony established by the U.S. Supreme Court, if applied competently, would exclude this evidence from the courtroom. The article is entitled “The Cause of the Destruction of the World Trade Center Buildings on September 11, 2001 and the Admissibility of Expert Testimony Under the Standards Developed in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceutical, Inc.” The author of the article is Stevan Looney, J.D. He is a trial lawyer and practices primarily in the courts of New Mexico and the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico.

Follow this link for the new article.

The speed of deciet [2.25s.FreeFall]

Very good work.
Thank you Douglas Looney.
I am thinking you are correct in your statement that to your knowledge "no court has conducted a Daubert hearing and considered the relevancy and reliability of any expert evidence on either side of the question of causation in connection with the destruction of WTC 1, 2 and 7".

Given the findings the process would ultimately reach, we would be living in a very different world had there been.

Adding to the overall hypothesis - to be tested by same/similar methodology; that 911 is a conspiracy including the courts and justice/legal system of the US of Amercia [ ]