Jim Hoffman

So, where are those 9/11 whistleblowers?

70-page essay by that title is available as PDF, advertised here:
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/roberts/index.html

The description text and contents (below!) pretty much give away the argument to anyone who knows the issues and can use logic to reconstruct what he's saying, based on the issues raised. Nevertheless, you may decide that you'd like to read what looks like a well-organized treatment and give the guy a deserved $9.50.

I think it looks very interesting.

TEXT:

Where Are the 9/11 Whistleblowers?
Answering a Common Objection to Theories That the September 11 Attacks Were an Inside Job

A 9-11 Research PDF Essay
by Gregg Roberts, Associate Editor (of http://wtc7.net )

Note: Since there have actually been many whistleblowers -- just no one who credibly claims to be one of the perpetrators -- the present title is something of a misnomer. (...)

Introduction

Q & A with Jim Hoffman and Steven Jones

Video of the question and answer session following Jim Hoffman's presentation at UC Berkeley on November 11, 2006.

Professor Steven Jones joins Hoffman in addressing questions from the audience.

Part One

Part Two

A Critical Plea To Dylan Avery, And A Call To Action

I had a very bad feeling last night about the upcoming debate on Amy Goodman's show, and 9/11 Truth in general. Although I couldn't quite pinpoint it at the time, now it seems as plain as day. Simply put, The Movement is currently coming under a most vicious, strategic attack by the official storytellers and the powers that be. Let me repeat myself: ladies and gentlemen, make no mistake about it: WE ARE UNDER ATTACK.

This all began over the past couple of weeks, as the disinfo regarding no planes at the WTC started to appear en masse on this site. I've been a regular visitor and contributor to 911 Blogger for a number of months now and I've never seen so much organized commentary on these fringe, unscientific topics prior to this recent period of time. In addition, The Movement has been receiving much press coverage over the past month or so- the vast majority of it highly unflattering and unhelpful.

Virtually every single instance of mainstream media coverage that has covered so-called "conspiracy theories" regarding 9/11, follows this modus operandi:

  • first and foremost, ignore and prevent any mention, whatsoever, of WTC Building 7
  • never debate or give credence, or acceptance, to any of the skeptical points raised, no matter what

Jim Hoffman rebuts the NIST - FAQ

NIST's World Trade Center FAQ

A Reply to the National Institute for Standards and Technology's Answers to Frequently Asked Questions

by Jim Hoffman

Introduction

On August 30, 2006, the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) posted on their website a list of fourteen frequently asked questions (FAQ) and answers to them. NIST should be commended for at least addressing a number of the serious questions that have been raised with regard to its investigation. However, NIST's new FAQ avoids answering the central charges of its most visible critique, Building a Better Mirage.

  • That NIST fails to support it's key assertion that "collapse initiation" automatically leads to "global collapse".
  • That NIST uses the diversionary tactic of describing some events -- such as the airliner crashes -- in great detail, while almost completely avoiding the core question of what brought the Towers down.
  • That NIST's report is internally inconsistent, supposing that steel columns were heated to temperatures hundreds of degrees in excess of the maximum temperatures indicated by its steel samples.
  • That NIST fails to substantiate it's implied claim that its computer models predicted "collapse initiation".
  • That NIST fails to even address most of the features of the Towers' destruction that are apparently unique to controlled demolitions.

Jim Hoffman shreds NIST's latest release

NIST's World Trade Center FAQ
A Reply to the National Institute for Standards and Technology's
Answers to Frequently Asked Questions
by Jim Hoffman

Introduction

On August 30, 2006, the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) posted on their website a list of fourteen frequently asked questions (FAQ) and answers to them. NIST should be commended for at least addressing a number of the serious questions that have been raised with regard to its investigation. However, NIST's new FAQ avoids answering the central charges of its most visible critique, Building a Better Mirage.

* That NIST fails to support it's key assertion that "collapse initiation" automatically leads to "global collapse".

* That NIST uses the diversionary tactic of describing some events -- such as the airliner crashes -- in great detail, while almost completely avoiding the core question of what brought the Towers down.

* That NIST's report is internally inconsistent, supposing that steel columns were heated to temperatures hundreds of degrees in excess of the maximum temperatures indicated by its steel samples.

* That NIST fails to substantiate it's implied claim that its computer models predicted "collapse initiation".

* That NIST fails to even address most of the features of the Towers' destruction that are apparently unique to controlled demolitions.

[SNIP]

Continued at link.

Jim Hoffman in Kansas City - 9/2/2006

SCIENCE APPLIED TO THE WTC COLLAPSES

9/11 Researcher Jim Hoffman Speaking to Kansas City
Saturday Sept. 2, at The Uptown Theater, 3700 Broadway, Kansas City
Times: 1:00-2:30 AND 7-9 PM, Admission $8.00 (two differing presentations)
Information, flyers and publicity resources can be found here.

On September 2, Kansas City's Uptown Theater is proud to be presenting Science Applied to the WTC Collapses by independent research scientist Jim Hoffman. This event will examine the official explanations of the collapses of the World Trade Center Twin Towers and Building 7, with special attention to the NIST Final Report on the collapses of the World Trade Center Towers. There will be a moderated Q&A period.

Jim Hoffman is a research scientist, mathematician, author and inventor. Hoffman's work has been featured in articles in Science News, Scientific American, and Nature, and he has co-authored papers in Science and Macromolecules. Hoffman's work in applying scientific visualization to minimal surface geometry was instrumental in the discovery of the first new examples of complete, finite, embedded minimal surfaces in over two hundred years. Hofffman is the creator of websites 911Review.com, Science911.org, 911Research.com, WTC7.net, and co-author of Waking Up from Our Nightmare.