Jones Replies to Reynolds and Wood

And once again, a 9/11 Activist and Investigator has to take time away from investigating and exposing the true perpetrators in order to respond to attacks.

Download a 500K preliminary report by Steven Jones in MS Word format here:

http://www.911podcasts.com/files/documents/JonesReplytoReynolds-Wood.doc

A notable quote from this document:

I could go on, but the fact is that as editor of the Journalof911Studies.com, I have invited Morgan Reynolds and whoever he wishes to join him, and another author to write papers on BOTH sides of this issue – did REAL planes hit the Twin WTC Towers, or not? Both sides agreed. In this way, readers will have two peer-reviewed scholarly papers side by side, both confronting the evidences presented above and whatever other evidences they wish to bring in – and then the reader can judge for himself or herself. And that is MUCH better than ad hominem arguments – it is the way of modern science.

I couldn't agree more. Thanks to PhrankM for sending this in.

File Doesn't Exist...

Personally, I think Professor Jones should do his best not to respond to attacks. They only bring more attacks. Like feeding the trolls...

i agree with you on that. i

i agree with you on that. i think we should all take that advice and ignore the Nicos of the world. its so hard though, hahahaha.

This is really too bad. I

This is really too bad. I couldn't care less about what Reynolds says, but for Judy Wood to have piled onto this attack on Jones and the "no planes" theory is unfortunate. It's clear to me from the original 'critique' that there is a lot of ego involved here on the part of those attacking Dr. Jones.

Check it, now Nico's

Check it, now Nico's misrepresenting the crap out of the blogger;

"At 911blogger: Suspicions about Prof. Jones grow..."
http://911blogger.com/node/2303

I don't know about everyone else, but I am personally sick of this guy and the bullshit he brings here. "no planes" got shown up for the impossible lunacy it is yesterday;

"no planes" debunked
http://911blogger.com/node/2285

And as for Reynolds, well this guy is ex admin, and for a while I thought he might have been cool. But if you remember he came on to the scene chatting some kind of sh!t about the planes. But now he's a certified "no brainier", and the biggest "no brainier" of all can't even defend a 5 minuet debunking of his "research". So its safe to say Reynolds in pushing no planes is pushing something so incredibly absurd that he's either got intensely poor reasoning skills, or he's dinsfo. Either way these attacks on Dr Jones are despicable from my perspective. And if Reynolds is still content with attempting to smear and sabotage some of the best research ever produced into the collapse of the towers. Then he should go look for another job at the Whitehouse, perhaps a position like toilet cleaner, and get the f*ck out of the truth movement!

Nico is getting on my last nerve...

Nico is getting on my last nerve. The guy is spreading lies that make him liable as an accessory-after-the-fact to mass murder. Hope he likes prison.

if you are reading this,

if you are reading this, keep up the good work Jones, the REAL work of 9/11 truth. most of us have your back completely.

Dr. Jones response can be found on st911.org now

The link to his response is:

http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/JonesReplytoReynolds-Wood.doc

This paper can be found under the articles section of st911.org

Thanks for the heads up!

Thanks for the heads up!

Link is fixed...

Link should work now, sorry about that...

Morgan Reynolds is DISINFO agent.

I read Reynold's attack on Jones and I thought it was way out of line. He attacks Jones for straying from the physics in his slides, them blasts him for not having an opinion on the Pentagon planes. It is mostly ad hominem

Let Jones do the physics and leave the political analysis to those who are expert, like Tarpley.

I also remember recently Reynolds called in to Fetzer's radio show when Jones was the guest and started arguing about molten aluminum! The economist arguing with the physicist about the emissivity of molten aluminum? Give me a break. That is when I realized that Reynolds was a disinfo agent.

Peace.
Matt
matt@9eleven.info

It's apparent now.

Reynolds and Wood have just lost a huge amount of credibility in my mind. From their method of personal attacks in their latest paper, to a number of factual errors and inconsistancies, and a clearly unecessary invocation of exotic processes (metal ablation/vaporization) which is in contradiction with public video. Their paper takes a totally unscientific approach.

Frankly I'm shocked they would put something like this out. Oh well, it's their reputation they are destroying.

such a shame...looks like

such a shame...looks like Morgan's being left on the cutting room floor for the Final Cut.

can't we all just get along?

Dylan...

getting along would certainly be nice. I don't get it... Why would they drop from writing a good quality scientific paper, to making a paper which seems intent on slandering another scientist. A good round of peer review would have cleaned up most if not all of their factual problems, but they still would have needed to change their personal attack tactics. I just don't get what they are trying to acheive!? Surely they can see that this type of paper reduces their credibility...

Did you have a good interview or footage with Reynolds and/or Wood which you were initially planning on including in the final cut?

Many Birds, So Few Stones.

dylan: You might 'say' in voice-over, (only if you agree) that he's being cut for his divisiveness as an over ridding concern for people who are working very hard to flush truth from disinfo.... The disifo is meant to sow infighting... by which Mr. Reynolds (no-matter the validity of his work or otherwise)... is doing more damage than what simple counter-claims should cause.

and rightly so!

This is relieving to hear, Dylan.

Somebody needs to do a documentary solely on the disinformation strategies and personalities in the 9/11 Truth movement. I saw Barry talking about it in the LC Final Cut footage- is discussing disinfo a big part of the Final Cut?

It would be very helpful for helping the lay viewer to follow who the various misinfo / disinfo parties are- what their arguments are- and how they distract from the Truth orthodoxy.

That's where this disinfo creep belongs

On the cutting room floor, in the trash, down the toilet.

when I read reynolds paper I was shocked at the tone

I couldn't understand why he was attacking with such absurd arguements jones' work, but it is suspect.

Anyone who wanted to be a Bush economist is suspect to me!

Anyone who was a Bush team economist has serious NeoCon tendencies & can not be trusted, IMO.

Now he is attacking Dr. Jones of all people? Reynolds is acting like a shill & has zero credibility with me!

Reynolds as the 'critic' of

Reynolds as the 'critic' of the 9/11 truth movement would be no problem, if this were like a commentary on any other organization (like the Bush admin.). But 9/11 truth has suffered enough attacks and ridicule from all over the media already, and it doesn't have a critical mass large enough to ensure survival. Chances are still high that it will all end in an infinite controvery, like JFK.

Maybe, speaking for Reynolds, he's just an old nay-sayer, criticising everything, first Bush, then 9/11, and now folks of 9/11 truth.

I disagree - 911 has far

I disagree - 911 has far reaching impact and is touching just about everyone on the planet today in one form or another. There is a psychological (fear) hold on the US population, and is being medicated by the lies/bias/ommisions of the MSM, but the control is not as intense around the world.

9/11 Truth will not die, and will only get stronger with each and every day.

Once a reasonable person is exposed to the truth they become inoculated to its lie.

A couple weeks ago I saw a

A couple weeks ago I saw a Steven Jones hit piece on the Fintan Dunne (very probable agent provocateur/disinfo agent) web site that was so vicious I don't know how they could possibly expect anyone to take them seriously. Now Reynolds and Wood are going after Jones. They claimed that glowing orange, molten metal in several photos they provided, is aluminum, and that Jones's claims that aluminum does not glow bright orange when molten are incorrect. Turns out that the man who took the photos for the book he published said the the molten metal in the photos is NOT ALUMINUM BUT MOLTEN IRON. Seems Reynolds and Wood need to get their facts straight. An odd pattern seems to be emerging.

they have to attack the most credible information

it's the only way for them to obfuscate the truth.

Jones right on about no-plane

S.Jones said it exactly correct: The best thing to do with no-plane is not to exclude it, it is one possibility, a very improbable one, but as long as someone can really make a convincing essay about it - ok. As we know, Nico & Co. have failed to make no-plane something 'convincing'. Instead they're accusing you of censorship, and narrow-mindedness from the first moment, and host thousands of web-pages that all have no smoking gun whatsoever in them.
(e.g. missing wing in 1 zoomed frame of thousands. likely answer: MPEG compression)

good analysis

After wasting so much bandwidth on no-planes trashing it does boild down to that: the no-planers just don't make a convincing case. I disagree though that 911 truth doesn't have critical mass. Obvious critical mass is different from actual critical mass, which is basically a point of no return. I think we've reached the point of no return--I say this having spoken to many different people in the streets who come from all walks of life. 9/11 ain't no ordinary rumor mill subject. Of course one could argue that in the strict sense, critical mass is a function of laws of nature which don't change, whereas the rules of engagement in infowars can and do change. Nevertheless I think that despite being more complex, there are certain bounds even on things like the rules of infowars. You can in theory go beyond a point where no effort by the hiders of information can stem the flow of truth because at some point any action they take increases their own visibility--that's been the point of the real truth movement--to inch forward so that the responses available to the perps are limited by every bit of growing awareness. All good truther should keep this in mind and try to stay three steps ahead of the perps and their allied unindictable co-conspirators. Chess is a good exercise for this kind of thinking that is necessary, but other strategy games, especially many out of europe are not just a lot of fun but also good for honing copmpetitive strategy and understanding of game theory, which is used by the elites in their schemes. Engage it on as many levels as you can--become the resistance, don't just contribute to it. We who know have to help those who don't not just by direct confrontation and logic but also by subtle shifts in our own behavior and values. There is nothing that can stop a large number of intelligent independent agents from accomplishing whatever they set out to do, except a larger group of intelligent agents. The most successful conspiracies are never written down or even spoken of directly if possible. They work because people join it without having to ever explicitly acknowledge that it exists. Think about these things--it will make sense.
_

"Among the 'spider-man' skeptics are those who claim that no human can shoot web and stick to walls... They conveniently ignore the fact that he was bitten by a radioactive spider."

Daily Bugle editorial debunking the claims of spider-man deniers

Greg is lying. There are

Greg is lying.

There are tons of discrepancies in incoming simulated flight paths, geographical directions, CGI sizes (even when Towers have the same size! See VH1 vs CNN), CGI shape, CGI behavior, LIVE broadcast contradictions with NON-LIVE footage, Speed, Timecodes, Soundtracks, Hitting Angle, contradictions with amateur footage, furthermore all physical law violations and endless other oddities (CGIs coming from nowhere, no aircrafts at all visible on amateur footage, CGI nose coming out of building) ...

This no-planes @ WTC is such obvious fraud!

Reynolds/Wood said: "When others challenge how aluminum wide-body Boeings can fly through steel-concrete walls, floors and core without losing a part, Jones does not turn to physics for refutation but continues to cite eyewitnesses and videos, thereby backing the OGCT.”

People, this is high school physics! It is called "normal force" and it also allows a soft lead bullet to blow a hole through a steel plate & a paper straw in a tornado to penetrate 10" into a tree!

Since Reynolds & Wood don't even understand high school physics, I'd must conclude they are frauds.

And it doesn't matter if

And it doesn't matter if there were planes or not. We most agree that the planes that crashed weren't the original airliners, but had been swapped (Op. Northwoods). And as far as the collapse of the towers is concerned, the official cause of it is mainly the fire, and the damage caused by the impact of the Boeings is acknowledged by the no-planers too, being from some other explosion.

- So why the heated debate about it? It won't help anyone, it will just divide us.

sure, instead of debating on these forums

We should warn everyone we talk to about this and other dubious examples of "9/11 truth" I've been doing this for a while and when people hear that I'm not peddling no-planes, they actually start to realize the extent of the shenanigans at work in trying to confuse and distract them--it can work to our advantage as long as we stay on message--no-planes people aren't convincing many people if any, and they do not represent anywhere near a siginificant number of OT skeptics. Period. End of discussion of no-planes! :)

_

"Among the 'spider-man' skeptics are those who claim that no human can shoot web and stick to walls... They conveniently ignore the fact that he was bitten by a radioactive spider."

Daily Bugle editorial debunking the claims of spider-man deniers

Reynolds is right that the

Reynolds is right that the 'planes' were just a damned SMOKESCREEN for a much deeper conspiracy to blow up the WTC. If he doesn't agree then that starting in-fighting about whether the smokescreen was 'real' or just on TV-images, that this in-fighting is more harmful than it helps, and wants to fight to the blood for it, then he's disinfo.

Ah, no. Dr. Jones is NOT disinfo.

Dr. Jones is NOT disinfo.

ummmm... where is your evidence?

where?

Notice how Reynolds states: "wide-body Boeings" as fact

Reynolds/Wood state: "When others challenge how aluminum wide-body Boeings can fly through steel-concrete walls,...

Notice how Reynolds/Wood try to conclude for all of us that the planes were "wide-body Boeings"! What about swapped drones?

I feel bad for Alex Jones,

I feel bad for Alex Jones, Prof Jones and William Rodriguez taking time out to have to address the no plane theories.
The no planes belief is like some mentally unstable guy on the street corner with a big sign that says "Did the moon landing and holocaust happen?". You kind of feel bad for him, because you know *he* knows he's full of crap on his view, but that he's pushed his theory so much he can't back peddle now.

At this point I think the few no planers making a stink no they have not one shred of evidence, yet have ostracized themselves so far that there is no turning back for them.

I hate to say it, but people who think the thousands of people who heard and saw the plane hit in person is "fake", and that "sh ape chargers" made the shape of the plane have no business in the 9/11 truth movement whatsoever.

Respectfully...

"We most agree that the planes that crashed weren't the original airliners, but had been swapped (Op. Northwoods)"

Respectfully, I don't think we most(ly) agree with this proposition. I think a lot of people in the Truth movement trust- and there are sound reasons to believe- that the original planes hit the towers.

Plane-swapping creates many more risks- and seems to offer few tangible new rewards.

I'll buy that the orginal planes hit WTC also, but...

I'll accept that the original airliners may have hit. But could be swapped drones, or no passenger flights to begin with, just drones--less to go wrong with no real passenger flights, just remote some drones into the WATCH.

Keep in mind they were prepared to do such treachery 45 years ago as clearly spelled out in Operation Northwoods.

Sorry, WTC not WATCH

Sorry, WTC not WATCH (loosing my mind).

don't forget the fake

don't forget the fake cell-phone calls

Betty Ong call

I've listened to the Betty Ong call many times. It is absolutely NOT coming from one of the "hijacked" airliners on 9/11!!! It is fake.

Respect noted, opinions not

disinfo agent said: Respectfully, I don't think we most(ly) agree with this proposition. I think a lot of people in the Truth movement trust- and there are sound reasons to believe- that the original planes hit the towers.

Plane-swapping creates many more risks- and seems to offer few tangible new rewards.
.............................
I disgres on both counts - that the majority of truther disbelieve the plane swap scenario, and that swaps create "more" problems.

Plane swaps remove many, many problems, as they place all aircraft in the total control of the Perps. Anyone who believes the Perps could hinge their success on the unlikely success of 4 simultaneous hijackings that morning is not going to run any of MY intel ops.

Finding out what happened to

Finding out what happened to the passengers and the answers to what really happened is one big motivation for 9/11 truth. Only getting this case all the way to the top news stories will get us the answers.

"Respectfully, I don't think

"Respectfully, I don't think we most(ly) agree with this proposition."

Someone needed to write that. :)

Yet another lie. Military

Yet another lie.

Military radar proves, that both potential stand-ins for "11" and "175" had been too far away at time of both hits.

Supporter of the RC theory therefore couldn't explain yet, where their alleged switched planes did come from.
They also continue to ignore violations of physical law when aircraft butters into the south tower (as seen on non live footage).

There is no violation of

There is no violation of physical law.

And yes, I have an engineering degree.

Micahyah is another

Micahyah is another magician, which allows aircrafts entering into buildings like butter, wings which do no break apart and walls which do not crumble.

Your degree was probably bought in Disneyland or Jurassic Park.

No, you just don't

No, you just don't understand basic physics. Someone just put up a good example, of launching a water balloon through a garage door.

Is this impossible because the garage door is a stronger material than the water balloon?

What you call "basic

What you call "basic physics" is also called common sense.
Planes frequently crash into buildings, mountains, streets but don't vapourize into nothing.

Slowing down the video frames also reveals that the alleged real nose should have compressed the rest of the airplane's structure as it hit. Yet we see the aircraft go into the building as if the structure is immune to the laws of physics.

The walls furthermore do not crumble as seen here in a loop from another non-live footage:
http://911closeup.com/nico/secondhit_nocrumble_loop.swf

Your 'baloon example' furthermore has zero to do with what we're talking about, therefore i don't see the importance to response to this distraction.

"Slowing down the video

"Slowing down the video frames also reveals that the alleged real nose should have compressed the rest of the airplane's structure as it hit. Yet we see the aircraft go into the building as if the structure is immune to the laws of physics."

No, you see what you would expect to see with the amount of mass involved and the speed at which that mass is moving.

Most planes crashing into buildings aren't going anywhere near that speed, which makes all the difference.

Another example:

Why did Japan use the strategy of kamikaze? Wouldn't all the planes bounce off the boats harmlessly? Using a plane as a missile is physically impossible right?

LOL

Show me another video of a

Show me another video of a plane hitting a building at 500 mph and you might be able to prove your point. Otherwise just shut up...

Precisely--normal force = mass times acceleration

Obviously the perps were going to infiltrate the movement early on, and while there may be more, Reynolds and this Wood woman seem to fit the bill. Their tactics are so aobvious as to be kind of pathetic, though we shouldn't let that make us complacent. Basically we have to not make fun of the no-planers per se, but of anyone with the gall or ignorance to claim that no-planes is in any way representative of 9/11 truth. That way poeple will see the obvious trick and again, as I mentioned above, their tactics will turn against them by bringing attention to their methods, sloppy as they are. Another reason why I think we've reached critical mass--this no-planes gambit is very foolhardy on their parts--it may not be the best they have, but it sure seems they think more highly of it than is warranted. That's very comforting to a truther. :)
_

"Among the 'spider-man' skeptics are those who claim that no human can shoot web and stick to walls... They conveniently ignore the fact that he was bitten by a radioactive spider."

Daily Bugle editorial debunking the claims of spider-man deniers

more blind assuptions, not looking at facts

how could you be a truther?

HANG ON HANG ON!!

Aluminum Glows By
Judy Wood and Michael Zebuhr
March 1, 2006
http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/ArticlAluminumGlows_1Mar06.html

Hang on hang on wait a minuet!!!! If Reynolds and Wood think that shit's aluminium from the plane! Then how in the flying 767 F*CK can they argue that no planes hit the towers? LOL WHAT ASSCLOWNS!

ROTFL

True

Also

If im not mistaken it takes something in excess of 1221 degrees F to melt Aluminum, also in order to see Aluminum "glowing" such as this wouldn't they have to heat it WAY past its melting point?

How did this aluminum attain such high heat and only do so in small areas, because clearly no such high temp existed over the whole 2-4 floor areas affected.

Sounds like Thermate to me.

Well YEAH, there's THAT...

nice catch!

_

"Among the 'spider-man' skeptics are those who claim that no human can shoot web and stick to walls... They conveniently ignore the fact that he was bitten by a radioactive spider."

Daily Bugle editorial debunking the claims of spider-man deniers

Probably because they're

Probably because they're hinging their disinformation lunacy campaign on the hopes that any people who read their nonsense -- and fall for it -- are going to be of a too minimal intelligence to automatically be able to see the obvious, direct contradiction that you just pointed out lol :)

DBLS, what you wrote is actually the only argument -- or point -- needed to completely debilitate the Reynolds/Judy disinformation piece. Unless they try to flip it a different way. But I won't write what I mean, in case either of them -- or any of their alLIES -- should happen to read this. Don't need to feed them ideas to help them try to resuscitate their already defeated campaign lol

LOL!

LOL!

DBLS, That's awesome, you

DBLS,

That's awesome, you gotta pass that along to Jones, Fetzer, etc.

CGI planes, yet aluminum is pouring out the building from real planes.

The argument cancels itself out as NONSENSICAL

LOLOLOL!

VERY GOOD POINT!

VERY GOOD POINT!

ROTFL

:)))

cb... where are you?

I believe that Bush is

I believe that Bush is responsible for 9/11.

People in the real world will not stand near me because of the smell.

The 9/11 Cold War begins?

Each seems to have a researched put-down of one of the other's key talking points. Diametrically-opposed leaders of the Truth Movement, possibly destined to permanently damage each other's credibility, or at least prevent the other from clearly aligning all members, resulting in total polarization of sides.

I'm shocked.

Yeah, but Reynolds/Wood is obvious bullshit

As this very thread demonstrates, Reynolds/Wood are full of shit. So Dr. Jones is just cleaning house.

Anonymous is a disinfo agent

proof: he's encouraging people to blindly accept theories without checking facts

"proof: he's encouraging

"proof: he's encouraging people to blindly accept theories without checking facts"

you are the boy who cried wolf of the 9/11 truth movement. You have at this point called just about everybody in here who *isnt* a no plane moron a disinfo agent. Good job....

Bush responsible?

I don't think Bush has ever been responsible for anything in his life, except maybe the pom poms in high school and college cheerleading, and those probably went missing more than once. What's your point?

Let's make something clear here. The following is not what the 9/11 Truth movement claims:

"Bush singlehandedly came up with a plot to use CGI planes to fool the public into thinking that the bombs he personally planted in the WTC in order to frame Osama and his flying circus of 19 lap-dancing hijackers were not the actual cause fo the collapses, or were even there. The reason most people are not aware of these remarkable facts is because Bush is so competent and sneaky that he did it all with no one finding out, not even the fanatically liberal and anti-Bush anti-war New York Times."

Let me repeat--that is NOT what we're saying. What I am saying and many other people are though perhaps not exactly the same is:

"Bush and his cronies cheated their way into the white house in 2000 and immediately started work on a top secret project. The details of this project involved going to war in Afghanistan and Iraq and rolling back some of Americans' most precious freedoms in the name of security. It was well understood by this Project for a New American Century crowd that their case was a tough sell, since it would lead to deaths of American soldiers and mountains of debt for the rest of us. Also the benefits would flow mainly to their friends, not the American people, who would really only get a false sense of "security" out of the deal. Knowing that Americans are well-meaning patriotic folks, it was deemed necessary to stage a medium scale attck in order to convince America that thier interests and those of the PNAC crowd were one and the same. The intelligence services of Pakistan and Israel as well as some connections in Saudi Arabia and Turkey were enlisted in support of this top secret scheme. It was arranged for the twin towers to be acquired from the government of new york. Enter Larry Silverstein who possibly contacts his friend Bibi Netanyahu and arranges for some of the 200 or so Israeli agents roaming around America to help him rig his new property for destruction. Having purchased the buildings' lease he would have had access to the construction plans and access to the building whenever he wanted, for anyone he wanted. Easy peasy. Planes take off from somewhere, perhaps a military base, and these are flown into the towers after falsely identifying themselves as commercial flights. By this time, a number of people were selected to go on record as having been on the planes and died. These people would reap the benefits of being presumed dead--never again pay taxes, be liable for crimes or debts, etc. Still no one would be the wiser except those involved who would obviously not go around telling everyone they were involved in a scheme like this. They may have even thought that the planes would be crashed early in the morning, thus no one would be kiled (or very few) and been unaware of good Larry's plan to blow up the buildings. Pakistan's ISI is charged with helping to create the illusion that Muslim hijackers were prowling around waiting to strike on 9/11. Passports are obtained, Korans purchased and littered about along with flight manuals, some arabs and muslims are even sent to flight school with orders to act suspiciously. Later on these facts will be revealed so as to strengthen the illusion that muslims hijacked planes. Once it all goes down a lot of benefits are derived by everyone aware of the plot. After the false case is presented, people who seem skeptical, including news anchors, are threatened with all manner of sanctions very subtly. Intimidation and an avalanche of misinformation and disinformation does the rest. Only after a few months will significant numbers of people put it all together and start the whisper campaign, but by then the "new reality" on the ground has been created and while they study that reality, history's actors continue to create new realities, dragging along almost everyone who fell for the original charade. Eventually bigger and bigger cracks start to appear in the official version of events and the active disinfo programs go into effect with plants in the truth movement going to greater and greater lengths to sabotage the increasinglky independent and numerous grassroots efforts. That's about it up til now._

"Among the 'spider-man' skeptics are those who claim that no human can shoot web and stick to walls... They conveniently ignore the fact that he was bitten by a radioactive spider."

Daily Bugle editorial debunking the claims of spider-man deniers

Could'nt have said it

Could'nt have said it better, except I think those passengers were on the planes that hit the towers. There is no way people could be content chilling on an island even with billions, knowing that their family etc are grieving about them.

I'm open to real passengers

Just goes to show how much we can disagree on and still agree on a lot of more important things..._

"Among the 'spider-man' skeptics are those who claim that no human can shoot web and stick to walls... They conveniently ignore the fact that he was bitten by a radioactive spider."

Daily Bugle editorial debunking the claims of spider-man deniers

or...

They could have been shot in the head... :(

good speech, let's call it

good speech, let's call it the story of 'the Neocon's hard sell'

Help a Fellow Truther

"Zlaya" needs help on this bulletin board: Bautforum. Clueless idiots outnumber him there.

Done

...

They're Challenging You

Jon, I assume you've seen their challenge to you at Bautforum. They naively call you a "hit-and-run" poster. We know that's the furthest thing from the truth. If anyone can tear them a new one, it would be you.

On It...

Sky King showed up. How nice.

You know...

Just because I started posting means you stop... one against 5 is still one against 5 no matter who it is.

Sorry, Jon

Jon, do you mean that I stopped here or over at the other site? Either way, I apologize. I didn't intentionally stop posting here. I am just constantly forgetting to keep track of some of my older comments. As for the other site, I just knew when I wasn't up to the task. That's why I called on anyone here who has a lot more energy and enthusiasm than I do to take up the debate. Sometimes, I just don't have what it takes to put up a good debate, especially when I suspect that it will be a really prolonged debate. I was really drained of energy that day.

I've learned in recent years that some people are lost causes, and the people at that site clearly fit that description. All of their arguments against you were pathetic, especially the ones where they were too lazy/proud/childish to click the links you provided.

Even if we could show video proof of Cheney ordering the false-flag attacks, some people would still deny it with fierce, stubborn blindness and try to tell us what "he was really doing."

The people at this forum are

The people at this forum are some of the most clueless sheep I have witnessed in a LONG TIME. It's highly entertaining because they think they're debunking, when in reality they're showing their unabaited ignorance to both current events and history. Do not waste your time there (I have wasted too much already).

I got banned! Yes!

Even though it's sad.....

The Reynolds file: A Bush

The Reynolds file:

A Bush appointee.

A Texan (like Bush)

An economist (knowing how to move all that dirty money upon which the elite enrich themselves?)

Embarrassingly Stupid

HAHAHA Classic!

HAHAHA, those fox news reporters have just been "released" by their "captors" in Gaza. And check this, they had to on camera "convert to Islam" LOL! I really think that this whole “Fox News kidnapping” couldn’t be more fake if Murdoch tried .

While the gereral truth of 9/11 many be getting out...

I think we're all being tricked. For anyone to blindly accept that 767s were involved is totally irrational. But if Jones can prove himself right then I will gladly appologize to him and everyone else.

Planting wreckage is easy and is therefore not necessarily "physical evidence". One must look deeper before accepting it. Jones uses it as fact which is unscientific, especially since the theory is that the TV pictures were faked. Pictures of wreckage cannot be blindly accepted as fact. I think we're all being tricked, but again I hope I'm wrong!

Is this animated gif really a good source for scientific data?
http://img119.imageshack.us/img119/5402/175underneathccwt1.gif

The more and more I look into this, the more I believe it's a trick. A trap.

You know all the people who blindly believe the OGCT? Think about fake planes. Now look in a mirror? Who's the one making blind assumptions?

Jon Gold: you said "don't feel the trolls". Are you a disinfo agent? If not, then why encourage people to blindly believe things? Reminds me of that radio interview of the PM editor... trying to trick the average sheep into believing something that has no proof. People have to wake up and stop blindly making assertions. The whole truth movement is possibly being tricked.

Dr Jones: Please prove me wrong! Show proof of authenticated samples of previously molten metal! You'll certainly make *me* feel a lot better. Also show scientific reasoning of how aluminum can cleanly slice through structural steel without breaking off. That will put my paranoia to rest and won't need to waste everybody's time!

Flat wrong, "no planes" is

Flat wrong, "no planes" is what's "irrational". It's only considered rational by those who are gullible enough to consider impossible BULLSHIT! Seriously, you believe "no planes" hit the towers? Then please say whether or not you agree with Nico that this isn’t fake;

http://thewebfairy.com/911/krash/

^ Real, or not real?

what is your basis for saying this:

"Flat wrong, "no planes" is what's "irrational""

explain it, in your own words.

Read the posts above. Steven

Read the posts above. Steven Jones is not ruling no-plane out. He keeps the door open to any theory that can be defended. The key is that no-plane or plane or drones doesn't matter. That was just the smokescreen to set off all those bombs in the WTC and WTC7.

Ummm

Whether it was aluminum or not is meaningless, because the planes wings consisted of much more than just aluminum, plus the "mass" Vs velocity is what needs to be taken into account here.
Paper Mache wings with structural support and filled with liquid (Kerosene) could break those steel beams if traveling fast enough.

The beams themselves I assume would be designed to "give way" to such force coming from that direction because the only thing that could possibly generate that much force straight into the side of the building would be a Jet or other such flying object, the more the building resist the more impact/force it would have to absorb.
this is why cars are DESIGNED to give way and crunch in the front, it is basically a "shock absorber".

These beams main strength is designed to support the weight of the building from top to bottom and also "over-designed" to be able to lose several sections such as happened when those "PLANES" hit the buildings and have the rest of the structure remain intact and still plenty strong enough to support itself, the outer framework of the building was like a screen, you could take out a large section yet the rest of the screen remained structurally sound and doing its job.

Just imagine

If you will that a 120 TON spit ball hit the side of a building going 500MPH.
Would it matter at all that it was nothing but paper and spit?

Not at all, all that matters is that its 120 TONS of MASS going 500MPH hitting an object from its weakest direction that most likely was designed to do exactly what it did.

For instance

I once when I was a kid put a hole right through our garage door with a WATER BALLON shot out of a water ballon launcher I made out of surgical tubing and a funnel.

Here we have freaking WATER smashing right through plywood.

Excellent comparison!

Aluminium wings fully loaded with jet fuel on impact are going to behave just like sold battering rams, especially when travelling at 500mph. And especially again if their impacting with structures designed to absorb, rather then repel their impact.

what is your scientific expertise to conlude this?

and are you looking at all the evidence? does you're theory account for all the available data?

Well

I hold a MS in Environmental Science from Stanford which obviously in this case means nothing.

However what I just stated is literally 8th grade Science & common sense.

Like I believe it was Dylan that said "You dont have to be a weatherman to tell if the wind is blowing"

your insulting-type comment...

belittles scientific research

a critical point to make

I have one point to make here: please do NOT buy into this concept that one of these guys is right, and one of these guys is wrong.

Divide and conquer, folks. It's the oldest method of conquest there is, yet we ignore the possibility. The best way to minimalize the Truth Movement is to get it fighting amongst itself. Behold the opening salvos in the Reynolds v. Jones war, and it will lead nowhere.

You don't need one guy who has all the answers - you take the good with the bad. One reason many are rushing to Jones' defense now is because perhaps they too easily accepted his "evidence." His argument hinged on thermate, and he produced 2 samples "from Ground Zero" for his proof. I haven't seen ANYONE question this evidence, mostly because we were all so eager to buy into this man's prosposals. Where did it come from, has he proven it's origin in any way?

Now we have another researcher questioning Jones, while at the same time proposing his own questionable theory about 'no planes'. What if they're both mostly right, but have the CD built-in beforehand? What if their purpose is to diametrically align and subvert?

I know... no one wants to go there. I just happen to trust no one 100%. It's not good investigative practice.

Herr Pi wrote: "...One

Herr Pi wrote:
"...One reason many are rushing to Jones' defense now is because perhaps they too easily accepted his "evidence." His argument hinged on thermate, and he produced 2 samples "from Ground Zero" for his proof. I haven't seen ANYONE question this evidence, mostly because we were all so eager to buy into this man's prosposals. Where did it come from, has he proven it's origin in any way?..."

That just means, that 9/11 truthlings generally never question any source.
http://www.911closeup.com/nico/911truthlings.html
That's why sensationalists like Szymanski, Flocco and Co. also always succeed.

The sample came originally from Janette McKinley.
However she never sent it to Prof. Steven "Los Alamos" Jones directly but to Mike Berger (911truth.org)!

Whatever Berger did with this sample before it arrived on Jones' desk, noone knows.

http://www.veronicachapman.com/nyc911/Jones-Kubiak.htm
Steven Jones, David Kubiak- The Los Alamos Connections

jesus christ.... "Jon Gold:

jesus christ....
"Jon Gold: you said "don't feel the trolls". Are you a disinfo agent?"

there you go again

Am I?

"Jon Gold: you said "don't feel the trolls". Are you a disinfo agent? If not, then why encourage people to blindly believe things?"

I don't know. Am I a "disinfo agent"?

Let's see... if I wanted to question Professor Steven E. Jones' work, would I do it with a "hit piece", or would I do it with a list of questions?

Chances are, I would do it with a list of questions, and allow the Professor to respond, and post both Questions and Answers online for everyone to see.

I would not go about doing it the way Morgan Reynolds, and Judy Wood did. I happen to have liked Professor Wood, but I don't know why she did what she did.

Unless...

It has to do with egos.

Well there goes the father

Well there goes the father of Reaganomics and Judy 'Sawdust' Wood.

fuck the father of

fuck the father of faggot-nomics

FYI

from Tarpley's 'Unauthorized Biography of George H. Bush'

[...]Sometime during the spring of 1980, Bush began attacking Reagan for his "supply-side" economic policies. Bush may have thought he still had a chance to win the nomination, but in any case he coined the phrase "voodoo economics." Bush later claimed that the idea had come from his British-born press secretary, Peter Teeley. Later, when the time came to ingratiate himself with Reagan's following, Bush claimed that he had never used the offending term. But, in a speech made at Carnegie-Mellon University on April 10, 1980, he attacked Reagan for "a voodoo economic policy."[...]

Reynolds not tied to Reagan admin.

You're confusing it. Paul C. Roberts was a member of the Reagan administration, and he's the one cited for Reaganomics. About Morgan Reynolds i would like to have a clear statement from him how he got into the Bush administration and why he left. Maybe i missed it. With all the suspicion of him having evil intentions, it's time he would defend himself.

LMAO@Anonymous

What about Judy Wood? A few months ago Michael Zebuhr was as naive about 9/11 as most other college students. However, one of his professors, Judy Wood, was among the first "full" members of a group called Scholars For 9/11 Truth.
Scholars For 9/11 Truth was created in response to professor Steven Jones, of Brigham Young University. After he announced his research that shows that the World Trade Center buildings appear to have been brought down with explosives, Professor Jim Fetzer, of the University of Minnesota, convinced him to join with him in creating an organization to expose 9-11.
Professor Wood says that Michael discovered the 9-11 information on her web site by himself. Even though she was actively involved in exposing 9/11, she implied that she did not push the issue on the students.
Professor Wood says that Michael became fascinated with the 9/11 information, and he began to research the issue. He joined the Scholars For 9/11 Truth as a student member. He soon organized a 9/11 student group on the campus. He was very active in educating the other students about 9/11, and he was in the process of arranging a showing of some 9/11 videos to the students. It appears that Michael became much more active in educating students about 9-11 than professor Wood.
During spring break he and his mother went to Minneapolis to visit his sister, who was a student at the University of Minnesota.
On 18 March 2006 Michael, his sister, his mother, and a friend were walking to their car after dinner at a restaurant when they were approached by a couple of young men who demanded his mother's purse. She gave it to them without a fight, but one of the men shot Michael in the head anyway, for no apparent reason. He died quickly.
The two men escaped in a car. Police were soon chasing after a car that matched the description. A woman was driving. Two male passengers tossed loaded handguns out the window. After a few miles the woman stopped the car and all three people in the car were arrested.
However, the two men, Omari Kwakou Thomas (2920 Northway Drive, Brooklyn Park), and James Michael Walker (2938 Morgan Avenue North, Minneapolis), were soon released. The woman, Aiesha Camille Williams (1301 Highway 7, Apt #127, Hopkins), is still in jail, but the police insist she had nothing to do with the murder. Mug shots are not available.
If you were driving a car that matched the getaway car for a murder, and if you were to toss a loaded handgun out the window as you tried to evade the police, would the police let you go free?
Would they be able to instantly determine that you had nothing to do with the murder? Would they decide that no investigation was needed?
Is this just another meaningless murder in a nation that has thousands of murders every year? Or was his murder connected to his involvement in educating students about 9/11? Is there any connection to Professor Judy Wood,or Morgan Reynolds?
There are several possibilities. I'll begin with a few facts and coincidences. Let's start with some of the suspicious aspects of Minnesota.
Harry Samit, the FBI agent who arrested Zacarias Moussaoui in August 2001, worked in Minneapolis.
This arrest helps to support the government's conspiracy theory that the September 11 attack was conducted entirely by 19 Arabs. This FBI agent is still supporting the official government story.
Coleen Rowley was the FBI agent who is held up by many people as a hero and a whistleblower because she announced that the FBI ignored information that some Arabs were training as pilots to attack America. She was working at the Minnesota FBI office at the time.
Coleen Rowley was the FBI agent who is held up by many people as a hero and a whistleblower because she announced that the FBI ignored information that some Arabs were training as pilots to attack America. She was working at the Minnesota FBI office at the time.
She appears to be exposing incompetence in the FBI, but in reality she is supporting the government official story that Arabs attacked us on September 11. She is currently running for Congress.She is still supporting the official government story. Do we really need another person in Congress who supports the official theory on 9/11? No!
Senator Paul Wellstone, his wife, and daughter died in a mysterious plane crash in Minnesota. However, the Minnesota FBI did not find anything suspicious about it.
While every FBI office is lying about 9-11 and other major crimes, the FBI department in Minneapolis, Minnesota is very actively involved in promoting the theory that the Arabs were training to be pilots, and that they were attacking us on September 11.
The Minneapolis FBI obviously wants to protect the official story on the September 11 attack. So why should we trust their investigation into the murder of Michael Zebuhr? Why should we trust the local police department to tell us the truth?
Now consider some of the coincidences in regards to Michael Zebuhr;
Professor Wood was a full member of Scholars For 9/11 Truth from its beginning in January 2006, but she did not seem to encourage students or faculty at the University to look into the issue. The students apparently had to discover the information on their own.
Why would Professor Wood join a group that exposes 9-11 if she had no interest in educating students or faculty? Was she too afraid to talk to the students or faculty about 9/11? Or did she join the organization for some other reason?
Morgan Reynolds is currently trying to convince us that the airplanes that crashed into the World Trade Center towers were illusions created by blue screen technology.
For example, her site promotes the idiotic theories from the mysterious Finnish military expert who wants us to believe that the World Trade Center buildings were brought down by miniature hydrogen bombs that do not need a fission bomb to start the fusion.
If this technology exists, it is a secret. Why would a professor at Clemson University promote a theory that has absolutely no supporting evidence?
I could understand her mistake if she was a professor of art or music, but she is a professor of mechanical engineering. Therefore, her promotion of the miniature hydrogen bombs is certain to be deliberate deception.
Professor Wood was not encouraging her students to learn about 9/11 because she was not really interested in exposing it. She was only interested in helping to saturate the Internet with nonsense.

calling the NPT theory "idiotic" is just like

the tactics the boxcutter belivers use.

Science proves aluminum can't slice through structural steel, especially in that manner. Dr Wood, PhD in Civil Engineering MS in Mechanical Engineering explains this. I still await Dr Jones, or any other qualified scientist to counter her claims.

Until they do, anyone discounting the NPT is a mindless fool

Science

http://www.weatherstock.com/T53.jpg

How 'bout plywood slicing through concrete? I guess it all depends on velocity.

The only

"mindless fools" would be those that have fallen for the NPT im afraid.

When a 2x4 weighing a couple Lbs slams right through a solid concrete slab traveling at most 200-250 MPH.

Then tell me again how an object regardless what it is made of that weighs 120 TONS traveling at 500MPH can not easily bust through the side of steel beams causing them to give away like they have been designed to do.

The NPT is idiotic, makes zero sense, has zero evidence to support it and fly's in the face of simple logic.

give it up.

To further clarify the science

What will really determine whether the airplane will cut through the structural steel is the amount of force it can exhert on the structural steel. With regards to a moving body, the force it can exhert on a stationary body is determined in large part by the moving body's kinetic energy. KE = 0.5 * mass * velocity(squared). The square relationship between kinetic energy and velocity means that the velocity of a moving body has a much bigger influence on the KE than mass. Thus, an airplane travelling at a velocity of 500+ mph will be carrying considerable KE, and when that KE is disapated over a rather short distance (around the moment of impact), the resulting force will be quite large as well.

As to why the airplane didn't slice through the building and stick out the other side, the initial impact of the airplane with the building would absorb and disapate much of the kinetic energy of the airplane by deforming, and we know the 47 core columns were bigger and stronger than the exterior columns, so they would probably have had no trouble absorbing and disapating the remaining kinetic energy of the airplane. Also, once the airplane exploded, there was no longer a coherent mass of material traveling together. By scattering the mass in all different directions, the explosion caused the kinetic energy of the airplane to scatter as well, which means there was no longer a single focused point through which the kinetic energy could act.

Absolutely Correct

Seve B.

The Foot pounds of energy exerted on that building would have been astronomical.
Unfortunately poor CB here is incapable of comprehending basic scientific principles.

By that logic...

...Science proves aluminum can't slice through structural steel

Did you know water can?

And, have you ever seen the show Myth Busters? There was one episode where they launched a chicken out of an air cannon and it penetrated something like 12 panes of tempered glass.

I can't believe I have to bring up an episode of Myth Busters to debunk what you're saying.

"...Science proves aluminum

"...Science proves aluminum can't slice through structural steel

Did you know water can?"

Correct.

http://www.wjta.org/Book%204/5.1_swanson_et_al.pdf#search=%22water%20jet...

What's the point? This

What's the point?
This movement is completely infiltrated with ex-spooks and U.S. administratives since Day 1.

Most of them are completely hangouters like Ray McGovern and then we have ex-Star Wars programmer Bob Bowman who's spreading drivel on FOX like:
"...The only real truth about 9/11 is, that we have no answers..."

the truth movement has been dupped

people are just to f'ing stupid to think scientifically. They are all dumbed down. Anyone discounting theories under the baseless assumption that it's "absurd" represent the most gullible and clueless of all. Sheeple who can't think.

Correct

However those not thinking "scientifically" would be those proposing that no planes hit the buildings.

Science has been my life & profession for 24 years.

Anyone discounting theories under the baseless assumption that it's "absurd" represent the most gullible and clueless of all.

Allow me to define "absurd" for you.

absurd:

–adjective 1. utterly or obviously senseless, illogical, or untrue; contrary to all reason or common sense; laughably foolish or false: an absurd explanation.
–noun 2. the quality or condition of existing in a meaningless and irrational world.

Now maybe in a totally irrational world the NPT might make sense to somebody it doesn't in the world that I reside in.

Andrew,

Andrew,
there is no damn paranoia.
This movement is completely controlled by orwellians or spooks at the top.

And while you're whining about some cyber fights *here, right now John Albanese and Nic Levis (who opposed the evidence against controlled demolition for 4 years!!) showed up tonight at the weekly events of ny911truth.org and dictated the party line again and turned off some progressive activists, which left because they showed up again.

Means, Levis/Albanese + Co. will try to soften the messages of some leaflets and planned ads right now and i assume the conditioned audience of Les Jamieson will just follow them, with only some hope of a potential veto by Frank Moralez.

That means, if they succeed we will also have a hangout event in NYC, no outraged protest, but a soften message and everything will be over again in 2, 3 weeks.
They even don't like the new Loose Change flyer, which was planned by the associated 911ny committee as part for a forthcoming the ad for Village Voice.

Fetzer and Jones are the real problem over there and ny911 *here is either still infiltrated by URANTIanized 'special k' activism or the cointel-pro influence by Levis, Albanese + Co.

I'm glad i'm not there in person today.

...yep, that's what it

...yep, that's what it always was since Day 1.

Research vs. infiltrated activism.

Watson just wasn't around when our content was reversed by other frauds like Hence, Ruppert, Schwarz and Co.

And that's why we still have hangout activism, just with different placeholders in public until they also get replaced again, most obviously with a few members of 911blogger.com, if their influence will continue.

I think you also ignored the background of Urantia
so far and you don't care about Levis, Albanese and co.
as long everyone pretends some unity BS.

I guess you also don't care about ny911truth, as long as it shuts up to their affiliated main hub of 911truth.org am i right??

Nothing is good enough for this movement anymore.

Cointel-PRO of the 60s was a joke.
Now it works basically by itself.

The anniversary is already in the hand between
hangouters, flagwavers and orwellians.

Honest research died a long time ago,
it was replaced with empty phrases and cultish drivel.

Heres the point

Categorize each event;all of this is not one continuous case. The 9/11 truth is so much information;something new everyday comes out..so follow the lead and see where it ends up..a lot of times you will find leads that go infintely on and on ,but they still end somewhere.False or not,keep it simple..for example.The complicit MSM draws their money from where? government or Sponsors?Sponsors,of course. So,Nico,the fakery from whatever news affiliate/owner that the video's come from is the one you look at to follow the money.Who are their main corporate sponsors?That is who the Television decision makers listen to. Like Rupert Murdoch; Fox News is a mouthpiece of what He believes,and He is a rabid Zionist supporter as is the rest of the MSM who are Zionist owned. But what the hell? follow this.. Who or what out there has the keys to everything that gets done in this world? Well what is most prevelant? Companies,Corporations in the military-industrial-complex,corporations in the MSM,organizations that lobby politicians,corporations that are corrupt,officials in government who are corrupt.Financial institutions are the ones who have the most power.For they have the ability to either give a loan or not to run the machinations described above.But in order to reach the top,you must start from the bottom and work up. You must categorize government complicity; From the ones allowing 9/11 to happen by ignoring evidence to the ones who participated and the ones who participated cause they were ordered to,or compromised to,whatever.This covers fake videos,the lack of exposure to 9/11 truth(MSM),planted explosives in the trade towers,quick removal of the trade tower debris,disinformation to distract or to mislead.Such as when I put a story out there that shows an ex-state department official telling what happened while working as a security agent in the Phillipines having credible information regarding the CIA,the FBI,and the NSA.Just because I got the story from the "Left-gatekeeping" Counterpunch newsletter,and then You disregard it just because of that reason,it's a BIG point. It was because of Counterpunch that I ended getting the truth about 9/11,or was lead to finding out.
Back to the money changers;to loan money to The nation with the most influential amount of capitol in the world is the nation that will be most likely be the one that pushes financial institutional commands or desires.Case in point;the Federal Reserve is a prime example;It's not owned by the government,but banks themselves..what would happen if We demanded it be shut down? can anybody answer this? If it were pushed for the upcoming elections,the pressire would be felt on those who make the electronic voting machines(and those who push for them),the military-industrial-complex,corporations,etc.I find this to be compelling.If anyone who has read John Perkins book;"Confessions of an Economic Hit Man",has an idea about how the money system controls NATIONS.
So shouldn't We look at them too?

Morgan Reynolds- 95% of people ignore his disinfo trash

These no plane people don't even merit discussion. Their little COINTELPRO operation is so obvious it's painful. I am all for open research, but allowing a bunch of Feds to keep disrupting things only encourages more "message board" disruptors. This is how the FBI/NSA destroyed Indymedia a few years back.

At best these "no planers" are selfish liars desperate to destroy 911 truth. At worst, they are paid operatives. The good news is that 95% of us ignore their clear idiocy. Their cell leaders are being banned on the LC forums as people finally rebel agains their pathetic "no plane" propaganda psy-op.

A message to Morgan Reynolds: Go tell your handlers that your divide and conquer tactics are not working. Nobody takes you seriously, except for a few unemployed sociopaths in New York City and a woman whose crappy website still says holograms hit the WTCs.

95%+ of us know what you are up to.

Stirring shit all over the place these days.

Just hold your nose and keep working. It will propably get worse before it gets better.

probably

I really need to learn how to spell.

Debunked

Quotes from Jones recent paper (my comments underlined):

 

“It’s true: I do not accept the no-planes-hit-the-Towers theory which is espoused by R&W and Gerard Holmgren, Rosalee Grable, Nico Haupt, and Killtown – who are listed by R&W as having performed “The only investigation worthy of the name,” according to them. (I disagree.)”

 

Does everyone see how he phrased that? It's the same technique the MSM use with their “conspiracy theory” term to disprove us! Ad hominem instead of hard facts! Gets the reader to distrust the alternate information before even looking at it!

 

 

 

“But I DO turn to physics and to hard physical evidences for refutation of this no-planes notion, right in my paper they cite http://www.journalof911studies.com/JonesAnswersQuestionsWorldTradeCenter.pdf, starting on page 171 in the current version (there is an index at the front).  The reader will find there, on the first page of my discussion:

 

         As usual, we look for hard evidences to test or rule out the hypothesis, using the Scientific Method.

         Look at the data for yourself:  mark the tail as it goes in (can you see the deceleration?): http://img119.imageshack.us/img119/5402/175underneathccwt1.gif

 

 

 

Is a gif file from “imageshack.us” supposed to be “hard evidence using the scientific method”?

 

 

“Now I have looked at these data myself, some time back.”

 

Yes, but your methods are in doubt. So others will need to look into it before drawing conclusion.

 

 

“I focused on the motion of the tail section of the aircraft as it entered the Tower.  And I found that the tail slowed down dramatically as the plane entered the building – there is REAL DECELERATION!   Now I would ask the reader to check me on this – mark the position of the tail in each frame and notice that the marks get closer together as the plane enters the Tower.  Now we have some data!  And we can discuss these data like scientists, and determine the amount of deceleration, etc.”

 
But is data from a gif file on imageshack.us trustworthy? Is this reliable source?

 

 

 

“But wait – Reynolds finds no deceleration of the plane!  He writes:

 
“How could two large wide-bodied aluminum jetliners penetrate massive steel towers and disappear with no deceleration visible, no plane wreckage visible in gashes and none knocked to the ground below the impact zone?”

“Zero deceleration upon impact, although shown in south tower videos, is physically impossible.”

Over and over he refers to no deceleration in his essay here:  http://nomoregames.net/printer_friendly.php?page=911&subpage1=we_have_holes

  

“Now we have a clear discrepancy in interpreting the data – and that is where the polite discussion should focus, rather than on ad hominems.”

 

From my understanding, Reynolds/Wood’s data comes from videos sourced from the MSM video feed, while Jones' is from a gif file from “imageshack.us”.  And Jones does not explain the aluminum cutting through structural steel, but intead distracts the reader by mentioning Reynolds/Wood’s use of ad hominems! Can everyone see this?

 

 

 

“Reynolds also brings up:  “no plane wreckage visible in gashes and none knocked to the ground below the impact zone.”  But again, I disagree – for I have shown photos of wreckage found on the ground below the impact zone in my Answers paper, e.g.:

 

Again, I presented physical evidences for real debris from real planes hitting the Towers.”

 

That’s not real physical evidence, it’s merely a picture. Besides, evidence can be planted as we all know.

 

 

“Now when a jet hits a building, the building is going to move –  due to conservation of momentum (basic physics), and then the building will sway back and forth after the collision.  But only if a REAL plane hit the Tower.   And so we find data for this oscillation:

 

 These are physical data, showing a characteristic nearly exponential decay (damping) of the oscillation.  Observed oscillation of the WTC 2 Tower provides compelling empirical evidence that it was hit by a fast-moving jetliner.  Any claim to the contrary must confront these published data or the analysis thereof. 
http://wtc.nist.gov/NISTNCSTAR1-5.pdf p. 26

 

So, we’re supposed to trust data from the NIST report?

 

 

“It will not do in scientific inquiry to ignore data like this – even if one does not trust the source for some reason.  In other words, the argument must be to the DATA, not to the source (ad hominem).”

 

Yes, and ALL the data must explain what happened. Where’s the data showing how aluminum can cut through structural steel?

 

 

 

“I could go on, but the fact is that as editor of the Journalof911Studies.com, I have invited Morgan Reynolds and whoever he wishes to join him, and another author to write papers on BOTH sides of this issue – did REAL planes hit the Twin WTC Towers, or not?   Both sides agreed.  In this way, readers will have two peer-reviewed scholarly papers side by side, both confronting the evidences presented above and whatever other evidences they wish to bring in – and then the reader can judge for himself or herself.  And that is MUCH better than ad hominem arguments – it is the way of modern science.”

 

Dr Jones, please explain how aluminum wings and tail can cut through structural steel, and without breaking off. IMO, we are being fooled into thinking Jones is using the scientific method.

I could go on....

I do have a question; If the video is a fake,then they wouldn't have shown deceleration or plane debris from the crash would they?

it's called....

fake evidence.. put out there to fool us. And it seems to be working.

IMO, the whole thing (for me anyway) lies on whether aluminum can really slice through structural steel, making clean cuts, not having tail/wings break off, and totally dissappear in the building without poking through the opposite wall. I'd like to see a debate from PhD's on that. Dr Wood addresses it, Jones didn't. Not even in that paper he just put out today.

You dont even make any sense

This whole diatribe makes no sense at all.

You believe something without a shred of evidence to support it.

So, do you also believe in Creationism over Evolution?

Believe the Holocaust didn't happen? Moon landing fake?

If not why not because they all are equally as ridiculous as the NPT.

Im thinking its time to /ignore because you flatly refuse to accept factual reality.

working hard for your bonus I see...

imgstacke

Imagine all truth spreading

Imagine all truth spreading we could be doing right now istead of arguing with these no-plane shills.

It is clear from this

It is clear from this thread, especially the comments of "CB" that these no-planers are either shills or friggin' morons. They are given perfectly logical explanations for their perceived "anomolies" yet they keep repeating the same debunked garbage over and over again. These people should be banned from 911 message boards; they contribute absolutely nothing and drain valuable energy from real truth seekers.

They only drain valuable

They only drain valuable energy from real Truth seekers if the real Truth Seekers let them.

 Endless, circular debate serves nobody but the true perpetrators of 9/11, don't fall for it...

It's good to see that people

It's good to see that people here have spotted the Reynolds/Wood disinfo op.
A question for the disinfo operators and their supporters: if there's something outrageous about the aluminum planes going into steel-frame buildings, just what were the planes supposed to do?
RICHOCHET OFF THE FAÇADES OF THE BUILDINGS?
One more thing: Steven Jones has every right to talk about political issues as much as any one else. Listeners are not dumb, and they are perfectly capable of distinguishing physical evidence from political argument and making up their own minds on these things. Reynolds and Woods want to censor Jones.

I agree just like playing with the disinfo guys

I know i shouldn't engage them, and trust me, I let 95% of it fly right past, but sometimes its fun to flash them a reality check. Everyone sees through them, except other operatives.

Its just more noise, and your right I shouldn't feed the trolls... :D

anyone who ignores this data is a disinfo agent

from a former professor of mechanical engineering:

about aluminum cutting through steel: It's about relative speed. It doesn't matter if the wing hits the steel column or the steel column hits the wing; it's the same problem. So, park an airplane on the tarmac, get a big steel column (assuming you could hold), and take a few swings at the wing. Guess which part will be destroyed? Remember, airplanes are not overdesigned like buildings.

First of all, the basis of

First of all, the basis of your example is wrong. You don't get "a few swings" at the wing, you just get one swing. You also have to swing the the big steel column hard enough to give it the same kinetic energy that the airplane would have traveling at 500+ mph. From my earlier post:

What will really determine whether the airplane will cut through the structural steel is the amount of force it can exhert on the structural steel. With regards to a moving body, the force it can exhert on a stationary body is determined in large part by the moving body's kinetic energy. KE = 0.5 * mass * velocity(squared). The square relationship between kinetic energy and velocity means that the velocity of a moving body has a much bigger influence on the KE than mass. Thus, an airplane travelling at a velocity of 500+ mph will be carrying considerable KE, and when that KE is disapated over a rather short distance (around the moment of impact), the resulting force will be quite large as well.

As to why the airplane didn't slice through the building and stick out the other side, the initial impact of the airplane with the building would absorb and disapate much of the kinetic energy of the airplane by deforming, and we know the 47 core columns were bigger and stronger than the exterior columns, so they would probably have had no trouble absorbing and disapating the remaining kinetic energy of the airplane. Also, once the airplane exploded, there was no longer a coherent mass of material traveling together. By scattering the mass in all different directions, the explosion caused the kinetic energy of the airplane to scatter as well, which means there was no longer a single focused point through which the kinetic energy could act.

So, take your "big steel column", swing it fast enough that it has the same kinetic energy as the airplane, which, by the way, will involve a velocity much higher than the airplane velocity since the steel column will not weigh close too the mass of the airplane, and see if the steel fractures. I bet it will.

To clarify

Let me also say that the wing of the airplane will be damaged as well, but in the case of the twin towers, the airplane and wings traveled inside the building, and the video footage is not clear enough to allow us to analyze the damage done to the wings of the airplane at the moment of impact. In other words, we weren't able to visualize the damage done to the airplane. In your hypothetical of the airplane parked on the tarmac, we would be able to inspect the damage to the airplane for ourselves. The salient point being that both the steel column and the wing of the airplane would be damaged.

1,2,3...

nice and clean, Seve B.

AWESOME and utterly correct!!

In fact, it made me think of another analogy--a karate chop breaking a piece of wood... think about it!

_

"Among the 'spider-man' skeptics are those who claim that no human can shoot web and stick to walls... They conveniently ignore the fact that he was bitten by a radioactive spider."

Daily Bugle editorial debunking the claims of spider-man deniers

interesting, but faulty

I'll try to get a reply from Dr Wood on this.

besides, Demartini stated it

besides, Demartini stated it was designed to take a hit, to be punctured. The towers behaved just as designed.

That may be the dumbest

That may be the dumbest thing I've ever heard. It DOES matter which is moving and which is not. Try a quick experiment yourself and find out.

ahhh no it doesn't...

ahhh no it doesn't... relative referential frames I believe its called.

http://dictionary.laborlawtalk.com/Reference_frame

counterintuitive at first, but when you think about it it must work this way.

You see, when a scientist

You see, when a scientist makes a claim and is found to be talking crap ..
their reputation is shattered, unless the money keeps flowing in from the establishment.

In fact .. follow the money. It is THE organising element of contemporary USA society.

WITH money, anything is possible.

AGAINST money it may be impossible to just 'state the obvious'.

I like this infighting a lot. For me it clarifies things. Jon, DBLS et al .. your psyche is clear to me. You are TRUTH-IN-THE-POCKET american braggarts. You simply know better, regardless.

Dylan Avery's job becomes more difficult now. I wish he would team up with Marcus Icke and Nico and visualize NPT for us.

It should be an afternoons work to MAKE PEOPLE SEE IT.

Even if NPT essentially stays unproven, or even can be disproven (which I doubt), the allegation ALONE would be news in the worlds newspapers.

HOLLYWOOD helped with 911.

Can you imagine the POWER of that thought?

Like a wild-fire this idea can travel.

Every MEDIA-STORY page would HAVE TO print the amazing "contradicting flight paths graphics" and the perps will then have to race to catch up. Putting them on the back foot will get them to release more statements, and that is something we need. We need to get official statements on 911. Even VIDEO-NEWS-RELEASES are good. But made-for-tv-re-enactments are useless, because they are attributed to TV stations that are allowed to get it wrong. The OFFICIALs do not have that luxury... one wrong step, and there will be oodles of bad press.

See, bad press is actually good press.

Watching FUCKS-NEWS one can say LIE .. SPIN .. LIE ... HALFTRUTH.. LIE
while they are talking. But they *do* hammer the proaganda home..

Something needs to counter that.

See, the perps are reading this here, too. They know I am right (that it is all about MAKING IDEAS TRAVEL) and they know that they can play the mighty Wurlitzer ... and 911blogger - kids cannot. The best we can do is to pose a entertaining wacko spectacle.

Another option is to rebuild a WTC tower and buy a 767 and film it crashing into the tower. I am certain it would come as a shock to us all, how different it would look.

Regarding the amazing non-crumpling plane and the missing vertical stabilizer imprint ... there were some interesting posts:

http://groups.google.com/groups/search?q=u2r2h+%22vertical+stabilizer

DBLS
.. show us where the vertical stabilizer gash in the facade is !

..here, I get you started:
http://www.google.com/search?q=wtc+%22Vertical+stabilizer

what are you yammering about?

imgstacke

Go to

Go to here;

http://www.911blogger.com/node/2285

^ Explain the colouration of the initial impact area.

And then realise just how much of a retard your being.

We know what We know and what We believe is what We believe

Now there's a Rumsfeld line for a header.I guess I'm guilty of feeding the trolls sometimes,but I like to debate and I listen to what they say because it gives Me experience on how they operate.Consequently it becomes valuable ammunition to learn how to deal with these people.Listen to them and then be ready to punch holes in their "theory".

A mini-documentary on disinformation

A mini-documentary on disinformation is being prepared.

It will go into the history of cointelpro - giving examples of how the government infiltrated organizations in the Vietnam era, distributed "literature" to discredit the Black Panthers, harrassed Dr. King, etc etc.

The film will then look at the most obvious disinformation agents permeating the 9/11 Truth movement.

It is my hope that this film will turn the collective wrath of the 9/11 Truth movement against those who seek to divide and attack us - and we can once and for all rid ourselves of these enemies of freedom. With any luck we can shut these guys down and run them out of town.

Fintan D. and the CIA

I saw a disparaging comment on the Fintan Dunne analysis. Before everyone discard's that website as "disinfo", let me present this: the take over there is that MOST of our "leaders" in this movement are disinfo plants from the CIA. Stephen Jones assisted the government's put-down of Cold Fusion back in the 80's. People rarely leave government service once they're in, and when they do, it's usually in the back of a hearse.

Now we have Reynolds and Jones, each with a fairly well-thought out criticism of each other - large enough to bring the other down in many eyes, and at least possibly divide the movement. Perfect govt op if I've ever seen one.

I'm not saying I immediately buy into all of this, but unless you consider the concept - the slight possibility - that both Morgan Reynolds AND Stephen E. Jones are competing disinfo agents, you might be in for a major psyop defeat yourselves. ALWAYS consider your sources, and question everything that is presented. The Perps rely upon blind faith in entities, because if they control those entities, they totally OWN the followers. Follow people because their arguments are valid, thoughtful and supported with hard evidence, not because they are saying exactly what you want them to say. Once you show an inquisitive mind, and stop swallowing everything you're fed - no matter where it comes from - they lose their power.

Just critical food for thought, people.

Harr Pi is RIGHT

One has to consider the possibility that Jones and Reynolds are on the same side, the governments side.

OBJECTIVELY EXAMINE THEIR ARGUMENTS AND EVIDENCE.

Great news! Just don't go to

Great news! Just don't go to witch hunt on these folks. Just show how stupid they are instead.

John, I certainly hope you're not a....

planehugger.

If you are: you at the data!

So, you'll be covering the

So, you'll be covering the obvious disinformation agents like Ruppert and Hoffman and likely disinformation agents like Steven Jones?

cointel orgy - Fintan Dunne conducting

WOW! Flame away, boys! Are we having fun yet? Listen to yourselves. Is it any wonder the so-called gatekeepers are keeping their distance? Why would they want to wade into this. Yes, Tarpley calls them out, but with measured respectable civility, but then he’s got the classiest broadcast on the planet - Beethoven bumpers for God’s sake. And do you see him mucking around with you lot here? Keep it up and he’ll disassociate as well. He’s the most cogent, sensible, articulate voice this movement has. Webster, if you’re reading this; doubtful, as you’ve likely got genuinely serious reading before you; but certainly you’re aware of this idiocy, and since everyone so respects you, could you please assert yourself and slap some sense into them? Focus, people. This is serious stuff that goes way beyond your ego issues.

redipen

No wonder Wood didn't get tenure...

tsk, tsk....