There’s THEIR kind of collapse and there’s OUR kind of collapse.

In the past, I have argued that we should completely stop using the word “collapse” when referring to the destruction of the WTC Towers.
http://www.truememes.com/semantics.html

My main points have been that 1) the word “collapse”, as a global descriptor, does not properly convey the explosive character of many of the dynamic features of the destruction and that 2) the government and media have exploited this fact in their relentless use of the word as a way to minimize citizen awareness of the explosive features.

Both of these factors work against us in our efforts to get the truth out, and in fact suggest that whenever we use the word “collapse” in this context, we are, to some degree, unwittingly endorsing government/media propaganda — in spite of whatever else we may be saying.

These studies deserve widespread discussion. If they are right, then there is a desperate need to broad the range of hypotheses under our consideration.

23 August 2006
Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Disintegrate?
Morgan Reynolds and Judy Wood
http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/why_indeed.html

14 December 2006
The Scientific Method Applied to the Thermite Hypothesis
Judy Wood and Morgan Reynolds
http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/JonesScientificMethod.html

__________________________________________________________________________
Abstract-Foreword

Disturbed about the content and quality of physicist Steven E. Jones'
9/11 work, Drs. Morgan Reynolds and Judy Wood conducted a
peer-review. This review covers ten major issues which include
demolition of WTC 7, demolitions of WTC 1&2, evidence for high-energy
explosives, thermite, glowing aluminum, No Big Boeing Theory (NBB)
and other issues. In the "truth movement," it is vital that we
police our own. If we don't, the defenders of the OGCT certainlly
will. You can be sure that it will get mighty ugly when defenders of
the OGCT find major errors. This is the purpose for having research
peer reviewed.