It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Yet another Professor comes out to question 9/11

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 03:26 PM
link   
How many more esteemed people have to come forward before the debunkers and doubters will agree to the truth that our govt murdered nearly 3,000 on 9/11 ?

Below is yet another college professor, a well educated man with impeccable credentials that says the official 9/11 story is garbage.

taken from


media.www.rutgersobserver.com...

Dr. Barry R. Komisaruk

Issue date: 9/11/07 Section: Observations
PrintEmail DoubleClick Any Word Page 1 of 2 next > Six years later, the impact is still felt. The implications are still more troubling. My vivid recollections are the sudden silent disappearance from my vantage point from Smith Hall on Warren Street of the towers, replaced by a giant plume of white smoke, and my thought of the futility of the UMDNJ's calling and mobilizing all health care personnel; no person in the buildings could survive the collapse.

Some months later over breakfast with a colleague, I reacted in disbelief when he said, "You know, there was no debris from a jetliner crash evident in photos of the Pentagon that day." His claim started me to read extensively about the events of the day.

Based upon my reading, published evidence leads me to a terribly disturbing conclusion as to the veracity of the official government accounts. Here are some of my questions. Can you answer them?


Mod Edit: External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.



[edit on 1/10/2007 by Mirthful Me]




posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 03:30 PM
link   
Well, his credibility will become smeared just like with anyone else who speaks about this. I wouldnt go so much on credibility... its pretty common knowledge that character assassination is the primary weapon when it comes to making people not listen. Its as old as human kind probably.



posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 03:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Copernicus
 



I agree they'll go after him with another smear campaign.

What will be interesting though is how its done. It will be funny and ironic if they decide to label him as another insane conspiracy nut considering the man has a PHD in psychology and runs Rutgers graduate school program



posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 03:40 PM
link   
reply to post by admriker444
 


Yeah, kudos for his bravery. The thing with credibility is that the ones who have lots of it are rarely willing to risk it by saying something controversial. There must be hundreds of thousands of professors out there who dont believe the official story but are unwilling to speak about it publicly.


[edit on 29-9-2007 by Copernicus]



posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 03:45 PM
link   
Can anyone point out where he offers some evidence to back up his already recycled claims. Look at what he lists and tell me what we all here HAVEN'T been discussing for years.



posted on Sep, 29 2007 @ 04:11 PM
link   
Is it the same Dr. Barry R. Komisaruk that co-wrote the book entitled - The Science of Orgasm? - psychology.rutgers.edu...

I am not entirely sure what he adds to the discussion. While obviously he must know his stuff I don't quite see how his field, if you will, of how different women react to orgasm has a connection to planes and buildings. If he has expertise in other fields I hope someone will soon post them.

psychology.rutgers.edu...



posted on Sep, 30 2007 @ 01:28 AM
link   
Add another one to the pile.
Frustrating Fraudsters
I stopped even bothering to update it about 2 dozen names ago.



posted on Sep, 30 2007 @ 01:39 AM
link   
Another academic has taken his blinders off. That's great. I'll be way more impressed when mom and pop at the store, or down on the farm, or in the factory wake up. Not that it will make much difference.

The new fascism in America is here to stay. If we had fifty Alex Jones's it might be different, but we don't. The kind of regime that America is going to become doesn't change from within, except for the rot. Outside pressure finally caves it in.

I wish it wasn't so.

[edit on 30-9-2007 by ipsedixit]



posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 02:33 PM
link   
My biggest concern with this whole 9/11 conspiracy (which it definitely is in my view)... is that all these intelligent, highly recognized people are coming forward and questioning and proclaiming disbelief in the original story of 9/11... but really, what is going to happen?

I compare this to the likes of the JFK assassination and the Robert Kennedy Assassination and so on and so on. When it is evident that a conspiracy has taken place, even the most recognized people coming forward and expressing themselves on the subject does not do jack. What happened with JFK? The files, we are told, will be made public in 2029. Where will anyone involved be by then? 6 feet under.

Although we have many many concerns about 9/11, I feel that nothing will really be accomplished, just like in the past.

There seems to be alot of conspiracy talk, whether on forums like this, or in books or just between friends. But the reality sadly is, that nothing gets done about it. Sure it stains history, but does anyone really pay for it? Is anyone really held accountable in the end?

If you disagree, I would love an opposing explination. I'm not here to argue about it, just to learn more.



posted on Oct, 1 2007 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by The Universe
 


No, I dont think they will ever be punished for it. Kennedy was also killed as a inside job and blamed on a innocent guy. Then you have the Diana murder, which only now after 10 years are starting, and will take several years to complete, most likely without finding out for certain what happened.

The people have no real voice when it comes to this stuff.



posted on Oct, 2 2007 @ 09:46 AM
link   
I agree, the people have no real voice. I can almost see the people in power, sitting in their wing-back chairs, having a nice chuckle over all of this. They sit back and watch as though we were mice trying to find our way through a lab maze. This maze just happens to be 9/11.

It's kind of disheartening, in a sense... but at the same time, it just fuels me to want to do something more. Dig deeper at this.



posted on Oct, 2 2007 @ 09:53 AM
link   
When your pals in the crime control the media, it is easy to hide the truth and demean anyone telling the facts. the media is complicit in all this: We KNOW that any iontelligent and rational person could NEVER believe the official story about 9-11, so many of them are just sell outs for a paycheck, and someday all of them will be shamed when the truth comes out.

As long as Americans are more concerned about celebrities and sports and watch Fox news as their source of info, this nation will keep sliding to hell, and fast. The perps can sit back and laugh at us because they know that after 6 years, if we have been unable to persuade any news outlets to take this seriopulsy, they never will. They are going to get away with mass murder and treason, and already have.



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 02:15 AM
link   
he's not the only professor at Rutgers who calls the official story rubbish

Professor Lee Clarke, my sociology prof., openly discusses the conspiracy theories associated with 9/11



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 02:29 AM
link   
And the band plays on...


A prominent physicist with 33 years of service for the Naval Research Laboratory in Washington, DC (Dr. David L. Griscom) said that the official theory for why the Twin Towers and world trade center building 7 collapsed "does not match the available facts" and supports the theory that the buildings were brought down by controlled demolition

A world-renowned scientist, recipient of the National Medal of Science, America's highest honor for scientific achievement (Dr. Lynn Margulis) said:

"I suggest that those of us aware and concerned demand that the glaringly erroneous official account of 9/11 be dismissed as a fraud and a new, thorough, and impartial investigation be undertaken."

The former . of the Fire Science Division of the government agency which claims that the World Trade Centers collapsed due to fire (the National Institute of Standards and Technology), who is one of the world’s leading fire science researchers and safety engineers, a Ph.D. in mechanical engineering (Dr. James Quintiere), called for an independent review of the World Trade Center Twin Tower collapse investigation. "I wish that there would be a peer review of this," he said, referring to the NIST investigation. "I think all the records that NIST has assembled should be archived. I would really like to see someone else take a look at what they've done; both structurally and from a fire point of view. ... I think the official conclusion that NIST arrived at is questionable."

The principal electrical engineer for the entire World Trade Center complex, who was "very familiar with the structures and [the Twin Towers'] conceptual design parameters" (Richard F. Humenn), stated that "the mass and strength of the structure should have survived the localized damage caused by the planes and burning jet fuel . . . . the fuel and planes alone did not bring the Towers down."

Former Director for Research, Director for Aeronautical Projects, and Flight Research Program Manager for NASA's Dryden Flight Research Center, who holds masters degrees in both physics and engineering (Dwain A. Deets) says:

"The many visual images (massive structural members being hurled horizontally, huge pyroclastic clouds, etc.) leave no doubt in my mind explosives were involved [in the destruction of the World Trade Centers on 9/11].''

A prominent physicist, former U.S. professor of physics from a top university, and a former principal investigator for the U.S. Department of Energy, Division of Advanced Energy Projects (Dr. Steven E. Jones) stated that the world trade centers were brought down by controlled demolition.

A U.S. physics professor who teaches at several universities (Dr. Crockett Grabbe) believes that the World Trade Centers were brought down by controlled demolition.

An expert on demolition (Bent Lund) said that the trade centers were brought down with explosives (in Danish.)

A Dutch demolition expert (Danny Jowenko) stated that WTC 7 was imploded.

A safety engineer and accident analyst for the Finnish National Safety Technology Authority (Dr. Heikki Kurttila) stated regarding WTC 7 that "The great speed of the collapse and the low value of the resistance factor strongly suggest controlled demolition."

A 13-year professor of metallurgical engineering at a U.S. university, with a PhD in materials engineering, a former Congressional Office of Technology Assessment Senior Staff Member (Dr. Joel S. Hirschhorn), is calling for a new investigation of 9/11.

And on and on and on...



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 04:49 AM
link   
I'm glad when another learned voice comes out for 9/11 truth. It's a good thing. If people in the academic communtiy are waking up, then there might be a chance that they will be more watchful on other fronts as the new Naziism asserts it's control over more and more of our lives. They might remember how distinguished academics had to flee Europe before the wrath of Hitler. They might realize that now, there is no new world to flee to.

When your back is to the wall you either surrender or fight.

However, academics, useful as they are, never make the real difference in a fight like this. What wins is toughness coupled with an adherence to a strong moral position. Those are the things that carried Vietnam to victory over the US in that war and those are the things that sustain Cuba aqainst a mighty and unjust adversary in that situation.

As a side note on the subject of academics, people should remember, when they are clamoring for "peer" review in the science community of truther claims, just who those peers are. For the most part they are academics, carefully winnowed out by the tenure awarding process to include only the most gutless and co-operative tools of the establishment.

Don't worship academics folks. They don't measure up.



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
And the band plays on...
And on and on and on...


Hi guys, I just wanted to add my thoughts on this subject. I believe in a lot of things but I'm finding it hard to believe the 'truthers' version of 9/11.

I've heard there's hundreds of scholars who don't believe the offical story but even me, a mere nobody, after looking at the evidence from skeptics find it hard to believe the version for instance the truth movement is putting out.

I've looked through the 9/11 starters pack and saw some interesting lectures from truthers and also watched loose change and I was beginning to wonder myself, but then, I read the responses (ie 'screw loose change' and skeptical articles) and it seemed very obvious the attacks were from terrorists and not controlled demolition, that with other information regarding that day and it's events.

Honestly I'm not a skeptic, I believe in ufos and think the best thing to come out of ufology is the hundreds of whistleblowers that surely make anyone think something maybe going on, but the evidence for 9/11 being an inside job I've found was easily dismissed by skeptics, and I'm inclined to agree with them.

But, I find it hard to understand why so many scholars, like in the OP believe it to be an inside job.

Anyway, any comments to help me understand more would be appreciated.

Dan



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 07:00 PM
link   
reply to post by maarduk
 


because scientists and people with engineering degrees in the related fields, have simply said this could not have happened without breaking several laws of physics and thermodynamics. and i trust them over some political hacks that try and defy logic and reasoning. motive my friend, motive.



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 07:10 PM
link   
reply to post by maarduk
 

Dan the WTC towers fell too fast and too symmetrically for the leveling of the buildings to have been the result of simple collapse. Asymmetries will develop during a long sequential process like the collapse piecemeal of a 110 story building. In fact there is no way that both towers would have collapsed to the ground without the assistance of added explosives.

People believe that those collapses could occur because they have seen long rows of dominoes collapse in sequence on TV, but a big welded and bolted building is not like a row of dominoes. Everything is not going to give at just the right moment to continue a smooth and symmetrical collapse. Asymmetries will develop when even one bolt hangs on just a little too long. That will destroy the symmetry of the collapse and would probably eventually stop the collapse long before the ground level.

Even in the dominoe example, an asymmetry can cause the sequence to stop collapsing.

There are many, many other good reasons to think that 9/11 was an inside job, but you have to seriously search and think to find and understand them.



[edit on 16-2-2009 by ipsedixit]



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 07:44 PM
link   


Below is yet another college professor, a well educated man with impeccable credentials that says the official 9/11 story is garbage.


It's interesting that the learned professor didn't bother to look for the answers himself, readily available to him and all of us, but as the old adage goes, you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

Sad.





[edit on 16-2-2009 by jthomas]



posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 10:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by ipsedixit
reply to post by maarduk
 

Dan the WTC towers fell too fast and too symmetrically for the leveling of the buildings to have been the result of simple collapse. Asymmetries will develop during a long sequential process like the collapse piecemeal of a 110 story building. In fact there is no way that both towers would have collapsed to the ground without the assistance of added explosives.

People believe that those collapses could occur because they have seen long rows of dominoes collapse in sequence on TV, but a big welded and bolted building is not like a row of dominoes. Everything is not going to give at just the right moment to continue a smooth and symmetrical collapse. Asymmetries will develop when even one bolt hangs on just a little too long. That will destroy the symmetry of the collapse and would probably eventually stop the collapse long before the ground level.

Even in the dominoe example, an asymmetry can cause the sequence to stop collapsing.

There are many, many other good reasons to think that 9/11 was an inside job, but you have to seriously search and think to find and understand them.



[edit on 16-2-2009 by ipsedixit]


Hi ipsedixit,

thanks for taking the time to reply to my post I appreciate that so thanks.

I've only started to really look at the 9/11 conspiracy theories, I've watched three lectures by truthers, seen Loose Change and Screw Loose Change, I also watched the debate with the makers of Loose Change and Popular Mechanics. I've also read a few articles by skeptics in response to the more common theories by truthers.

With the WTC buildings coming down too fast, what is the skeptical response to that? Is there footage of any buildings coming down of their own accord and does it resemble the WTC? I've read into the theory of explosives used but it seems every point made in its claims can easily be answered with more natural and more likely causes. Maybe I'm wrong here, I don't know, it's interesting though.

I'll have to go back to the 9/11 starter pack in this section of ATS. If you could be so kind, maybe you could flag anything I really should see? If you don't have the time, no worries.

I'm open minded about the whole thing because basically I'm well aware of the proof there is of special interest groups within the US government who have had a hand in ufo cover-ups. I first heard about the whole 9/11 theories from Whitley Strieber and I simply thought he'd finally gone too far, but then I found out it's a common theory.

Although I'm open minded I can't help but be skeptical, in the debate with Loose Change and the Popular Mechanics, I couldn't help but feel the skeptics walked all over the two (very young) guys involved with Loose Change. I know they were seasoned skeptics, but it seemed their points couldn't be answered, and all the Loose Change guys could say was 'you're a liar' rather than illustrate exactly why anyone should think it was an inside job etc.

But I am open minded, and I won't dismiss the whole thing, it's just from what I've seen there are more prosaic explanations for a lot of the claims made by truthers.

If you can point me to anything that will be of interest, I'd be interested to see it, any links or websites that stand out from the starter pack put up in this section.

Thanks again for your reply, really appreciated,

Hope I haven't sounded too ignorant or niave lol, I mean the best,

Dan

[edit on 16-2-2009 by maarduk]




top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join