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.
60 Aerospace Engineers Call for a New 9/11 Investigation
As the number of verified architect and engineer petitioners at AE911Truth passes 1,000, the number describing themselves as aerospace engineers, or as engineers who have contributed professionally to the aerospace field, exceed sixty. These sixty-plus engineers were motivated to place their names on the public record as a matter of professional and social responsibility. While the skills necessary to conduct professional forensic analysis of destroyed buildings is largely distinct from those experienced in aerospace engineering, the basic physical laws involved in an analysis of the speed, symmetry, and energy input/output balance of the World Trade Center’s destruction involve only high school physics and chemistry, some lookups regarding the energy necessary to crush concrete, and basic arithmetic.
Here is a listing of these sixty-plus aerospace engineers, together with brief bios and their statements made at the time they signed: The engineers are listed alphabetically, grouped with those having full careers in aerospace listed first, and those with less than 30 years in aerospace listed second.
Dr. David Chen,
“NIST & the US Congress should be ashamed of the poor investigation.
“Thanks to the architects & engineers of this site for carrying the torch for truth.”
Joseph L. DeClue
The Government’s politically-correct explanation is not credible. It seems highly likely that our government must have had some part or at least been aware of the pending attack. Also the lack of response by the Air Force was not credible.”
David Wayne Nicholson
“My professional experience with metals in high temperature environments convinced me that the three buildings could not have been demolished with jet fuel fires.”
It's great that they are opening a new investigation into this. Hopefully they can get this completely straightened out
We will know whats going on if they mysteriously die as they close in on the truth.
Originally posted by trueforger
It would be nice to see 'em questioned while hooked up to a lie detector.
Originally posted by trueforger
reply to post by hooper
Ruining the future fact finding inquiry is the loss of evidence.First responders die.Films get 'lost'.The steel would tell ALL,but who ,what.where,when and WHY?!?How they gonna explain that?
It would be nice to see 'em questioned while hooked up to a lie detector.
In other words, they're not analyzing the facts and events and basing it upon their own expertise.
They're simply swallowing the foolishness Richard Gage and all these other damned fool conspiracy web sites are pushing out and repeating it like a parrot.
it doesn't mean there's any actual credibility in these conspiracacy stories. All it means is that they're simply being suckered by these snake oil peddlers the exact same way all these other truthers (including you, Impressme) are being suckered.
Just becuase they have expertise in aerospace engineering it doesn't make them any more immune to those "the gov't wants to murder us all", con artists out on the internet.
After all, Tom Cruise is a rich and famous actor, and HE thinks all our troubles are caused by the ghosts of space aliens murdered by Xenu the galactic warlord.
Originally posted by trueforger
reply to post by hooper
Who?Condie,Bush Jr,Bush Sr,Cheney,Rudy and Larry for starters.
Also that NIST guy,what's his name?Gross?
So, there are 60!! aerospace engineers who want a new investigation. So when are they going to start?
what do they need from the rest of us?
They are the pros, the experts, the scientist - what exactly is holding them back?
Do they want money?
Do they want power?
Let them do the same thing as the NIST did.
I really do not understand this constant call for a new investigation from the very people, who in theory, would be ruinning the investigation.
By the way, the word is credible. And Richard Gage is not.
I really do not understand this constant call for a new investigation from the very people, who in theory, would be ruinning the investigation.
Actually, the word I meant to type was "running". Please note on your keyboard that the U and I are right next to each other
I wasn't actually going to say anything about "credible", however, you misspelled it about 50 times and being that the core of most of your "arguments" are based on "credibility" I thought you would appreciate it.
Ah, subpeona power. That's the ticket, huh? Exactly whom would you like to subpeona? Bush? Cheyney?