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.

 

Jones Talks About His "Debunkers" and other Interesting Facts: Possible Use of Thermitic Material

page: 1
10
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 05:15 AM
link   
About 45 minutes of audio from Dr. Jones.

I love listening to this guy; aside from being very informative and intelligent, his voice is very relaxing.

www.blogtalkradio.com...

Just press the play button in the Blog Radio frame and check it out!

P.S. There is also a good hypothesis of why/how the energetic material was used in the towers: as an igniter for
cutter chargers as per Amptiac Journal referenced by the scientists.

edit on 14-1-2011 by turbofan because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 06:18 AM
link   
This is the devout Mormon who believes that he found evidence that Jesus traveled across North America:
web.archive.org...://www.physics.byu.edu/faculty/jones/rel491/handstext+and+figures.htm

In view of this absurdity, how can ANYONE trust a word the man says about what he believes he has found to support his theory that thermate or nano-thermate was used to assist the destruction of the North and South Towers? WHAT HE WANTS TO BELIEVE clearly influences his scientific work and therefore his analysis and pronouncements cannot be trusted.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 06:35 AM
link   
reply to post by micpsi
 


Jones isn't the only scientist on this paper. Using that excuse is pathetic; not only for the reason I just
stated, but because it doesn't address the peer reviewed and factual science.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 06:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by turbofan
P.S. There is also a good hypothesis of why/how the energetic material was used in the towers: as an igniter for
cutter chargers as per Amptiac Journal referenced by the scientists.

edit on 14-1-2011 by turbofan because: (no reason given)

So we're back to the Hush-a-boom explosives?



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 07:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by micpsi
This is the devout Mormon who believes that he found evidence that Jesus traveled across North America:
web.archive.org...://www.physics.byu.edu/faculty/jones/rel491/handstext+and+figures.htm


His Phd. is in physics not religious history. Everyone is entitled to their hobbies and doing funstuff that they are no good at.


In view of this absurdity, how can ANYONE trust a word the man says about what he believes he has found to support his theory that thermate or nano-thermate was used to assist the destruction of the North and South Towers? WHAT HE WANTS TO BELIEVE clearly influences his scientific work and therefore his analysis and pronouncements cannot be trusted.


Well for starters, his specialty is physics and he has published numerous peer reviewed articles in established journals in that field. You can understand that can't you?

This interview is well worth listening to because it includes some amusing stories of encounters Professor Jones has had with some of the academic frauds who are his main detractors. He also talks about the offer of a bribe of a large grant to divert the point of his research into fire prevention rather than forensic analysis of the red thermitic material discovered in the dust of the WTC.

One of the funniest things in the interview is his retelling of Thomas Eager's reaction to the lack of zinc in the red material that Jones and his associates believe is an exotic nano-thermitic material. Jones et al did analyse the paint from the steel in the WTC rubble and found that it contained zinc as one of it's constituents.

Correspondingly, a conclusive determinant that the red chips found in the dust are not paint was the absence of zinc in that material, plus, of course it's property of producing iron spherules when burned, something that the paint from the steel does not do.

Eager just simply ignores this evidence and continues to insist that the red chips are paint, with no scientific rationale behind his assertion, at all.

Another debunker, Greening, has apparently come around to acknowledge that the red chips in question are not paint.

Jones also recounts some of his scientifically hilarious encounters with the frauds at NIST. All in all, a great interview.
edit on 14-1-2011 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 07:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by micpsi
This is the devout Mormon who believes that he found evidence that Jesus traveled across North America:
web.archive.org...://www.physics.byu.edu/faculty/jones/rel491/handstext+and+figures.htm

In view of this absurdity, how can ANYONE trust a word the man says about what he believes he has found to support his theory that thermate or nano-thermate was used to assist the destruction of the North and South Towers? WHAT HE WANTS TO BELIEVE clearly influences his scientific work and therefore his analysis and pronouncements cannot be trusted.


So its the tired old argument that scientific work that has been iniciated out of a suspicion can not be trusted. The flaws need to be shown in his work. You need to show in his work that rather than applying sound since he fudged and created results, rather than going where science leads him.

If the police suspects me and takes my fingerprints and they match, then thats evidence against me. The police suspecting me before taking the fingerprints does not dilute the fingerprints in any way.
edit on 14-1-2011 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 07:59 AM
link   
Interesting interview, and Jones does have a relaxing voice. LOL

On another note the guy doing the interview Todd Fletcher I think, yeah he sucks as an interviewer sounds like a rank amateur.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 08:14 AM
link   
reply to post by snowen20
 

Fletcher's manner is a little amateurish, but he is knowledgeable of the material and he is not obnoxiously annoying as some intervewers can be. He doesn't subject the interviewee to untimely interruptions or inadvertently miss the point of the discussion as is sometimes the case with others.

Even Walter Cronkite was a young broadcaster once.

edit on 14-1-2011 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 09:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by micpsi
This is the devout Mormon

Someone's religious faith has no bearing on the scientific process and standards.



Originally posted by micpsi
who believes that he found evidence that Jesus traveled across North America

Someone's religious beliefs have no bearing on the scientific process and standards.

Suffice it to say, when one looks at the bible with a scientific point of view, one can see that "god" and his angels traveled around in physical craft, and as such, likely traveled the world.

There are even Indian civilizations that still currently believe that their ancestors came from the stars in ships.



Originally posted by micpsi
In view of this absurdity

It's only absurdity to those who ignorantly and blindly follow religious faiths, instead of being agnostic and having an open mind to what the bible says from a scientific point of view.



Originally posted by micpsi
WHAT HE WANTS TO BELIEVE clearly influences his scientific work and therefore his analysis and pronouncements cannot be trusted.

Would you mind showing the world how Dr. Jones' religious beliefs "clearly" influence his scientific work? Because from a scientific standpoint, I seen no evidence of religion in his scientific results.


Your ad-hominem attacks on Dr. Jones instead of attempting to debunk his scientific findings shows your true intentions and agenda.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 09:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by roboe
So we're back to the Hush-a-boom explosives?

There was no such thing at the WTC. The by-standers, survivors, and first responders prove otherwise:





posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by roboe
So we're back to the Hush-a-boom explosives?

There was no such thing at the WTC. The by-standers, survivors, and first responders prove otherwise

Bystanders, survivors, and first responders also reported hearing trains, hurricanes, and what-have-you. It's called similes.

Incidently, the most solid evidence we have for what happened inside the towers around the time of the collapses, are all missing these massive explosions. Have you listened to the Kevin Cosgrove phonecall recently?



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 10:06 AM
link   
reply to post by ipsedixit
 


Funny you should say that because I actually found the ability to finally listen to a guest completely and without interruption refreshing.

Let me drop a name of annoyance...........ALEX JONES.... lol
Master of interruptions, King of babbling, Lord of boisterous ranting! Yeah a needed relief for sure.
Thanks for the links.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 10:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by roboe
Incidently, the most solid evidence we have for what happened inside the towers around the time of the collapses, are all missing these massive explosions.

False. You probably didn't even watch my video that I just posted. I included a few of the many witnesses that heard timed booms as both towers collapsed.

Further, had you read the First Responder Oral Histories, you would know about the firefighters who saw flashes going "up, down and around" not one, but both towers as they collapsed. The flashes preceded the collapse front and the flashes had "popping or exploding sounds" associated with them according to the firefighters that saw and heard them.


The witnesses reported the timed detonations, flashes, and sounds associated with the flashes. All are indicative of controlled demolitions and none are indicative of fire-induced collapse. If you think any of the above is indicative of fire-induced collapses, I'll ask you to show some sort of evidence proving such. If not, this conversation ends here.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 10:17 AM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 

While I have no doubt that there was foul play involved in September the 11th, I find that video and the supposed detonations to be a hard pill to swallow. Those sounds could literally be anything within the crumbling structure of the building.

I'm not trying to negate the possibility of explosives being used, only that that video is mildly unconvincing.
Has 9/11 truth even decided upon what explosives were used?
High yeild conventional? Thermite? Nano Thermite? Or all of the above?



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 10:23 AM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


Way to display the obvious for people who dont want to see it to begin with. Its a waste of time.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 10:34 AM
link   
" you would know about the firefighters who saw flashes going "up, down and around" not one, but both towers as they collapsed. The flashes preceded the collapse front and the flashes had "popping or exploding sounds" associated with them according to the firefighters that saw and heard them."


This statement is the one thing that initially got me interested in the probability of CD at WTC. It's hard to deny trained observers. Also I remember them stating that they say flashes around and up and down the building which is in my opinion the only way those buildings could have come down in that manner. My problem is the videos like this which are interesting and useful for explanation purposes really do nothing to further the concept of CD in my opinion.

It's like they always ride this fine line between "yes it is" and "could be" which leaves a nice pocket of plausible deniability at all times... How convenient.
edit on 14-1-2011 by snowen20 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 10:44 AM
link   
Not only is Jones correct about the science, he is correct about the debunkers that make excuses for his
work.

You know the ones that can't debate the science, and stand by theory without experiment?

That was one of my favourite parts of the interview.

Guys, just let these "debunkers" spew their junk. We are past the point of debate. We are here to spread
the word and inform each other, not debate brick walls.




posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 10:52 AM
link   
Did anybody even listen all the way through the interview? Threats, the proposal of a large grand by Homeland security? Why would Homeland security be tied into university grands, or universities to begin with. Nobody found this worth mentioning?



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 10:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Cassius666
 


Its just another thing debunkers will turn their head away from rather than face the music.
I mean even if you don't agree with everything you have to admit something was horribly amiss and in the case of jones, where are the contradictory science papers? I want to see them.

Until someone debunks Jones with more than a bucket of words and ad hominem attacks Im sticking to the unofficial story.



posted on Jan, 14 2011 @ 11:30 AM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


_BoneZ_....your video.

Once again....what people HEARD, and then described as a comparison doesn't mean that what they HEARD was, in actual fact, HOW they described it!!! I have seen, besides that clip, one by the Naudet brothers....they are most famous for being out on the streets of Manhattan and swinging the camera around, upon hearing the approaching American 11, and catching the only footage if its impact. However, they filmed much more that day....including capturing the impressions and reactions of the NYFD personnel, IN one of the NYFD houses. In that clip I have seen, witnesses (firefighters) recall seeing the Tower (I assume the South Tower, first to collapse) and the progressive "popping" floor-by-floor. THIS IS CONSISTENT with the fact that, once the structure began the failure process, it progressed.

The load-bearing supports were designed, were they not, to bear the weight vertically, for the most part?? (Allowing for the built-in flexibility and tolerances for lateral wind-sway...).

The structural members themselves, steel beams and such, had tremendous compression strength of course (the ones NOT affected by the uneven heating of the intense fires). BUT ---- the connections, the joints, the places where each structural component HAD to be attached to another....those were the "Achille's Heel" of the building, once the imbalance (from the damage, and heat above) became too much.

!!BOOM!! !!BOOM!! !!BOOM!! as those connections failed, snapped, went !!BOOM!! ---- and other structural members, also subject to extreme forces that they weren't aligned to withstand, ALSO underwent stress and breakage and fracture.

It is a LOUD event...and those sounds can resemble "explosions"....because they occur with violence, as the material gives way. SO, in a sense, they do "explode". Same as you taking a wooden dowel, and subjecting it to enough stress so that it snaps...it "explodes" at the fracture point(s).


THIS video....it is a structure (steel) that undergoes an extreme stress, and thus beyond its design load limits, fails. It is NOT loaded with a detonating explosive....the sounds are purely those of the failing of structural members within the construct. AND are very similar to what were heard at the Towers, during their collapse (begins at :40):




There isn't always video and sound of similar events, such as that crane example, for comparison to the WTC collapses. But, a little bit of thinking and reflection will help lead people to the comprehension, and NOT the immediate leap to "demolition" ---- which is, frankly, ludicrous for many, many reasons already delineated countless times.


edit on 14 January 2011 by weedwhacker because: (no reason given)







 
10
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join