|
|
|
|
|
|
Response Letter to the Boston Globe, "The Science of How Buildings Fall Down", 3 Dec 2007 9/11
blogger I've written a letter to the editor, Boston Globe, in response to the article which appeared there yesterday: http://www.boston.com/news/science/articles... I invite feedback as I plan to send this letter to the Globe later today. I wish to address some important 9/11 points, and call attention to the Boston Tea Party conference next week. The letter will also be sent to the author of the article (Colin Nickerson of the Boston Globe). Dear Editor: "As the column shattered at the base of the scale model structure in the basement lab, the downward force of the 5,000-pound load - metal weights simulating a real-life building's burden of walls, floors, and contents - shifted instantly, invisibly, to other beams and columns…. But the mock building held." http://www.boston.com/news/science/articles...
This experiment provides further reason to doubt the “official story” that gravity alone was enough to cause complete and rapid destruction of the WTC Towers and WTC 7. WTC 7, a 47-story skyscraper, was not even hit by a plane, yet it completely collapsed on the afternoon of 9/11/2001. This experiment confirms our argument that buildings are designed to stand, not give up and fall down completely even if a key support column is destroyed in an instant (see technical articles in the JournalOf911Studies.com). On the other hand, we have all seen controlled demolitions using explosives in which tall buildings are brought straight down – completely and quickly. Of course, such a process leaves behind tell-tale residues. I will discuss the residues our team of investigators has in fact discovered in the WTC dust, at Faneuil Hall on Dec. 15, 2007. (See http://boston911truth.org/teaparty/911conference.php.) Dr. Steven E. Jones
|
||||
