Comments about ‘Traces of explosives in 9/11 dust, scientists say’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, April 7 2009 12:00 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Ronnie Bray

Thank you Professor Jones for adding to the USA's mountain of urban myths another shoddy theory. Did we need it?

I saw the towers come down. It is impossible for a building to completely collapse 'from the top down' as some believe the towers ought to have done. When you can demonstrate one doing so, then I will come and watch. I do not expect to be summoned.

The most amusing part - aside from people actually swallowing the Bush-Cheney sabotage plot - is the comments from 'experts' that press their sapiential authority on readers as conclusive evidence that they [and they alone] know what can and cannot happen from a large jetliner striking a multi-storey building.

My reasons for knowing better than they do are just as off the wall, but here goes:

1. I have seen a tall building, so I know all about them.

2. I have been on an aeroplane, so I know all about them too.

3. I have a friend who is an airline pilot, so I have inside knowledge.

4. I have flown petroleum-driven miniature aircraft one of which crashed into a tall [by comparison] building, so there!

Next ...

Sitting-Bull

@ Jessica:

What were their motives for saving the dust and turning it over to researchers?

Many people saved some of the dust of that infamous day, and there is no merit in speculation why they did so. BTW: The samples were sent to Prof. Jones and others after they requested for it in their first papers and interviews. Nothing sinister here. There are even reference samples sent to other scientists as well. Many of them never called back, not because the hypothesis or the experimental results were wrong, but because the issue is still to hot. Kudos for the scientists listed in the study, especially Dr. Niels Harrit, a chemistry professor at the Copenhagen University who had published numerous studies in journals such as the Nano Letters, the Journal of the American Chemical Society and the Journal of Physical Chemistry in the past 30 years, for standig up for truth.

Larry J

I don't know what is more amazing; Dr. Jones' conspiracy claims, or, all the people who really believe them. But then a lot of people around here believe in some really crazy things.

harry

The 'American People' are responsible for the conspiracy of 911 succeeding.
They are either too scared to confront the realities or they are happy that the powerful ones are making all those tough decisions for them.

Most ordinary people have trouble choosing which car to buy (its easy, they are all junk) - fear is the key.

When a few 'ordinary' types get asked to take part in a cover-up, they love the ego trip it provides and will lie for their country till their dying days.
If you cant be a poweful person, it feels great to be a supporter, or a fan.

Humans are liars and fools - the purpose of existence is to get past that and become something better.
From a lot of the comments here, that isnt happening very often.....

Of course 911 was a phoney attack - the evidence is overwhelming.

Oh, and flying a plane precisely into a small target has been possible for over 40 years.

Dont any of you people read books? I guess not.


Mike Zelinski

Interesting article, thank you Deseret News. Independent news is necessary for an informed public. And thanks to the scientists involved for following where the science lead them.

This article should convince the American people that we need to encourage more scientists and engineers to investigate the events of 9/11. Free and open inquiry is always the best solution.

I hope all those who support the official gov't story of 9/11 will demand that NIST publicly release all evidence in order to prove its case. The rest of us should demand the same from NIST.

QRDeNameland

Jeff R wrote:

"Some people just cant face reality. No building is designed to take huge airliner with thousands of gallons of highly flammable jet fuel straight into the core."

Why do 'debunkers' make claims that are so easily countered by readily available facts? The WTC towers were famously designed to withstand jet impacts and fuel fires.

Don't take my word for it. Here's what John Skilling, head structural engineer of WTC construction said after the 1993 WTC bombing:

"We looked at every possible thing [...] even to the extent of an airplane hitting the side. Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the fuel would dump into the building. There would be a horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed, [but] the building structure would still be there."

(google "Skilling Twin Towers Engineered To Withstand Jet Collision" for source from Seattle Times)

No one has yet provided any pre-9/11 analysis which challenged this claim, meaning the architect/engineer community considered the claim sound. Yet both towers "collapsed" as catastrophically as possible. If they were so wrong, why do we trust any skyscrapers after 9/11?

"Face reality", indeed.

Too Late

Whether I believe it was a conspiracy or not doesn't matter now. It has been too many years since it happened. I am afraid that this will just become another conspiracy theory a-la J.F.K. and Pearl Harbor.

RB

No cover up?

Flight 91 that crashed in the field was shot-down by our own military jets.

Fact - USAF fighters were scambled in the D.C. area when all flights were ordered down and the Penegon had been hit.

Fact - Air Traffic control was fully aware of an in-coming unidetified aircraft rapidily approach Wash D.C.

Fast - The military was already authorized shoot-to-kill orders.

Fact - a Heat seeking missile locks onto the exhuast from the engine.

Fact - the right hand engine (No.2) fell first, hitting the gorund over 7 miles away and BEFORE the impact crater.

The trajectoy and loaction of debris is consistant with an airliner hit with and air to air missile, rolling out of control and hitting the ground nearly straight down.

Who covered up all those FACTS ?

What???

A large aircraft smashing with tremendous force into the side of a building would not comprise it's structual integrity?? REALLY???

BACK SHOW

I noticed recently that Glenn Beck earlier this week promo'ed a Beck segment about Popular Mechanics Magazine editor(s) to debunk the 9/11 conspiracy theories (so that's the best source possible, uh?).

Beck is a popular up-and-coming conservative who I believe made a deal with FOX--he gets the show, FOX gets their propagada.

Margaret

First thing to do is read the article. It is sophisticated, but elegantly simple, as truth frequently is. It draws no conclusions EXCEPT that a nano-version of Thermite was demonstrated in all samples. Nano thermite is only able to be produced by a very small number of sources, all of which would be under tight security. This is the smoking gun!
I think we are back to my favorite "square one", which is FOLLOW THE MONEY, cui bono? I may not live long enough to see this play out, but I am certain that a number of people are very disconcerted that this paper was published- and is receiving attention. Thank God!!!

secret

If there was a conspiracy it wasn't George Bush.

Our government and society is riddled with people belonging to secret combinations.

Also, since our society and government is riddled by these secret combinations there must have been many who live in NYC and worked at the buildings.

I find it stange (just a theory) that the hijackers (who want to kill as many people as possible), didn't wait until a little later to be sure all the people who worked there showed up? Perhaps it was so those who are in this secret combination could stay away until it was done?

Also, President Hinckley said the terrorists belonged to the very secret combination that the book of mormon says will exist in the latter days.

Also, Pres. Benson said long ago that the communists were also members of that secret combination.

Also, notice how hollywood loves both the communists and the terrorists.

Turow

@ Larry J

I don't know what is more amazing, the Bush administratoin's explanation for how the towers fell or the the people who believe them. But then a lot of people around here believe in some really crazy things.

Try using evidence in your arguments, Larry--its more persuasive.

Here's a tidbit. You will recall that Bush tried to appoint Henry Kissinger, the master of conspiracies, to lead the investigation into 911.


ripz

Hey "debunkers"... what part of "peer reviewed and published in a scientific journal" don't you get?

You don't get to simply debate you're way out of this. What you need to try to do is find some "experts" who can refute this evidence by way of publishing scientific proof of their own in a peer reviewed journal. Until that happens (it won't so don't hold your breath) This paper stands as "unchallenged" in the scientific community.

Even though the "Journal of 911 Studies" is not mainstream, It's body of work stands unchallenged... just like the first two MS peer reviewed papers this group of wonderful patriotic scientists have been successful in having published.

Thank you so much for writing and, having the courage, to publish this article.


george

And the 9/11 conspiracy theory has returned. It was all an inside job. And since so many people are willing to believe this, lets revisit these conspiracies as truth:

One world order, Philadelphia experiment, How AIDS really got started, Cars able to run only on water,
Global warming, Illuminati, ETs


Say, is there any truth to the rumour that the trumpet that Moroni is tooting on the mormon temples is really a signal that is going to Kolob?

Randy A Michael

When buildings fall down, they don't BLOW UP.

stuarthwyman

A lot of witness reported explosions, collapses of the 3 building are at all similar to controlled demolition, NIST as accounted a lot of lies with only 16 milions dollars thay had from gouvernment...

An indipendent investigation needs to the world...

Gretavo

@ george 1:17 p.m.

You left out these: al Qaeda hiding out in numerous high tech bunkers built inside of mountains in Afghanistan, Saddam being involved in 9/11, Saddam having WMD, Jessica Lynch going down shooting, Anthrax being mailed by Islamic terrorists, Bernie Madoff is a brilliant investor, Enron's business model was ingenious, Bill Clinton did not have sex with that woman... Now these are just the ones that have been proven to be lies, and yet at some point in time the majority of people believed them to be true. If the best you can muster as a counterargument is to insinuate that 9/11 skepticism is comparable to belief in UFO's then we must be getting closer to the truth. Why don't you join the rest of us in reality and accept already that you were duped? Most of us were, until we found the courage to examine all the relevant facts for ourselves.

LuKe

@Gretavo:

"Why don't you join the rest of us in reality and accept already that you were duped? Most of us were, until we found the courage to examine all the relevant facts for ourselves."

Be patient. I`m German, and this is your version of the Reichstag-fire. It`s hard to recognize that you`ve been lied to.

Of all CT-versions of what happened on 9/11, the official one is one of the worst. Besides the media coverage, there is not a single, simple evidence for it.

Try yourself.

An American

Fire could have burn the Towers, however, fire could have not vaporised the 3 NY Towers. It were exlosives or some kinds of thermate explosions which vaporised entire the 3 NY Towers.

Larry Silverstein has publicly confessed to his crimes by "...PULLING IT...".

The Towers were blown to bits, and the owner, Lucky Larry who had been owning the Towers for less than 4 months, has confessed to his crimes. Yet, noone has been charged. Even the FBI has not indicated that Bin Laden involvement into the Tower attacks.

Larry Silverstein was one of those people(s) behind the 911 attacks.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments