Grahod You wrote: "Gees Imperial I'm really cut up by reading that unscientific dribble. Even Jones debunked his own theory."
What you have written is incorrect, but I'm sure that you know that. Your real motives for pursuing such a dogmatic position on the 9/11 issue are now seriously open to question.
Professor Steven Jones DID NOT debunk his own theory. His initial paper, which had been highly peer reviewed, and resulted in him being sacked from the Brigham Young University (because he would not withdraw his claims ... university funding is always at stake when one doesn't toe the party line) was rewritten and again peer reviewed before being re-published in Sept. 2006. This man has sacrificed his career in trying to arrive at the truth of this issue, whereas others have just rescinded their beliefs so as not to jeopardise their incomes and careers.
The Abstract of this paper is below.
ABSTRACT "In this paper, I call for a serious investigation of the hypothesis that WTC 7 and the Twin Towers were brought down, not just by impact damage and fires, but through the use of pre-positioned cutter-charges. I consider the official FEMA, NIST, and 9-11 Commission reports that fires plus impact damage alone caused complete collapses of all three buildings. And I present evidence for the controlled-demolition hypothesis, which is suggested by the available data, and can be tested scientifically, and yet has not been analyzed in any of the reports funded by the US government."
And a little bit of additional info (cut and pasted) just to highlight the academic rigour that this paper has been subject to.
Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Completely Collapse? By Dr. Steven E. Jones, Physicist and Archaeometrist. The views in this paper are the sole responsibility of the author. The paper has undergone significant modifications following an additional set of peer reviews ... One of the editors (Prof. Griffin) has explained that there were four reviewers for my paper, all Ph.D’s, two were physicists.
