|
120+ Professors Question 9/11
The Patriots Question website:
http://patriotsquestion911.com/professors.html is
constantly being expanded with new names of well known public
personalities in the U.S.A. and around the world, each of whom question
the official fraudulent version of the events of 9/11. Please go
to the above link or links below for all future updates.
The PatriotsQuestion911
website now features statements by more than 650 highly specialised credible individuals who
question or contradict the official account of 9/11, with more being added
all the time. They include:
A statement
by the site’s author: “I want it to be clear that this is not an
organization and none of these individuals are formally associated
with the website. The website is a reference collection of their public
statements.”
Public Statements by Professionals
"The Twin Towers were designed to have fully loaded Boeing 707s crash into
them. That was the largest plane at the time. I believe that the buildings
probably could sustain multiple impacts of jetliners because this
structure is like the mosquito netting on your screen door. This intense
grid - and the jet-plane is just a pencil puncturing that screen netting.
It really does nothing to the screen netting."
-- Frank A. DeMartini, WTC victim, Architect. Mr. DeMartini was the
Construction Manager on the WTC project.
"The whole idea of the pancake theory and this progressive collapse that
NIST talks about means that you have no resistance on the way down...what
an amazing thing that all of the bolts would have failed at the same time.
All of the welds would have failed at the same time...And there isn't
even an explanation for how the core of the structure — an extremely
highly structurally-resisting part of the structure that basically takes
the lateral loading — collapsed. [NIST] just talk about the trusses that
go across from column to column. And all of them fail at the same time?
Even if you were to accept that, you've got resistance as the floors come
down. And they did an analysis there, ... It should have taken 96 seconds
for that total collapse to have occurred in a pancake manner down to
ground zero. It took 9. I think Building number 7 is the big, big
question mark and I don't know that there is an engineering explanation
for that other than controlled demolition."
-- Robert M. Korol,
BA Sc, MA Sc, PhD, PE, F.C.S.C.E. – Professional Engineer and Professor
Emeritus, Department of
Civil Engineering, McMaster University. Elected Fellow of the Engineering
Institute of Canada for exceptional contributions to engineering in
Canada. Well known for his research on steel structures; the plastic
theory of metal structures, inelastic buckling, limit analysis,
environmental assessment and life cycle analysis methodologies.
"In my opinion the building WTC 7 was, with
great probability, professionally demolished.”
-- Hugo Bachmann,
PhD, Professor Emeritus and former Chairman of the Department of
Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, Swiss Federal Institute of
Technology. Author and
co-author of Seismic Analysis of Concrete Reinforced Structures (1990),
Vibration Problems in Structures (1992): Practical Guidelines (1995),
Structural Analysis of Linked Concrete Beams (1998), Structural
Construction for Engineers. An introduction (2001), Earthquake-proofing
Buildings (2002)
“I looked at the drawings, the construction and it couldn't be done by
fire. So, no, absolutely not. Building 7 was brought down by controlled
demolition. Absolutely.”
-- Danny Jowenko,
Proprietor, Jowenko Explosieve Demolitie B.V., a European demolition and
construction company,
with offices in the Netherlands. Founded 1980, Jowenko Explosieve
Demolitie is certified and holds permits to comply with the Dutch
Explosives for Civil Use Act and the German Explosives Act. Jowenko's
explosives engineers also hold the German Certificate of Qualifications
and the European Certificate for Shotfiring issued by The European
Federation of Explosive Engineers.
“The interesting fact is that each of these 110-story Twin Towers fell
upon itself in about ten seconds at nearly free-fall speed. This violates
Newton’s Law of Conservation of Momentum that would require that as the
stationary inertia of each floor is overcome by being hit, the mass
(weight) increases and the free-fall speed decreases. Even if Newton’s Law
is ignored, the prevailing theory would have us believe that each of the
Twin Towers inexplicably collapsed upon itself crushing all 287 massive
columns on each floor while
maintaining a free-fall speed as if the 100,000, or more, tons of
supporting structural-steel framework underneath didn't exist. Controlled
demolition is so politically unthinkable that the media not only demeans
the messenger but also ridicules and "debunks" the message rather than
provide investigative reporting.”
-- William Rice,
PE, Registered
Professional Civil Engineer who worked on structural steel and concrete
buildings in Boston, New York, and Philadelphia. Former Professor at
Vermont Technical College where he taught engineering materials,
structures lab, and other building related courses.
"Research proves the current administration
has been dishonest about what happened in New York and Washington, D.C.
The World Trade Center was almost certainly brought down by controlled
demolitions and that the available relevant evidence casts grave doubt on
the government's official story about the attack on the Pentagon."
-- Jack Keller,
PhD, PE, Professor Emeritus, Civil and Environmental Engineering, Utah
State University.
Member, National Academy of Engineering. International advisor on water
resources, development and agricultural water use. Serves as an advisor to
the CALFED Water Use Efficiency Program and former member CALFED
Independent Science Board. Awarded State of Utah Governor's Medal for
Science and Technology (1988). Selected by Scientific American magazine
as one of the world's 50 leading contributors to science and technology
benefiting society (2004).
"The FEMA/Kean Commission Report was a
flawed investigation... In addition to the firemen calling the Commission
a cover up, there are the victim's family organizations that are saying
the same thing. The commission did gather many experts but did not provide
them with the full information they needed. FEMA hampered and distorted
the investigation of the professionals they hired. In conclusion, FEMA/Kean
Commission Report was a flawed investigation and it needs to be reopened.
An open, independent of the Federal Government, public inquiry into the
attacks should be set up under an independent judicial body with power to
subpoena evidence."
-- Charles N.
Pegelow, BS CE, Licensed Civil Engineer (Structural) with more than 25
years experience in
structural design and analysis and project management of major
construction projects, including large steel structures
"So, for the building to be collapsed in
about 10 seconds, the lower floors would have to start moving before the
upper floors could reach them by gravity alone. Did we see this? I believe
it's pretty clear in some of the videos. The "wave" of collapse,
progressing down the building, is moving faster than free-fall speed. This
would require something like a detonation sequence... In conclusion, the
explanations of the collapse that have been given by the 9/11 Commission
Report and NIST are not physically possible. A new investigation is needed
to determine the true cause of what happened to these buildings on
September 11, 2001. The destruction of all seven WTC buildings and
especially WTC1 and WTC2 may be
considered the greatest engineering disaster in the history of the world
and deserves a thorough investigation."
-- Judy Wood, PhD,
Assistant Professor, Mechanical Engineering, Clemson University
1999-2006. Postdoctoral
research associate in the Department of Engineering Science and Mechanics,
Virginia Tech 1997-1999. Member of the Society for Experimental Mechanics
(SEM). Co-founder SEM’s Biological Systems and Materials Division.
Currently serves on the SEM Composite Materials Technical Division
"Research proves the current administration has been dishonest about what
happened in New York and Washington, D.C. The World Trade Center was
almost certainly brought down by controlled demolitions and that the
available relevant evidence casts grave doubt on the government's official
story about the attack on the Pentagon."
-- Gordon Ross,
Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineer.
“Our nation and the world have wagered everything on the Bush
Administration’s story of what happened on September 11th. It is now clear
that their story is entirely false, and this fact points toward a greater
crime than the crimes of 9/11 themselves."
-- Kevin Ryan, BS
Chem, Certified Quality Engineer.
Former Site Manager for Environmental Health Laboratories, a division of
Underwriters Laboratories. Mr. Ryan was fired by Underwriters
Laboratories 5 days after sending a letter to a NIST scientist pointing
out inconsistencies in the NIST report on the causes of the building
collapses at the
World Trade Center and asking
for clarification
"It is clear extraordinarily powerful explosives were used to destroy the
WTC Twin Towers. Careful scrutiny of video of the collapse of the South
Tower (WTC2) shows the upper segment (above the airplane strike) listing,
then dropping, then disintegrating or pulverizing. There was a massive
explosion near ground level immediately before those events. Using only
common sense and reflection, the tilt-then-drop sequence shows the
building's central structural steel core (including stairwells, elevator
shafts, utility conduits, etc., and mainly, 47 thick-walled 2'X4' box
section steel columns) had by some agency been made insubstantial and
unable to bear weight. Putting that together with the ground level blast
and the subsequent pulverization it is clear very powerful explosives had
to have been in play. The airplane strike was a mere smokescreen.
Understanding the mechanism of the collapse leads to additional important
questions. Who planted the explosives? What kind of explosives were
used? When were they planted? And for what reasons would someone destroy
not only the Twin Towers, but all the buildings in the World Trade Center?
Simple logic requires of a credible account of the Sept. 11 events that it
explain ALL details clearly shown in documentary footage, together with
all other known facts e.g. that alleged ring-leader Mohamed Atta had been
identified by the Department of Defense antiterrorist program known as
Able Danger more than a year prior to 9/11. The Official Story does not
even come close to meeting that standard."
-- Bruce R. Henry,
PhD, Professor Emeritus, Mathematics and Computer Science, Worcester State
College Former guidance systems engineer for Polaris and Trident missiles,
General Electric Co.
"Research proves the current administration has been dishonest about what
happened in New York and Washington, D.C. The World Trade Center was
almost certainly brought down by controlled demolitions and that the
available relevant evidence casts grave doubt on the government's official
story about the attack on the Pentagon."
-- Rodger Herbst,
BAAE (Aeronautical and Astronautical Engineering),
ME, Flight Controls Simulation
Engineer
"The 9/11 Commission Report is fatally flawed. Among its many problems;
1) It is entirely silent on the collapse of WTC Buidling-7. 2) The FBI
has admitted it has no hard evidence that Bin Laden was responsible for
the attacks of 9/11. 3) To this day, the hijackers' identities remain in
doubt. 4) Evidence, including the lack of adequate debris, at both the
Pentagon and Shanksville contradicts the official theory of Flights 77 and
93. 5) There is prima facie evidence of the controlled demolition of the
WTC Twin Towers and Building 7.”
-- Enver Masud,
BS EE, MS OR
(Operations Research), PE, Engineering management consultant. Expert in
electrical power grid management. Former Chief, Strategic and Emergency
Planning Branch, U.S. Department of Energy. Consulted for World Bank, EBRD,
and USAID in Albania, Czech Republic, Egypt, Ghana, Indonesia, Latvia,
Norway, Pakistan, Russia, Tanzania. Former Director, Office of
Engineering, Washington, D.C. Public Service Commission. Served on the
System Planning Subcommittee, the International Practices Subcommittee,
and the Long Range Planning Task Force of the IEEE. Author of more than
120 technical and non-technical articles and reports.
“The events of 9/11 were the result of either passive complicity among
certain elements within the Bush administration and terrorists, or, more
likely, a self-inflicted wound on the nation orchestrated by such elements
to create a new reality in geopolitical affairs.”
-- Joseph P.
Firmage, Chairman and CEO, ManyOne Networks.
Formerly, Co-Founder, Chairman and CEO of USWeb Corporation, which, under
his leadership, became the world’s largest Internet consulting firm,
serving half of the Fortune 100, and a publicly traded company with
thousands of employees in North America and Europe. Previously, Vice
President of strategy for Novell’s Network Systems Group. Previously,
Founder and CEO of Serius Corporation, an early pioneer of object-oriented
visual programming tools, which was acquired by Novell in 1993. Recipient
of Silicon Valley's Young Entrepreneur of the Year Award from Ernst &
Young in 1998.
“There is no doubt in my mind that what
transpired on September 11, 2001, was an inside job carried out by members
of our own government. Based on my experience as a commercial pilot, I do
not believe that it's possible for four large commercial airliners to have
gone off course for as long as they did and as far as they did and were
not intercepted by Air Force pilots, without the explicit cooperation of
highly placed people in the military and government. I also do not believe
that both of the WTC Twin Towers could have been identically pulverized
and that both identically collapsed into their own footprints as a result
of a single airplane impact and the fire from a few thousand gallons of
jet fuel. I also do not believe that WTC Building 7, which wasn't even
hit by an airplane, could have entirely collapsed as a result of a few
fires, particularly in a manner that is entirely consistent with a
controlled demolition. Additionally, the visible evidence at the Pentagon
is inconsistent with an impact by a Boeing 757. There was virtually no
debris from the 80-ton airplane, except a few small pieces that were
picked up by hand. Nor was there any evidence of holes in the building
that surely would have resulted from the impacts of the two 6-ton RB-211
engines on the alleged Boeing 757. Similarly, at Shanksville, PA, the
small gash in the earth is far too small to have resulted from the impact
of a Boeing 757. All of these factors have convinced me that our
government was fully onboard with what took place on 9/11. The official
account of 9/11 is absolute B.S. We, as citizens of this great country,
need to do research, question the government, and demand a full, impartial
investigation to determine what actually took place that day."
-- Dennis Cimino,
Systems Engineer. Commercial pilot rating for 25 years.
Navy Combat Systems Specialist
(Radar, ECM, UHF/VHF/HF COMMS., GPS, INS, SATNAV)
"In the 120 years history of high-rise steel-framed buildings, none has
ever collapsed with all the characteristics of a controlled demolition,
other than by a controlled demolition. On 11th September 2001, we are told
that three such buildings did: World Trade Center buildings 1, 2 and 7
(the Twin Towers and a 47-storey building one block away. The latter was
not hit by an aircraft. This is at least a little curious. The whole
world’s media witnessed the three sky-scrapers falling in to their own
footprints at near free-fall speed, i.e. at the same speed as apples would
have fallen from their roofs in a vacuum. How could this be? Was there no
resistance whatsoever from hundreds of hardened steel columns? What about
the braking effect of the stationary concrete floors beneath (i.e. the law
of conservation of momentum)? How did relatively minor asymmetrical damage
bring about a symmetrical, total collapse -- in three separate buildings
constructed in different ways and at different times? Surely it takes
weeks of meticulous planning to bring about that type of ‘controlled
demolition’, not random missile hits in the side (WTC 1 & 2) or falling
debris and small fires (WTC 7)? If I were at the cinema, I would have to
suspend belief in the laws of physics for the benefit of the story.
Unfortunately, this is real life and I am very disturbed. Who would do
this? Why? Please do your own research and consider the evidence coldly
and rationally. There may come a time soon when science, logic and the
internet will need to defeat political misinformation and the vested
interests in perpetual terror and war. Are you ready?"
-- Timothy A.
Millea, Computer Scientist and Systems Engineer. Former
Lecturer, School of Systems Engineering, Reading University (UK).
Researcher in self-evolving software systems.
"And what we have learned in the years since then (2004) only confirms
that initial impression. At the simplest level there is a gross violation
of conservation of energy: for the towers to fall at or near free-fall
speed, all the stored gravitational energy would have had to be used to
accelerate their own mass downward. The same energy can’t be used twice,
which is to say that any “work” extracted, for example to pulverize
concrete, will slow the collapse by a corresponding amount. In the case of
the twin towers even a rough calculation of the amount of energy needed to
pulverize all the concrete and gypsum to the very fine dust observed (and
without including the energy needed to crumple and deform steel) indicates
that it would have far exceeded the entire gravitational potential energy
of the structures. As measurements by Cahill have shown, dust particles
were mostly <30 microns, with a sizeable fraction smaller than 0.25
micron. Not only is an immense amount of energy needed to break most of
the chemical bonds holding the concrete together, but there is no
mechanism that can be postulated with only a gravitational collapse that
might account for such rapid and complete pulverization. Such a process
is almost by definition an explosive event: the almost instantaneous
conversion of a slab of concrete into a rapidly expanding cloud of dust.
The obvious question is what does it mean that there was a controlled
demolition. At the simplest level, it means that someone had a lot [of]
access to the buildings over a long enough period of time to set this up.
It implies, as many other things have tonight, that the people who had
effective control of the site had an interest in having it scrubbed and
making sure that no information was available; that a forensic
reconstruction couldn't be done. Even in much smaller catastrophes we
typically will reconstruct things as completely as possible. For example
with TWA Flight 800 pieces were dredged off the bottom of the sea. A
complete reconstruction was done to allow a detailed analysis. In this
case, just the opposite was done. ... "
-- Jeff King, MD,
SB (MIT Science Baccalaureate in Biology and Electrical Engineering),
Physician. Former Electrical Engineer.
"I am a senior design RF cell phone engineer (cellular/CDMA engineer) and
have designed systems for Sprint, Verizon and Alltel. I have 2 FCC
licenses and have worked in the industry for 13 yrs. From what I read
several calls were made on flight 93 some were reported to last as long as
20 minutes. No way! Believe me, it's hard to OPTIMIZE these sites
correctly for cars going 50mph on the ground. The sites' antennas are
OPTIMIZED toward highways, and cities, and usually down-tilted. At
30,000ft, even 1 degree of down-tilt would make the RF energy totally
useless."
-- Brad Mayeux,
Senior RF Design Engineer
|