Monday, 10 September 2007

THE SCIENTIFIC PROOF THAT ENDS THE 911 TRUTH DEBATE: Responding to a Mainstream 911 Hit Piece

This is a reply to Christopher Scanlon's article "9/11 theories as factless as those of Bush" appearing in The Age Newspaper (10/9/07).


Mr Scanlon's article, "9/11 Theories as Factless as those of Bush" (10/9), reveals that he is the one who is devoid of facts. The man claimed there is no solid evidence for the conspiracy claims, but as we can see below, there exists some extremely disturbing scientific evidence which totally undermines the official story. It does not matter what theories you believe in, the evidence here speaks for itself:

The picture above shows MOLTEN STEEL being removed from the World Trade Centre rubble pile. However, from all accounts (even the official NISTs report concedes this point) the fires in the WTC buildings were too weak to cause such melting. Conventional building fires, including ones initiated with aviation kerosene, cannot raise the temperature of structural steel to its melting point of around 1300 degrees celsius. According to all the available data, the fires in the Towers could only have reached a maximum temperature of around 650 degrees celsius- yet here we can see steel so hot that it has taken on a yellow look (revealing a temperature of between 850-1000 degrees celsius !!).

There are only two ways which would enable this steel to reach such a high temperature.
1. In a blast furnace.
2. From Explosives.
The rubble pile was not a blast furnace.
Therefore one must assume that explosives were the most likely agent.

Furthermore, we have supporting eyewitness testimony from firefighters and civilians which reveals that many of them felt, and were knocked over by, huge explosions occurring in the lower floors of the WTC buildings -far away from the fire zones.

Recent analysis conducted by physics Professor Steven Jones has now uncovered the chemical signature for the explosive THERMATE in multiple samples taken from the WTC steel and dust- proving, without doubt, that explosives were used. The newly formed, Architects for 911 Truth organisation, with over 160 building professionals onboard, concurs with these findings.

The science here is clear cut. Whatever one thinks about the various theories floating around out there, one thing is certain: The Twin Towers (and Building 7) at the World Trade Centre site were rigged with explosives.

At the very least, part of the 911 attacks against the World Trade Centre complex MUST have been an "Inside Job" as Bin Laden's men could not have gained the necessary access to wire these buildings.

I find it very interesting that Mr Scanlon should deny the existence of strong scientific evidence, from physicists and numerous building professionals, that run counter to the official story.

His whole article appears to be nothing more than an attempt to whitewash the evidence. We can see this clearly in his claim that the lower floor explosions inside the Towers were small and caused by "air pressure" from the collapses. He "neglects" to mention that the explosions in the lower areas of the buildings were massive and occurred well before the collapses began.

Mr Scanlon pretends that he is offering a "more plausible" (more simple?) explanation of events but obviously the man is delusional. A simple explanation that does not fit the facts is no explanation at all. Rather than sounding like a voice of reason, Mr Scanlon's factually bankrupt and emotionally charged hit piece only makes him sound like a propagandistic shill.

This charade must end. If we are honest with ourselves we must now seriously consider ALL the evidence- including material which indicates the complicity of certain elements within the US government in the attacks of September 11.[1] A new independent criminal investigation must be launched.

No comments: