Trailer for “Hypothesis,” a film by Brett Smith:
From the film website, hypothesis.com:
hy.poth.e.sis’ is a documentary film that follows physics professor Steven E. Jones during a pivotal point in his life. In 2005, Steven went public with a controversial theory regarding the collapse of the World Trade Center on 9/11. His assertion that the collapse was likely the result of pre-positioned explosives rather than the hijacked planes resulted in a backlash from the community and even threatened his standing as a professor at BYU. Despite hate mail, threats, and even bribery to end his research, Steven refused to give in to overwhelming pressure and continued his pursuit of the truth.
Trailer for ‘Hypothesis’, a documentary short about Steven Jones and his 9/11 research. The film tells his story in his own words and reflects the explosive controversy that ensued which resulted in everything from threats, bribery, and academic suspension. What started as a mere hypothesis became so much more.
Interview with Brett Smith, Creator of 9/11 Movie ‘Hypothesis’
Posted by Abby Martin
March 6, 2011
Interview at Rootsmedia.com: Listen here. (Visit source to download and interact.)
Photo: Brett Smith
This is an exclusive Media Roots Radio interview with Utah based documentarian Brett Smith, conducted by Abby and Robbie Martin on February… Continue reading
May 10, 2011
Dr. Steven Jones
Blog at 911blogger.com
Here I field questions that come to me fairly often, to help get the facts out and to counter misrepresentations and misunderstandings. I expect to make edits for a while and welcome comments.
1. Can nanothermites (also called superthermites) be explosive?
The definition of “explosive” can lead to endless debates. Is a flash of light required? Is a loud sound required? How loud? What rate of energy generation is required for a material to be called an explosive? Where is the line between low explosives and high explosives? Rather than getting mired into ad nauseum debates, I will use the term “explosive” in conjunction with superthermites/nanothermites IF the national defense laboratories which developed these materials use the term. Here we go.
“Researchers can greatly increase the power of weapons by adding materials known as superthermites that combine nanometals such as nanoaluminum with metal oxides such as iron oxide, according to Steven Son, a project leader in the Explosives Science and Technology group at Los Alamos. “The advantage (of using nanometals) is in how fast you can get their energy out,” Son says. Son says that the chemical reactions of superthermites are faster and therefore release greater amounts of energy more rapidly… Son, who has been working on nanoenergetics for more than three years, says that scientists can engineer nanoaluminum powders with different particle sizes to vary the energy release rates. This enables the material to be used in many applications, including underwater explosive devices… However, researchers aren’t permitted to discuss what practical military applications may come from this research.” (Gartner, John (2005).…Continue reading
February 26, 2011
by Carol Brouillet
Let us remember Janette and think of her especially on her birthday, which is on Saturday, February 26th, by synchronicity a day in 2011 which might go down in history as “the day Americans woke up,” following the example of numerous other countries, rallies and demonstrations have been called for throughout the US to challenge the policies which enrich the few and impoverish the many. We will gather together the following day, on Sunday, February 27, 2011 to celebrate Janette’s life– some of us in New York, and some in California–to share mementos, memories, food, drink, and stories about our dear friend, her life, her wake up call, which merits our attention, love, and appreciation.
The Celebrations will be webcast on Sunday-
We will start off the Celebration at 12:00 Noon PST (3:00pm EST) with a Skype call with James Lecce. This will be between him and the California crowd (If Ed has a second computer, NY may be able to see it) and will only last a few minutes. Then we will interact with NY for about 1.5 – 2 hours. Then we will continue to broadcast our respective local events.
IMPORTANT: When starting the Ustream Broadcast, also hit the Record button. If you do not do this, there will be no video archive available later.
The California Celebration will be broadcast from this link
The New York Celebration will be broadcast from this link
http://www.ustream.tv/channel/nyc-mackinlay-cronin-helaki-memorial… Continue reading
David Ray Griffin
At 5:21 PM on 9/11, Building 7 of the World Trade Center collapsed, even though it had not been hit by a plane — a fact that is important because of the widespread acceptance of the idea, in spite of its scientific absurdity, that the Twin Towers collapsed because of the combined effect of the impact of the airliners plus the ensuing jet-fuel-fed fires. The collapse of World Trade Center 7 (WTC 7) thereby challenges the official account of the destruction of the World Trade Center, according to which it was accomplished by al-Qaeda hijackers, even if one accepts the government’s scientifically impossible account of the Twin Towers. This fact was recently emphasized in the title of a review article based on my 2009 book, The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7, 1 by National Medal of Science-winner Lynn Margulis: “Two Hit, Three Down — The Biggest Lie.” 2
The collapse of WTC 7 created an extraordinary problem for the official account of 9/11 for several reasons.
One reason is that, because of the collapse of WTC 7, the official account of 9/11 includes the dubious claim that, for the first time in the known universe, a steel-frame high-rise building was brought down by fire, and science looks askance at claims of unprecedented occurrences regarding physical phenomena. New York Times writer James Glanz, who himself has a Ph.D. in physics, wrote: “[E]xperts… Continue reading
David Ray Griffin
A right-wing neocon organization called the Institute on Religion and Democracy (IRD)1 — which devotes itself to attacking religiously and socially progressive churches while supporting US imperial policies (going back to the Nicaraguan Contras funded illegally by the Reagan administration2 ) — has recently put out a press release attacking my next book, which is scheduled to be published this coming fall. Saying that I am “back with another outrageous book” in which I allege “new absurdities,” the IRD claims that I am “this time alleging that the Obama administration is attempting to undermine 9/11 conspiracy theorists.”3
Last September, Dr. Griffin was interviewed by God TV, the End Times show. It reaches over 100 million people worldwide by TV, plus others on the Internet.
It was aired on Friday night at 5:30 PM PDT and turned out to be an excellent interview, really professional. The hosts, Rory and Wendy, are gracious and delightful. Just a simple, straightforward interview that freed David to take his time to explain things. It’s also on their website: http://www.god.tv/video/play?video=1219. Part 2 will be shown live this Friday at 5:30 Pacific, 8:30 PM Eastern. [Originally posted at 911blogger.com]
False Assumptions about My Forthcoming Book… Continue reading
by Janice Matthews
November 23, 2009
The Hard Evidence Down Under 2009 Tour has nearly wrapped up, following events
in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane, Australia and in Wellington, New Zealand. Every one of these events met with overwhelming success.
John Bursill, Principle Organizer of the tour, and his ‘backup crew’ made up
of scores of dedicated, generous, passionate volunteers planned and executed
a very significant series of events that resulted in the presentation of 9/11
truth information, in person, to approximately 1,200 people and along the way,
radio interviews and news stories reached at least tens of thousands more. Kudos and much gratitude are in order to John, his wonderful, patient wife and family, to Helen
in New Zealand who coordinated the Wellington event, and the many volunteers who gave so much to make this important
tour happen. Of course, huge, sincere thanks are in order to the event sponsors
whose very generous financial contributions made possible travel from the United
States by presenters Richard Gage, AIA, founder of Architects
and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, Professor Steven Jones, emeritus professor
of physics, founder of Scholars
for 9/11 Truth and Justice and co-editor of the Journal
of 9/11 Studies, Cosmos, founder of TruthAction.org
and the massive “Eleventh Day of Every Month Till Justice” campaign, Luke
Rudkowski, founder of WeAreChange
and Janice Matthews, Director of 911Truth.org
and small business owner, so that we could present in Sydney. In addition, Ken Jenkins
and hummux, of 911TV.org,
were brought from the U.S.…
August 31, 2009
posted at 911oz blog at 911blogger.com
Visit our podcast page:
Tonight we welcome Dr. Frank Legge back to show for an extended discussion on one the most vexed questions about 9/11: what hit the Pentagon?
As Dr. Legge stresses, there are two essential points to note:
Many researchers are not satisfied with stopping at these reasonable claims however, and want to propose more detailed theories about what really happened. During the show we critically examine some of the theories, with the help of Dan Collins, a regular contributor to TNRA.
We present below several key pieces of evidence often cited in investigations of the Pentagon attacks.
Below we reproduce the Pentagon Building Performance Report image showing that “no portion of the outer two-thirds of the right wing and no portion of the outer one-third of the left wing actually entered the building”.
Punch out hole
Flight 77 Wreckage
“What Hit the Pentagon?”
by John Parulis
Dr. Steven Jones presents important features from the paper, “Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe”
This talk is powerful and challenges the un-peer reviewed science of NIST, as that agency of the government tries to explain the collapse of building 7 during the 9/11 event.
Since the days of Sir Isaac Newton, Science has proceeded through the publication of peer-reviewed papers. Peer-review means a thorough reading, commentary and even challenge before publication by “peers”, that is, other PhD’s and professors. This paper was thoroughly peer-reviewed with several pages of tough comments that required of our team MONTHS of additional experiments and studies. It was the toughest peer-review I’ve ever had, including THREE papers for which I was first author in NATURE. (Please note that Prof. Harrit is first author on this paper.) We sought an established journal that would allow us a LONG paper (this paper is 25 pages long) with MANY COLOR IMAGES AND GRAPHS. Such a scientific journal is not easy to find. Page charges are common for scientific journals these days, and are typically paid by the University of the first or second author (as is the case with this paper) or by an external grant.
Useful information for “non-scientists” about the process of peer-reviewed publishing, such as has been the case with Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe, Fourteen Points of Agreement with Official Government Reports on the World Trade Center Destruction, and Environmental Anomalies at the World Trade Center: Evidence for Energetic Materials .
A peer-reviewed journal is also called a “refereed” journal. Peer-reviewers are almost always anonymous for scientific publications like this — that is standard in the scientific world. While authors commonly… Continue reading
Physics professor Dr. Steven Jones was forced out of Brigham Young University for his research suggesting the World Trade Center was destroyed by controlled demolition. Dr. Jones is the lead author of the first two scholarly articles in mainstream academic journals disputing the official story of 9/11 — and a third is on the way! Kevin Ryan told us during his interview Tuesday, March 3rd that the upcoming article will include research by many respected scientists worldwide, and will for all intents and purposes seal the case that nanothermates were used in the controlled demolition of the WTC.
First mainstream academic 9/11 truth publication: 14 Points of Agreement with Official Government Reports on the World Trade Center Destruction.
Second mainstream 9/11 truth publication: Environmental Anomalies at the World Trade Center: Evidence for Energetic Materials:
Journal of 9/11 Studies: http://www.journalof911studies.com
Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice: http://www.stj911.org
“FAIR & BALANCED” with Kevin Barrett features Steven Jones
Tuesday, March 10th, 2009, 9:00 am Pacific – 12:00 Noon Eastern – 16:00 GMT
The interview will be archived for later listening after the broadcast.
Deadline for emailed questions is 9pm Pacific Time, Monday, March 9th. Not all emailed questions will be answered on the air. Email your questions now: (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Note from NoLiesRadio: Fair & Balanced with Kevin Barrett is independently produced and hosted by Kevin Barrett and these shows are externally produced content. All externally produced content broadcast on No… Continue reading
by Kevin Ryan
December 27, 2008
Kevin Ryan’s Blog at 911Blogger.com
This past year I’ve done some photomicroscopy of samples of WTC dust. A number of examples of the photos can be found in the latest AE911truth.org video. The related scientific analyses of the particles found in the WTC dust, in particular the red-gray chips first discovered by Professor Steven Jones, are ongoing.
But I’ve also spent some time making nanothermites, and igniting them. Here is a slideshow of 26 photomicrographs, half of which are nanothermite residues and half of which are ferromagnetic particles extracted from WTC dust samples. These photos share many things in common, including the presence of metallic microspheres, vesicular formations and red-orange chips. Sometimes it’s hard to remember which photo belongs to which category. If the nanothermite residues were mixed with concrete dust and glass fragments, it would likely be much more difficult to notice any differences.
You can see the slideshow here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/32512879@N05/sets/72157611572140729/show/
Interesting stuff, to be sure. And many thanks to Professor Jones, Janette MacKinlay, Shane Geiger, Mike Berger and others for the samples and inspiration. Scientific papers are on the way, of course, but sharing some of the photos now is worthwhile I think. Here’s to a truthful New Year!
Nanothermite (C) ignition photo:
by Kevin R. Ryan
In a famous book by Antoine de Saint Exupery, a little prince from another planet asks the narrator to draw a sheep. After several unsatisfactory attempts, the narrator simply draws a box and tells the little prince that the sheep is in the box. The little prince then exclaims — “That is exactly the way I wanted it!” 1
Just so, the Bush Administration asked its scientists at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) for an explanation as to what happened at the World Trade Center (WTC) on 9/11. In response to this request, NIST drew up a series of fanciful stories over a period of years, each story differing from the previous one. Finally, after seven long years, NIST published its last story for WTC 7 by simply saying, in effect: “The explanation is in our computer.” 2
As expected, however, this explanation in a box leaves much to be desired for those of us who prefer to live in reality, instead of in a fictional world. On the other hand, we are learning something from NIST with this new report, and that is that when government scientists begin working for a political agenda above all else, there is no limit to the extent of deception that they will engage in. We also know that those who have produced the NIST WTC reports must now assume personal responsibility for the ongoing 9/11 Wars, and the millions of deaths that will result from those wars.…Continue reading
Debunking NIST’s conclusions about WTC 7 is as easy as shooting fish in a barrel
By George Washington
NIST lamely tried to explain the symmetrically (sic) collapse as follows:
WTC 7′s collapse, viewed from the exterior (most videos were taken from the north), did appear to fall almost uniformly as a single unit. This occurred because the interior failures that took place did not cause the exterior framing to fail until the final stages of the building collapse. The interior floor framing and columns collapsed downward and pulled away from the exterior frame. There were clues that internal damage was taking place, prior to the downward movement of the exterior frame, such as when the east penthouse fell downward into the building and windows broke out on the north face at the ends of the building core. The symmetric appearance of the downward fall of the WTC 7 was primarily due to the greater stiffness and strength of its exterior frame relative to the interior framing.
NIST can’t have it both ways. If the exterior frame was so stiff and strong, then it should have stopped the collapse, or – at the very least – we would have seen a bowing effect where tremendous opposing forces were battling each other for dominance in determining the direction of the fall. See also this .
In real life, the thick structural beams and “stiff [and strong]” exterior frame used in the building should have quickly stopped any partial collapse, unless… Continue reading
From Steven Jones
July 4, 2008
Kevin Ryan shows his skills as both a chemist and a “private investigator” in his paper, “The Top Ten Connections Between NIST and Nano-Thermites” — Published July 4, 2008, in the Journal of 9/11 Studies — http://journalof911studies.com/volume/2008/Ryan_NIST_and_Nano-1.pdf.
Kevin Ryan discusses nano-thermite (“super-thermite”) and provides very important results of his own investigation of connections between NIST and researchers studying/developing nano-thermite.
Several of us have been discussing nano-thermite for quite a while now. For instance, I announced in Boston last year the observation of red-gray chips which I found in WTC dust samples. (If you need to catch up, please see this short video: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4186920967571123147&hl=en). Research papers on this material are now being written/reviewed for publication.
Thermite is comprised of aluminum powder and iron oxide powder (or another metal oxide). When the powders are “ultra-fine grain,” less than about 100 nano-meters, then nano-thermite is formed. This form of thermite, also known as “super-thermite,” is not just an incendiary — it is EXPLOSIVE!
I explained this distinction and even gave references to the explosive nature of super-thermite/nano-thermite in my first-published paper on 9/11, available here: Why Indeed Did theWTC Buildings Completely Collapse.
Here’s a quote from that paper, pp. 16-17 (hope you all have read it, or will do so!):
‘Researchers can greatly increase the power of weapons by adding materials known as superthermites that combine nanometals such as nanoaluminum with metal oxides such as iron oxide, according to Steven Son, a project… Continue reading
Steven E. Jones
April 18, 2008
Letter published at 911blogger.com
Finally! After submitting a half-dozen papers to established peer-reviewed technical journals over a period of nearly a year, we have two papers which have passed peer-review and have been accepted for publication. One of these was published TODAY! In science, we say that we have “published in the literature,” a major step in a nascent line of scientific inquiry.
And many thanks to the editors for their courage and adherence to science in allowing us to follow the evidence and publish in their journal. (Indeed, expressions of thanks along these lines to the editors will be appreciated, as they will probably get a few letters chastising them… )
The paper is here:
http://www.bentham.org/open/index.htm (our paper is listed on top at the moment, the most recently entered paper); or go here:
(Click on “year 2008” then scroll down to the paper and click on it.)
Yes, it is available on-line FOR FREE, since this is an “open e-journal.” TOCEJ = The Open Civil Engineering Journal. You may download the paper and make copies to give to local professors and engineers (hint, hint). That’s one reason this particular journal was chosen — open access, free to download and make copies. What do Profs/Engineers say about it — let us know would you?
In this Letter, we emphasize “points of agreement” with FEMA and NIST, seeking to build bridges for further communications. Of course, we will send a copy to NIST for their comment and hopefully open a public discussion on these crucial evidences and analyses.…Continue reading
Take Action: Order Now. New York Times Best-Selling Author’s 9/11 Truth Novel Hits Stores January 22!
Dear 9/11 Truth Seekers Demanding a New 9/11 Investigation,
Today we have an amazing opportunity, if we work together, to launch 9/11 truth into a new mainstream American paradigm.
In the formation of the global 9/11 truth movement there have been landmark moments that catapulted this truth movement forward:
* Mike Ruppert’s early work with copvcia.com and his crucial early research (which got me in this)
* The first national truth conference, formed by Carol Brouillet/Ken Jenkins in San Francisco
* The formation of 911Truth.org after that conference
* The dissemination of the “Stop the 9/11 Cover Up” signs to groups nationwide (911visibility)
* David Ray Griffin’s earth shaking work
* Professor Steven Jones physics research
* Kevin Ryan’s blowing the whistle on inaccuracies of UL’s report to NIST
* The release of Loose Change, which exploded the movement
* The “Eleventh Day of Every Month” TruthAction.org Campaign
* The release of PatriotsQuestion911.org
* We Are Change’s national television exposure on 9/11 truth issues
* The release of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, ae911truth.org
Today, we have an opportunity to explode 9/11 truth issues into the mainstream mind, in the form of a soon to be released popular action fiction novel by New York Times Best-Selling Novelist, Steve Alten (stevealten.com). If we can help get 30,000 copies of this profound novel purchased in the first month of its release, we can… Continue reading
On Saturday, August 26th at 5PM, Pacific Time, the History Channel aired “Conspiracy Theories about 9/11, Fact or Fiction?” Many facts were ignored:
As to the attacks in Manhattan:
1. Residue of thermate, a compound used to cut steel in controlled demolitions, was found in the rubble.
2. There are eyewitness statements describing molten metal in the rubble just after the attacks, as well as orange to light-yellow hot pieces of metal, weeks afterward.
3. There were witnesses to explosions before the planes hit the buildings.
4. There is seismic evidence supporting explosions before the impacts of the planes.
5. There is physical evidence of destruction in the basement and lobby of the North Tower at the time of the initial impact of the airplane at the 92nd floor.
6. There is photographic evidence of steel heated beyond the capabilities of jet fuel.
7. There is photographic evidence of jaggedly cut, corroded steel from Ground Zero consistent with the use of explosives.
8. There is video evidence of a thermic reaction in the twin towers as predicted and described by Professor Steven Jones, now retired from Brigham Young University.
9. There is audio evidence of an explosion before the impact of Flight 11 into the North Tower.
10.There is audio evidence of explosions as the towers are actually collapsing.
As to the attack on the Pentagon:
11. There are multiple eyewitnesses to a flight path contradictory to that established by the 9/11 Commission for American Airlines Flight 77, which is… Continue reading
Outraged truth community demands answers from Guy Smith, immediate retractions and apologies urged, savage agenda driven yellow journalism an insult to the truth
Paul Joseph Watson
Monday, February 19, 2007
The BBC’s Conspiracy Files documentary about 9/11 was a tissue of lies, bias and emotional manipulation from beginning to end. Producer Guy Smith should be ashamed of himself for inflicting this travesty of yellow journalism upon the 9/11 truth movement and he is assured to encounter a vociferous and outraged response in its aftermath.
Separated into two categories below are a number of questions intended to highlight Guy Smith’s production for what it was – a deliberate hit piece on the 9/11 truth movement structured around fallacy, lying by omission and overwhelming bias. We invite Mr. Smith to respond to these questions and the hundreds of others that are already being asked by furious and informed community of people who were made sick to their stomachs by Smith’s yellow journalism hatchet job.
GROSS FACTUAL INACCURACIES AND YELLOW JOURNALISM
1) Why did the BBC use a thoroughly debunked graphic animation from PBS’ Nova show to illustrate the collapse of the twin towers? This graphic portrays the tower collapsing at a rate of ten floors every six seconds.…Continue reading