Paolo Attivissimo (www.attivissimo.net)
- Flight 93 Smoke Plume - Some people say the photograph of a smoke plume rising from the Flight 93 crash site looks more like an ordnance blast, then a plane crash. But Paolo Attivissimo has a photograph that says they’re wrong...
Giulio Bernacchia (email@example.com)
- Another expert! - It’s frequently claimed that the 9/11 attacks required more flying experience than the alleged hijackers possessed, and therefore they couldn’t have been controlling the planes. Giulio Bernacchia takes a different view, though, and as an experienced pilot (air force, then airline Captain), simulator instructor and examiner, it’s perhaps worth listening to what he has to say.
Curtis Cameron (firstname.lastname@example.org)
- Photo Analysis - Does photographic evidence really indicate that Flight 175 didn’t hit the South Tower of the World Trade Centre? Curtis Cameron takes a closer look.
Jay H, aka “apathoid” from JREF & other forums (email@example.com)
- Remote takeover on 9/11: A Critical Analysis - Central to many "inside job" 9/11 conspiracy theories is the idea that hijackers weren't controlling the 4 ill-fated flights involved in the attacks. Instead there was some sort of remote system guiding the aircraft to their targets. But how easy is it to add this kind of remote control technology to a Boeing 757/ 767? An Aviation Maintenance Technician/ Avionics Technician with years of airliner experience tells us what he thinks: it's a technical piece, but well worth the read.
Mark De Martini (firstname.lastname@example.org)
- Trinity Videos Audio Analysis - There’s a video available online that shows about four seconds of the collapse of WTC2, shot from a point near Trinity Church. It includes two loud explosion-type sounds which, it’s been suggested, are evidence of controlled demolition. But can the clip convince experienced audio professional Mark De Martini? Follow the above link to find out.
Dr Frank Greening (email@example.com)
- WTC Report - Dr Greening sent us an interesting study on the WTC collapse, covering such issues as how and why it began, the collapse time, momentum transfer theory, the energy involved in the impacts and the collapse itself (including that required to crush concrete), and more. (PDF file, updated February 16th 2006).
- Energy Transfer Addendum - This companion to the WTC Report addresses other issues, including Jim Hoffmans claim that there was insufficient evidence from a gravity-driven collapse to pulverise concrete and create and expand the observed dust clouds. (PDF file).
- NIST Report - Dr Greening has some questions of the NIST WTC report, though. Does it really provide a plausible mechanism to show how the process of global collapse was initiated? He points out some possible contradictions and other issues (PDF file).
- WTC Thermite - Another Greening article suggests that perhaps a thermite reaction really did play a part in the collapse of the WTC... Though not for the reasons commonly assumed. (PDF file, updated 8th April 2006 with new observations on the molten metal pouring from 80th floor of WTC2).
- Sulfur - Thermite (or thermate) is also commonly suggested as an explanation for the sulfur traces found on WTC steel, but it’s not the only one. In this paper Greening discusses other possible sources of sulfur in the WTC, and mechanisms for the observed sulfidation of the structural steel (PDF file, very minor update 15th May 2006 with one corrected reference).
- Tipping of the Upper Section of WTC2 - did the tilting of the top of WTC2, immediately prior to collapse, really defy the laws of physics, as some might have you believe? Dr Greening explores the issue here. Beware: seriously technical, to be avoided if you’re even slightly math-phobic.
- The Pulverization of Concrete in WTC 1 During the Collapse Events of 9-11 - ...are there any experimental data available to support the claim that concrete in the WTC could have been pulverized by gravity driven impact as opposed to explosive blasting?
In this report we address these questions and after considering the available evidence conclude that the pulverization of WTC concrete by gravitational collapse of each tower was indeed quite possible. Furthermore, we show that the predicted concrete particle size distribution is consistent with observations of the concrete debris at, and adjacent to, ground zero.
Ryan Mackey (firstname.lastname@example.org)
- On Debunking 9/11 Debunking - “In this paper, we examine the claims of Dr. David Ray Griffin regarding the NIST investigation into the World Trade Center disasters, and find those claims to be unfounded. All 18 major claims are discussed and rigorously dismissed, and a further analysis of the text reveals an overwhelming density of factual and logical errors. This paper refutes Dr. Griffin’s major claims, supporting with evidence that the aircraft impacts were expected to significantly damage the structures, that the resulting fires were of both sufficient temperature and duration to cause structural collapse, that a progressive collapse resulting in total destruction of the Towers was the likely result, and that the “controlled demolition” hypothesis is speculative and unsupported by any evidence. We also discuss the anticipated NIST report on World Trade Center Seven. The author highlights the fundamental sources of errors present in Dr. Griffin’s research and provides a template to evaluate future claims using resources available in open literature”.
Karl Rader (email@example.com)
- Ground Effect - It’s been claimed that a phenomenon known as “ground effect” would have made it impossible for Flight 77 to have hit the Pentagon, at least with the claimed flight path and speed. But does that idea stand up to scrutiny? Here’s what a retired Navy pilot has to say.
Mark Roberts (firstname.lastname@example.org)
- Loose Change 2nd Edition Viewer Guide - Many of the claims made in “Loose Change” are disputed on this site already, if you know where to look. But now there’s an easier way, because Mark Roberts has bundled many of them (and lots of new work) into a single Word document. (This is not exclusive to us, it’s available in several places, but Mark has also kindly agreed to let us host it here.)
- Loose Change Creators Speak - Having pointed out myriad problems in Loose Change, Mark Roberts moves on to take a closer look at its creators. Includes telling interview transcriptions with Dylan Avery, Korey Rowe and Jason Bermas, complete with Roberts’ acerbic commentary.
- The Truth about the “9/11 Truth Movement” - A look at the claims in the pamphlet distributed by NY911truth.org in New York City.
- WTC 7 Lies (Word .DOC format, smaller .PDF version available here but beware, some links don’t work) -- “Did firefighters abandon their fallen brothers to help real estate developer Larry Silverstein demolish a skyscraper?
Conspiracist Alex Jones and other 9/11 “Truth Movement” leaders gather at Ground Zero and accuse Silverstein of murder and FDNY heroes of heinous crimes, lies and cover-ups.
Do their claims stand up to examination?”
Bruce Rolston (email@example.com)
- Israeli Art Students - Bruce Rolston was commenting on the likelihood of the Israeli art students being “Mossad agents”, monitoring or controlling the hijackers, long before this web site ever existed. But still, he’s kindly given us permission to host his three blog articles on the topic here.
Vincent Sauvé (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Zachary Wick (email@example.com)
- WTC CD? - How likely is it that the explosives necessary to carry out a controlled demolition could survive the conditions at the WTC in general, and building 7 in particular? Zachary Wick takes a detailed look at the various options.
Brandon Wright (firstname.lastname@example.org)
- Proving controlled demolition - Many people say the accounts of “explosions” at the WTC are solid evidence for controlled demolition, but is it really as simple as that? Brandon Wright says not -- and he’s discovered some interesting evidence to support his views.