[OFB Cafe] Who's Still on Here?

[Peter Hollings]

Tim --

We have an empirical proof that supports the third thesis described 
below. Being empirical, it rests on the observable laws of physics, 
repeated, independent experimentation, etc., so I consider it the very 
strongest form of proof. Put briefly, it states that the potential 
kinetic energy in the elevated masses of the WTC towers were sufficient 
to accelerate the structures downward as observed at free fall speed  
only if the structures presented no resistance.  Moreover, in order for 
this to occur and not have the buildings tip over and fall sideways, the 
structural supports had to have been removed in a controlled, 
simultaneous fashion.  Think of it as a table with very long legs as 
vertical supports: unless all the legs are cut simultaneously it will 
tip sideways. Falling straight down naturally is highly improbable.  For 
further information, including physical evidence, calculations, etc., I 
would refer you to the Journal of 911 Studies website, 
http://www.journalof911studies.com/.

Of course, proving that the third point below is true does not prove 
that the other two are untrue -- it just diminishes their explanatory 
importance. Moreover, proving that the WTC towers were brought down in 
controlled demolitions does not, in itself, establish that 911 was "an 
attempt by powers within the USA to create a political climate conducive 
to active military operations overseas."  I am prepared to discuss the 
reasoning that will get us to that conclusion, but first I want to 
clearly establish the fact that the WTC towers must have collapsed due 
to controlled demolitions. Please review the scientific papers on the 
Journal of 911 Studies website which I believe fairly establish that 
conclusion.

Peter Hollings


Timothy Butler wrote:
> On Jun 26, 2008, at 8:57 PM, Peter Hollings wrote:
>
>   
>> It seems to me that the most fundamental thing is how we characterize
>> the attacks of 911. Were these:
>>
>>    * the attacks of fanatical Muslims in a "Clash of Civilizations"
>>    * the understandable response of Middle Eastern people to attempts
>>      by western powers to subjugate their people and obtain control
>>      over their natural resources
>>    * an attempt by powers within the USA to create a political climate
>>      conducive to active military operations overseas.
>>
>> If we could prove one of these scenarios, then we should be able to
>> narrow the conversation.
>>     
>
> 	That's certainly a succinct summary of the issues. Nice job, Peter.  
> Now just find a way to prove any given one of those points to anyone  
> holding any of those other points, and you'll really have something. :-)
>
> 	-Tim
>
> ---
> Timothy R. Butler | "Because philosophy arises from awe, a philosopher
> tbutler at ofb.biz   | is bound in  his  way to  be a lover of myths  and
> www.uninet.info   | poetic fables. Poets and philosophers are alike in
> timothybutler.us  | being big with wonder."
>                                                       -- Thomas Aquinas
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OfB Cafe - Cafe at ofb.biz
> Brought to you by your friends at Open for Business.
> http://ofb.biz/mailman/listinfo/cafe_ofb.biz
>
> DISCLAIMER: The views expressed on this mailinglist are the personal
> opinions of the author and do not represent those of Open for Business.
>
>