Article on Rue89 dismantle the theory of 11 / 09

[Christophe]

Beautiful Flytox prose! I have 4 hands! It deserves a separate subject called something like "What is democracy? The real one"

For Obamot and Dede, I repeat myself:

Listen to the last seconds ...

It looks like legislative evidence as a precaution

[dedeleco]

Obama would not be where he is if he did not speak double or triple language, as a diplomat ready for all contradictions with concessions to the strongest such as lobbies of all kinds, oil, etc.

He "granted to his predecessors an immunity which ensures to sanction any questioning on September 11" quote from the last seconds of FR3 noted by Christophe.

[Obamot]

Wi, wi Dede, I put this to add water to the cool modo mill!

In the end, the message is: they are at home, they do what they want, move around there is nothing to see. And when they're not home, it's pretty much the same.

[Grelinette]

An experimental study of the effects of molten aluminum with different products and effects on steel beams;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5d5iIoCiI8g

it seems hard to believe that aluminum aircraft could have made spontaneously on both towers repeatedly, which they have a lot of trouble to achieve in these experiments ??

The WTC7 did not have a lot of molten aluminum aircraft.

It is certain that one must make real experiments, as on this video, by adding molten aluminum with water to see the spontaneous effects ???

The aluminum of the planes was certainly strongly dispersed ???

This theory of tower explosions due to molten aluminum is explained here:
http://www.maxisciences.com/11-septembre/une-reaction-chimique-serait-a-l-039-origine-de-la-chute-des-twin-towers_art17187.html

[dedeleco]

Nothing more than what Stipe said:
https://www.econologie.com/forums/post212490.html#212490


The original article detailed in explanations by Greening:
http://www.911myths.com/WTCTHERM.pdf

http://jpdesm.pagesperso-orange.fr/pent ... -alum.html

The difficulty is to verify the claims at the real level, given the complexity of the metals and fuels involved, especially since once molten the aluminum flows elsewhere and does not remain in large massive quantities.
A question not addressed: a good part of the aluminum must have been projected outside the WTC, burned too, and found outside in pieces mixed with aluminum burned in oxide.
No rigorous investigation seems to have been carried out on these problems, of how the metals of the planes transform in the collision and after.

[Remundo]

An experimental study of the effects of molten aluminum with different products and effects on steel beams;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5d5iIoCiI8g

it seems hard to believe that aluminum aircraft could have made spontaneously on both towers repeatedly, which they have a lot of trouble to achieve in these experiments ??

The WTC7 did not have a lot of molten aluminum aircraft.

It is certain that one must make real experiments, as on this video, by adding molten aluminum with water to see the spontaneous effects ???

The aluminum of the planes was certainly strongly dispersed ???

This theory of tower explosions due to molten aluminum is explained here:
http://www.maxisciences.com/11-septembre/une-reaction-chimique-serait-a-l-039-origine-de-la-chute-des-twin-towers_art17187.html

This "theory" is particularly weak to justify the fall of the Twins as it has been observed (free fall and symmetry and huge horizontal projections to the base), and totally void for WTC7.

[Remundo]

Pretty literary pirouette published on Reopen911

http://www.reopen911.info/11-septembre/ ... entifique/

To summarize, scientific doubt is good to promote obscure particles that exceed the speed of light, but not to question the official explanation of the events of 9/11.

Crispy!

@+

[Christophe]

Copy / pasted of the 2 editos + summary in question:

The original: http://www.lemonde.fr/planete/article/2 ... _3244.html

Scientific doubt, an exemplary attitude

It is a fine moral lesson that researchers from CNRS and CERN, the European organization for nuclear research, which is also the largest physics laboratory in the world, have just administered. After discovering, in an experiment called "Opera", that particles could travel faster than light, the team of physicists spent six months trying to find a flaw in this discovery. The stakes are high: if the results of this work are confirmed, they will bring down Albert Einstein's classic theory of special relativity, the central law of physics since 1905.

Faced with results that upset the comfortable routine of certainties, the physicists associated with this experiment could have kept their work for themselves. They chose the opposite approach. Friday, September 23, they published the results of their research, exposing in the most open way the details of their experience and its raw data.

Brought to question the validity of a cardinal principle of physics, they thus offer the scientific community all the means to question in turn, methodically, the fruit of their work. They voluntarily expose themselves to criticism from their peers. During this process, which could be stormy, each other's arguments will be heard; new experiments will no doubt be carried out or imagined to settle the question. Gradually a consensus will emerge, and science will emerge stronger, opening or not the way to new theories capable of better describing the laws of nature. The "super-light neutrinos" - the name of these stealthy fundamental particles - from the underground laboratory of Gran Sasso, Italy, where measurements of the speed of their propagation took place, will perhaps be the source of a new adventure for Science. In the immediate term, they are above all the symbol of the thirst for knowledge of scientific communities, and of their desire to free themselves from social, ideological or economic convenience. Skepticism as an antidote to arrogance.

Health scandals, failing expert reports, corruption and conflicts of interest have, for several years, tarnished the image of scientists with the general public. What is currently happening in the physics community is, on the contrary, a remarkable manifestation of the integrity of the scientific approach.

This approach has sometimes been diverted by conflicts of interest. It could be used to deliberately create doubt, for industrial or commercial purposes - on the harmfulness of tobacco, asbestos, the Mediator, or on the reality of climate change. The facts themselves most often end up being imposed. Nothing remains today of cold fusion or the memory of water. In these times of double global, economic and ecological crisis, one can only wish economists to be inspired, by the extraordinary freedom of mind of physicists.

Article published in the edition of 25.09.11

summary by reopen

This editorial is in fact devoted to the questioning of Einstein's theory of relativity, due to the recent discovery of a new scientific fact, in this case the measurement of the displacement of an elementary particle which makes "flash" in the process of exceeding the speed of light considered up to this day as impassable according to the foundations of contemporary physics. The Editorial of the World welcomes with enthusiasm the questioning of a scientific "dogma", universally accepted and recognized by the international community of researchers.

By making some substantial modifications compared to the original text, the editorial staff of ReOpen911 takes the initiative to divert this editorial from the World in order to highlight the difference in journalistic treatment according to the subjects taken into account. The major discoveries of new scientific facts about the events of September 11 do not receive the enthusiastic reception that we see here. These discoveries are, in fact, completely overlooked by the mainstream media. It is nevertheless legitimate to consider that the scientific approach to the facts is a process which must be universal.

Only the passages in italics have been modified in the text above, compared to the original editorial.

Parody by reopen:

Scientific doubt, an exemplary attitude

Editorial diverted from the World | Original published on 24.09.11 | 14:02 pm • Updated on 24.09.11 | 15:44 p.m.

It is a great moral lesson that the independent researchers of the 9/11 Truth Movement have just administered. After discovering, as part of their research (relayed in France by the site ReOpen911.info), that the events of 2001 deserved a new independent and impartial investigation, the teams of researchers working in the United States and everywhere through the world, have spent several years trying to find a loophole so that an investigation into the events of September 11 is “re-opened”. The stakes are high: if the results of this work are confirmed, they will destroy the official theory of the Islamist conspiracy, the fundamental law of western geopolitics since 2001.

Faced with results that upset the comfortable routine of certainties, the independent researchers associated with this experience could have kept their work to themselves. They chose the opposite approach. Since 2006, they have published the results of their research, exposing in the most open way the details of their experience and its raw data.

Brought to question the validity of the official explanation on a founding event of contemporary history, they thus offer the scientific community all the means to in turn question, methodically, the fruit of their work. They expose themselves, voluntarily, to criticism from their peers. During this process, which may be stormy, the arguments of both parties will be heard; new experiments will undoubtedly be carried out or imagined, to settle the question. Gradually a consensus will emerge, and science will emerge stronger, opening or not the way to new theories capable of better describing the laws of geopolitics. The speed of collapse of the three towers of the World Trade Center, the traces of nanothérmite found in the dust of the rubble or even the analyzes of the trajectory of flight AA77, may be at the origin of a new adventure for international diplomacy. In the immediate term, they are above all the symbol of the thirst for knowledge of scientific communities, and of their desire to free themselves from social, ideological or economic conventions. Skepticism as an antidote to arrogance.

Health scandals, failing expert reports, corruption and conflicts of interest have, for several years, tarnished the image of scientists with the general public. What is currently happening in the independent research community is, on the contrary, a remarkable manifestation of the integrity of the scientific approach.

This approach has sometimes been diverted by conflicts of interest. It could be used to deliberately create doubt, for industrial or commercial purposes - on the harmfulness of tobacco, asbestos, the Mediator, or on the reality of climate change. The facts themselves most often end up being imposed. Nothing remains today of cold fusion or the memory of water. In these times of double global, economic and ecological crisis, we can only wish economists to be inspired by the extraordinary freedom of mind of independent researchers on September 11.