This page is currently UNDER CONSTRUCTION
(Not ready for sharing the link, yet.)
Open Letter about and to Steven Jones
by Judy Wood
24 January 2007
a) Steven Jones has not proven that his "unofficial" sample(s) even contained thermite.
Looking at the data, we see that the WTC towers were pulverized.
b) Steven Jones has not proven that thermite was used to pulverize the WTC Towers nor does Jones even maintain that he has proven thermite was used to pulverize the WTC Towers. He merely calls for a "serious investigation of the hypothesis," "The hypothesis ought to be explored further." We have explored it and found that thermite cannot account for all the WTC 9/11 facts.
c) Steven Jones has not proven that anything else was used to pulverize the WTC Towers nor does Jones seem interested in investigating whether anything other than thermite or its variants was used to pulverize the Towers.
Steven Jones has presented no evidence of what caused the massive pulverization of the WTC. To illustrate how bad it is, instead of thermite, thermate, or super-duper thermite, Steven Jones could just as easily have said "there's strong evidence showing bubble gum is looking like it could maybe perhaps be the possible culprit, but this is only preliminary."
Steven Jones has not met his burden of proof and has no verified evidence of anything. End of story.
[btw, where is the proof that "nanoaluminum in superthermite becomes explosive"? p. 38, "9/11 and the American Empire." If explosive, does it cease to be a steel-cutter then?].
Curiously, up until very recently, Steven Jones has been saying that the buildings were "pulverized" and "turned to dust." (see "9/11 and the American Empire" where his paper appears).
I note that Steven Jones also stated that he had "studied" the demolition of the Seattle Kingdome and confidently stated that it was completely pulverized, just like the WTC towers. The Kingdome was not completely pulverized. After having been told on numerous occasions that thermite does not explode or pulverize material, Jones has begun to say that the buildings were not pulverized. Listen here. For those interested in reviewing the data, please see these images. Changing the reported "data" to fit the speculated "theory" contradicts the "scientific method," does it not? I believe Jones has switched from the "scientific method" [if he ever used it] to the "political method."