Jones’ interests also extend to archaeometry, solar energy, and, like many professors at BYU, archaeology and the Book of Mormon. For example, he has sought radiocarbon dating evidence of the existence of pre-Columbian horses in the Americas, and has interpreted archaeological evidence from the ancient Mayans as supporting his faith’s belief that Jesus Christ visited America.
...
On September 22, 2005 Jones presented his views on the collapse of the World Trade Center towers and World Trade Center 7 at a BYU seminar attended by about 60 people. Pointing to the speed and symmetry of the collapses, the characteristics of dust jets, eyewitness reports of explosions down low in the buildings, partially vaporized beams, molten metal in the basements which was still red hot weeks after the event, and the notion that no modern high rise had ever collapsed from fire, Jones suggested that the evidence defies the mainstream collapse theory and favors explosive demolition, possibly by the use of thermite or nanothermite.
You are free to look for any flaws regarding his arguments in the papers he published in the peer reviewed journal of 911 studies.
http://www.journalof911studies.com/
They might as well have named it the journal of 911 conspiracy rationalizations, since every paper (I clicked on) aims to cast doubts on the official explanation. ”...and therefore the US government is hiding something” seems to be their pre-written conclusion.
No. There is physics professor Steven Jones, he was forced into retirement for his view on 9/11.
Wikipedia entry.
...
Amazing. These are identical thought processes.
You are free to look for any flaws regarding his arguments in the papers he published in the peer reviewed journal of 911 studies. http://www.journalof911studies.com/
Peer review isn’t magic trust dust. Looking at their website, I don’t see any details on their review process or why I should trust them.
They might as well have named it the journal of 911 conspiracy rationalizations, since every paper (I clicked on) aims to cast doubts on the official explanation. ”...and therefore the US government is hiding something” seems to be their pre-written conclusion.