Tags for This Article:

911 Truth (430)  9 11 Truth (345)  911 (295)  911 Profiteers Political (202)  911 Coverup (129)  Ferreting Out The Truth (15) 

Populum Tag Cloud
       Control Panel
Fine tune your search to access content
Articles Links
Diaries Products
Events All
All time
Last 6 mos
Last month
Last week
Last 24 hrs 		From:
Month  Day   Year

To:
Month  Day   Year
Alphabet
Popularity 		Count ON
Count OFF
This Level
 Sub-levels

 

 

 

 Tag(s): ; ; ; ; ;
Add to My Group
July 23, 2008 at 09:19:30

Another 9/11 Apologist Exposed

by scott creighton     Page 1 of 3 page(s)

www.opednews.com
 

Tell A Friend

View Ratings | Rate It  

 by Scott Creighton

Thanks to 9/11 Blogger and AJFan, I just listened to one of the most amazing pieces of abject fabrication I have heard on any radio station; and that includes Bill O’s show.

“Professor Muller (at about 7:30) is led by Boston Public Radio host Tom Ashbrook  to the subject of what future presidents should know about the physics of terrorism; specifically, how did those buildings come down?” 

Professor Muller is currentlywith the University of California, Berkley and also a member of the JASON Defense Advisory Group which brings together top scientists as consultants for the United States Department of Defense. So he shouldn’t be too biased, eh?

He writes a monthly column for MIT’s magazine and by all accounts, he is a very smart man (you can tell by how he holds his glasses there). So, let’s see what he says in the interview about the physics of 9/11, shall we?

This is part of what he says during that interview:

“TNT is uh, a (sic) explosive, releases a certain amount of energy, I like to measure the energy in food calories, per gram or per pound. 

If we compare the energy released by gasoline, many people are surprised to learn that gasoline releases more energy, 15 times the energy of TNT.

The planes carried about 60 tons of jet fuel, and if you multiply that by about 15 to get a sense of it, it was about 900 tons of TNT or the equivalent. 2 planes=1.8kila tons. That’s why there was so much damage done.”

First, let me say that jet fuel isn’tgasoline, though Muller interchanges the two during his talk. The jet fuel used in these planes was Type A jet Fuel. “The most common fuel is an unleaded/paraffin (kerosene) oil-based fuel classified as Jet A-1 (otherwise known as AVTUR), which is produced to an internationally standardized set of specifications.” Wiki, here.

Now, aside from the equation of “15 times the energy of TNT” statement he makes, which I don’t know whether that is true or not of “gasoline”, since we are talking about Type A Jet Fuel, I don’t think it makes a difference. But I want to work out the math for you, and then show you a video real quick.

But, since gasoline is derived from oil, even though it does have several additives that make it more volatile, we can basically derive that the energy output would be close that of oil when compared to TNT.

“A ton of oil equivalent or tonne of oil equivalent (TOE), a conventional value of 10 Gcal (IT) = 41.868 GJ ≈ 10.0067 ton of TNT.” Wiki, here.

So, we are looking at something akin to a 10 to 1 ratio as opposed to a 15 to 1 as he claims, depending on the additives. But he is the professor, not me, so I will yield to his pedigree on this one.

Let’s “do the math” shall we? He says there were the equivalent of 900 tons of TNT on each plane, and that is what caused “all the damage”. Well, 900 tons (Short Tons) equals 1,800,000 lbs. That is nearly 2 million lbs of TNT… per plane. Wanna see what 1 million pounds of TNT does? Almost HALF of what Muller says is the same as what the planes did to the Trade Center? Take a look…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0Bl2DKMv4A&eurl=http://willyloman.wordpress.com/2008/07/22/one-lie-after-another-from-npr/ 

 1  |  2  |  3

 

http://willyloman.wordpress.com/

Attended J.M.U. and V.C.U. in the '80s and '90's. Worked as a builder and installer of film, stage, and theme park sets and attractions. Currently works as a designer and draftsman for residential and commercial projects. Wrote "Prescription for a Free Iraq" in late 2006 as well as the "Petition to Replace Pelosi as Speaker of the House" in December of 2007.

Contact Author
Contact Editor
View Other Articles by Author

 

Bookmark this page: (what's this?)

NETSCAPE      DIGG THIS      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      My Web      Tag!RawSugar      Blink List     (More...)
Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
12 comments

I have achieved nothing of consequence apart from raising children in a way that they would excel where I failed. And they are on good tracks.
ramsheyiI have achieved nothing of consequence apart from raising children in a way that they would excel where I failed. And they are on good tracks.

Today's Winner Of 'The Medal Of Dishonesty'

And thanks to Herr Professor's non-experimental pseudo-science hogwash we now have a perfect explanation as to how WTC7 went down to its  roots at gravitational velocity without being hit by an airplane. His drivel also make us understand why the Pentagon hole is so small. Thank you Herr Professor for having made an asshole of yourself. We will reward you with The Medal Of Perversity And Dishonesty.

by ramsheyi (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 460 comments) on Wednesday, July 23, 2008 at 3:17:48 PM
 

Hater of Nazis above all. Hobbies include activism, military model building, military history, exciting and vital conversation with retired crooks. Retired
John HanksHater of Nazis above all. Hobbies include activism, military model building, military history, exciting and vital conversation with retired crooks. Retired

I'm surprised that there haven't been more.

911 is so full of wholes, that they know amnesia is their best defense.

by John Hanks (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1191 comments) on Wednesday, July 23, 2008 at 8:29:02 PM
 

I am a bone fide skeptic. I find the glut of nonsense posted on the internet to be particulary annoying. My goal is to explore the realms of stupidity and hold them up for closer inspection. This can be tricky, since stupid evaporates quickly in the light of reason.
Roark HowardI am a bone fide skeptic. I find the glut of nonsense posted on the internet to be particulary annoying. My goal is to explore the realms of stupidity and hold them up for closer inspection. This can be tricky, since stupid evaporates quickly in the light of reason.

Energy Density

The energy Density of gasoline is ranges from 44 to 47 MJ/kg.

The energy density of Jet fuels range from 42 to 46  MJ/kg.

 

I'm just saying, ya, know? 

 

by Roark Howard (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 350 comments) on Wednesday, July 23, 2008 at 8:43:40 PM
 

(Dave Patterson is a Canadian social-democrat-anarchist patriot, living in exile in Thailand where the process of making a living for a non-corporate worker bee is less onerous, until people in Canada start to care about saving their country. Unfortunately, he is not holding his breath - the corporate indoctrination is very deep and very strong, and the iceberg nigh. But hope reigns eternal. All the good books (including Dave's own Green Island http://www.rudemacedon.ca/greenisland.html ) manage...

to see more of bio, click on member name
siamdave(Dave Patterson is a Canadian social-democrat-anarchist patriot, living in exile in Thailand where the process of making a living for a non-corporate worker bee is less onerous, until people in Canada start to care about saving their country. Unfortunately, he is not holding his breath - the corporate indoctrination is very deep and very strong, and the iceberg nigh. But hope reigns eternal. All the good books (including Dave's own Green Island http://www.rudemacedon.ca/greenisland.html ) manage...

to see more of bio, click on member name

context

These interviews are no accident, of course, they well know there are a lot of people out there who question the official conspiracy theory, but who also are kind of fence riding because they don't really want to believe their government could possibly be quite that evil, all other evidence notwithstanding, so stuff like this is put out to try to pull them away from understanding what evil b**tards are really running their country. And it's effective, as well, esp when delivered by someone from a place like MIT that at one time could be trusted. This guy, and others like him, will, in the fullness of time and exposure of history, be on the same page as guys like Albert Speer and Propagandameister Goebbels. If anyone is reading here who would like an answer to his pseudo-scientific crap, have a look at A" target="_blank">click here 911 Thought Experiment, which tries to add a bit of context to the fuel and what it did - context you will never see the OCT propagandists talk about, as it makes their fairy tales sound like the blatant bs they are. 

by siamdave (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 70 comments) on Wednesday, July 23, 2008 at 10:13:47 PM
 

The author is a fifty-something year old physician soon to be expatriated.
YaybobThe author is a fifty-something year old physician soon to be expatriated.

Nice post

Nice post. Impressive scholarship on the author's part in debunking these claims.

I personally believe that the Neocons orchestrated the whole pageant of 911, although there is no way for me to distinguish that scenario from one where they became aware of a plan to do the same and chose to allow it to happen. What is impossible to accept is that primitive people with limited resources and access caused 911 without being discovered in advance, resisted in the air, or having multiple accomplices subsequently identified and exposed like Terry Nichols in Oklahoma City or Ted Kaczynski in Montana. How many terrorists would be needed to pull off 911 even if they had all of the access that they needed to supplies, intelligence, documents and the like? At least several on the ground for every one in the air. But all we have are 19 patsies who, like Oswald, can never speak for themselves. Signature American M.O.

But do you know what? I have no doubt that if somebody provided the gift of 911 to the Neocons, that they would welcome it and stand down in response if not facilitate it actively. Is there anybody with a modicum of analytic ability who believes that Bush or Cheney, if they were aware that 911 was in the works, would have any reason to prevent it? That seems obvious and indisputable to me, and that is what is relevant. That is, is there any practical difference between somebody who would do such a thing and somebody who didn't think of it, but discovered the plan in advance and didn’t attempt to prevent it? Even those who refuse to accept complicity theories should be able to say that if Bush or Cheney had known, that they would not have intervened. Even conspiracy theory haters and administration apologists like the professor here must, if they were honest, agree with this.

This may not seem like an important consideration, but change the crime to a domestic equivalent. A plan to murder a married man is uncovered before it can be implemented, but it cannot be determined whether his wife was partly or completely responsible, or uninvolved. These are two very different situations from the husband’s perspective, and it is vitally important if possible to distinguish between them. It determines what he should do - continue his marriage or end it. It determines whether he should love and trust her or the opposite.

But add this fact. He has good reason to believe that even if she had nothing to do with the plot and didn't know about it, that had she discovered it, she definitely would not have tried to prevent his murder. If somehow he knew that was not only capable of permitting his murder but that she almost certainly would choose to allow it to come to pass, now, it only matters to the police whether she was the perp, a co-conspirator or neither. To the husband, there is no longer a problem. His next move is clear either way. He needs another wife, and he doesn't love her or support her any longer.

That is what we Americans face conspiracy or not. Of course there was a conspiracy, but the important point is that even if the naysayers were correct about the administrations innocence, we can never be convinced that they would have cheered and supported the conspiracy rather than attempt to prevent its execution, and that is just as damning. This is my answer to  those who ridicule others who accept or accept provisionally that  the administration was the perp, or at a minimum, a co-conspirator, that even I can concede the point without having to modify my assesment of Bush and Cheney, because I cannot be convinced by any argument that they would not gladly let it happen to benefit themselves (at it did), an outcome that would be easy to predict, and that would require a conscience or at least some regard for life or the law to take action.

 

by Yaybob (12 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 174 comments) on Wednesday, July 23, 2008 at 10:33:33 PM
 

I live in the capital city of a major blue state.
MaxwellI live in the capital city of a major blue state.

Explosives and fuel are not the same

No one denies the jet fuel had energy. Enough to lift an airliner several thousand feet into the air and carry it across the continent against aerodynamic drag. The figures given by Roark Howard seem reasonable (fan of Ayn Rand?)

The reason TNT is an explosive is that it releases its energy over a short period of time. Energy can manifest itself as either a large force exerted over a short distance, or a relatively small force over a large distance. Fuel can release its energy rapidly when mixed with oxygen in the right proportions, while explosives are self-contained, with their own oxygen supply. But, as is frequently pointed out, the fires in the WTC are clearly oxygen-starved. There isn't any evidence of widespread vapor, particularly when the buildings collapsed, when most of it would have dispersed.

I have to say the argument that the explosive force couldn't be as much as the professor says, otherwise the tops would have blown off the buildings, isn't very convincing. A more productive line of reasoning is this: while we have no other instances of implosions of buildings due to fires to study, there have been plenty of jet liner crashes, usually with most or all life aboard lost. Why, though, do they not typically explode with enough force to level a skyscraper?

I agree that the professor's thesis that gasoline-fueled terrorist attacks are something we need to be vigilent of is bogus fear-mongering.

by Maxwell (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 240 comments) on Thursday, July 24, 2008 at 10:34:02 AM
 

I have achieved nothing of consequence apart from raising children in a way that they would excel where I failed. And they are on good tracks.
ramsheyiI have achieved nothing of consequence apart from raising children in a way that they would excel where I failed. And they are on good tracks.

How About WTC7 ?

Troll Maxwell,

How about WTC7 ? Is free-falling a contagious disease transmetted through heat waves?

What abour molten steel at 10 000 degrees centigrade two months after the initial explosions? Can jet fuel do that ? Mini-nukes would for sure.

You are a brand new agent of the criminal Establishment doing your best to throw confusion into the debate. Others before you have tried and failed.

We are uncheatable and undupable.

We don't need your explanations and theories and commentaries aimed at whitewashing through absurd rhetoric. 

Just go away or we will chase you out

by ramsheyi (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 460 comments) on Thursday, July 24, 2008 at 12:43:31 PM
 

I am a bone fide skeptic. I find the glut of nonsense posted on the internet to be particulary annoying. My goal is to explore the realms of stupidity and hold them up for closer inspection. This can be tricky, since stupid evaporates quickly in the light of reason.
Roark HowardI am a bone fide skeptic. I find the glut of nonsense posted on the internet to be particulary annoying. My goal is to explore the realms of stupidity and hold them up for closer inspection. This can be tricky, since stupid evaporates quickly in the light of reason.

HA HA HA HA

"What abour molten steel at 10 000 degrees centigrade two months after the initial explosions?"

 What a load of crap.   ROFLMAO

by Roark Howard (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 350 comments) on Thursday, July 24, 2008 at 7:07:46 PM
 

I am a bone fide skeptic. I find the glut of nonsense posted on the internet to be particulary annoying. My goal is to explore the realms of stupidity and hold them up for closer inspection. This can be tricky, since stupid evaporates quickly in the light of reason.
Roark HowardI am a bone fide skeptic. I find the glut of nonsense posted on the internet to be particulary annoying. My goal is to explore the realms of stupidity and hold them up for closer inspection. This can be tricky, since stupid evaporates quickly in the light of reason.

Nice. . .

"Just go away or we will chase you out"
I'm sure Stalin, Hitler, Hugo Chavez, Castro, Tito would approve of that sentiment.  ;) 

by Roark Howard (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 350 comments) on Thursday, July 24, 2008 at 7:09:34 PM
 

I am a bone fide skeptic. I find the glut of nonsense posted on the internet to be particulary annoying. My goal is to explore the realms of stupidity and hold them up for closer inspection. This can be tricky, since stupid evaporates quickly in the light of reason.
Roark HowardI am a bone fide skeptic. I find the glut of nonsense posted on the internet to be particulary annoying. My goal is to explore the realms of stupidity and hold them up for closer inspection. This can be tricky, since stupid evaporates quickly in the light of reason.

Fuel Air Explosives

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/dumb/fae.htm

by Roark Howard (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 350 comments) on Thursday, July 24, 2008 at 7:05:06 PM
 

Joel S. Hirschhorn is the author of Delusional Democracy - Fixing the Republic Without Overthrowing the Government (www.delusionaldemocracy.com). His current political writings have been greatly influenced by working as a senior staffer for the U.S. Congress and for the National Governors Association. He advocates a Second American Revolution, beginning with an Article V Convention to propose constitutional amendments. He is Chair of the Independent Party of Maryland.
Joel S. HirschhornJoel S. Hirschhorn is the author of Delusional Democracy - Fixing the Republic Without Overthrowing the Government (www.delusionaldemocracy.com). His current political writings have been greatly influenced by working as a senior staffer for the U.S. Congress and for the National Governors Association. He advocates a Second American Revolution, beginning with an Article V Convention to propose constitutional amendments. He is Chair of the Independent Party of Maryland.

Listen up

Ph.D can mean nothing more than piled high and deep; after receiving my Ph.D. I became a full, tenured engineering professor at a major university, so listen up:

When something with potential energy burns it is NOT the same thing as exploding.  Explosions mean a sudden release of energy.  Jet fuel burning is NOT an explosion.  The cited professor said a complete load of bullshit.

I have studied the WTC buildings collapse (all three buildings) and totally support the view that they did NOT collapse because of the airplanes and their fuel.

Follow the money: and you would surely learn that the cited professor has lived off of federal money.

by Joel S. Hirschhorn (126 articles, 31 quicklinks, 58 diaries, 508 comments) on Saturday, July 26, 2008 at 2:29:01 PM
 

I am a bone fide skeptic. I find the glut of nonsense posted on the internet to be particulary annoying. My goal is to explore the realms of stupidity and hold them up for closer inspection. This can be tricky, since stupid evaporates quickly in the light of reason.
Roark HowardI am a bone fide skeptic. I find the glut of nonsense posted on the internet to be particulary annoying. My goal is to explore the realms of stupidity and hold them up for closer inspection. This can be tricky, since stupid evaporates quickly in the light of reason.

Hey Joel

How much energy would be released by the combustion of 5,000 gallons of jet fuel plus a typical office environment fire load after say 1 hour?

 

 

by Roark Howard (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 350 comments) on Sunday, July 27, 2008 at 10:31:19 AM
 

 

12 comments

 

Tell A Friend

 

Copyright © OpEdNews, 2002-2008

Blog Ads

 

 

 

 

Most Popular Articles
in the Last 2 Days
(by Recommend Emails)

Obama Must Appoint a Consumer Protectionist as FDA Commissioner by Stephen Fox

Naomi Wolf Must Watch Video: A Coup Took Place on October 1, 2008 by youtube

BARACK OBAMA On Gandhi's Birthday by Stephen Fox

CBS's Spoiled Poodle Dean Reynolds Bites Obama-- Reports his Plane Smells by Rob Kall

What I Learned At The Sarah Palin Rally Before They Threw Me Out! by Linda Milazzo

The dangerous McCain/Palin character assassination of Obama by Sherman Yellen

Return of the Jedi by Ferdinand

How low can Palin go? by Deb Della Piana

Onward, Christian Soldiers (Redux) by Shirley Bianchi

This is Your Nation on White Privilege Posted by Siv O'Neall

Go To Top 50 Most Popular