John D. Wyndham, PhD (Physics)

Scientists for 9/11 Truth Peterborough, NH johndwyndham@myfairpoint.net

Abstract—The final official reports on the destruction of the World Trade Center Twin Towers (WTC1/2) were published in September, 2005 by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) [1]. Since then, serious questions have been raised by over 2100 qualified architects, engineers and scientists about how NIST selected the forensic evidence to be included and about the processes used to reach its conclusions [2]. This is troubling for such important reports. The public has come to expect that analyses would depend on peer review to verify the soundness of a scientific work and ensure that the conclusions are the result of a consistent, transparent and ethical process. This is especially important in reporting on an event with such major consequences as that of September 11, 2001.

Keywords--demolition; explosive; gravity; dust; powder; nano- thermite; iron; micro-sphere; health; negligence; ethics; peer- review; 9/11; World Trade Center Twin Towers

I.OVERVIEW

On September 11, 2001, the Twin Towers at the World Trade Center (WTC) in New York City suffered damage from aircraft impact followed by fires. In less than two hours from the first plane impact, both steel-framed structures were destroyed all the way down into their basements. These destructions were accompanied by audible explosions as reported by scores of witnesses [3]. Thousands of citizens trapped in the Towers, and many nearby, were killed. Most of the buildings’ material was ejected outside the footprints of the buildings (see Fig. 1). The concrete and building contents were largely pulverized to a very fine powder which was deposited over lower Manhattan by a pyroclastic-like “dust” cloud. Steel columns were broken into short lengths.