Write-up on Steve Jones and 9/11 Conspiracies
Interesting (to me at least) write-up on Steve Jones and the whole 9/11 Conspiracy movement. Whether one agrees with Jones or not (and at this stage I think his views are pretty well refuted) the groups he’s associating with seem more than a tad scary. It kind of bothers me that BYU’s name gets drug into all this as well. Much worse, as I see it, than the Nielsen kerfuffle.
I’ve heard that Jones’ theories have been allegedly refuted, but I haven’t come across any documentation or source of somebody actually doing so.. do you have any suggested links?
Comment by Connor Boyack — June 21, 2006 @ 4:22 pm
I’m sure that Steven Jones’s theories have been refuted, but was the refutation correct? How could I tell if it was or wasn’t?
I really hope that the 9/11 conspiracy theories are wrong, and that Steve Jones is just a delusional paranoid. If he is not, then we are in deep, deep trouble in this country because the Islamic terrorists are the least of our worries. The truth is I am thoroughly confused about all conspiracy claims. Common sense tells me that some of them must be correct because of my understanding of the Book of Mormon, but I do not know how to sift out the good ones from the paranoid baloney. It think that those who reject all conspiracies out of hand are just as illogical as those who gullibly accept them all. Obviously the truth lies somewhere in between, but where? Where is there a reliable source of information? Everyone has an axe to grind. Everyone is going to try to support his claims with alleged “facts.” Virtually nothing written in the mainstream or “alternative” media is without a bias or slant. This is why history books are so hard to trust. We can’t even objectively interpret the facts of history when we are on hand to interview the eye witnesses. How are we to sort it out many years later?
I think important such questions as, What is reality? What is the nature of perception? How do variations in our perception affect our understanding of what is and is not a “fact.” How do I know for sure that my life is not a dream and reality is actually something completely different that I will wake up to when I die? What actually takes place in the brain when we learn? And what is it about what we learn that we can take with us into the next life? What is the difference between the mind and the brain?
The more I listen to the arguments of philosophers, scientists, and holy men, the more convinced I become that we are all completely confused, or at least ignorant of almost everything.
Consider… what percentage of all there is to know do we actually know? Is it .000001 percent? Or is it .000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 percent. Does it really make any difference? When our ignorance so vastly outweighs our knowledge, just how can we be certain that we know anything? I mean, is it not only possible but highly likely that somewhere in that .9999999999999999999999 percent that we have yet to learn, that we are going to learn something that will completely overturn what we already think we know?
I sure hope that Steven Jones is wrong about the collapse of the WTC towers on 9/11. But if he was or wasn’t, how could I know? How could anyone know? Where are the reliable sources of information? What if there aren’t any?
Comment by John W. Redelfs — June 21, 2006 @ 7:24 pm
I have a relative teaching in the BYU physics department and the Jones/9-11 controversy is now an issue when they interview candidates for professorships (as in, do you hold press conferences before your paper is published, etc.).
Comment by queuno — June 22, 2006 @ 10:29 am
I think that the Nielsen saga is a bigger issue than the Jones saga, because, with Nielsen, official action of the university is involved (albeit one department of the university). In other words, I think it’s more reasonable to draw conclusions about BYU based on what happened to Nielsen as opposed to what a random professor, WITHOUT the university’s blessing, did. And I think the public knows that…I think
I would also add that I don’t know that his claims have been refuted. I watched his UVSC presentation, and granted some of it is speculative (who did what, what certain people’s motivations were, etc), but the scientific part made as much sense to me as anyother explanation I’ve heard (although I’m no scientist). I’m with Connor: could you point us in the direction of something that purports to refute his work?
Comment by APJ — June 22, 2006 @ 11:28 am
Sorry, I’d made a post yesterday but for some reason it didn’t make it to the comments. Server problems I suppose.
There are lots of places to deal with the responses. This blog entry deals with Jones a fair bit. You can also check out this page that deals with some elements of Jones’ theory. There are others if you google.
Comment by Clark Goble — June 22, 2006 @ 2:47 pm
I don’t know much about copyright law, but it seems odd to me that the site Clark links to can simply swipe the text of this article from The Chronicle of Higher Education. A link to a legal copy of this article is here.
Comment by Chris Grant — June 27, 2006 @ 1:35 pm
It’s embarrasing to be a BYU alum these days. BYU does the double damage of not tolerating dissent, which undermines the credibility of all BYU profs and then tolerating this delusional Jones retard. Will the place ever reform? If so, how long will it take to redeem its reputation?
Comment by Steve EM — June 27, 2006 @ 5:37 pm
I’m not embarassed to be a BYU alum at all. Blaming an entire organizatioin for the actions of a few (or one) of its members or employees is naive. I am reminded of investigators I had in my mission in Honduras – some would not join the church because of the actions or behavior or a single member.
Claiming that BYU “doesn’t tolerate dissent”, but then “tolerates this delusional Jones retard” (ah, such kind, educated words) is far too generalizing and assumptive.
Comment by Connor Boyack — June 28, 2006 @ 1:15 pm
For those interested, here is a movie clip of an interview w/ Jones on Utah channel 2 News.
Comment by Connor Boyack — July 4, 2006 @ 2:15 pm
Connor,
Please understand that I’ve already articulated my position on Jones elsewhere in this blog a number of times and didn’t wish to be redundant regarding him. You got the abridged version above. I am genuinely embarrass that BYU makes a mockery of academic freedom and their own employment policies while tolerating a nut job like Jones at the same time. Jones must have pictures of a high BYU administrator with animals or a boy.
Comment by Steve EM — July 6, 2006 @ 6:46 pm
911 was a watershed event that many of us are still reeling from. For those who were not directly impacted by the loss of life or limb, we’ve seem to have heeded the words of our President and Im paraphrasing, “To move on with our lives… take those trips… spend money you don’t have… fly our airlines…” Id like to see his own family eat his cooking without the assistance of Air Force One or the Secret Service. To play loose and free with other peoples lives offers a possibly window into what kind of threat the terrorists really pose.
Most American are ill equipped to fathom that 911 could have had “other influences” involved with the attacks, and our transparent media has done a great job of “hiding the ball.”
I think its great that an academic like Steve Jones is applying his skills as a physicists and academic to help decipher and unwind the “official story.” He’s also a part of cadre of accomplished and concerned citizens that arent buying the official story. His scrutiny of the Building 7 collapse offers us the most egregious aspect of the 911 debacle. That incident alone clearly doesnt stand on the merits.
Jones has courage and probably voices the opinion of others who feel similarly, but are too pragmatic and fearful of Govt or public opinion reprisals. This is a tough environment to live in and have a voice.
Comment by Michael James — July 11, 2006 @ 10:48 am
This is a tough issue for me. I don’t believe Jone’s story, but I get stuck when I start thinking whether or not Jones’s opinion should be dismissed as looney or that we should be tolerant of people’s views even if they are this disagreeable to many people.
Comment by RubyG — July 13, 2006 @ 2:57 pm
It’s a travesty that the 9/11 Conspiracy has gotten any traction at all.
To actively promote this ugly & insidious disinformation is shameful.
Such outlandish conspiratorial accusations proffered by the 9/11 Conspiracy crowd ought to be vehemently repudiated for the rubbish that it is.
To believe and promote such lies dishonors those who died at the hands of the murderers who were guilty of such cold-blooded barbarity and heinous crimes against humanity.
Comment by LDS Patriot — July 23, 2006 @ 11:08 pm
Steve EM (#10): yes, i’m sure BYU is much more embarrassed of a perhaps-misguided professor (which many universities put up with) than someone like you who is willing to assume that at least one high-ranking administrator has pictures out there with little boys or animals. Your righteous indignation as to BYU’s self-perception is laughable.
Comment by APJ — July 23, 2006 @ 11:33 pm
APJ,
I was speculating that Jones has big dirt on a high BYU official to survive this BS he promotes. Others have been dumped for far less, in terms of damage to the institution. Hey, he’s not the most masculine guy; maybe they’re gay lovers. Of course, most of BYU’s damage is self inflicted with their mockery of academic freedom and their own employment policies. Moreover, with this gay marraige thing, the church issues a statement that members who support gay marriage won’t be disciplined, and then BYU cans a guy for supporting gay marriage. So much for being honest in one’s dealings with others. It’s kind of like Dallen preaching about not criticizing church leaders after he back stabs BKP. Why does our church hold Joe and Molly Mormon to a higher standard than the top leaders, which includes BYU admin, hold themselves? Yes, it’s a safe bet this Jones has the goods on somebody.
Comment by Steve EM — July 24, 2006 @ 10:28 pm
I had a class from Jones before 911 and had a favorable impression of him. I therefore listened to his presentation. I was surprised, but will take the time to study it out. His figures on temps, angular momentum and facial measurements are most interesting to me because that is science. The refutations I have read are mostly imprecise and do not touch on science. I look forward to a better peer review and more data. I don’t want to believe him, but it is what it is, whether I like it or not, I would rather find the truth than succumb to my less important desires.
Many people will gloss over the Jones presentation and not look into the works cited or ponder the facts. That is to be expected. #13 seems to represent this group. If I understand correctly he says that to look into a possibility in a scientific way is ugly and insidious. To me it is ugly and insidious to not look into such a theory and have it be shown true or false. It is the beauty of democracy that such theories exist. Since #13 made such a passionate plea I will counter, do we not owe it to those who died to find the truth? How do you know the truth if it is not investigated? Has a full investigation been done? How do you know? Will their blood not cry up from the dust against us if we do not do our part?
Why are people afraid to consider possibilities, look into them, and find if they are true or not? Is that not what Joseph Smith did and we are all asked to do? Is that not learning, discovery? I for one would like to see a refutation written that is at the same level of science that Jones’s paper is at. So far I have not been able to find one. Maybe one will come out soon. In the mean time I know some physics, chemistry etc.. I’m lookin into this a bit myself. That’s what the bibliography is for.
Comment by Aaron T — August 23, 2006 @ 12:24 am
Hey check this:
out.http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=403757&in_page_id=1770
BYU, please, please, make it stop! Can this guy, please!
Comment by Steve EM — September 6, 2006 @ 1:21 pm
Consider this quote from Dwight D. Eisenhower,
“Here in America we are descended in blood and in spirit from revolutionists and rebels – men and women who dare to dissent from accepted doctrine. As their heirs, may we never confuse honest dissent with disloyal subversion.â€
It takes a tremendous amount of character to speak against the status quo. Although you may not agree with Jones, you should have the strength of character to defend his right to question the “official” story about 9/11.
As for BYU. I cannot believe my tithing is going to support an instutution that quashes freedom of speech, the right to question our government, and the seemingly blind support of the Bush machine.
There were people that were considered “crazy” for questioning Nixon and the Vietnam war. Yes …. it was the cut-and-run “liberals.”
I think history will vindicate people like Jones.
Comment by Greg T — September 8, 2006 @ 7:46 pm
Greg how has Jones’ freedom of speech been infringed? He’s still free to say whatever he wants. Surely the institution that hired him has some say in the consequences that reflect upon the institution though. Say what you will about Jones but he (or at least his supporters) have been flashing the name of BYU to give the conspiracy theories respect they might otherwise not have. And this certainly is reflecting upon the university.
Now I personally, because of academic freedom reasons, think that what BYU has done is inappropriate. Even though my sympathies overall are definitely with BYU.
Comment by Clark Goble — September 8, 2006 @ 9:05 pm
Its all very basic that they would eventually reign Jones in with a suspension. You have to sacrifice ones right to speak and expose for political expediency. BYU has basically pandered to power as does our media and many other organizations that cant afford to rock relations with our dictator in the White House.
However, there is no such thing as a free lunch, and the Church continues to have its missionaries manhandled and criticized around the world as official representatives of our country and Bush’s war machine.
The Church wants converts but the many first world converts they seek see the hypocrisy in sending missionaries while men of a similar age from our country are shipped off to kill. Its a twisted reality the Church finds itself in in trying to convey the message of Christ.
BYU wants blind patriotism and an environment that doesnt encourage dissent, yet everyday Missionaries are receiving an education of hatred and well informed positions as to what our country is promoting around the world.
Steve Jones represented in my book a courageous voice for what many people know and feel but are afraid to speak out about. Sacrificing one academic will not eliminate the 911 movement nor the information that is out there.
Comment by David — September 9, 2006 @ 2:20 am
The arguments of Prof Jones are solid. No one should make an opinion of them before reading the article. He points out objective facts which radically undermine the credibility of the official story. You need to examine these objectively before reacting. Here is a link to the professor’s article, http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/WhyIndeedDidtheWorldTradeCenterBuildingsCompletelyCollapse.pdf
Read It. And see the quality of the evidence for yourself. If he is so wrong it should not be hard to find a valid refutation to his claims. So far I have only found ad-hominem attacks and forgone conclusions; no solid refutation, from anyone. So, as far as I can tell, the good prof. is right and is being persecuted for showing that the emperor has no clothes.
Comment by erasmocbc — September 9, 2006 @ 12:14 pm