|
World Trade Center controlled demolition theories contend that the collapse of the World Trade Center was not solely caused by the airliner crash damage that occurred as part of the September 11, 2001 attacks, and the resulting fire damage, but by explosives installed in the buildings in advance.〔Clarke, Steve. "Conspiracy Theories and the Internet: Controlled Demolition and Arrested Development". ''Episteme'', Volume 4, Issue 2, 2007, pp. 167-180.〕 Controlled demolition theories make up a major component of 9/11 conspiracy theories. Early advocates such as physicist Steven E. Jones, architect Richard Gage, software engineer Jim Hoffman, and theologian David Ray Griffin, argued that the aircraft impacts and resulting fires could not have weakened the buildings sufficiently to initiate a catastrophic collapse, and that the buildings would not have collapsed completely, nor at the speeds that they did, without additional energy involved to weaken their structures. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the magazine ''Popular Mechanics'' examined and rejected these theories. Specialists in structural mechanics and structural engineering accept the model of a fire-induced, gravity-driven collapse of the World Trade Center buildings, an explanation that does not involve the use of explosives.〔 NIST "found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition using explosives planted prior to Sept. 11, 2001." In 2006, Jones suggested that thermite or super-thermite may have been used by government insiders with access to such materials and to the buildings themselves, to demolish the buildings.〔(【引用サイトリンク】accessdate=May 28, 2009 )〕 In April 2009, Jones, Danish Niels H. Harrit and seven other authors published a paper in ''The Open Chemical Physics Journal'', causing the editor, Prof. Marie-Paule Pileni, to resign as she accused the publisher of printing it without her knowledge;〔〕 this article was titled 'Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe', and stated that they had found evidence of nano-thermite in samples of the dust that was produced during the collapse of the World Trade Center towers. NIST responded that there was no "clear chain of custody" to prove that the four samples of dust came from the WTC site. Jones invited NIST to conduct its own studies using its own known "chain of custody" dust, but NIST did not investigate.〔 ==History== Questions related to the technical details of the collapse of the buildings of the World Trade Center have been debated for years, including rebuttals and ridicule. Controlled demolition conspiracy theories were first suggested in October 2001.〔 Eric Hufschmid's book, ''Painful Questions: An Analysis of the September 11th Attack'', in which the controlled demolition theory is explicitly advocated, was published in September 2002.〔 David Ray Griffin and Steven E. Jones are the two most prominent advocates of the theory.〔 Griffin's book ''The New Pearl Harbor'', published in 2004, has become a reference work for the 9/11 Truth movement. In the same year, Griffin published the book ''The 9/11 Commission Report: Omissions and Distortions'', in which he argues that flaws in the commission's report amounts to a cover-up by government officials and says that the Bush administration was complicit in the 9/11 attacks. Griffin theorized in a June 2010 article that those in the alleged false flag operation wanted the buildings to fall straight down. If they had toppled over, they would have destroyed dozens of other buildings and killed tens of thousands of people.〔(Did 9/11 Justify The War In Afghanistan? David Ray Griffen for countercurrents.org June 26, 2010 )〕 Steven E. Jones has been a leading academic voice of the proponents of demolition theories. In 2006, he published the paper "Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Completely Collapse?".〔 Brigham Young University responded to Jones' "increasingly speculative and accusatory" statements by placing him on paid leave, and thereby stripping him of two classes, in September 2006, pending a review of his statements and research. Six weeks later, Jones retired from the university.〔 〕 The structural engineering faculty at the university issued a statement which said that they "do not support the hypotheses of Professor Jones".〔 In its final report, NIST stated that it "found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition using explosives planted prior to Sept. 11, 2001. NIST also did not find any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead, photographs and videos from several angles clearly show that the collapse initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed from the initiating floors downward until the dust clouds obscured the view." and posted a FAQ about related issues on its website in August 2006.〔 Allegations of controlled demolition have been found to be devoid of scientific merit by mainstream engineering scholarship.〔 The magazine ''Popular Mechanics'' also found the theories lacked scientific support in its special report "Debunking the 9/11 Myths". Articles, letters and comments by controlled demolition advocates have been published in scientific and engineering journals. In April 2008, a letter titled "Fourteen Points of Agreement with Official Government Reports on the World Trade Center Destruction," was published by Steven E. Jones, Frank Legge, Kevin Ryan, Anthony Szamboti and James Gourley in ''The Open Civil Engineering Journal''.〔 〕 A few months later, in July 2008, an article titled "Environmental anomalies at the World Trade Center: evidence for energetic materials," was published by Ryan, Gourley and Jones in ''the Environmentalist.''〔 〕 Later that same year, in October 2008, the ''Journal of Engineering Mechanics'' published a comment〔 〕 by chemical engineer and attorney James R. Gourley, in which he describes what he considered fundamental errors in a 2007 paper on the mechanics of progressive collapse by Bažant and Verdure.〔 〕 In the same issue, Bažant and Le rebutted Gourley's arguments, finding his criticisms scientifically incorrect.〔 "The interdisciplinary interests of Gourley, a chemical engineer with a doctorate in jurisprudence, are appreciated. Although none of the discusser's criticisms is scientifically correct, his discussion provides a welcome opportunity to dispel doubts recently voiced by some in the community outside structural mechanics and engineering." 〕 They suggested future critics should "become acquainted with the relevant material from an appropriate textbook on structural mechanics" or risk "misleading and wrongly influencing the public with incorrect information."〔 "Although everyone is certainly entitled to express his or her opinion on any issue of concern, interested critics should realize that, to help discern the truth about an engineering problem such as the WTC collapse, it is necessary to become acquainted with the relevant material from an appropriate textbook on structural mechanics. Otherwise critics run the risk of misleading and wrongly influencing the public with incorrect information." 〕 In April 2009, Danish chemist Niels H. Harrit, of the University of Copenhagen, and eight other authors published a paper in ''The Open Chemical Physics Journal'', titled, "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe." The paper concludes that chips consisting of unreacted and partially reacted super-thermite, or nano-thermite, appear to be present in samples of the dust.〔〔Politiken: (Konspirationsteorier om 9/11 får nyt liv ), Jyllands-Posten: (Forskere: Sprængstof i støvet fra WTC ), Ekstra Bladet: (Mystik om WTC: Nano-termit i tårne ), Kristeligt Dagblad: (Dansker genopliver konspirationsteori om 11. september ), Videnskab: (Dansk forsker: Eksplosivt nanomateriale fundet i støvet fra World Trade Center ). The journal Videnskab is sponsored by the Danish Ministry for Science and Technology. 〕 Internet websites and videos have contributed to the growth of the movement of individuals supporting the theory that planted explosives destroyed the World Trade Center. The website of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth cites the membership of over 1,500 architects and engineers.〔(【引用サイトリンク】url=http://ae911truth.org )〕 The controlled demolition theory often includes allegations that U.S. government insiders planned and / or participated in the destruction of the WTC in order to justify the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan. The theory features prominently in popular entertainment type movies, such as ''Loose Change'', as well as more documentary type films, such as ''9/11: Blueprint for Truth'', by San Francisco-area architect Richard Gage. While mainstream press has a significant history of derogatory labels, descriptions and interpretations of demolition theory advocates (i.e., in 2006, the magazine ''New York'' reported that a "new generation of conspiracy theorists is at work on a secret history of New York's most terrible day."), the theory has been supported by a number of popular actors, musicians and politicians, including Charlie Sheen, Willie Nelson,〔(Fox News )〕 former Governor of Minnesota Jesse Ventura,〔(Ventura Regrets Not Being More Skeptical Over 9/11 ). Retrieved on April 8, 2008.〕 talkshow host Rosie O'Donnell, and actors Ed Asner and Daniel Sunjata. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「World Trade Center controlled demolition conspiracy theories」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|