- 9/11 Revisited - Jeff King MIT Engineer - 1of2
Uploaded by: 911truthnc
Video Description:
"September 11th Revisited"
MIT Engineer Research Scientist Jeff King
1 of 2 - appx 9:30mins
details how the official government story violates the laws of physics and chemistry. He goes on to explain how the subsequent government investigations were designed NOT to uncover what happened. He also provides insight into what most likely happened that day.
http://truth-tv.org magical - brew - funky - blues http://beautifulevil.net
Tags for this video: 911 CAN Controlled Demolition Handle Jeff King MIT NWO series The Towers Truth Twin web You
Find more videos in the "Education" category
See more videos uploaded by 911truthnc
| 9/11 Revisited - WTC Metal Analysis by Physics Professor | 9 11 Truth MIT Engineer Jeff King Says WTC Demolished | 9/11 Physics simulation |
 |  |  |
| Bill Maher attacks Charlie Sheen 9/8/06 | Mystery 9/11 aircraft was military 'doomsday plane' | 9/11 Truth: MIT Engineer Jeff King Says WTC Demolished |
 |  |  |
Share This Video:
Comments for this video: Show || Hide
| Comments for this video on YouTube |
| watch?v=ZzJ7uLUxCjE ... ( 1 week ago by 911truthnc) |
| watch?v=ZzJ7uLUxCjE Listen to the explosions here. |
| Dude, did you even ... ( 1 week ago by 911truthnc) |
| Dude, did you even look at the people supporting a new investigation? You act like a child. |
| When you decide to ... ( 1 week ago by 911truthnc) |
| When you decide to behave like an adult. I will continue. You are making your side look even worst than it already does. |
| oh so you take out ... ( 1 week ago by heafers84) |
| oh so you take out the bottom of a building to initiate a collapse at the top, why didn't i think of that, makes perfect sense (sarcasm) The fact is it was a top to bottom collapse, there's no way an explosion at the bottom of the towers affects anything, b/c we see the building fall floor by floor, that's a fact, we also see the building give at the point of impact that's a fact, and i hear no explosion at :57 of the video you showed me it just sounds like wind, where's your facts |
| So, i need an ... ( 1 week ago by heafers84) |
| So, i need an answer to why at 1:16 there would be squibs needed in a top to bottom collapse, squibs are used in bottom to top collapses to knock steel columns off their base so gravity takes over, plus we don't see them before hand like other CD, like this one watch?v=8U4erFzhC-U, more than likely it's just airpressure breaking out. At 3:30, that's b/c most of the plane melted, they did recover an engine a few parts but not very many, flight 93 and 77 were put back together though |
| at 4:30 black smoke ... ( 1 week ago by heafers84) |
| at 4:30 black smoke doesn't just indicate low oxygen , it also depends on what's burning, if you like oil or kerosene it burns black, watch any car fire on youtube, 5:50 except for the freight elevator which was destroyed on impact of the plane, proof b/c people in the basement witness a fireball and destruction of the freightelevator seconds after impact of the plane, 7:00 NIST explained what initiated the collapse, they did not show how it fell, and still believe pancake collapse was plausible |
| So Jim Hoffman a ... ( 1 week ago by heafers84) |
| So Jim Hoffman a software engineer all of a sudden becomes a structural engineer over night awesome. It's also great that he points out that Weidlinger and Associates b/c they don't believe it was brought down by CD and believe the planes are what caused the most damage, 8:20 if the dust clouds are from explosions then why don't we hear them, and if their talking about precollapse explosions then why isn't there dust before the collapse. |
| On the dust. Watch ... ( 1 week ago by heafers84) |
| On the dust. Watch the implosion video i showed, the dust cloud doesn't occur until the building comes down, indicating that this is just caused by pulverized concrete as it comes into contact with lower floors, Same thing we wee in the towers, concrete floor by floor coming into contact creating pulverized concrete, |
| Some of those ... ( 1 week ago by 911truthnc) |
| Some of those comments below are aimed at Adorabilly. Look I saw comments you made to adorabilly supporting controlled demolition. Are you playing devil's advocate here? |
| Explosions are ... ( 1 week ago by 911truthnc) |
| Explosions are backed up dozens of eyewitnesses and fire fighters. Ever heard of William Rodriguez? |
| Kevin Ryan - has ... ( 1 week ago by 911truthnc) |
| Kevin Ryan - has completely debunked NIST. You are a neophyte on this matter no? |
| flight 93 and 77 ... ( 1 week ago by 911truthnc) |
| flight 93 and 77 were put back together though. Show me! The towers were much taller than your example. Explosion at the bottom to enable falling into footprint. Top down to break the material into small enough sections to remain in a restricted area. The build might topple otherwise. Which would be expected in a pancake. Plenty of past examples. |
| Facts! There was ... ( 1 week ago by 911truthnc) |
| Facts! There was no forensic investigation. We have video to make deductions and inferences. YOU are not bothered no one has been held accountable. No one lost their job. You are willing to accept the gummit official story on blind faith. Have you ever published any research papers? My guess would be no. |
| seekTo - had not ... ( 1 week ago by 911truthnc) |
| seekTo - had not seen that. slick. |
| journalof911studies ... ( 1 week ago by 911truthnc) |
| journalof911studies com |
| yeah his orignal ... ( 1 week ago by heafers84) |
| yeah his orignal statements, found in a live interview and on wikipedia with refrences to their news sources, talk nothing of explosions, he says he hears a 2 loud rumbles, the first one is the plane hitting, which he says sounded like a transformer blowing a coupld of stories up, then the second rumble is the freight elevator crashing down which he says was caused by a fireball, proving jet fuel made it down the freight elevator b/c dynamite does not cause ball of fire, but jet fuel does |
| The building ... ( 1 week ago by heafers84) |
| The building doesn't fall into it's footprint, you're own video shows this, it covers 8x it's footprint, so your complete statement goes against half of the video shown above that tries to prove that explsions ejected material hundreds of feet away, have you even watched what you posted. I published with one of my professors just last year, but it was on Python, have you had any research papers in structural engineering I don't accept it on blind faith, i use to be a truther also |
| I used to go to 9/ ... ( 1 week ago by heafers84) |
| I used to go to 9/11 meeting at a college 20 minutes away from my own. I didn't believe it as whole heartedly as my former roomate but he had me basicallyl convinced. And then after about 4 meetings i realized there were 400 different CT and for some reason everybody believed every one of them even if they contradicted each other, and that's what led to my complete to my own investigations, especially the scholars, and architects websites that are so easy to fake credentials |
| Maybe the fact that ... ( 3 days ago by smmeegal) |
| Maybe the fact that there was no resistance at all really in the collapsing buildings is like a coded message from the elites telling us that they can continue to do whatsoever they wish and they can be pretty well assured they will meet with no resistance from us serfs. Or was the WTC complex designed to disintegrate upon impact from outside forces? Handy that.Thats some seriously efficient destruction. Tax payers money I guess. Thx for vid. |
| I didn't hear him ... ( 1 day ago by simba4455) |
| I didn't hear him mention at what temperature concrete fails...important point... you would think someone making an arguement such as this would have noted it... |
| do you really think ... ( 22 hours ago by yousuckinlife) |
| do you really think a building 100+stories would actually just collapse on itself and not spread in the event of a controlled demolition?! you'd be crazy to use it's collapse print as an argument to say it wasn't controlled. |
| Please describe how ... ( 20 hours ago by 911truthnc) |
| Please describe how your "important point" is important. A localized fire causing entire sky scraper to crumble to dust? Your point is moot ask me. Dick Cheney Confirms There Is NO EVIDENCE That Bin Laden Was Involved In The 9/11 Attacks interviewed by Tony Snow watch?v=I22AmlZFzKg |
| as i said it didn't ... ( 7 hours ago by heafers84) |
| as i said it didn't fall into it's own foot print as 911truthnc would like you to think, I'm not talking about dust or smoke which spread up to miles away, i'm talking panels and steel and such. Controlled Implosions cause a building to fall bottom to top into their own footprint, WTC was an acre and both towers were spread over 16, that's 8 times it's own footprint, not even close. He also says that explosions at the bottom started the collapse, any idiot can tell it fell top to bottom, |
| I guess the only ... ( 2 minutes ago by TAHESER) |
| I guess the only way to do it is build a 110 story building identicle to WTC 1 or 2 and construct EACH floor and furnish it EXACTLY as it was then fly the EXACT same plane with the EXACT same number of people and the EXACT same amount of fuel and see what happens. No? |
Tell a friend: