Slideshow image

Since your web browser does not support JavaScript, here is a non-JavaScript version of the image slideshow:

slideshow image

slideshow image

slideshow image

slideshow image

slideshow image

Why Fact-check? Why preserve a visual record?

The Website Written as a Book
1: Science and Subjective Viewpoints
2: Toward Accurate Collapse Histories
....2.1: Progressive Floor Collapses in the WTC Towers
....2.2: General Global Characteristics of Collapses
....2.3: Mathematical Basis of ROOSD Propagation
....2.4: WTC1 Accurate Collapse History
....2.5: WTC2 Accurate Collapse History
....2.6: WTC7 Accurate Collapse History
3: WTC Collapse Misrepresentations
....3.1: Purpose of the NIST Reports
....3.2: NIST WTC1 Misrepresentations
....3.3: NIST WTC7 Misrepresentations
....3.4: NIST WTC2 Misrepresentations
....3.5: Reviewing the Purpose of NIST and FEMA Reports
....3.6: Bazant Misrepresentation of Collapse Progressions
....3.7: Block Misrepresentations of Collapse Progressions
....3.8: AE911T Misrepresentations of the Collapses
4: Scientific Institutions Can Be Unaware of Contradiction
5: Reassessing the Question of Demolition
....5.1: The Case of WTC1
....5.2: The Case of WTC2
....5.3: The Case of WTC7
6: WTC Collapse Records Studied as Meme Replication
....6.1: Meme Replication in Technical Literature
....6.2: Meme Replication in Mass Media
....6.3: Meme Replication in Popular Culture
....6.4: John Q Public and the WTC Collapse Records

WTC Twin Towers Collapse Dynamics

Official, Legal Attempts to Explain Collapses

Academic Attempts to Explain Collapses Reviewed

On the Limits of Science and Technology

WTC Video Record

WTC Photographic Record
WTC1 Attack to Collapse
WTC2 Attack to Collapse
Fire Progression, WTC1 North Face
Fire Progression, WTC1 South Face
Fire Progression, WTC1 East Face
Fire Progression, WTC1 West Face
Fire Progression, WTC2 North Face
Fire Progression, WTC2 South Face
Fire Progression, WTC2 East Face
Fire Progression, WTC2 West Face
Debris: WTC1 Around Footprint
Debris: WTC2 Around Footprint
Debris: From WTC1 Westward
Debris: From WTC1 Northward
Debris: From WTC2 Eastward
Debris: From WTC2 Southward
Debris: Plaza Area, Northeast Complex
Debris: Hilton Hotel, Southwest Complex
Debris: General, Unidentified Locations
Damage to Surrounding Buildings
Perimeter Column Photo Record
Perimeter Columns: Types of Damage
Core Box Columns: Types of Damage
Complete Photo Archive
Other Major 9-11 Photo Archives
The 911Dataset Project

WTC Structural Information

Log In


Remember Me

Online Misrepresentations of the WTC Collapses

Forum, Blog Representations of the WTC Collapses

The Book Tested Through Experiments

Miscellaneous Notes, Resources
FAQ for Miscellaneous Notes
History Commons 9/11 Timeline
The 911Dataset Project
Skyscraper Safety Campaign
First and Largest 9/11 Conspiracy Theory
Key Words in Book and Website
Trapped Within a Narrowed False Choice
Vulnerability and Requestioning
On Memes and Memetics
Obedience, Conformity and Mental Structure
Denial, Avoidance (Taboo) and Mental Structure
Taboos Against Reviewing the Collapse Events
Extreme Situations and Mental Structure
Suggestibility, Hypnosis and Mental Structure
Awareness and Behavior
Magical, Religious, Scientific Cause-Effect Relations
The Extreme Limits of Mental Dysfunction
Orwell's "Crimestop", "Doublethink", "Blackwhite"
William James, Max Born: Science as Philosophy
Plato on Self Reflection and Mental Structure
Rewriting History, part 1
Rewriting History, part 2
On Smart Idiots

New Ideas in Education

FAQ for Miscellaneous Notes

FAQ for Miscellaneous Notes

Why include information of a psychological nature on your website? Why not limit the website to technical information only?

Because most of what I have witnessed in discussions on this subject is psychological in nature.

Why include a section called "Suggestibility, Hypnosis and Mental Structure"?

Consider these key characteristics of a hypnotic state:

1) Narrowed focus
2) Heightened suggestibility
3) Ideo-dynamic or ideo-sensory reflex response

These are key words used within this website:

an artificially narrowed false choice
false certainty

There is a correlation between basic characteristics of a hypnotic state and key words used throughout the website.

1) Narrowed focus corresponds to:

an artificially narrowed false choice
false certainty

2) Heightened suggestibility corresponds to:


3) Ideo-dynamic or ideo-sensory reflex response corresponds to:


Are you saying hypnosis plays a role in research related to the WTC collapses?

No. I am simply pointing out that sloppy thinking and ingrained systems of belief have some common characteristics to that of a hypnotic state. This is not surprising. Both states deal with non-rational and largely automatic elements within thinking.

Consider the approach to hypnosis as communication with the subconscious mind (Erickson). Well, what are common characteristics of the subconscious mind?

Ernest Rossi and David Cheek list 6 characteristics of unconscious mentation reproduced at the bottom of this page. The first 2 are:

1) Thought processes go on independently at both a conscious level and a more child-like, literal, unconscious level while we are awake. The objective inductive type of thinking is blocked off in serious illness, during fear, and when the individual in unconscious, regardless of the reason for unconsciousness.

2) The unconscious mind puts together associations of thought that are senseless to the conscious mind, and equally senseless identifications of the self with real or imagined unfortunate people.

Unconscious mentation is described as a more child-like, literal type of thinking or as a more "senseless" type of thinking when compared to what is commonly called "conscious mentation".

Why did you choose these key words?

Because they are attributes that can be seen within discussions on the WTC collapses at all levels of the technical hierarchy.

Why include a section on the extreme limits of mental dysfunction, giving a brief outline of psychosis, schizophrenia and sociopathy?

All these mental states have one thing in common; they are based on mental fragmentation. The mind becomes fragmented into parts. The person cannot see the fragments in a wholistic way.

Those are the most extreme cases of mental dysfunction so they stand out. But this same fragmentation can be seen on so many levels in what are commonly referred to as normal everyday people.

The technical history of the WTC collapses is en excellent contemporary example of this same mental fragmentation in action. But in this case it is found to exist throughout the highest levels of the technical hierarchy.

It is natural for people to turn their heads away from and avoid events of a negative nature. What is wrong with that?

Nothing within certain contexts.

Beginning in childhood people learn to trust the world- learning that they are not vulnerable, but secure. They learn their world is controllable, dependable and just - they develop self worth in that they are the recipient of positive care-giving. The assumption of benevolence, meaningfulness of events and self worth are grounded in the early preverbial experiences.

While these assumptions may be true within ones small home environment, they are not necessarily true in a larger social, national or planetary context. In fact, to this author it seems nearly impossible to understand much of what is witnessed in the larger world with such childhood naivete.

Concerning the reexamination of the events of 9-11-01, one of the facets that stands out the most is how the very act of fact-checking is treated as highly taboo. The mere act of reexamination is sensed as a threat to some assumed and unstated core system of beliefs.

There is nothing wrong with requestioning and fact-checking claims and systems of beliefs. In fact, that is at the very heart of scientific thinking as expressed by Feynman:

And that is what science is: The result of the discovery that it is worthwhile re-checking by new direct experience, and not necessarily trusting in the race experience in the past. I see it this way. That is my best definition.

Yet within this context it is treated as something taboo and to be shunned.

Why mention "taboo"?

A taboo is meant to create an automatic response of avoidance. One automatically reacts before thinking.

Taboo = obey, conform, deny, avoid

In this sense taboo is ideo-dynamic in nature. It is a conditioned response to some idea or sensory perception. Such conditioned, largely automatic responses are quite visible in discussion or technical literature on the WTC collapses.

Why include a section on how mental structure commonly reacts to extreme events?

It is the amnesia surrounding formative or traumatic events that seems to lie at the core of deep-rooted psychological problems.

As Ernest Rossi and David Cheek state, "People often do not recognize the source of their problems. The history of psychotherapy, in fact, could be summarized as an effort to understand the amnesia surrounding the origins of psychological problems."

It is natural for people to turn their heads away from and avoid events of a negative nature. Yet it has been known for thousands of years that in doing so, the negative events do not simply disappear. This type of avoidance and amnesia leave lasting consequences.

Why discuss a splitting of behavior from awareness?

If the technical history of the WTC collapses is not based on science and skepticism, what is it based upon?

To approach this complex issue one has to look to systems of thought, belief and the formulation of consensus that predate science as we know it. For this reason I have included a section titled Magical, Religious and Scientific Thinking

Created on 08/26/2013 06:01 PM by admin
Updated on 01/08/2015 06:41 AM by admin
 Printable Version

Copyright © 2008 WiredTech, LLC
phpWebSite is licensed under the GNU LGPL