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

Limits of the physical sciences

Limits of the physical sciences

Limits of science: Science runs into ego

There is no doubt that the physical sciences have produced intricate mappings of complex and quite amazing processes.

There is little doubt that science allows us to look into the structures and mechanisms of the physical universe with amazing detail. The sciences as a whole provide highly detailed and comprehensive mappings of all physical processes as can be seen here.

Researchers at the frontiers of any science can be thought of as "map makers". They are doing nothing more than mapping structure, quantitative and qualitative features and mechanisms. They are mapping form and pattern. The applied part of science and engineering is in the manipulation of the structures and mechanisms inherent in nature for specific uses.Physics, astronomy, chemistry, biology, geology, anatomy are some of the most fundamental external mappings ever created by human beings.

But these sciences have a limit on what they can accurately map and that limit is discernible.

What about internal mappings? Since everything is ultimately perceived not through the senses but through ones "mind" and understanding of a perception is therefore limited as "mind" is limited, internal mappings of the nature, states and mechanisms of "mind" seem at least as important as external mappings, if not more.

Within the western sciences the nature, states and mechanisms of "mind" are studied in the fields of psychology, sociology and philosophy. They are also central to all the arts and humanities.

When perception is redirected back on the conditions of the observers themselves, something goes wrong. The same scientific methods used to map the structures and mechanisms of physical processes break down when applied to our own mental processes and our own social behaviors. Forms of deception, illusion, and lying enter the process and interfere with observation and analysis. The problem seems to be that common cherished illusions are challenged by impartial observation.

Lopsided Maps

Consider a fundamental imbalance in science as expressed by Einstein:

It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity

Physical scientists tend to become engrossed in external mappings while remaining highly ignorant of internal mappings. This ignorance, or imbalance, is encouraged within our advanced cultures. Many of these people are paid quite well for their work in exploring, mapping and manipulating physical processes.

It is as if our societies have gained a great capacity to manipulate physical processes through a knowledge of their structure, qualities and mechanisms, while at the same time remaining highly vulnerable to psychological manipulation. One can say that the external mappings are quite advanced while the internal mappings remain quite primitive, hence a gaping and dangerous imbalance is noticeable.

Often "science" is just thin veneer people use to legitimize their beliefs. Perhaps they subconsciously need some form of authority to confirm their own beliefs, but admitting so openly, or even to oneself, may be too uncomfortable for those not ready for such an admission. Perhaps many people are not comfortable admitting they, too, have beliefs and need some mechanism through which to call their beliefs "objective truth".

This imbalance emphasized by Einstein often seems to be a central attribute of modern scientific activity. Consider a different way to phrase the the same claim:

The limit of science is that science runs into ego

or rephrased in a more intellectual way:

The ability to intricately map physical structures and mechanisms

contrasted with

The inability to see or understand mental structures and mechanisms

or rephrased as old advice:

Know thyself

I enjoy and value the physical sciences. I am simply acknowledging that they have a limit. Application of a scientific method can be easily obstructed, corrupted, or steered by ego, ignorance, bias, greed, power, fragmentation of understanding, and many other purely human tendencies.

There are people who do not seem to recognize the limits of science. There is often an exaggeration of the effectiveness of scientific processes and peer review processes.

When the subject being studied involves analysis of human behavior and human activity, science tends to yield to ego.

The evidence for this breakdown is overwhelming.

Ignorance of human suffering and consequences of human activity

The shallow nature of greed

The psychopathy of power, and hunger for approval and recognition

Inability to accurately depict either self or other in an objective way

The disease of unchecked hoarding

In the social sciences of economics, sociology, and psychology, science is often corrupted by self interest, ego and ignorance.

From the ONN:

(This is a parody)


More scientists seem to be making funny noises:

Climate at five minutes to midnight: IPCC head

article linked here

Speaking in Delhi on Monday he said: “We have five minutes before midnight,” arguing that governments had historically avoided taking responsibility for global warming.

“We may utilise the gifts of nature just as we choose, but in our books the debits are always equal to the credits.

“May I submit that humanity has completely ignored, disregarded and been totally indifferent to the debits? Today we have the knowledge to be able to map out the debits and to understand what we have done to the condition of this planet.”

He added: “We cannot isolate ourselves from anything that happens in any part of this planet. It will affect all of us in some way or the other.”

Pachauri is head of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

Later this month the organisation will release the first volume of a new assessment of global warming and its impacts.

Fukushima more than 2 years later:

Reuters (Link to article here):

Radiation readings around tanks holding contaminated water at the crippled Fukushima nuclear plant have spiked by more than a fifth to their highest levels, Japan's nuclear regulator said, heightening concerns about the clean-up of the worst atomic disaster in almost three decades.

Radiation hotspots have spread to three holding areas for hundreds of hastily built tanks storing water contaminated by being flushed over three reactors that melted down at the Fukushima Daiichi plant in March 2011.

The rising radiation levels and leaks at the plant have prompted international alarm, and the Japanese government said on Tuesday it would step in with almost $500 million of funding to fix the growing levels of contaminated water at the plant.

Readings just above the ground near a set of tanks at the plant showed radiation as high as 2,200 millisieverts (mSv), the Nuclear Regulation Authority (NRA) said on Wednesday. The previous high in areas holding the tanks was the 1,800 mSv recorded on Saturday.

Both levels would be enough to kill an unprotected person within hours. The NRA has said the recently discovered hotspots are highly concentrated and easily shielded.

The tanks sit on a hill above the Pacific Ocean at the Fukushima plant, which was devastated by a massive earthquake and tsunami in March 2011, triggering the worst nuclear crisis since Chernobyl a quarter of a century earlier.


The plant operator, Tokyo Electric Power Co, or Tepco, said last month water from one the tanks was leaking. Another small leak was found later and the rising number of areas of concentrated radiation are raising concerns of further leaks.

The NRA later raised the severity of the initial leak from a level 1 "anomaly" to a level 3 "serious incident" on an international scale of 1-7 for radiation releases.

"There's a strong possibility these tanks also leaked, or had leaked previously," said Hiroaki Koide, Assistant Professor at Kyoto University Research Reactor Institute. "We have to worry about the impact on nearby groundwater...These tanks are not sturdy and have been a problem since they were constructed two years ago."

It's also possible the radiation readings are increasing because of more frequent monitoring and inspections by Tepco employees, indicating the hotspots and leaks have been there for some time, Koide said.

"The government has finally said they will be involved in this problem but they are still not going to be fully involved in the decommission," he said. "It is too little, too late."

Please recall an article written just after a hydrogen explosion blew the top off of one of the Fukushima buildings by George Monbiot titled:

Why Fukushima made me stop worrying and love nuclear power
The Guardian, Monday 21 March 2011:

Linked here

From the article:

You will not be surprised to hear that the events in Japan have changed my view of nuclear power. You will be surprised to hear how they have changed it. As a result of the disaster at Fukushima, I am no longer nuclear-neutral. I now support the technology.

A crappy old plant with inadequate safety features was hit by a monster earthquake and a vast tsunami. The electricity supply failed, knocking out the cooling system. The reactors began to explode and melt down. The disaster exposed a familiar legacy of poor design and corner-cutting. Yet, as far as we know, no one has yet received a lethal dose of radiation.

Atomic energy has just been subjected to one of the harshest of possible tests, and the impact on people and the planet has been small. The crisis at Fukushima has converted me to the cause of nuclear power.

Next to the article....

George Monbiot: Nuclear opponents have a moral duty to get their facts straight

George Monbiot: As governments ponder a disastrous move away from nuclear power, it is vital campaigners don't spread misinformation " but Helen Caldicott fails to interrogate her own claims and sources

The initial disaster happened on March 11, 2011 and George Monbiot had it all figured out by March 21, 2011.

In the case of the WTC collapses, physical study of the collapses has clearly been impeded by a limiting factor. The limiting factor is human ego. Scientific study ran into the wall of human ego and self interest and ego won. Physical reality lost.

Therefore, not surprisingly, the core concepts of mechanism and structure are central in relation to the events of 9-11-01. But it is not just the obvious lack of knowledge of the physical structure of the buildings and the mechanisms of collapse that are to blame for all the confusion witnessed. I think it is more about an understanding of the mechanisms of mind in the form of human perception, knowledge and deep seated beliefs that surround this issue.

Limits of the application of Occam's Razor

Occam's razor. From the link, A common formulation:

"simpler explanations are, other things being equal, generally better than more complex ones"

"plurality should not be posited without necessity"

"entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity"

Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) states that

"it is superfluous to suppose that what can be accounted for by a few principles has been produced by many".

Ptolemy (c. AD 90 " c. AD 168) stated,

"We consider it a good principle to explain the phenomena by the simplest hypothesis possible."

Later formulations

Isaac Newton:

"We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances. Therefore, to the same natural effects we must, so far as possible, assign the same causes."

Bertrand Russell offers a particular version of Occam's Razor:

"Whenever possible, substitute constructions out of known entities for inferences to unknown entities."

In the case of the WTC collapses:

The NIST perceives one building. FEMA perceives another. Bazant perceives a third.

Tony Szamboti perceives yet another. Ryan Mackey perceives yet another. Richard Gage perceives yet another.

Each party is using highy fragmented, highly selective sets of observations and measurements to support their claims.

Each party, by using their own highly selective and fragmented sets of observations and measurements, is literally perceiving the building collapses differently than the others.

Consider the application of Occam's razor to a situation in which different observers are perceiving different versions of the same physical event. Their observations don't match. Their measurements don't match.

"simpler explanations are, other things being equal, generally better than more complex ones"

Other things cannot be equal in a situation in which different observers use their own fragmented, biased, and largely incorrect observations and measurements as their guiding perceptions.

Dearest reader, please consider the ephemeral frailty of human thought and perception.

Consider the frailty of thought and perception and apply possible consequences of such frailty to this:

or apply it to this:

or apply it to the U.S. financial system, banking, and debt...

or apply it to the supposed weapons of mass destruction that were in Iraq...

or apply it to what so many people are convinced they know about these:

about which Max Photon correctly wrote in 2007:

I will repeat my very simple point to the very simple: the rational person will view the US Government's account of 9/11 with suspicion.

The rational person will wish to carefully fact-check claims with a healthy sense of skepticism.


A second limit to the physical sciences is when they run into worlds outside of physical observation and measurement (which, again, has to do with mind, perception, art - nontangible objects).

The limits of science is a highly illuminating subject connected with these core philosophical concepts:

Limits of scientific and technical institutions and organizations, technical and industrial companies and corporations

Limits of Science and Technology

Limits of a Western World View

Limits of the Mechanical World View

Limits of physical progress

Limits of academics

Limits of a materialist, pecuniary power culture

Limits of the Megamachine

Direct experience vs conceptualization and abstract thinking

Limits of ego-based thinking and perception

Limits of perception, thought, analysis, consciousness

Social and psychological imbalance

Dualistic thinking

Created on 01/26/2014 08:38 AM by admin
Updated on 03/25/2016 06:41 AM by admin
 Printable Version

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