New Paper at Journal of 9/11 Studies, September 2014

ASCE Journals refuse to correct fraudulent paper they published on WTC collapses, by Tony Szamboti and Richard Johns

A new letter has been published at the Journal of 9/11 Studies which expands upon the points made in the peer-reviewed paper “Some Misunderstandings Related to WTC Collapse Analysis.” As explained by the authors, what's particularly noteworthy is the JEM's unjustified reasons for rejecting their original paper. Very interesting considering that James Gourley also experienced problems with the JEM in publishing a response to Dr. Bazant et. al. I'm genuinely suspicious that the JEM may indeed have a bias towards Bazant and his "crush down/crush up" theory.

Debunking Dr. Zdenek Bazant

New Peer-Reviewed Paper on the WTC Collapses - Some Misunderstandings Related to WTC Collapse Analysis

Discussion of "Why the Observed Motion History of World Trade Center Towers is Smooth," by Jia-Liang Le and Z.P. Bazant

Anders Björkman Published in "The Journal of Engineering Mechanics"

James Gourley Published in "The Journal of Engineering Mechanics"

The Missing Jolt: A Simple Refutation of the NIST-Bazant Collapse Hypothesis - The 116th Peer-reviewed Paper Published in Journal of 9/11 Studies

NIST and Dr. Bazant - Simultaneous Failure - Journal of 9/11 Studies

Bazant and Zhou Explaining the Collapses With Elastic Dynamic Analysis