Seismic Proof – 9/11 Was An Inside Job (Updated Ver
sion II) 1 of 11
Craig T. Furlong & Gordon Ross (Member, Scholars fo
r 9/11 Truth) © 2006
And there is a time for every event under heaven
Ecclesiastes 3:1
SUMMARY
On September 11, 2001, the seismic stations grouped
around New York City recorded seismic
events from the WTC site, two of which occurred imm
ediately prior to the aircraft impacts upon the
Twin Towers. Because these seismic events preceded
the collisions, it is clear they were not
associated with the impacts and must therefore be a
ssociated with some other occurrence. None of
the authorities charged with the responsibility for
the investigation of the events of 9/11 have
proposed a source for these seismic events, nor hav
e they given a valid reason for the difference in
times between the seismic events and the aircraft i
mpacts. Only by consideration of the evidence of
basement explosions before the aircraft impacts, as
experienced by William Rodriquez and 36
others, can an explanation be found for the fact th
at the seismic stations recorded seismic events
originating from the WTC sites prior to the aircraf
t impacts. It seems unlikely that Middle Eastern
terrorists could have overcome the WTC security and
managed this kind of high-level, technological
coordination. Do the facts presented here, simple
and few, raise the possibility of inside
involvement in 9/11/01, both before and after the a
ttack?
OVERVIEW
This paper is primarily concerned with the factual
data surrounding the exact impact times of the two
aircraft that hit WTC1 and WTC2. This is neither th
eory nor hypothesis, but a statement of
publicized facts regarding the timing of the aircra
ft impacts. There exist two separate precision da
ta
time sets that address when the aircraft crashed in
to the Towers. Both data time sets are based on
UTC (Coordinated Universal Time, the world’s atomic
clock system) and the sources that
determined these times were prestigious, reliable a
nd credible. There is no question regarding the
precision and accuracy of the instruments used to r
ecord both data time sets, since their entire
function depends and relies upon temporal accuracy,
and therefore there can be no doubt that both
data time sets are correct. The time data sets rep
resent objective scientific data recorded by two
separate, independent entities.
The problem is the data sets have different impact
times.
These times were given out years ago but at differe
nt times. Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory at
Columbia University (LDEO) gave its findings around
the time of the event with what it thought
were impact times based upon the seismic data recor
ded, while the 9/11 Commission published its
impact times, based upon FAA radar data and air tra
ffic control software logic, years later in its
Final Report. The Commission no longer exists.
Seismic Proof – 9/11 Was An Inside Job (Updated Ver
sion II)
2 of 11
Craig T. Furlong & Gordon Ross (Member, Scholars fo
r 9/11 Truth) © 2006
Original seismic and Commission times.
Table 1
AA Flt 11
2001
LDEO
8:46:26
Original seismic
2004
Commission
8:46:40
(14 seconds difference)
UA Flt 175
2001
LDEO
9:02:54
Original seismic
2004
Commission
9:03:11
(17 seconds difference)
SEISMIC DATA AND TIMES
LDEO Published Findings 2001
Link:
http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/LCSN/Eq/20010911_wtc.h
tml
LDEO confirmed its data as accurate:
Link:
http://www.mgs.md.gov/esic/publications/download/91
1pentagon.pdf
9/11 COMMISSION DATA AND TIMES
Commission Timeline Link:
http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/index.html
Seismic Proof – 9/11 Was An Inside Job (Updated Ver
sion II)
4 of 11
Craig T. Furlong & Gordon Ross (Member, Scholars fo
r 9/11 Truth) © 2006
At first he thought it was a generator that had exp
loded. But the cement walls in the office cracked
from the explosion. "When I heard the sound of the
explosion, the floor beneath my feet vibrated,
the walls started cracking and everything started s
haking." said Rodriguez, who was crowded
together with fourteen other people in the office i
ncluding Anthony Saltamachia, his supervisor for
the American Building Maintenance Company.
Just seconds later there was another explosion way
above which made the building oscillate
momentarily. This, he was later told, was a plane h
itting the Tower at about the 90th floor. Upon
hearing about the plane, he immediately thought of
the people up in the restaurant. Then there were
other explosions just above B1 and individuals star
ted heading for the loading dock to escape the
explosion’s resulting rampant fire. When asked late
r about those first explosions he said: "I would
know if an explosion was from the bottom or the top
of the building." He heard explosions both
before and after the plane hit the Tower.
-------
The number of witnesses who presented evidence of e
xplosion and explosion damage, and
particularly the injuries that some witnesses recei
ved, again leaves no room for doubt that there were
explosions in the basement of WTC1. The following
video link is powerful testimony by William
Rodriguez and is evidence that corroborates the fac
ts of this paper; also, these facts corroborate the
37 eyewitnesses in the WTC1 basement: Link:
http://www.jonhs.net/911/william_rodriguez.htm
BASEMENT AND LOBBY DAMAGE
It is noted that the damage caused by these explosi
ons had previously been attributed to aircraft
impact. However, refutation of this is provided by
both the testimonies of William Rodriguez in the
above link, and by NYFD Lieutenant William Walsh in
the below link. This concerns specifically
the middle, local elevators that were blown off the
ir hinges
from below, as evidenced by the doors
resting outward at 45 degree angles that met in the
middle near the bottom. These local elevators
serviced only Floors 34 down to the lowest level of
the building, Level B6 in the basement. They
could not have been the result of aircraft impact
:
Link:
Testimony, Lt. William Walsh NYFD, Jan 11, 2002.pdf
WTC Building Layout Link:
World Trade Center Building Layout, Floors and Elev
ators
----------------------------
Lt. Walsh- Answer:
What else I observed in the lobby was that – there’
s basically two areas of
elevators. There’s elevators off to the left-hand
side which are really the express elevators. That
would be the elevators that’s facing north. Then o
n the right-hand side there’s also elevators that a
re
express elevators, and that would be facing south.
In the center of these two elevator shafts would
be elevators that go to the lower floors. They wer
e blown off the hinges. That’s where the service
elevator was also.
Chief Congiusta- Question:
Were these elevators that went to the upper floors?
They weren’t side
lobby elevators?
Answer:
No, no, I’d say that they went through floors 30 an
d below.
Question:
And they were blown off?
Seismic Proof – 9/11 Was An Inside Job (Updated Ver
sion II)
5 of 11
Craig T. Furlong & Gordon Ross (Member, Scholars fo
r 9/11 Truth) © 2006
Answer:
They were blown off the hinges, and you could see t
he shafts. The elevators on the
extreme north side and the other express elevator o
n the extreme south side, they looked intact to me
from what I could see, the doors anyway.......
......
.So I headed for the B stairway. I did not want to
deal with elevators. So Ladder 1—
Question:
Were there any elevators working or no? Probably n
o, I assume.
Answer:
I couldn’t tell about the express elevators. The e
levators that I mentioned before that were
on the extreme north end and the extreme south end,
I don’t know about those elevators. But I
headed for where the service elevator was, which wa
s in the center where the lower floor elevators
were, the ones where the doors were blown off them.
----------------------------
Lieutenant Walsh makes an extremely relevant point
when he shows that the local elevator shafts
acted as a conduit for the explosive effects and th
ereby limits the source of the explosion to the are
a
covered by those shafts. His evidence shows that th
e elevator shafts affected by the explosions
served only the lower floors and not those at the i
mpact levels
, thereby ruling out jet fuel from the
aircraft as being involved in the explosions.
Additional corroboration of the elevators being blo
wn out is provided by Lt. Brian Becker &
Firefighter Robert Byrne, NYFD: Link:
Lt. Brian Becker, NYFD, Elevators Were Blown Out
Link:
Firefighter Robert Byrne, NYFD: Core Elevators (Blo
wn Apart)
Since only one elevator shaft was continuous from t
he aircraft impact level to the basement level, we
can further rule out the aircraft impact as being t
he cause of the basement explosions by using
additional testimony of William Rodriguez. In dire
ct response to a question which postulated that
the explosion was caused by aircraft fuel traveling
down the elevator shafts, he stated,
"Very strange
indeed, since there were only one elevator shaft (t
he 50A car) that went all the way to B6, the
operator was inside, Mr. Griffith and he survived w
ith a broken ankles. He should have died burnt
since on this theory the ball of fire went down. He
is alive and well and I will interview him in the
future to clear the disinformation."
Link:
William Rodriguez | 08.18.06 - 12:20 am
When talking about the lobby damage and his experie
nces, Rodriguez added,
"I said many times that
when I got back to the basement after escorting a p
erson totally burnt and 14 people from my office
out of the building, there were sprinklers going of
f on the basement and not on the upper floors. Also
when I got to the lobby, the passenger elevators in
the field of view, their doors were popped open
sideways like a pyramid, from the bottom up."
The evidence of William Walsh and William Rodriguez
shows that there were explosions that
affected the basement and lobby levels, and these w
ere not caused by the jet fuel.
TIME DELAY FROM BASEMENT EXPLOSIONS TO AIRCRAFT IMP
ACT
The authors have located evidence that possibly sho
ws how long the time was between the initial
explosion and the later impact of AA Flt 11 at WTC1
. Jenny Carr was at a business meeting with
others on the morning of 9/11 at 1 Liberty Plaza, a
nd a recording was being made of that meeting.
During this recording a first explosion is heard, a
nd then a second one about 9 seconds later. This
data still needs to be corroborated, and both autho
rs and the Scholars for 9/11 Truth are involved in
Seismic Proof – 9/11 Was An Inside Job (Updated Ver
sion II)
6 of 11
Craig T. Furlong & Gordon Ross (Member, Scholars fo
r 9/11 Truth) © 2006
this; however, it is worth presenting at this time.
This was found inside a movie compendium, "9/11
Controlled Demolitions of September 11, 2001". To
repeat, this needs further corroboration.
Link:
Jenny Carr, Video - 9 Seconds
and go in 14 minutes, 30 seconds.
FAA TIMES
Within the Federal Aviation Administration’s “Summa
ry of Air Traffic Hijack Events September 11,
2001” are found the impact times of 8:46:35 and 9:0
3:14.
Link:
FAA Summary of Air Traffic Hijack Events September
11,2001
What is interesting is, when the 9 seconds found on
the Jenny Carr tape are added to the original
LDEO seismic time of 8:46:26, the result is 8:46:35
, the exact FAA impact time for AA Flt 11
.
And although anecdotal, it is also intriguing that
the FAA’s 9:03:14 for UA Flt 175 matches closely
to the time of 9:03:17 found in the recent Vanity F
air article by Michael Bronner.
Link:
Vanity Fair article by Michael Bronner
This 9:03:17 time occurred when NEADS received
the call notifying them of a 2
nd
possible hijacking while “almost simultaneously” p
eople in the
NEADS control room watched Flt 175 crash into WTC2
on CNN, including Colonel Marr, the
commanding officer. This adds credibility to the C
ommission’s impact time of 9:03:11.
Nevertheless, although the 9/11 Commission referred
to this FAA Summary many times in its Final
Report, it still based its impact times upon all th
e data they had and issued impact times of 8:46:40
and 9:03:11.
NTSB TIMES
Within the flight path studies by the National Tran
sportation Safety Board are found approximate
impact times of 8:46:40 and 9:02:40.
Link:
NTSB report, "Flight Path Study-American Airlines F
light 11," Feb. 19, 2002
Link:
NTSB report, "Flight Path Study-United Airlines 175
," Feb. 19, 2002
These reports, as a matter of course, state times o
f impact as approximate, this done with an
understanding that higher authority will review all
data in determining actual times of impact.
The 9/11 Commission’s impact time of 8:46:40 for AA
Flt 11 is the same as is found in the NTSB
report that the Commission referred to in its Note
39.
The Commission referred to the NTSB report for the
impact time of UA Flt 175 in its Note 51, but
even in doing so, it rejected the NTSB’s approximat
e 9:02:40 time and issued instead 9:03:11 as the
official time.
When one examines the radar graph from the study on
AA Flt 11, it can be seen there was one last
radar position-plot at the end. This coincides wit
h testimony by Controller Dave Bottiglia who
tracked AA Flt 11 that morning: This is from an art
icle that covers this: “
It was now being tracked
by New York Centre, where a controller, Dave Bottig
lia, saw it disappear from his screen just before
8.47. It had ploughed into the World Trade Centre's
north tower.”
Link:
Controller Dave Bottiglia, AA Flt 11 Disappears Fro
m Radar
Reference is now made to the original source data u
sed by the 9/11 Commission when analyzing the
impact time supplied by the NTSB flight path study
for AA Flight 11. Examination of this and
Seismic Proof – 9/11 Was An Inside Job (Updated Ver
sion II)
7 of 11
Craig T. Furlong & Gordon Ross (Member, Scholars fo
r 9/11 Truth) © 2006
particularly the radar graph supplied by magnificat
ion of the ending point area shows the last radar
return from the aircraft before impact at 08.46.40.
AA Flt 11 crashed at 8:46:40 EDT.
FAA & NTSB times added.
Table 2
AA Flt 11
2001
LDEO
8:46:26
Original seismic
2001
FAA
8:46:35
Rejected by Commission
2002
NTSB
8:46:40
2004
Commission
8:46:40
UA Flt 175
2002
NTSB
9:02:40
Rejected by Commission
2001
LDEO
9:02:54
Original seismic
2004
Commission
9:03:11
2001
FAA
9:03:14
Rejected by Commission
NIST TIMES
NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technolog
y) developed its own times over the years
regarding the plane impacts of AA Flt 11 and UA Flt
175, and these were made available in the
progress report of June 2004. Link:
NIST Interim Progress Report June 2004 - Appendix H
Seismic Proof – 9/11 Was An Inside Job (Updated Ver
sion II)
8 of 11
Craig T. Furlong & Gordon Ross (Member, Scholars fo
r 9/11 Truth) © 2006
So, what are these NIST times? NIST had around 14,
000 photos and videos of the events of 9/11
and wanted to bring this information into a chronol
ogical timeline to better understand the events of
that day. They first had to determine a standard o
r baseline to use in order to bring all the data in
to
temporal alignment. They decided to use the impact
time of UA Flt 175 crashing into WTC2 at
9:02:54 because of the many TV stations and cameras
trained on WTC1 at the time, as it had just
been hit by AA Flt 11 moments before. This 9:02:54
time is seismic data from LDEO. NIST later
claimed that the actual impact time of UA Flt 175 w
as not 9:02:54 but 9:02:59 ± 1 sec. Their basis
for this were four TV stations with timestamped tra
nsmissions, times that are presumed to have been
accurately updated to UTC at the time of the event.
The difference between 9:02:54 and 9:02:59 is 5
seconds. NIST then took this 5 second differential
to make the other 4 major events “relative
”; i.e.,
they added 5 seconds to each time they had for the
other 4 major events (the impact into WTC1, and
the collapses for WTC2, WTC1, and WTC7). This mean
t they took the supposed time of “impact”
for AA Flt 11 into WTC1 of 8:46:25 [seismic] and ad
ded 5 seconds to it to come up with their new
supposed time of “impact” of 8:46:30. (Please reca
ll that the facts put forth in this paper bring int
o
question the causes of the seismic spikes, and this
is why these seismic times are referred to as
“supposed” times of “impacts”.)
NIST used false logic in doing this 5-second additi
on. It is wrong. Adding 5 seconds is sleight-of-
hand statistics, a non sequitur that is meaningless
. The 9:02:59 is from a discrete event with a time
set derived from TV stations (one type of source).
The other time of 8:46:25 is from another distinct
event derived from seismic data (another type of so
urce). These then are two detached time sets for
two separate events from two different source types
. Therefore, the adding of 5 seconds can not be
done according to either logic or statistics. (In
accounting this type of error is known as “mixing
apples with oranges”.) Therefore, the NIST 8:46:30
“Adjusted Time from Television Broadcasts”,
for their first aircraft “impact”, is not real. To
reiterate: the NIST 8:46:30 a.m. time labeled as “
First
aircraft impact” under the column “Adjusted Time fr
om Television Broadcasts” is artificial
.
NIST times added.
Table 3
AA Flt 11
2001
LDEO
8:46:26
Original seismic
2004
NIST
8:46:30
Artificial
2001
FAA
8:46:35
Rejected by Commission
2002
NTSB
8:46:40
2004
Commission
8:46:40
UA Flt 175
2002
NTSB
9:02:40
Rejected by Commission
2001
LDEO
9:02:54
Original seismic
2004
NIST
9:02:59
Adjusted per TV
2004
Commission
9:03:11
2001
FAA
9:03:14
Rejected by Commission
Seismic Proof – 9/11 Was An Inside Job (Updated Ver
sion II)
9 of 11
Craig T. Furlong & Gordon Ross (Member, Scholars fo
r 9/11 Truth) © 2006
NIST SPONSORED RE-ANALYSIS SEISMIC TIME STUDY
Additionally, NIST contracted in 2005 for the servi
ces of Dr. Won-Young Kim of Lamont-Doherty
Earth Observatory (LDEO) to re-analyze the original
seismic data and times that were issued by
LDEO back in 2001 (Kim was instrumental in the issu
ance of the original times). This new study
resulted in Kim issuing revised seismic times in 20
05 that added three seconds to both of the 2001
originally calculated times for aircraft “impacts”.
The revised times were 8:46:29 and 9:02:57.
[Reference report: “NIST NCSTAR 1-5A, WTC Investiga
tion, Chapter 3, pages 22-24]
See Table 3-1 Link:
NIST NCSTAR 1-5A, Chapters 1-8
NIST's determination of 8:46:30 time of first “impa
ct” is artificial. It is not only erroneous, but m
ay
be specious if time manipulation is the motive. Th
is phony time for AA Flt 11 is directly
contradicted by the statement made by the NTSB and
is not supported by the radar data supplied by
the NTSB. The last radar signal from the aircraft
before impact was received at 8:46:40, ten seconds
after
the time that NIST now says is when the aircraft i
mpacted the Tower. One wonders again if the
NIST 2005 contract with Dr. Kim to re-analyze the s
eismic times is also an attempt at time
manipulation in order to find credibility for the b
ogus 8:46:30 NIST time. An audit by independent
seismological experts to determine the authenticity
of the revised seismic times would be in order to
resolve this matter. It would be worth doing as th
is concerns the mass murder of nearly 3,000
people.
NIST sponsored revised seismic times added.
Table 4
AA Flt 11
2001
LDEO
8:46:26
Original seismic
2005
LDEO
8:46:29
Revised per NIST contract
2004
NIST
8:46:30
Artificial
2001
FAA
8:46:35
Rejected by Commission
2004
Commission
8:46:40
2002
NTSB
8:46:40
UA Flt 175
2002
NTSB
9:02:40
Rejected by Commission
2001
LDEO
9:02:54
Original seismic
2005
LDEO
9:02:57
Revised per NIST contract
2004
NIST
9:02:59
Adjusted per TV
2004
Commission
9:03:11
2001
FAA
9:03:14
Rejected by Commission
Seismic Proof – 9/11 Was An Inside Job (Updated Ver
sion II)
10 of 11
Craig T. Furlong & Gordon Ross (Member, Scholars fo
r 9/11 Truth) © 2006
The first aspect of these times that must be commen
ted upon is the fact that, after three major
enquiries, we are still left without answers, even
on such basic questions as when the various events
occurred. It must be seen as an indictment of thes
e bodies that most people would probably regard
the best evidence as having come from television ra
ther than the official investigations. Are we to
understand that NIST, FEMA and the 9/11 Commission
did not have access to exactly the same,
many, television sources of the event? It is a sad
commentary that the words “9/11 Commission” are
not found once throughout both NIST reports [NCSTAR
1-5 and NCSTAR 1-5A]. And if a word
search is done on the Final Report of the 9/11 Comm
ission for the words “Lamont” or “LDEO” or
“8:46:26”, the answer is the same: nothing. This a
ppalling lack of attention to detail is inexcusable
and can be viewed by some as highly sinister.
NIST suffers a lack of credibility for its issuance
of the false 8:46:30 “impact” time for AA Flt 11.
It
is an unreal time and is not an impact. What is ne
eded from NIST are: (1) the names of the four
television stations whose data was used, (2) the ac
tual times of impact from these four stations, and
(3) the procedures used by each station in the regu
lar synchronization process to UTC.
Regarding UA Flt 175, a question remains: What are
the main specifics that the Commission based
its time of 9:03:11 on, those that go to the heart
of their Note 130? The Commission based it on
something, as one doesn’t just come up with such a
precise number out of thin air. “FAA radar data
and air traffic control software logic” needs to be
elaborated upon. Something is behind this time,
and if this something is credible, this would confi
rm once and for all the large time-gap between
seismic and impact, and would be another conclusive
demand for a new investigation. Nevertheless,
until the specifics become known, the 9:03:11 remai
ns the official time of impact, and this by itself
demands a new investigation
.
Regarding AA Flt 11, there still remains a huge 11
- 14 second time-differential between the
precision times of seismic & impact. This time-gap
, along with the many corroborating WTC1
basement eyewitnesses and fire department personnel
, demands a new investigation now, and this
can not be emphasized or stressed any stronger
.
CONCLUSION
Several seismic stations recorded seismic signals o
riginating from two events which occurred at the
WTC site, immediately prior to both aircraft impact
s. Because these signals preceded the impacts
there can be no doubt that the seismic signals reco
rded were not those associated with the aircraft
impacts on the Towers. These signals were in fact
the seismic spikes associated with the huge
basement explosions reported by witnesses. Only by
a revision of the previously well-regarded
seismic times has NIST been able to attempt to say
the times of the aircraft impacts coincide with the
seismic signals, and even then, their 8:46:30 first
impact time is a fake. Meanwhile, the evidence of
basement explosions prior to the impact of AA Flt 1
1 has not been explored or examined at all, even
with so great a cloud of witnesses.
The inescapable conclusions drawn from this analysi
s and the facts contained herein, cast extreme
doubt on the government's claim that these attacks
were carried out solely by Middle Eastern
terrorists, who would not have had the ability or o
pportunity to plant the explosive devices, nor
to detonate them so as to be masked and partially h
idden by the aircraft impacts. The real
perpetrators, those who actually did plant these de
vices, clearly had free access to the Towers. The
Seismic Proof – 9/11 Was An Inside Job (Updated Ver
sion II)
11 of 11
Craig T. Furlong & Gordon Ross (Member, Scholars fo
r 9/11 Truth) © 2006
total number of people who had this opportunity was
small and a list of these people should be easily
available. Middle Eastern terrorists alone could n
ot have been responsible as they do not have the
wherewithal of this kind of scale. It is more than
remarkable that the 9/11 Commission, although it
had heard the testimony of William Rodriguez regard
ing the explosions in the basements, did not
deem it important enough to be included in the Fina
l Report. In Rodriguez’s testimony he says
many of his fellow witnesses wanted to give their t
estimony to the Commission, and tried repeatedly
to bring this about, but the 9/11 Commission never
called any of them. Rodriguez said the only
reason he was able to appear out of all of them was
because he was instrumental in bringing about
the actual formation of the Commission (he was heav
ily involved with many of the families of the
victims who were trying to get a commission formed
to investigate 9/11).
This analysis has examined the evidence of basement
explosions as given by William Rodriguez and
others and has shown by the evidence given by Willi
am Walsh, and by examination of the Tower’s
elevator layout, that it is not physically possible
that these could have the aircraft impact as their
source.
The analysis has identified further information fro
m Jenny Carr and shown that this confirms the
evidence of William Rodriguez that the basement exp
losions preceded the first aircraft impact by
nine seconds. Examination of the various times giv
en for the seismic events and aircraft impacts,
detailed by the FAA, the NTSB and the LDEO original
seismic analysis confirm that there was a
time delay between the basement explosions and the
aircraft impact.
THEREFORE, the facts in this paper, which pertain
directly to the greatest crime and conspiracy of
modern times, demand a new independent, quasi priva
te/public, non-politicized 9/11 investigation
(a
real one this time, one with teeth) be formed immed
iately
to pursue this crime investigation until the
murderers / conspirators are identified, apprehende
d, and brought to justice
. All Americans,
especially the NYPD, the Attorney General for the S
tate of New York, Congress, and the Bush
Administration need to work in answering this quest
ion: Who are the ones responsible for the
explosions before the planes hit the buildings
?
To ignore the facts of this paper would be intellec
tual dishonesty at best, and if the government and
the media do not respond, it is like an admission o
f guilt and/or continued coverup.
Five years is long enough.
Now is the time for justice
for those who died that day, justice
for their families and friends who
grieve to this day, justice
for all the victims who survived, and that those w
ho did this heinous act
receive the full measure of justice befitting their
crime
.
No stone should be left unturned until these murder
ers are caught.
Now
is the time for the new 9/11 investigation.
No comments:
Post a Comment