Templeton Times: Seismic Proof – 9/11 Was An Inside Job (Updated Version II) 1 of 11

Seismic Proof – 9/11 Was An Inside Job (Updated Version II) 1 of 11

Seismic Proof – 9/11 Was An Inside Job (Updated Ver

sion II) 1 of 11

Craig T. Furlong & Gordon Ross (Member, Scholars fo

There is an appointed time for everything

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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

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

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.

Templeton Times

Tuesday, March 1, 2022

Seismic Proof – 9/11 Was An Inside Job (Updated Version II) 1 of 11

No comments:

Post a Comment