Political Crossfire Forums

[NAB]

Controversial Physics Professor on Paid Leave


Steven E. Jones, BYU professor on review for theory.By Daniel Jackson
11 Sep 2006


BYU officials placed a controversial professor on paid leave Thursday, Sept. 7, 2006, in order to review his research and statements related to the collapse of the World Trade Center towers on September 11, 2001.

Steven E. Jones, a professor of physics and astronomy at BYU since 1985, has stirred controversy with his theory that explosives, not hijacked airliners, caused the collapse of the Twin Towers. Jones has written that research performed on fragments from the towers at BYU suggest the presence of thermite, a substance Jones wrote is used by the military in demolition exercises.

In an official statement, university spokeswoman Carri Jenkins said university officials are "concerned about the increasingly speculative and accusatory nature of these statements by Dr. Jones" and that the professor's work related to the World Trade Center collapse "has not been published in appropriate scientific venues."

Jones is currently a full professor who has been granted "continuing status" (BYU does not give professors tenure). Jones' work will be reviewed by university administration, the College of Physical and Mathematical Sciences and the Physics Department while Jones is on paid leave, according to Jenkins and an article published in Deseret Morning News.

Jenkins said BYU rarely places professors on leave with pay. It is a step taken "when there is a question about a professor's performance in citizenship, scholarship or teaching," Jenkins said.

Jones could not be reached for comment.

Jones published his controversial views in The Journal of 9/11 Studies, a web-only journal of which Jones himself is a co-editor, under the title "Why Indeed did the WTC Buildings Completely Collapse?" The article was also posted on a religion- and politics-themed website, LatterDayConservative.com.

"None of the government-funded studies have provided serious analyses of the explosive demolition hypothesis at all," Jones wrote near the end of the article. "The case for accusing ill-trained Muslims of causing all the destruction on 9-11-01 is far from compelling. It just does not add up."

As a longtime physics professor, Jones is widely viewed as a leading academic voice for what some have termed the "9/11 truth movement." Jones has explained and defended his conclusions in interviews with Deseret Morning News, London's The Guardian and MSNBC's Tucker Carlson. The decision to place Jones on leave with pay came after the university was contacted by reporters from Deseret Morning News interested in preparing a special report on his research.

Aside from his interest in the Sept. 11 World Trade Center collapse, Jones has focused a part of his research on cold fusion; three published papers on the subject have been posted on Jones' research website. He has also studied Native American cave drawings and other ancient artifacts, according to his Web site.

In response to the news of the university's decision, the editors of the 9/11 Truth Movement Web site commented, "The good doctor Jones is finally called to task for speaking 9/11 truth in an archconservative clime." They continued that despite the negative effects on Jones and his family, the university's decision had "obvious and significant" benefits, including "increased issue visibility, the investigative involvement of real . . . scientists, and lots more free time for Dr. Jones to spread the gospel locally and globally."

Jones is not the first college professor to find himself in hot water after questioning the official account of the collapse of the World Trade Center towers. In July, 61 Wisconsin state legislators demanded the firing of University of Wisconsin professor Kevin Barrett after he joined Scholars for 9/11 Truth, a group of which Jones is a member. UW did not fire Barrett, citing academic freedom. (Source)

-----
I was a bit surprised that this story hasn't shown up here yet (unless I missed it). From what I've read from this story and numerous others on the topic it sounds like the University put him on paid leave for a couple of different reasons.
1-Unhappy with the unwanted publicity that he's bringing to the university
2-Questioning the method he used for publishing his paper without vetting through the proper peer review channels.
While I'm not for silencing anyone, I just wonder if these seem to be legit concerns for the University? One thing I did read was that his paper will be scutinized for it's legitimacy one way or the other, so at least we can see if any of his claims have any justification.

Since this is actual news I guess it should go in a different forum, but I'm posting it here since he is the topic of a lot of discussion.

[Patriot911]

The fact Jones refuses to put his paper before academic review speaks volumes. Given the response from the CT crowd, they are viewing Jone's trouble as a positive thing. I wonder how Jones feels about being thrown under the bus by his fellow CTers. Even if his paper undergoes peer review and comes back ripped apart, I am sure the CT crowd will just claim it was done wrong / with bias / men in black came and made every reviewer claim it was wrong.

[BigOMG]

It's about damn time. This so called "scholar" claim to "have the facts" and know the truth"yet he never offers any. Typical of the Conspiracy Theorist(yeah, I said it!) crowd, all fluff, no fact.

[Constitutional Republic]

Patriot911 wrote: The fact Jones refuses to put his paper before academic review speaks volumes. Given the response from the CT crowd, they are viewing Jone's trouble as a positive thing. I wonder how Jones feels about being thrown under the bus by his fellow CTers. Even if his paper undergoes peer review and comes back ripped apart, I am sure the CT crowd will just claim it was done wrong / with bias / men in black came and made every reviewer claim it was wrong.

Typical untrue statement from Patriot911.

Read an exerpt from another article:
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,645199800,00.html

"Jones told the Deseret Morning News on Wednesday that his paper had gone through an unusual third round of peer review in what is now an apparently unsuccessful effort to quell concerns on campus."

As far as I've seen, Jones is receiving incredible support from the conspiracy crowd. I've read or heard nothing of the contrary.

He has PURE EVIDENCE of the CD in his hands in the form of WTC metal with Thermate residue. He has written a beautiful paper using science to conclude that 9/11 was an inside job. He is an exhibit of perfection as close as a human can get when it comes to investigating correctly. Yet he is slandered by many not because they can refute his claims, but because of falsely contrived reputation concerns. Shameful.

[Wizard From Oz]

Hmmmmmmmmm an Astronomer being an expert on 9/11. Interesting............very interesting................ but stupid +p

[Patriot911]

Constitutional Republic wrote: Patriot911 wrote: The fact Jones refuses to put his paper before academic review speaks volumes. Given the response from the CT crowd, they are viewing Jone's trouble as a positive thing. I wonder how Jones feels about being thrown under the bus by his fellow CTers. Even if his paper undergoes peer review and comes back ripped apart, I am sure the CT crowd will just claim it was done wrong / with bias / men in black came and made every reviewer claim it was wrong.

Typical untrue statement from Patriot911.

Read an exerpt from another article:
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,645199800,00.html

"Jones told the Deseret Morning News on Wednesday that his paper had gone through an unusual third round of peer review in what is now an apparently unsuccessful effort to quell concerns on campus."

As far as I've seen, Jones is receiving incredible support from the conspiracy crowd. I've read or heard nothing of the contrary.

He has PURE EVIDENCE of the CD in his hands in the form of WTC metal with Thermate residue. He has written a beautiful paper using science to conclude that 9/11 was an inside job. He is an exhibit of perfection as close as a human can get when it comes to investigating correctly. Yet he is slandered by many not because they can refute his claims, but because of falsely contrived reputation concerns. Shameful.

Jones has NEVER submitted his paper for official academic peer review. He's handed it out to select people to review it. As a member of the academic community, he should know what a true peer review is. If it had undergone true peer review, there would be a report of such a review. Where is it?

As for evidence, he has no such thing and he even admits it. Maybe you should read what HE writes instead of what the conspiracy sites write. He found trace elements that are all the end results of a thermate reaction but there are two problems. First, the end result of a thermate reaction is very common chemicals found in nature. Second, he didn't receive the steel he tested from a souce where he can guarantee that the sample wasn't tainted by something else. Both of these issues mean you don't have "PURE EVIDENCE".