by Scott Creighton
Jim Hoffman has just published his essay ” A Hypothetical Blasting Scenario: A Plausible Theory Explaining the Controlled Demolition of the Twin Towers Using Aluminothermic Incendiaries and Explosives with Wireless Ignition Means” in time for it to coincide with the new Jones et al piece, “Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe” and quite frankly, Hoffmans work is structurally unsound.
I don’t want to get too far into a critical review of Hoffmans work till I can wrap my head around what Jones’ paper concludes and that is mainly because Hoffman’s efforts are largely based on giving what he thinks is a practical application for the hypothesis of aluminothermic controlled demolition of the Trade Centers. Clearly understanding more about the new Steven Jones work is key to validating Hoffman’s theory.
I am currently working through the Jones effort as you will see in a moment.
But Hoffman’s “Plausible” theory is a horse of a different color. It would appear that he may have been too eager to get a working demolition theory out there at the same time Jones released his research.
His “Plausible” theory and his conclusions need a lot more work.
1. An unsupported assumption
Right off the bat, Mr. Hoffman makes the claim that “… there is direct evidence for two broad types of thermitic pyrotechnics in the destruction of the Twin Towers” : incendiaries and explosives. This is not completely accurate, according to the Jones report.
Though Jones does conclude at the end of his work that ” … the red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material.” earlier he clearly states that it was not possible for them to determine the how it was used.
“We make no attempt to specify the particular form of nano-thermite present until more is learned about the red material and especially about the nature of the organic material it contains.” Steven Jones
You see, the organic material is the key here because without it, you don’t have an “explosive” you have an incendiary material and an incendiary material couldn’t do what Mr. Hoffman presumes as the basis for his hypothesis.
In a nutshell, even massive amounts of Jones’ active thermetic material, which he has clearly found, would not be capable of creating the needed detonating velocity to break up the floor structures were it not for very specific organic materials combined in just the right manner. And even then, the question still becomes would that specific compound still have enough detonating velocity to destroy all 220 concrete floor systems in the two towers?
Jones does NOT make that conclusion whereas Hoffman’s work is dependent on it.
“We suggest that the organic material in evidence in the red/gray chips is also highly energetic, most likely producing gas to provide explosive pressure… As this test was done in air it is possible that some of the enhancement of energy output may have come from air oxidation of the organic component.” Steven Jones
Not only does Jones NOT make that conclusion, but he also clearly states that other materials need to be tested for, because as he himself puts it…
“ The red material does burn quickly as shown in the DSC, and we have observed a bright flash on ignition, but determination of the burn rate of the red material may help to classify this as a slow or fast explosive. It may be that this material is used not as a cutter-charge itself, but rather as a means to ignite high explosives, as in super-thermite matches . Having observed unignited thermitic material in the WTC residue, we suggest that other energetic materials suitable for cutter charges or explosives should also be looked for in the WTC dust. NIST has admitted that they have not yet looked for such residues.” Steven Jones
This is a critical part of Mr. Hoffman’s hypothesis and it is basically grounded in the suggestion that Jones has definitely found a thermetic material that creates enough detonation velocity to produce a concussion wave strong enough to demolish the floor systems. Yet Jones doesn’t come to that conclusion in his paper so therefore it is certainly a weakness in Hoffman’s argument.
2. The Ridiculous Ceiling Tile Theory
I am sorry, but I have to call it ridiculous, because, well because it is. According to Jim Hoffman, this is how it works: This thermitic material is formed into a sheet (which is possible) and that sheet is then sandwiched between two ceiling tiles and out fitted with it’s very own wireless “igniter” making each and every one of these things it’s own separate bomb.
How many of them would it take to do the job? Well, without giving any specifics at all about the thermitic material film in each one of these or giving us an idea about the necessary detonation velocity required to break up the floor systems (and floor pans and truss systems and furniture) Mr. Hoffman tells us they would need 1 million of these “hot” ceiling tiles to do the trick.
But that is just on the tenet part of the buildings. The core area would require another 800k of them. For a grand total of 1.8 million ceiling tiles to be replaced, each with it’s own wireless “igniter”.
1.8 million separate ceiling tile bombs, according to Mr. Hoffman.
Now, how does Mr. Hoffman suggest they were installed? Simple, they were put in place by a crew of non-English-speaking workers who, by the way, didn’t know they were bombs.
Not only is Mr. Hoffman suggesting that the people who based everything on those towers coming down put 1.8 million individual bombs in the hands of unsuspecting illegal immigrants, but, according to Mr. Hoffman, they would have to have installed them at a rate of 10 per minute.
That’s 10 ceiling tiles, ceiling tile bombs mind you, per every 60 seconds in a room that Mr. Hoffman details as being 8′-3″ high. That means, on AVERAGE now (sometimes moving even faster) that they would have to go up and down a ladder, remove the old tile, grab a new one and put it in place, all in the course of 6 seconds. And remember that’s a bomb, now.
Not only that, but to make his numbers work, those workers would have to do that 600 times in one hour. Not taking into consideration the fact that the ladder has to be moved or the old tiles have to be stored away or they have to get them out of the box… none of that should be considered. Just imagine getting anyone to go up and down a ladder 600 times in an hour and you will understand how ridiculous that time estimate is.
Now lets also not forget that to make even that number of 1.8 million separate bombs work, Mr. Hoffman has constructed his “plausible hypothesis” on the premise that only EVERY OTHER FLOOR GETS WIRED FOR DEMOLITION.
So now Mr. Hoffman is suggesting that the thin film sandwiched in between the ceiling tiles not only has the detonation velocity to pulverize the floor and the floor pan and the trusses above it, but it also has enough to do the same to the one BELOW it as well?
All that based on the work where Jones himself says even he doesn’t even know how “explosive” the organic compound enriched thermitic material is?
That’s quite a leap, Mr. Hoffman. But then again, you got immigrants running up and down ladders 4,800 times per work day, so I guess that little “two floor demo” stretch really isn’t that much in comparison.
3. All that said… it gets worse
Aside from the fact that we have 1.8 million individual bombs being set by Speedy Gonzalas and his merry band of men that have no idea not only about how to handle explosives or that they are actually handling explosives while running around at break neck speed (mind you now, this theory is based on the notion that a “controlled demolitions EXPERT” must have devised this plan in the first place) but in fact, there are STILL more bombs to set.
They have to prep the thermite gel on the columns and the kicker charges that knock them out of the way after the thermite “cutter charges” ignite.
I am glad to see that Mr. Hoffman did some research on demolition processes, but I have to admit he seems to have missed the point just a little.
(oh wait a minute, I have to throw this in; how does he suggest the kicker charges don’t get noticed by the people in the towers? He suggests they disguised them… as “fire extinguishers”. Really. A bomb disguised as a fire extinguisher in an occupied and working office space…)
Now, here is where it all gets a little strange… the demolition process itself.
Here, Mr. Hoffman suggests (and I am going to run through this quickly now) that the “cutter charges” SLOWLY melt through the massive core columns for 10 full minutes before the demolition takes place (for some reason). Now it’s key to remember that according to Mr. Hoffman’s “plausible hypothesis”, the planes would have had to hit exactly right above the place where these cutter charges were planted (no real room for high winds or error of any kind), you see that way the thermite gel applied to the core columns could eat away at the core of the towers and, as he puts it, leaves the entire core structure above the impact zone “floating”.
That’s right. Mr. Hoffman is suggesting that the upper section of the South Tower just floated there completely supported by the exterior columns alone for a time (now mind you again, this “plausible hypothesis” of his would have to have been designed by a controlled demolitions expert (the emphasis is on the word CONTROLLED, by the way).
Now, this is where it gets REALLY weird.
The kicker charges then go off before the 1.8 million individual ceiling tile bombs take about 12 seconds to blow the floors out, two at a time all the way down to the ground floor.
Notice he doesn’t seem to need any more demolition materials in the core columns below the point of impact. I suppose he thinks some thing will just knock those 47 massive columns out of the way and into other buildings on it’s own?
He also doesn’t seem to address one very big problem. All of this is contingent on 1.8 million plus individual wireless receivers synchronized perfectly in the demolition sequence, all placed within the concrete and steel frame work of a massive building that is being blown to bits.
I hope they had very good reception in the towers.
Mr. Hoffman’s work is not quite ready for peer review, in my mind. Or maybe he will be receptive enough of constructive criticism to consider this one, who knows.
As anyone who knows what I do here can tell you, I am a firm believer in the fact that the towers were demoed by carefully controlled demolition. Where I tend to disagree with Hoffman and apparently many others in this field, is that I believe no controlled demo expert would put his career, his life, his family on the line by using untested materials on a project like this one.
This is different than any other controlled demolition in the past (with one possible exception); innocent people were going to die in the process and that in and of itself made this one the absolute last demo any skilled professional would take a chance on.
It’s one thing to mess up and have your insurance rates go up, it’s another to get the death penalty.
Controlled demolition experts leave next to nothing to chance. Every aspect is thought out, every mistake is planned for. Nothing to chance. Nothing.
Though Mr. Hoffman’s heart was clearly in the right place, and I hope he takes this paper in the constructive manner in which it was intended, it is my conclusion that his “plausible theory” is anything but. Based not only on a logical evaluation of what he has presented but also on the original work by Steven Jones and my own knowledge of the demolition process.
Though I still adhere to the theory that conventional demolition tools were used in the dropping of the Twin Towers, I considered this effort solely on the merits of the material presented.
It may in fact be possible that the material that Steven Jones and his fellow researchers have been studying is what brought down the towers, that has yet to be proven one way or the other by Steven Jones by his own admission, but one thing is for certain, it didn’t happen the way Mr. Hoffman has described in his paper.