After agreeing last month to review a hugely important article on the WTC collapses that has been censored for over a decade, the ASCE’s Journal of Engineering Mechanics has rejected the article AGAIN. The editor says he is rejecting the article “on scientific grounds,” but he does not explain what those grounds are.
We (at Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth) are now going back to the ASCE to demand that the editor produce a “technically reasoned decision” if he’s going to reject the article. That is what we asked for in the ethics complaint that led to the new review.
I encourage you to read the authors’ stinging letter to the ASCE.
.
Sure, Looks like Gravity
Prestigious journal agrees to new review of 9/11 paper a decade after censoring it
AE911Truth May 4, 2022 PRINT
It took a four-year ethics complaint process and more than ten years of waiting, but finally the current editor of the ASCE’s Journal of Engineering Mechanics has agreed to conduct a new review of a “discussion paper” by researchers Tony Szamboti and Richard Johns that was unfairly rejected by the journal’s former editors in 2013. Their grounds for rejecting the discussion paper was that it was “out of scope,” even though it was critiquing a paper published in the same journal.
The censored discussion paper refutes a highly influential paper from 2011 co-authored by engineering professor Zdeněk Bažant that purports to explain how, through gravity alone, the top of the North Tower could crush through the lower structure at nearly the rate of gravity without observably slowing down.
Bažant’s analysis has served as the foundation of the official story of 9/11 since his first paper was published in the Journal of Engineering Mechanics in January 2002. Publishing this critique of Bažant’s 2011 paper would deal a devastating blow to his theory — and could prove to be a turning point in how the engineering community views the World Trade Center collapses.
AE911Truth and the authors are now working vigilantly to ensure that the review is conducted fairly. If the paper is accepted, it should be published within the next three to six months.
For more on this major development, we invite you to watch this 15-minute video update from AE911Truth Director of Strategy Ted Walter, who spearheaded the ethics complaint that resulted in getting the journal to agree to a new review of the censored paper.
.
The 9/11 Attack Government Conspiracy
.
progressiveissuesblog 