Howie, your assertation that Professor Jones' "Why Indeed Did the World Trade Center Buildings Completely Collapse" is "a scientific paper which was peer reviewed" is shaky at best. This would lead our many thousands of daily readers to believe this paper was reviewed for sound science and proper analytical methods by an impartial board of scientists representing diverse expertise and viewpoints, and subsequently published in a reputable journal of science. In actuality, that couldn't be much further from the truth.

This was most certainly not a traditionally peer-reviewed scientific paper published in a reputable science magazine. It was published in the "Journal of 9/11 Studies" which is an online-only open-access 9/11 conspiracy theory site. And oh yeah, Jones is the editor. If this wasn't enough to make the "peer review" process suspect how about this: all the peer reviewers (listed on the Journal of 9-11 Studies site) about whom I could find information appear to have at least dabbled in conspiracy theory rhetoric, and have become quite well known for it in a couple of cases. And how many of them are physicists, who could knowledgeably comment on the scientific validity of the Professor's analysis? One (Grimmer), and he is a well-known conspiracy nut who hasn't been able to hold down a long-term university job (currently at Wash U I believe). If you go into a "research" endeavor looking for a specific solution, you're going to find some evidence for it eventually, especially if you're willing to ignore all the contrary evidence as "out of context."

Is that to say that Dr. Jones' paper doesn't raise some interesting questions and pressing concerns? Certainly it does. However, its publication in this "Journal" is tantamount to the chairman of the board of National Right to Life publishing "Extensive RU-486 Research" on their site. Can you guess what the scientific and objective conclusion of said research was? This is my big issue with a lot of things of this nature...it was the same when I was in the environmental science field. Political agenda clouding the integrity of the science, on both sides. Makes it hard to separate fact from partially true theoretical propaganda.

This guy's placement on paid leave is a cop-out by the University which is becoming all too common. I probably would have fired the guy outright, but that's just me. Either way, its weak. But really, what would you have expected in this case? BYU is a school which makes no secret of its intent to provide moral and spiritual guidance, in addition to empirical knowledge, by combining a strong religious and strong academic education. The University obviously has a long tradition of controlling what ideas are put into the minds of its students; you can't expect they'd want to keep this reactionary wonk around. I also doubt they'd have
Farid Esack in for a guest lecture or Penn Jillette on campus for a comedy gig. Or this guy for his One Man Show. By the nature of that institution, its leaders should reserve that right. Am I going to send my hypothetical kids there? Hell no.

Don't worry about Jones though, he should have a long and successful career as a "subject matter expert" on FoxNews.

I knew it was just a matter of time before BYU clipped this guy's wings. He's a professor of physics at BYU that came out with a paper stating that burning airplanes couldn't have brought down the towers of the World Trade Center because burning jet fuel (or a burning office) wouldn't have heated the massive steel columns hot enough to melt them (would have been about 1000 degres too cool). Pretty sad that his job is basically over (after 20 years there) for publishing a scientific paper which was peer reviewed.

See story "BYU Professor on Paid Leave for 9-11 Theory"

On a related note, I am predicting neither Howie nor Captain will be able to complete a 2 Gallon Challenge on either day of Oktoberfest.

I am also still predicting that Howie will not make it to the event, though I am hoping with all my heart that he does.

I predict that the Dow will be drifting downward but mostly sideways for the next 2- 3 weeks, and bottom out close to 11,200. After that there will be steep run up to the 11,800 area (by middle of October?), which will break a record (record is 11,750) and will also be the highest we see the Dow in our lifetimes, after that comes a steep decline.