Utilisateur:Cs32/911/AE911Truth
Modèle:Ifarticle Modèle:Infobox Non-profit
Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth est une organisation des architects en ingénieurs qui milite pour la continuation de la recherche sur les des attentats du 11 septembre 2001. Le group demande du congrès des États-Unis d'ouvrir une nouvelle investigation « vraiment indépendante » des attentats et dit que les investigations menées par les agences du governement des États-Unis n'includeraient pas les « évidences massives qui existent pour und démolition controlée » des bâtiments du World Trade Center. La grande majorité de la communauté scientifique rejète l'hypothèse d'une démolition controlée pour expliquer la déstruction des bâtiments du World Trade Center.
Activités[modifier | modifier le code]
Richard Gage, un architect californien, a fondé Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth en 2006.[1][2][3] L'organisation collecte des signatures pour une pétition au congrès des États-Unis qui demande « une investigation vraiment indépendante » des attentats du 11 septembre 2001. En particulier, selon l'organisation, cette investigation doit inclure une recherche complète de « la possibilité que l'utilisation des matières explosives était la cause » de la déstruction des bâtiments du World Trade Center.[4][5] Selon le site internet du groupe, plus de 600 professionnels et 3.500 autres ont signés la pétition.[5]
Richard Gage a donné des présentations dans plusieurs endroits des États-Unis.[6] Ses présentations, qui focalisent sur la séquence des évents qui ont conduit à la déstruction des bâtiments du World Trade Center,[7][8] includent des vidéos de l'éffondrement des bâtiments du World Trade Center et des images qui montrent des feux dans d'autres gratte-ciels.[6] Il a fait une tournée des pays européennes en 2008.[4] Gage a donné un interview pour un épisode de la documentation The Conspiracy Files produîte par la BBC en cooperation avec la chaîne de télévision allemande ZDF.[9][10]
Advocacy[modifier | modifier le code]
Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth argues that the buildings of the World Trade Center could not have collapsed only because of the impact of the planes,[11][12] but does not blame any particular individuals or organizations for the September 11 attacks.[13] Investigations by the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have concluded that the buildings collapsed as a result of the impacts of the planes and of the fires that resulted from them.[14][15] The mainstream of the scientific community has rejected the position taken by the group, and many mainstream scientists do not want to debate proponents of 9/11 conspiracy theories, saying they don't want to lend them unwarranted credibility.[16]
World Trade Center towers[modifier | modifier le code]
In 2006, NIST released a fact sheet based on a detailed report it had published in 2005, in order to respond to conspiracy theories.[14] Assistant Secretary of Defense for Homeland Defense Paul McHale said about the investigation: "The events of September 11 have been reconstructed in meticulous detail. Every reasonable person can only agree on the basic mechanisms of the attacks. There may be still unanswered questions, but the theories about a conspiracy of the government are absolutely baseless."[17]
Gage critizised NIST for not having investigated the complete sequence of the collapse of the World Trade Center towers[18] and claims that "the official explanation of the total destruction of the World Trade Center skyscrapers has explicitly failed to address the massive evidence for explosive demolition."[19] To support its position, the group Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth points to the "free fall" pace of the collapse of the buildings, the "lateral ejection of steel", and to the "mid-air pulverization of concrete".[11]
In a paper written to examine whether allegations of controlled demolition might be scientifically justifiable, Zdeněk P. Bažant, Professor of Civil Engineering and Materials Science at Northwestern University, and three other scholars, found that the available video records are not consistent with the free fall hypothesis, that the size of the concrete particles is consistent with comminution caused by impact, and that the high velocity of compressed air explains why material from the towers were ejected to a distance of several hundred meters form the tower. The authors conclude that the allegations do not have any scientific merit.[20]
7 World Trade Center[modifier | modifier le code]
According to Richard Gage, 7 World Trade Center (7 WTC), a 47-story high-rise building that was part of the World Trade Center complex and collapsed in the afternoon on September 11, 2001, is the "smoking gun of September 11,"[21] and would provide the most compelling evidence that something was "wrong" with the building that had not been told to the public.[22][23] Gage also described 7 WTC as "the most obvious example of controlled demolition."[24] Scott Grainger, a fire protection engineer and member of the group, told the BBC that the fires that were observed in 7 WTC were scattered about on the floors, would have moved on as they would have found no more combustibles, and thus could not have developed enough heat to cause the collapse of the building.[24] According to Richard Gage, skyscrapers that suffered "hotter, longer lasting and larger fires" have not collapsed.[21] "Buildings that fall in natural processes fall to the path of least resistance", says Gage, "they don't go straight down through themselves."[25]
After the publication of the results of NIST's inquiry into the collapse of 7 WTC, Richard Gage called a news conference[26] and leaders of Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth dismissed NIST's investigation as flawed. "How much longer do we have to endure the coverup of how Building 7 was destroyed?" said Richard Gage, the leader of the group.[15] Gage maintains that the "sudden and spontaneous" collapse of the towers would have been impossible without a controlled demolition and that traces of a high-tech thermitic incendiary had been found in samples of the dust produced by the collapse of the World Trade Center.[4][27] When told of the claims, Shyam Sunder, the lead investigator from NIST, responded: "I am really not a psychologist. Our job was to come up with the best science."[15]
The community of specialists in structural mechanics and structural engineering generally supports the explanation of the collapse of the World Trade Center buildings provided by the investigation conducted by NIST.[28] The appearance of a controlled demolition can be explained by an interior failure of the building, which is suggested by the sequence of the collapse of 7 WTC that shows roof elements sinking into the building while the façade remains intact.[29]
Liens externes[modifier | modifier le code]
Notes et références[modifier | modifier le code]
- (en) Eric Moskowitz, « Airing of 9/11 film ignites debate », {{Article}} : paramètre «
périodique» manquant, (lire en ligne) - Mike Rudin, « The evolution of a conspiracy theory », BBC, (consulté le )
- (en) Peter Barber, « The truth is out there », {{Article}} : paramètre «
périodique» manquant, (lire en ligne) - « Un arquitecto estadounidense presenta en Madrid su versión alternativa al 11-S », Telecinco, (consulté le )
- « Welcome to Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth! », Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth (consulté le )
- (en) Jennifer Abel, « Theories of 9/11 », {{Article}} : paramètre «
périodique» manquant, (lire en ligne) - (en) Jonathan Kay, « Richard Gage: 9/11 truther extraordinaire », {{Article}} : paramètre «
périodique» manquant, (lire en ligne) - (en) Richard Handler, « Don't read this, I've been abducted by aliens », Canadian Broadcasting Corporation News, (lire en ligne)
- (en) Mike Rudin, « Controversy and conspiracies II », BBC, (lire en ligne)
- (en) Christoph Röckerath, « Das Geheimnis des dritten Turms », Zweites Deutsches Fernsehen, {{Article}} : paramètre «
date» manquant (lire en ligne) :
(Translation: "Avec la BBC, le ZDF a evalué des centaines des traces.")« Gemeinsam mit der BBC, ist das ZDF Hunderten von Spuren nachgegangen. »
- (en) Christopher Beam, « Heated Controversy », {{Article}} : paramètre «
périodique» manquant, (lire en ligne) - (en) Reuters, « Arquitectos estadounidenses piden a Obama que reabra la investigación sobre el 11-S », {{Article}} : paramètre «
périodique» manquant, (lire en ligne) :
(Press agency report. Translation: "They argue that the Twin Towers were not destroyed by the impact of the planes."}}« Aseguran que las Torres Gemelas no fueron derribadas por el choque de los aviones. »
- (en) « Corrections », {{Article}} : paramètre «
périodique» manquant, (lire en ligne) - (en) Jim Dwyer, « 2 U.S. Reports Seek to Counter Conspiracy Theories About 9/11 », {{Article}} : paramètre «
périodique» manquant, (lire en ligne) - (en) Eric Lipton, « Fire, Not Explosives, Felled 3rd Tower on 9/11, Report Says », {{Article}} : paramètre «
périodique» manquant, (lire en ligne) Erreur de référence : Balise<ref>incorrecte : le nom « Lipton » est défini plusieurs fois avec des contenus différents. - (en) Justin Pope, « 9/11 Conspiracy Theorists Thriving », CBS, (lire en ligne)
- (en) Agenzia Nazionale Stampa Associata, « La seduzione delle teorie alternative », {{Article}} : paramètre «
périodique» manquant, (lire en ligne) :« Gli eventi del'11 settembre 2001 sono stati ricostruiti in modo meticoloso: ogni persona di buon senso può solo essere d'accordo con i meccanismi fondamentali degli attacchi - ha affermato ieri il sottosegretario alla difesa per la sicurezza nazionale Paul McHale - Ci possono essere ancora domande senza risposta ma le teorie del complotto governativo sono assolutamente prive di fondamento »
- (en) P. Joseph Potocki, « Down the 9-11 Rabbit Hole », {{Article}} : paramètre «
périodique» manquant, (lire en ligne) - (en) Alex Beam, « The truth is out there . . . Isn't it? », {{Article}} : paramètre «
périodique» manquant, (lire en ligne) - Zdeněk P. Bažant, Jia-Liang Le, Frank R. Greening et David B. Benson, « What Did and Did Not Cause Collapse of WTC Twin Towers in New York », Journal of Engineering Mechanics, vol. 134, no 10, , pp. 892—906 (lire en ligne)
- (en) Rich Bowden, « Twin towers mystery resolved, fire brought down WTC7 », {{Article}} : paramètre «
périodique» manquant, (lire en ligne) - (en) Christoph Röckerath, « Das Geheimnis des dritten Turms », Zweites Deutsches Fernsehen, {{Article}} : paramètre «
date» manquant (lire en ligne) :
(Translation: "Is World Trade Center 7 really the "smoking gun" of September 11, as Richard Gage, the prominent architect [...] says?")« Ist World Trade Center 7 wirklich die "Smoking Gun" des 11. September, der Beweis, das etwas "faul" ist, wie es der prominente Architekt Richard Gage [...] formulierte? »
- (en) Maurizio Molinari, « Il crollo della Torre Sette? «Fu solo colpa delle fiamme» », {{Article}} : paramètre «
périodique» manquant, (lire en ligne) :
(Translation: "Gage's theory is that video of the collapse is "the smoking gun of September 11" and offers compelling evidence that something is being hidden from the public.")« La teoria di Gage è che il video del crollo è «la pistola fumante dell’11 settembre» ovvero la prova incontrovertibile che qualcosa è stato nascosto al pubblico. »
- « Q&A: The Collapse of Tower 7 », BBC, (consulté le )
- (en) Mike Rudin, « 9/11 third tower mystery 'solved' », BBC, (lire en ligne)
- (en) Brendan Trembath, « Sept 11 building downed by fire, not explosives: inquiry », Australian Broadcasting Corporation, (lire en ligne)
- (en) Olivier Rogenau, « 11 Septembre, le mystère de la 3e tour », {{Article}} : paramètre «
périodique» manquant, (lire en ligne) :
(Translations: "According to 430 architects and engineers belonging to the group AE911 Truth, residues of the military explosive themate would have been found in the debris of Ground Zero [...].")« On aurait, selon 430 architectes et ingénieurs regroupés au sein de l'association AE911 Truth, retrouvé des résidus d'explosifs militaires de type thermate dans les débris de Ground Zero [...]. »
- Zdeněk P. Bažant et Mathieu Verdure, « Mechanics of Progressive Collapse: Learning from World Trade Center and Building Demolitions », Journal of Engineering Mechanics, vol. 133, no 3, , pp. 308–319 (lire en ligne, consulté le )
- Ramon Gilsanz et Willa Ng, « Single Point of Failure », Structure magazine, , pp. 42—45 (lire en ligne, consulté le )