Welcome to our website and Home page. If you are new to the findings of independent, scientific research on the events of September 11, 2001 (9/11), please begin by clicking Introduction.


[Print the pdf version of this announcement for specific information about accommodations, guidelines, and other details] (Spanish Version)

Conference on the 9/11 Pentagon Evidence

University Park United Methodist Church
(East Fellowship Hall)
2180 S University Blvd, Denver, CO 80210

May 4, 2019 / 9:30 am – 5:00 pm

Tickets / GoFundMe

[This is an expensive event. If this effort is meaningful for you, please contribute.]

Scientists for 9/11 Truth and the International Center for 9/11 Studies will be sponsoring a “Conference on the 9/11 Pentagon Evidence” on May 4 in Denver, Colorado, hosted by Colorado 9/11 Truth. To date we have three co-sponsors: Northern California 9/11 Truth Alliance, 911Truth.org, and Michael Wolsey of visibility911.org.  Other groups are invited to co-sponsor this event.

The 9/11 Truth Movement’s strongest and most rigorously verified evidence-based theory is the explosive demolition of the Twin Towers and Building 7 at the World Trade Center.

By contrast, the Truth Movement’s most contentious and divisive issue has been the question of what happened at the Pentagon. The early study of the Pentagon was plagued by lack of information and misinformation, much of which has persisted. But even though we now have more evidence, most current theories fail to address the full range of evidence, especially that which supports large plane impact. Why? For all of us, anchoring and confirmation bias make it hard to let go of initial impressions. The scientific method requires us to challenge our biases as we seek truth.

A key word for this conference is “evidence.” Addressing all of the currently known relevant evidence is a crucial component of the scientific process – a process in which anyone can participate. The goal is to put all of the evidence on the table, not to end discussion, but to be the basis for ongoing discussion. We believe the current evidence supports large plane impact of the Pentagon. Scientific conclusions remain fluid, however, so all research remains open to critique.

The goals of this conference are to present current evidence that any viable theory must address and to put the discussion of what happened at the Pentagon on a solid scientific footing to make our movement as strong as possible. If the Truth Movement ever gets real traction in a court of law or with society at large, we will be attacked at our weakest point. Our adversaries are very powerful and have the media at their beck and call. If we are shown to be in disarray on such a major issue as the Pentagon, our good work proving demolition at the World Trade Center might well be ignored. Thus we welcome your participation in this conference and your questions as we continue in the search for truth.

The invited speakers at this event are, in alphabetical order, David Chandler, Wayne Coste, Ken Jenkins, Warren Stutt, and John D. Wyndham, all of whom have done active scientific research on the evidence at the Pentagon. We invite you to join us in Denver on May 4 and/or help us defray the costs by contributing financially through our GoFundMe account. The event will be videotaped.

We invite 9/11 Truth organizations and individuals to co-sponsor this event. Sponsorship does not imply endorsement of the particular conclusions of the various presenters, but implies support for the goals and process that are being advocated. Let us know if you or your group would like to be listed as a co-sponsor.


Presenters and their 9/11 Pentagon Evidence Research

David Chandler; BS (IPS) Physics/Engineering, Harvey Mudd College; MA Education, Claremont Graduate University; MS Mathematics, California Polytechnic University; Coordinator, Scientists for 9/11 Truth; Board, International Center for 9/11 Studies

A Joint Statement on the Pentagon (with Jonathan Cole)

Pentagon Plane Puzzle + Going Beyond Speculation (with Ken Jenkins)

The Pentagon Attack on 9/11: A Refutation of the Pentagon Flyover Hypothesis Based on Analysis of the Flight Path and Addendum (with Frank Legge)

Critique of CIT’s Fundamentally Flawed Methodology

Blink Comparator Views of the Plane at the Pentagon

Wayne Coste; BS Electrical Engineering, University of Connecticut

Explanation of the Evidence at the Pentagon on 9/11 – Answering the 9/11 Consensus Panel Challenge

Ken Jenkins; BS Electrical Engineering, Carnegie-Mellon University; Post graduate studies, Psychology

Pentagon Plane Puzzle + Going Beyond Speculation (with David Chandler)

The Truth is Not Enough: How to Overcome Emotional Barriers to 9/11 Truth

The 85 Pentagon Area Surveillance Cameras

Why Not Use a Plane? — Fake vs. Real Events (with Frank Legge)

Warren Stutt; BSc (Hons) Comp. Sci., Auckland University

Flight AA77 on 9/11: New FDR Analysis Supports the Official Flight Path Leading to Impact with the Pentagon (with Frank Legge)

A Response to Pilots for 9/11 Truth (with Frank Legge)

John D. Wyndham; PhD Physics, Cambridge University (U.K.); Board, Scientists for 9/11 Truth

Bringing Closure to the 9/11 Pentagon Debate

The Pentagon Event: The Honegger Hypothesis Refuted, Ver 2 (with Victoria Ashley, David Chandler, Jonathan H. Cole, Jim Hoffman, Ken Jenkins, Frank Legge)

The Pentagon Attack: Eyewitnesses, Debris Flow and Other Issues – A Reply to Fletcher and Eastman

The Pentagon Attack: The Event Time Revisited

The Pentagon Attack: Problems with Theories Alternative to Large Plane Impact

[Print the pdf version of this announcement for specific information about accommodations, guidelines, and other details]

(And on a related note…)

New Video: Seeing the Pentagon Plane

Bitchute / YouTube

New Concise Video Summary of Wayne Coste’s Research

Feb 13, 2019

Wayne Coste’s presentation of the 9/11 Pentagon evidence is essential homework for any who want to engage in the ongoing discussion of what happened at the Pentagon on 9/11. We have come a long way from the early memes of “too little debris” and “the hole is too small.” As Wayne puts it, “If you care enough to have an opinion about what happened at the Pentagon, you should care enough to know what the evidence is and what it shows.”

There is a lot of ground to cover, and we acknowledge that watching the full series of videos requires a significant time commitment. Therefore we have produced an overview video with a concise 35 minute summary of Wayne’s findings. The summary video is keyed to the original videos, so at any point, if you want more detail, you can easily find the corresponding discussion in the original series.

Bitchute / YouTube / Full original series

The Pentagon event has become the most divisive issue in the 9/11 Truth Movement. Organizations such as Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, and other groups that have followed their lead, have set aside the question of what hit the Pentagon as “out of scope.” This policy has had the virtue of enabling them to focus their energies on the most solid evidence we have, which is the demolition of the Twin Towers and Building 7 at the World Trade Center.

However a side-effect of this decision has been to leave an intellectual vacuum at the Pentagon, where unscientific theories could flourish, unchallenged by any kind of scientific process. The uproar that has resulted threatens the credibility of the 9/11 Truth Movement. The situation has been described by some as “a mudfest.” If the movement ever gains real traction, it is the weakest link that will be the sole focus of public scrutiny, and it will be used to discredit all of our other work. The good work we have done at the World Trade Center will be ignored.

Scientists for 9/11 Truth has taken a different approach to this question. Rather than put the Pentagon event “off limits” our goal has been to put the discussion of the Pentagon evidence on a firm scientific footing. That is not to say only particular kinds of evidence, or particular analytic techniques are allowed, or that only “scientists” can be involved. Instead it insists that all who engage in the discussion enter into the dialectical process that is at the heart of real science.

In other words observations, analysis, and hypotheses about what happened should be presented openly to the community for critique, discussion, and correction. It is this self-correcting process, not some particular subject matter, or particular analytical techniques, or particular academic degrees that defines science. Science is characterized by its openness to public scrutiny.  Promulgating private theories, encouraging a climate of us vs them, and attacking any who disagree is contrary to the nature of real science.

We welcome you to join us in doing real science, but please do the homework.