1211 replies to this topic

[booNyzarC]

Q24, on 12 April 2012 - 02:17 PM, said:

Your continued denial of observation, material properties and logic certainly does not make for truth.

Sorry booNy, do you have an alternative that fits or not?

If so then we can talk about it.  If not then you may as well continue to cover your eyes, plug your ears and shake your head whilst repeating, “you’re wrong, you’re wrong, you’re wrong” for no other reason than you cannot handle the truth.

You are yet again missing the point.  I'm not saying “you’re wrong, you’re wrong, you’re wrong”.  I'm saying that you can't definitively make the claim that it is molten steel (or iron, or whatever) based on the available evidence.  The available evidence is insufficient to make such a definitive determination.

In the end, you are still just making an assumption, and delivering it with a notable measure of smarm.

[Czero 101]

* snipped *


Never mind... not worth it...






Cz

Edited by Czero 101, 12 April 2012 - 04:57 PM.

[skyeagle409]

Q24, on 12 April 2012 - 03:36 PM, said:

IHowever, the flow can be easily recreated everytime, and is perfect match, to thermite, and supports what a huge number of people (architects, engineers and scientists included) have been saying for years: that devices were planted in the WTC buildings to intentionally demolish them.

Since 175 pounds of thermite could not cut through a simple steel box beam and more than 1000 pounds of  explosives was unable to bring down the WTC in 1993 and 1000 pounds of thermite was unable to cut a vehicle in two, then what makes you think that someone is going to plant thousands and thousands of tons of thermite above the 77th floors of the WTC buildings and not expect the impacts of the aircraft to set off planted thermite? Most of all, who in their right mind is going to transport thousands and thousands of  tons of thermite up more than 70 floors up to the areas of impacts where the impacts would have set off any planted thermite? There are no secondary explosions evident after the impacts.

Quote

The colour match is ideal (I honestly think your bias has affected your eyesight/perception).

Considering that more than 100,000 pounds of aluminum was used in the construction of the B-767 that struck the WTC builidngs, where do you think all of  that molten aluminum from the aircraft was going to flow?

Quote

The volume of the flow is absolutely consistant with the size of charge that I have proposed.

That is false, There are estimates that it would have taken tens of thousands of tons of thermite to bring down the WTC building.

Quote

Nanothermite: If It Doesn't Fit, You Must Acquit!

Hightower has further calculated that if conventional explosives (such as TNT or RDX) acting alone were used to bring down the Twin Towers, the quantity necessary would have been hundreds of tons of explosives per tower. On July 27, 2011, Niels Harrit (chief author of the 2009 nanothermite paper) presented a calculation for how much thermitic material would have been necessary to explain the presence of the many tiny iron-rich spheres in the dust (assuming that a thermite reaction was the source of the spheres). He gave a range of numbers, based on lower and higher concentrations of the thermite formulation. His lowest figure amounted to 29,000 metric tons of thermitic explosive per tower – a value hundreds of times greater than the calculation for conventional explosives.

His "conservative" estimate (based on 10% iron-oxide in the thermitic material) was 143,000 metric tons of thermitic material that would have been placed in each tower. Let's be realistic: How could the perpetrators drag in and plant over 100,000 tons of explosive without being seen? Even 29,000 tons is hard to imagine and would have been rather difficult to do unnoticed.

What does other peer-reviewed scientific literature have to say about nanothermite? "Nanoscale Aluminum-Metal Oxide (Thermite) Reactions for Application in Energetic Materials," Central European Journal of Energetic Materials (2010), authored by Davin G. Piercey and Thomas M. Klapötke, identifies the fastest known combustion velocity for a mixture of metal oxide and aluminum: 2400 meters per second (m/s), in a type of nanothermite made of copper oxide and aluminum. Remember that what Steven Jones found in the WTC dust was iron-oxide/aluminum nanothermite. The authors of this paper make it clear that copper-oxide/aluminum nanothermite is significantly more reactive than the iron-oxide version, and cite a combustion velocity of 895 m/s for an iron-oxide/aluminum nanothermite aerogel. So 895 m/s is the highest velocity yet to be found for an iron-oxide/aluminum nanothermite in the scientific literature, and this velocity is much too low to have played a significant role in the destruction of the Twin Towers.

My link

Edited by skyeagle409, 12 April 2012 - 05:58 PM.

[flyingswan]

skyeagle409, on 12 April 2012 - 05:45 PM, said:

That is false, There are estimates that it would have taken tens of thousands of tons of thermite to bring down the WTC building.

Q24's position is actually wrong for the opposite reason.  He is claiming that the molten flow is due to a single thermite demolition charge that got knocked away from its column by the aircraft impact, yet still managed to go off on cue.  He wants this charge to be small, so it can be plausibly fitted in the building without anybody noticing.  His problem with the molten flow is that it contains far too much material to fit his scenario.

[Q24]

flyingswan, on 12 April 2012 - 04:14 PM, said:

Summary: The flow is not steel because the structural steel would fail well below the melting temperature. The flow is likely to be a mixture of aluminum, aluminum oxides, molten glass and coals of whatever trash the aluminum flowed over as it reached the open window. Such a flow would appear orange and cool to a dark color.

Glass?  What, was there a whole glass factory up there?  The engineer is basing his judgement on a single photo – the fellow obviously hadn’t seen the video footage and realised the volume and uniformity of the flow (and quantity of glass that would be required).  And sorry, experimentation (which trumps simple hypothesis) has proven that glass and “trash” will not mix/entrain consistently with molten aluminium.

But let me get this straight… due to the diffuse flame of an office fire, the aircraft melted and oxidized orange, and the glass melted orange, the two somehow ‘hung around’ waiting for one another (after you, no after you), were somehow finely mixed/entrained in the building (perhaps by those invisible ninja elves people tell me about), and then somehow sporadically flung themselves out of the tower in the minutes prior collapse, somehow initially as a lemon colour.

I’ve never heard such nonsense in my life.  I don’t mean to criticize the guy too much – afterall, he admitted to not having seen the video footage; I wouldn’t expect him to understand what we are dealing with - but an informed hypothesis would be preferable with experimentation/example to prove it were somehow possible.  Except, a scientist has already done the experiment and found it impossible.

He did get one thing right – the WTC2 flow is not fake.

flyingswan, on 12 April 2012 - 04:14 PM, said:

The rapid change to a reddish colour indicating a temperature well below that of molten iron or steel is clearly apparent.  This is unlike any of your pictures of thermite.

The WTC2 flow falls between the colours of a known thermite reaction.

It can be lemon, darker orange or grey: -



All you achieve in claiming the images are “unlike” one another is to reveal your bias/eyesight condition (whichever it is).

flyingswan, on 12 April 2012 - 04:14 PM, said:

All your thermite pictures show it cutting through metals, but the WTC flow continues from the same place on the building.  It is clearly doing no damage.

Which is irrelevant – thermite can flow over materials without doing major damage - it depends on the ejection/setup.

flyingswan, on 12 April 2012 - 04:14 PM, said:

You don't have to rely on my estimate, people on your side have also come up with "many tons" of material.  Here's Christopher Bollyn:
One cubic meter of iron weighs about 8.5 tons and it certainly looks like several cubic meters poured from the 81st floor...

Hardly consistent with your proposed charge.

I don’t care what Bollyn thinks on this issue... the same as I don’t care what Balsamo or Reynolds or Fetzer think on other issues.  I definitely don’t care how much material you think there was.  I don’t need to rely on anyone’s estimate…

I have determined through my own observation and comparision with known thermite reactions that the WTC2 thermite charge was considerably less than 1m³.  I have previously provided reason for my estimation using the Thermite vs. Car video above for comparison (a little bit of thermite goes a long way), demonstrating why the flow was less than “tons”, and you were unable to show otherwise.  It is another area where you want to imagine a ‘problem’ that is in fact non-existent.

booNyzarC, on 12 April 2012 - 04:32 PM, said:

I'm not saying “you’re wrong, you’re wrong, you’re wrong”.  I'm saying that you can't definitively make the claim that it is molten steel (or iron, or whatever) based on the available evidence.  The available evidence is insufficient to make such a definitive determination.

Are you saying we could be right?

I can claim that the WTC2 flow is some form of 1,000^oC+ thermite reaction, because it matches that perfectly and deduction tells us it cannot be anything else.  That is why still no one has provided an ‘alternative’ that fits.

[Sky Scanner]

Q24, on 12 April 2012 - 06:32 PM, said:

Glass?  What, was there a whole glass factory up there?  

Don't know how it equated to each floor, but overall it was a bit more then your average glass factory, about 600,000 sq ft of glass in total..

Edited by The Sky Scanner, 12 April 2012 - 07:04 PM.

[Q24]

The Sky Scanner, on 12 April 2012 - 06:46 PM, said:

Don't know how it equated to each floor, but overall it was a bit more then your average glass factory, about 600,000 sq ft of glass in total..

Yes, throughout the whole 110 storey, 4,300,000 sq ft floor space tower.

Not in one location.

And I have a hunch that the windows in the impact zone/location of the WTC2 molten flow might have been blown out long before: -



Don’t you think?

Anyhow, if it were glass it’d be flowing out of the whole fire zone.

It isn’t glass.

[Sky Scanner]

Q24, on 12 April 2012 - 07:19 PM, said:

Yes, throughout the whole 110 storey, 4,300,000 sq ft floor space tower.

Not in one location.

And I have a hunch that the windows in the impact zone/location of the WTC2 molten flow might have been blown out long before: -



Don’t you think?

Anyhow, if it were glass it’d be flowing out of the whole fire zone.

It isn’t glass.

No that isn't throughout one tower, that's both towers, it's about 3,000 sq ft of glass per floor - which is a lot of glass.

But no it couldn't be glass, after all you just said it wasn't, and we all know your word is final.

That's that settled.

[and then]

Babe Ruth, on 12 April 2012 - 02:54 PM, said:

Your premise that thousands of government employees or elected officials were in on the planning or execution is flawed.

An intimate knowledge of how the system works was all that was required in order to manipulate the system for the desired results.

The unnamed fighter pilot who reported that he saw nothing at the Pentagon resembling 757 debris is an example of an honest report by an honest officer.  In all probability, his testimony was NOT heard or considered by the Commission.  Barbara Honegger worked for the Justice Dept, yet she tells little factoids of truth that are not included in the official reports.

It did not take thousands.

I've heard that airplanes were rerouted and replacement "drones" were used for the knock down.  What about their crews/passenegrs and families?  I've seen a doco. that shows how thermite works and how it would have to be strategically placed.  My words might have been a bit confusing.  I did not mean that thousands of government employees had to be aware.  But there WOULD have to be thousands of individuals aware that something was going on that day prior to the events.  In this country with a 24 hour news cycle and hundreds of reporters scrambling for every angle on the story of the decade, it is impossible that a conspiracy could be kept secret IMO.

[RaptorBites]

Q24, on 12 April 2012 - 06:32 PM, said:

In the picture of the vehicle, was the hood made up of the the same composition of steel used in WTC steel?  I mean it's great that thermite did destroy that poor car's hood, or at least made a hole, but to my understanding most vehicles outside of the actual frame is made mostly from aluminum.

For your theory that thermite was used to help bring down the towers then the immense amount of thermite needed in an uncontrolled environment to effectively cut/weaken steel beams would have been noticeable by the average person way before the impact happened.

I highly doubt this is the case.

[Babe Ruth]

and then, on 12 April 2012 - 07:54 PM, said:

I've heard that airplanes were rerouted and replacement "drones" were used for the knock down.  What about their crews/passenegrs and families?  I've seen a doco. that shows how thermite works and how it would have to be strategically placed.  My words might have been a bit confusing.  I did not mean that thousands of government employees had to be aware.  But there WOULD have to be thousands of individuals aware that something was going on that day prior to the events.  In this country with a 24 hour news cycle and hundreds of reporters scrambling for every angle on the story of the decade, it is impossible that a conspiracy could be kept secret IMO.

Since the theme was HIJACKING, I would suggest that what was hijacked that day was not airliners, but rather certain portions of the federal government.  Specifically, the NORAD and FAA interface, and the very radar systems that make up part of that interface.

The mechanism for the hijack was the training exercise Vigilant Guardian.

Once the hijack was accomplished, THEN many individuals, almost all innocent, became pawns in a rather elaborate chess game.  FAA and military controllers played roles in a well-planned game.  If you've ever participated in a military training exercise, you know what I mean.

[RaptorBites]

and then, on 12 April 2012 - 07:54 PM, said:

I've heard that airplanes were rerouted and replacement "drones" were used for the knock down. What about their crews/passenegrs and families?  I've seen a doco. that shows how thermite works and how it would have to be strategically placed.  My words might have been a bit confusing.  I did not mean that thousands of government employees had to be aware.  But there WOULD have to be thousands of individuals aware that something was going on that day prior to the events.  In this country with a 24 hour news cycle and hundreds of reporters scrambling for every angle on the story of the decade, it is impossible that a conspiracy could be kept secret IMO.

The quote in bold is what most CT believers cannot give an answer to.

The families of those individuals that died in those flights also claim their family members were on the plane.  Heck even some of them blame the US Government but have not claimed that their family member was still alive.

That is the part that I do not understand on why CT beleivers can justify their claim that the planes were switched by drones or the passenger lists were falsified.

*smh*

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

and then, on 12 April 2012 - 07:54 PM, said:

I've heard that airplanes were rerouted and replacement "drones" were used for the knock down.  What about their crews/passenegrs and families?  I've seen a doco. that shows how thermite works and how it would have to be strategically placed.  My words might have been a bit confusing.  I did not mean that thousands of government employees had to be aware.  But there WOULD have to be thousands of individuals aware that something was going on that day prior to the events.  In this country with a 24 hour news cycle and hundreds of reporters scrambling for every angle on the story of the decade, it is impossible that a conspiracy could be kept secret IMO.

That seems to be the thing with all these conspiracies; people are very happy to say how, in very great and painstaking detail for pages and pages and pages and pages, how it couldn't possibly have happened as the "Official Version" says, but they never seem to be quite so keen to explain, if you ever ask them, how they think it was done exactly, and what They did with the real planes/the real passengers or whatever, and why They would have taken such a gamble with whatever kind of technology they're suggesting (remotely piloted planes, holograms, whatever), which had never been tried publicly before, and has, it seems, never been used since, and how incredibly lucky they were that the whole enormous plan, with all this untried technology, worked perfectly the very first time they tried it. The sheer complexity of the plot, the way that everything fell into place exactly, and the fact that no one has ever come forward to claim that they were involved; it doesn't seem to me that all that might be more plausible than that hijackers of some form or other took control of four planes. Suppose that some Air Force personnel may have been involved, even in an incidental way, with experiments about remotely piloting a large commercial aircraft; have none of them ever put two and two together and, it dawning on them that the project they spent so long (and we know it must have been years) never seems to have seen daylight in any commercial or mainstream military application, perhaps there may have been some sinister end to it...? And taking the theory that the real planes were diverted to some Military Base, and the passengers then disposed of; not one person, having been involved in such a monstrosity, has ever come forward, has ever made any deathbed confession, that they were involved? I'm afraid that no amount of shouting "WAKE UP, SHEEPLE" can make that any more plausible.

[RaptorBites]

Babe Ruth, on 12 April 2012 - 08:10 PM, said:

Once the hijack was accomplished, THEN many individuals, almost all innocent, became pawns in a rather elaborate chess game.  FAA and military controllers played roles in a well-planned game.  If you've ever participated in a military training exercise, you know what I mean.

I have participated in military training and it is as real to a scenario as possible.  However, aside from you considering that this was a well planned military exercise, you still need to give an explanation on what happened to the passengers on the flights that crashed.  Without an explanation on that alone, your point is moot.

[Babe Ruth]

Raptor

The stories and details regarding the airplane passengers and crew, about 200 people, are very interesting if one studies them in detail, ESPECIALLY 10 years after.

But that observation aside, as a disinterested observer, one NEED NOT explain what happened to those people, assuming they even existed and boarded airplanes that day, IN ORDER TO understand that the Official Story is simply a lie.

Do you see what I mean?

Understanding that a bright and shining lie has been told DOES NOT require one to be able to explain every last detail of the lie.

If the lie has 10 elements, for example, if it can proven that 7 of those elements are false, then the lie is exposed, no matter the mysteries surrounding the other 3 elements.

Does that make any sense to you?