1667 replies to this topic

[joc]

skyeagle409, on 29 January 2013 - 10:12 PM, said:

Did pilots of the 911 hijacked airliners convey to ATC personnel that they lost control of their aircraft? What significance can you place on the fact that pilots did not indicate to ATC that they lost control over their aircraft?

I'm just going to venture out on a limb here and make an educated guess:  'cause they were dead?

[skyeagle409]

joc, on 29 January 2013 - 11:02 PM, said:

I'm just going to venture out on a limb here and make an educated guess:  'cause they were dead?

Yes!

If there was enough time, the pilots would have instantly reported a problem to ATC, such as loss of control of their aircraft, but there was no such communication conveyed to ground controllers. If an aircraft is hijacked, there is a special code the pilots can dial on the transponder which will notify ground controllers that the aircraft is being hijacked yet no such code was sent to ground controllers. That is an indication the hijackers acted very quickly and overpowered the pilots before they could take such action.

[flyingswan]

Babe Ruth, on 29 January 2013 - 08:20 PM, said:

Swan

I offered a comment regarding perhaps a common sense way to understand which metal comprises the molten metal, but unless I missed it, you did not respond.

My post #233.

Quote

And perhaps come to an understanding that Cahill might be right--the presence of iron particles MAY be the result of boiling metal?

Cahill does not mention either boiling metal or iron microspheres.  Cahill says that many metals were present and picks out vanadium, nickel and lead for special mention.

[Babe Ruth]

flyingswan, on 27 January 2013 - 05:30 PM, said:

I've no problem with Cahill, just with the people who misquote his results.
I refer you to my post #181.  Iron microspheres are a very common product of metal-working.  They don't need to be explained.  Just look at this photo of welding fume particles.
http://nanoparticlel...port.asp?ID=105

It's not a matter of the proportion of the metals, it's a matter of the temperatures in the fires.  Aluminium melts at a normal fire temperature, but you need really exceptional circumstances to provide the temperature to melt steel.  There is not a shred of evidence that such temperatures occurred.

OK, let's say there is not a shred of evidence that such temperatures occurred, though we both agree the molten metal existed.

Whatever the actual temperature, and let's say it actually was molten aluminum that everybody saw.

What energy source kept that aluminum in the molten state for 6 weeks?

And I guess you are suggesting that the iron particles present were all the result of people welding and cutting there at the pile?

[skyeagle409]

Babe Ruth, on 30 January 2013 - 01:48 PM, said:

OK, let's say there is not a shred of evidence that such temperatures occurred, though we both agree the molten metal existed. Whatever the actual temperature, and let's say it actually was molten aluminum that everybody saw. What energy source kept that aluminum in the molten state for 6 weeks?

Definitely had nothing to do with thermite or explosives.

[DONTEATUS]

It would be nice if everyone listened to the entire ATC tape you posted Skyeagle ! It dose show what confusion that day we had in the sky`s
And It shows just how we track the aircraft,and the people that work hard to protect our country !
Sad that theres anyone out there that thinks that It was a inside job ny our government ! Really Sad !
Just take a full listen to it ! You will learn that it really was the terriost !
Good find Skyeagle !

[flyingswan]

<p>

Babe Ruth, on 30 January 2013 - 01:48 PM, said:

What energy source kept that aluminum in the molten state for 6 weeks?

Combustion of the contents of some very large buildings.  Such long-lived fires are not unusual after a building collapse. A small hotel in the UK was still burning three days after it collapsed.  The La Fenice opera house in Venice burnt for over a fortnight.  Those buildings were tiny in comparison with WTC.

Quote

And I guess you are suggesting that the iron particles present were all the result of people welding and cutting there at the pile?

Not just the clear-up work.  As I said before, some could have been on site in undisturbed dust since the buildings were constructed, others added during maintenance and yet more from the violent grinding together of building components during the collapses.  They are common.

[Little Fish]

Babe Ruth, on 30 January 2013 - 01:48 PM, said:

OK, let's say there is not a shred of evidence that such temperatures occurred, though we both agree the molten metal existed.

Whatever the actual temperature, and let's say it actually was molten aluminum that everybody saw.

What energy source kept that aluminum in the molten state for 6 weeks?

And I guess you are suggesting that the iron particles present were all the result of people welding and cutting there at the pile?

the strongest evidence is the unreacted thermitic material found in the dust. the residue at 400C ignition produces those iron spheres with the same chemical fingerprint as those found by independent analysis, so you have an explanation for those microspheres which is fact not speculation which means either the samples were spiked with the unreacted thermitic material (given official reluctance to investigate this matter coupled with NISTs circular reasoning, I would say that is unlikely those samples were spiked), or, that unreacted material was in the towers as a means to destroy/burn them.

....and don't forget - they get paid per post.

[Czero 101]

Little Fish, on 30 January 2013 - 06:02 PM, said:

the strongest evidence is the unreacted thermitic material found in the dust.

You meant the "paint flecks" that were never positively identified as "super thermite", nor were they tested properly to see if they actually were thermite?

Quote

the residue at 400C ignition produces those iron spheres with the same chemical fingerprint as those found by independent analysis,

Is this the same "independent analysis" that didn't perform any actual tests to see if the material was actual thermite, and was "peer reviewed" by a pay-to-publish "journal" with a long and known history of bias and shady "review"policies...?

Quote

so you have an explanation for those microspheres which is fact not speculation which means either the samples were spiked with the unreacted thermitic material (given official reluctance to investigate this matter coupled with NISTs circular reasoning, I would say that is unlikely those samples were spiked), or, that unreacted material was in the towers as a means to destroy/burn them.

Either that or the more likely and plausible explanation that the material was actually rustproofing paint commonly found in steel-framed construction.

Quote

....and don't forget - they get paid per post.

Are you accusing someone here of being a "paid government disinfo agent"...?

Or are you referencing the shady "journal" that published the "independent analysis" you mention that - despite having been shown to be incomplete and biased - CT's seem to like to grab onto as fact and actual evidence that they believe validates their unfounded and unsupported "thermite / thermate / super thermite brought down the WTC" beliefs?






Cz

[Little Fish]

Czero 101, on 30 January 2013 - 07:16 PM, said:

Either that or the more likely and plausible explanation that the material was actually rustproofing paint commonly found in steel-framed construction.

why would they paint the steel with a substance that produces 1500 C molten iron at 400 C? that would be like making the furniture out of dynamite.

[Czero 101]

Little Fish, on 30 January 2013 - 07:28 PM, said:

why would they paint the steel with a substance that produces 1500 C molten iron at 400 C? that would be like making the furniture out of dynamite.

What exactly do you think fire retardant insulation is designed to do...?





Cz

[Babe Ruth]

Little Fish, on 30 January 2013 - 06:02 PM, said:

the strongest evidence is the unreacted thermitic material found in the dust. the residue at 400C ignition produces those iron spheres with the same chemical fingerprint as those found by independent analysis, so you have an explanation for those microspheres which is fact not speculation which means either the samples were spiked with the unreacted thermitic material (given official reluctance to investigate this matter coupled with NISTs circular reasoning, I would say that is unlikely those samples were spiked), or, that unreacted material was in the towers as a means to destroy/burn them.

....and don't forget - they get paid per post.

I'll bet some get paid by the year.

[Little Fish]

Czero 101, on 30 January 2013 - 07:51 PM, said:

What exactly do you think fire retardant insulation is designed to do...?

go on...
no wait, don't bother.

[skyeagle409]

Little Fish, on 30 January 2013 - 06:02 PM, said:

the strongest evidence is the unreacted thermitic material found in the dust. the residue at 400C ignition produces those iron spheres with the same chemical fingerprint as those found by independent analysis, so you have an explanation for those microspheres which is fact not speculation which means either the samples were spiked with the unreacted thermitic material (given official reluctance to investigate this matter coupled with NISTs circular reasoning, I would say that is unlikely those samples were spiked), or, that unreacted material was in the towers as a means to destroy/burn them.

....and don't forget - they get paid per post.

Thermite was not responsible for the collapse of the WTC buildings. Thermite has been discredited by demolition, civil engineers and architectural experts and it was determined that fire, not thermite, was responsible for the collapse of the WTC buildings, which was evident as the WTC buildings buckled.

The force of the aircraft impacts was unable to bring down the WTC buildings so what makes 911 conspiracist think that thermite was responsible, especially in the absence of evidence? No thermite cuts were found on the steel columns and thermite alone would have been unable to bring down the WTC buildings without high explosives.

Quote

Debunking 9/11 Myths': Nano-thermite dust found near Ground Zero

Five myths debunked and briefly shot down by Meigs include:

• Air defenses were ordered to stand down
  
• Missile/military jet struck the Pentagon
  
• Flight 93 was hit by air-to air missile
  
• Building 7 was professionally demolished
  
• Active thermitic material was discovered

http://www.examiner....ear-ground-zero

http://www.examiner....ear-ground-zero

[Q24]

Czero 101, on 30 January 2013 - 07:16 PM, said:

You meant the "paint flecks" that were never positively identified as "super thermite", nor were they tested properly to see if they actually were thermite?

Is this the same "independent analysis" that didn't perform any actual tests to see if the material was actual thermite, and was "peer reviewed" by a pay-to-publish "journal" with a long and known history of bias and shady "review"policies...?

You rather miss the point.  It doesn’t even matter if this did turn out to be non-thermite ‘paint flecks’.  The fact is that the material produces a high temperature reaction resulting in molten iron.  Whether of an innocent or reprehensible nature, the presence of such material in the towers could conceivably go some way to explain initiation of the collapses and should have been fully considered by the official investigation.