Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4
MysteryX

If you were under 15 on 9/11 click here

1,212 posts in this topic

Gee be quiet already, you have bored me with your apathy. I could careless who you responded to. You are spineless self server of yourself, your reality is the game you play on yourself. If you got something to say disproving the molten steel coming out of the tower then say it or get the hell out of this conversation. The proof is clear 9/11 was not a conspiracy but cold blooded murder.

Well you've said at least on factual thing in this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Outstanding analysis!

As has been the case from the start, the Europeans are way ahead of the US in understanding what DID NOT happen that day. So too the Japanese Diet and elements of the Russian press.

Thanks very much for the video MysteryX. I had seen some parts, but not others.

That so many americans cling to the sophistry that is the Official Conspiracy Theory is testimony to the effectiveness of the government's skill at manipulating the public perception.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What we are seeing is a thermite charge used to bring the building down.

Couple of problems with that idea. The colour corresponds to a much lower temperature than thermite and, with no indication that the flow is cutting downwards through any part of the building structure, it is rather ineffective for thermite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and by the way, just to spare you some confusion later... BooNy isn't really an Omnipotent Entity (no offense, BooNy :blush: )... that's just the automatically generated title his post count has earned.

Cz

But... but... but... :cry:

Awww dangit. <_<

:P

Well think about that for a moment for yourself. There is only one material in the entire tower that will flow with orange hue glow. You don't need a building material list from the enginners for that. Why. because it is simple there was only one material that could melt that way in the tower, only steel. That's the problem with many of you, you are always looking for some complicated answer that explains this simple fact away.

Only molten steel.

So essentially you are assuming that it was molten steel, because you can't think of a different material which could fit. That's alright by the way. We are all allowed to make assumptions. I'm not saying that your assumption is correct or incorrect, but it may be wise to recognize that until the actual facts of a thing have been established irrefutably, assumptions can fall on either side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boo

You guys have not yet made the case that it is anything OTHER THAN steel. It has taken months just to see you admit that it even existed.

Have you guys no measure of common sense at all? :wacko:

What other metals, in sufficient quantity, were present to account for that? Remember, we all know that aluminum melts quickly and then solidifies quickly.

The presence of sulfur and barium are huge clues as to thermate.

Frankly, I think it is quite plausible that tactical nuclear devices were employed too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boo

You guys have not yet made the case that it is anything OTHER THAN steel.

Erm... there have been plenty of alternatives put forward. Have you not seen any of them?

It has taken months just to see you admit that it even existed.

Erm... when have I ever denied that there was a flow of molten material?

Have you guys no measure of common sense at all? :wacko:

I guess we can't all have the same measure of common sense that you miraculously possess...

:unsure2:

What other metals, in sufficient quantity, were present to account for that? Remember, we all know that aluminum melts quickly and then solidifies quickly.

There were plenty of materials in there which could account for the flow.

The presence of sulfur and barium are huge clues as to thermate.

And you detected this from the videos and photographs of the flow how exactly?

Frankly, I think it is quite plausible that tactical nuclear devices were employed too.

Oh my... :rolleyes:

It must have been a new fandangled nuclear device with no radiation that the secret gummint has been hiding. Yes?

:no:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First we hear about the explosive squibs that "explain" the bursts of smoke/dust coming from random windows as the towers collapse. Now it's thermite charges that leave a (single, isolated) stream of molten material at one location. Were such measures really necessary to bring down the buildings after the plane impacts? Were they both used? Was this the plan?

I'm surprised none of the conspirators have come forward, ala "wikileaks". There had to be a lot of them with this 4 plane conspiracy, plus the teams involved in preping the targets. The idea of an air defense standown is ignorant, if you were in the business in the post-cold war days, you'd know this fact.

Yes, there a lot of seeming curiosities in the situation that day, but I find a lot more disconnects in the conspiracy theories. And I was over 15 that morning, so I understood what was happening as soon as that second plane hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Couple of problems with that idea. The colour corresponds to a much lower temperature than thermite and, with no indication that the flow is cutting downwards through any part of the building structure, it is rather ineffective for thermite.

Your excuses are just as stupid as the last time you were corrected on them.

  1. The colour is an ideal match: -
    ethg2.jpg
    Spot the difference – not a lot.
  2. Thermite can flow over surfaces: -

    Here it flows over and through a car bonnet.
    At the WTC the surface was a concrete floor which would be further difficult to penetrate.

Erm... there have been plenty of alternatives put forward. Have you not seen any of them?

The WTC2 flow is a perfect match to thermite in every regard.

There are no alternatives. If you provide what you think is an alternative, I’ll let you know why it is not. OCT’s consistently come out with, “oh there must be an alternative answer” for no other reason than they desperately want it to be so, without ever being able to actually provide one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Here is something to consider. I used to have one of the versions of microsofts flight simulator. The physics were supposed to be very realistic. One of the "missions" on that simulator was landing at o'hare in chicago. I decided to hit a building instead. I tried multiple times and even came close on a couple of attempts. To hit that vector perfectly at the speeds it takes to keep a plane airborne for someone with no flight experience is nearly impossible. so to hit not just one tower but both? Unlikely. and then a third plane manages to exactly run into a five story building without overshooting or hitting the ground beforehand? Laughable. I don't have the answers but the official version is definetly not true.

Edited by OverSword

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hang on...

The video said the thermite melted thought the engine block, but just showed a hole in the hood. Show us the melted engine block.

Can we see something that shows thermite being used in a CD against massive I beams/box beams (of WTC scale)?

I suspect it would take enormous amounts, if it worked at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is something to consider. I used to have one of the versions of microsofts flight simulator. The physics were supposed to be very realistic. One of the "missions" on that simulator was landing at o'hare in chicago. I decided to hit a building instead. I tried multiple times and even came close on a couple of attempts. To hit that vector perfectly at the speeds it takes to keep a plane airborne for someone with no flight experience is nearly impossible. so to hit not just one tower but both? Unlikely. and then a third plane manages to exactly run into a five story building without overshooting or hitting the ground beforehand? Laughable. I don't have the answers but the official version is definetly not true.

Outstanding, I love people that state "no flight experience is nearly impossible". You are using the wrong verbage, "improbable" is more likely.

Then again there were some extra-ordinary things that happened that day does not make them impossible in the least.

Just like the reply to MysteryX, you are entitled to your assuptions but then again just by saying "if I can't do it then obviously it can't be done" is very weak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Outstanding, I love people that state "no flight experience is nearly impossible". You are using the wrong verbage, "improbable" is more likely.

Way to knitpick. You really prove your point. :rolleyes:

You're obviously correct. It should be fairly easy for someone who has never flown before to exactly hit a relativley small target while under extremely stressfull circumstances. How silly of me.

But on the serious side I recomend you give it a try yourself. Go download microsofts flight simulator and give it a try. Otherwise you can just stick with correcting my verbage because that's the important part, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Can we see something that shows thermite being used in a CD against massive I beams/box beams (of WTC scale)?

I don’t think so but the centre image of the five I posted above shows how a small, extremely crude thermite device can cut a steel beam in an engineer’s back garden. Now if we imagine a slightly larger device, more technologically advanced, ejecting military grade thermite and doing so in multiple bursts, it’s going to cut through or severely weaken any size/thickness of steel.

I know…

You can have as much jet fuel and office combustibles as you like, along with a lighter.

I’ll have a thermal/thermite lance.

Let’s see who can cut through or weaken a 5” thick steel column first.

Edited by Q24

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Boo

Yes, I've seen the alternatives you and others have offered regarding which metal was molten. The trouble is sir, that neither you nor the other 'debunkers' have managed to put forth any sort of persuasive argument to support those alternatives.

Your claim that plenty of other metals might have been involved is fine, IF ONLY you could make a case. You cannot.

Sulfur and Barium were detected in the dust, as sampled by the lady in her apartment, and at other locations in Manhattan gathered by ordinary citizens who DO NOT WORK FOR THE GOVERNMENT.

Possession of common sense is not miraculous sir. Study the etiology of the term. It is "common" sense, not "miraculous" sense. :yes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're pretty well lined up, hitting things isn't that difficult in FS at high speed. But, either way, FS isn't real world. You'll note that the WTC2 plane made a late course correction before impact, making an off-center, banked impact. This likely resulted in more damage (more floors and external) and the earlier collapse.

Using FS flying as a yardstick isn't necessarily accurate...though it does replicate a lot of the physics pretty well. Meanwhile, they didn't have to land the thing, and that's where the flying sense comes in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hang on...

The video said the thermite melted thought the engine block, but just showed a hole in the hood. Show us the melted engine block.

Can we see something that shows thermite being used in a CD against massive I beams/box beams (of WTC scale)?

I suspect it would take enormous amounts, if it worked at all.

You won't be granted any evidence that you are asking for. I think sometimes they fail to grasp how many TONS of thermite/thermate it would have taken to do any considerable damage to the beams in question. All you will hear is that they found the compounds needed to make thermate/thermite... nevermind the fact that those compounds are also found in the paint/sealant used on the steal beams.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dredimus

Can you imagine how easy it might be to place that thermate if the outfit that ran security at the complex were owned by a friend? :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BusDriver

Your comments above regarding landing an airplane, and other aeronautical maneuvers, suggest you are a pilot. What sort of licenses or experience do you have?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The video offered by MysteryX was informative.

I never realized that the FBI had siezed 86 cameras that day. I had previously thought it was only the 1 at Doubletree Hotel. Busy boys, those FBI types.... :yes:

I never realized that General Larry Arnold had ordered one of his fighter types to check out the Pentagon, and that the pilot had reported that he saw no sign of a crashed Boeing there. :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're pretty well lined up, hitting things isn't that difficult in FS at high speed. But, either way, FS isn't real world. You'll note that the WTC2 plane made a late course correction before impact, making an off-center, banked impact. This likely resulted in more damage (more floors and external) and the earlier collapse.

Using FS flying as a yardstick isn't necessarily accurate...though it does replicate a lot of the physics pretty well. Meanwhile, they didn't have to land the thing, and that's where the flying sense comes in.

Yeah, but I'll wager that real world is more difficult than ms flight simulator. But forget the towers and think about the difficulty of hitting the pentagon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dredimus

Can you imagine how easy it might be to place that thermate if the outfit that ran security at the complex were owned by a friend? :ph34r:

I wish I had as much faith as you have in a small element of associated agencies being able to pull these many elements of this conspiracy off. No offence intended to my fellow US posters, but with the absolute exception of your space agency(ies), I just don't think you're competent enough to be able to pull a major conspiracy like this off...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I don't think so but the centre image of the five I posted above shows how a small, extremely crude thermite device can cut a steel beam in an engineer's back garden.

It has been estimated that it would have taken thousands upon thousands of tons of thermite to bring down a WTC tower. I even posted on another thread an experiment where 175 pounds of thermite was unable to burn through a steel box beam.

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your excuses are just as stupid as the last time you were corrected on them.

Your claims are just as unfounded as the last time you made them.

The colour is an ideal match: -

Yeah, yeah, just make a claim and don't back it up. In every picture the centre is washed out white, but the thermite is still near-white at the far end of each flow, while the WTC flow rapidly becomes reddish.

At the WTC the surface was a concrete floor which would be further difficult to penetrate.

That's a pretty dubious claim from someone who's just posted a picture of thermite apparently cutting through a block of concrete.

The WTC2 flow is a perfect match to thermite in every regard.

It's amazing how easily some people confirm their own beliefs. Never mind the wrong colour, no damage, and volume of material much greater than your suggested thermite charge. That's what you want to believe, so ignore all that.

There are no alternatives. If you provide what you think is an alternative, I’ll let you know why it is not.

The two top proposals for alternatives are a mixture of aluminium and other building debris or lead from the battery room which was right where the flow originates. Both match the colour and lack of damage to the building much better than thermite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sky Scanner

No offence taken.

Consider the low occupancy rate at WTC, and consider that several of the major tenants had very close connections with the White House. For example, a tenant occupying 6 of the 8 floors involved in one of the impact zones went on shortly thereafter to become the head of the Coalition Provisional Authority in Iraq. That would be Paul Bremer, acolyte of Henry Kissinger, who was Bush's first choice to head up what became the 911 Commission.

Consider the company providing security for the WTC towers, and that a Bush son was involved in that company.

Consider that the towers had been under some sort of maintenance projects for many months before, and the weekend before, according to a Brit who worked there, the entire electrical grid in the towers was shut down--tenants had been advised.

The closer one looks, the more one finds. :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish I had as much faith as you have in a small element of associated agencies being able to pull these many elements of this conspiracy off. No offence intended to my fellow US posters, but with the absolute exception of your space agency(ies), I just don't think you're competent enough to be able to pull a major conspiracy like this off...

Yet, in the Lavon Affair, there is an on record case of the Mossad planting explosives to be blamed on Muslims.

The man who recommended privatisation of the WTC.

The man who oversaw the 2001 sale of the WTC.

The WTC owner himself.

The five agents arrested on the morning for celebrating the WTC collapses.

The man with links to all the above who described 9/11 as “good” for Israel.

What did these individuals have in common… ?

All Jewish.

Heck one of the ‘hijackers’ had a relative working as an Israeli informant.

It was not U.S. ‘agencies’. Only isolated elements in the U.S. were involved. The main bulk of the operation was carried out by foreign intelligence with the blessing of U.S. Neocons who wanted a “new Pearl Harbor” pretext to drive their agenda. Lewis Eisenberg, one of the Jewish individuals I referred to above, even did them the favour of comparing the attack to “Pearl Harbor” on the very day of 9/11.

Listen: -

“They did it. I have had long conversations over the past two weeks with contacts at the Army War College, at its headquarters, Marine Corps and I made it absolutely clear in both cases that it is 100 percent certain that 9/11 was a Mossad operation. Period.”

~Dr. Alan Sabrosky, former Director of Studies at the U.S. Army War College - 2010

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 4

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.