Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe

[Modelworks]

What the CT don't like to admit is that it would have been much easier to just plant explosives and set them off and show a video from terrorist claiming they did it, than it would be to use planes and alter filght data recorders, make fake phone calls, etc.


I also believe the founder and still owner of the worlds leading demolition company who said it was NOT caused by any type of explosive charges he has seen in his career.

This is a man that has used explosives to bring down stadiums, casinos , sky scrapers, nuclear power cooling towers, and hundreds of other structures. I think he has seen and done more in that area than anyone in the world. He knows how buildings fall better than any engineer.

Just look at the companies web site to see the stuff they have brought down. If that guy says it wasn't rigged, it wasn't.
http://www.dykon-explosivedemolition.com/

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: kylebisme

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
Your giagantic pile was pulverized. One could see in the original vidoes, of the dust being created and thrown into the air as the buildings collapsed.
Take a concrete block and drop another onto it. When it shatters the peices are not able to match beck together. There will be cement dust that has fallen to the ground and/or blown away.

Like I said, the collapses look rather quick for that, and the pile looks awful small for such large buildings. were it simply floors falling on floors, I'd expect something similar to the effects of earthquakes rather than the buildings dustifying from top to bottom as they did.

By the time 3 or 4 floors fell; those floors coming down on the lower floors and also with no structural support of the above floors (creating increased downward mass) would be coming closer to free fall for the lower 80+ floors. Each one adding mass to break the structural integrity of those that were below.

Take a cinder block up a couple of stories and drop it onto a hard surface.

Then perform the same test with 3-4 blocks at the same time. Look at the result of the first couple of blocks. Very little will be there in a solid pieces.

Bring a vacum cleaner and a broom - you will need it.

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: kylebisme

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
Your giagantic pile was pulverized. One could see in the original vidoes, of the dust being created and thrown into the air as the buildings collapsed.
Take a concrete block and drop another onto it. When it shatters the peices are not able to match beck together. There will be cement dust that has fallen to the ground and/or blown away.

Like I said, the collapses look rather quick for that, and the pile looks awful small for such large buildings. were it simply floors falling on floors, I'd expect something similar to the effects of earthquakes rather than the buildings dustifying from top to bottom as they did.

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: kylebisme
You are conflating, projecting the views of others onto event8horizon to suggest he insulted what he never did.

He damn sure did. He claimed that possibly the planning was in the works for a long time. Since truthers believe the government was behind 9/11 that means that Clinton must have been in on it as well. There is no other alternative, but considering your lack of critical thinking skills I doubt you're able to figure that out.

Again, just because others think the "the government" as a whole was in on the attacks doesn't make anything event8horizon suggested an implication of any administration.

What do you base these expectations on? How many 100+ story buildings have you ever seen collapse? What YOU think is completely irrelevant because you have no basis to determine what a building collapse should look like. It's very clear you've put almost no thought into this conspiracy and simply want to believe.

The buildings didn't "dustify." Have you actually ever been to ground zero? Ever seen any pictures? For the love of god, stop just saying things and hoping they're true. They aren't.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: kylebisme

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
Your giagantic pile was pulverized. One could see in the original vidoes, of the dust being created and thrown into the air as the buildings collapsed.
Take a concrete block and drop another onto it. When it shatters the peices are not able to match beck together. There will be cement dust that has fallen to the ground and/or blown away.

Like I said, the collapses look rather quick for that, and the pile looks awful small for such large buildings. were it simply floors falling on floors, I'd expect something similar to the effects of earthquakes rather than the buildings dustifying from top to bottom as they did.

How are the piles small? Small compared to what?

http://www.stevespak.com/fires/manhattan/wtc3.html

Those photos are 2 months after 9/11. So much for the "There was a quick cleanup" claim, eh?

Again, just because others think the "the government" as a whole was in on the attacks doesn't make anything event8horizon suggested an implication of any administration.

When did event8horizon appoint you as his public spokesman? I must have missed the announcement.

 

[FaaR]

Originally posted by: event8horizon
that is where bazant et el comes in with the crush down theory. now what this author is presenting is that collapse arrest should have happened.

Should have?

It's kinda amazing what happens when someone tries to reason (whilst applying his own personal bias to any logic that may or may not exist in his arguments) with actual historical facts.

You can't REASON with what was seen by millions of people, real-time, both with their own eyes and recorded through video cameras.

No doubt there WERE slow movements in the structure before the final, sudden collapse, but due to the enormous height of the buildings and the fires inside them, nobody survived to give any accounts of what exactly happened inside.

 

[KlokWyze]

What fuels these theories is the alarming amount of anomalies that were particular to that day coupled with the obvious use of the event in order to push war & legislation. For a person to not @ least be suspicious (just a little bit) after just looking over basic information on this day is incredibly inept. There are people who immediate say inside job without looking @ much information & there are people who rationalize even the most obviously suspicious aspects of the event in ridiculous ways... constantly changing their rationalizations to suit whatever state of argument they are in.

How many of you can look @ the collapse of building 7 & not see controlled demolition? I'm not saying it is & I'm not saying it isn't. It's just the mirror image of a professional controlled demotion & the reaction from the blindly pro authority people is just "that is absolutely definitely not a controlled demotion ('because the government told me so')". Statement in the parenthesis is the thought to go along with the spoken part.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: KlokWyze
What fuels these theories is the alarming amount of anomalies that were particular to that day coupled with the obvious use of the event in order to push war & legislation. For a person to not @ least be suspicious (just a little bit) after just looking over basic information on this day is incredibly inept. There are people who immediate say inside job without looking @ much information & there are people who rationalize even the most obviously suspicious aspects of the event in ridiculous ways... constantly changing their rationalizations to suit whatever state of argument they are in.

How many of you can look @ the collapse of building 7 & not see controlled demolition? I'm not saying it is & I'm not saying it isn't. It's just the mirror image of a professional controlled demotion & the reaction from the blindly pro authority people is just "that is absolutely definitely not a controlled demotion ('because the government told me so')". Statement in the parenthesis is the thought to go along with the spoken part.

What fuels these theories is an overload of paranoia causing people to look for things that aren't there in the first place so they concoct all sorts of wacked out theories to make the evidence fit their preconcieved paranoias instead of making the theory fit the evidence. That's why the conpsiracy theories are all over the place ranging from thermite to micro-nukes to giant holograms and mass hypnosis. The preponderance of solid evidence makes it very clear what happened on 9/11, at least to anyone who bothers to take the entire gamut of evidence into account. The conspiracy theorists have ZERO evidence because "looks like" and "sounds like" do not constitute solid evidence in the first place.

 

[wwswimming]

Originally posted by: event8horizon
well, its about time they came out with this. prof jones and company put this out just a few days ago. seems like jones sent some of his red chip thermite to different labs yrs ago. for those inquiring minds:

Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe

pp.7-31 (25)

Authors: Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley, Bradley R. Larsen

round of applause for Event Horizon !

for having the nerve to discuss forbidden subjects in P&N.

 

[SP33Demon]

/chuckles at the nuts who are still interested in this topic.

 

[CLite]

Originally posted by: wwswimming

Originally posted by: event8horizon
well, its about time they came out with this. prof jones and company put this out just a few days ago. seems like jones sent some of his red chip thermite to different labs yrs ago. for those inquiring minds:

Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe

pp.7-31 (25)

Authors: Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley, Bradley R. Larsen

round of applause for Event Horizon !

for having the nerve to discuss forbidden subjects in P&N.

forbidden? Do you see anyone locking topics? We are too busy laughing at your stupidity, I can't believe this post is still carrying on. TLC has already posted a very informative website that does some good analysis work. The debunking 911 one..... if you cared about this topic at all you would take the time to read that site indepth. What they do is actual scientific and engineering investigative work, what the loonies do is pick apart one single photograph or video clip and go on and on about it ignoring all the other evidence.

 

[event8horizon]

Originally posted by: CLite

Originally posted by: wwswimming

Originally posted by: event8horizon
well, its about time they came out with this. prof jones and company put this out just a few days ago. seems like jones sent some of his red chip thermite to different labs yrs ago. for those inquiring minds:

Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe

pp.7-31 (25)

Authors: Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley, Bradley R. Larsen

round of applause for Event Horizon !

for having the nerve to discuss forbidden subjects in P&N.

forbidden? Do you see anyone locking topics? We are too busy laughing at your stupidity, I can't believe this post is still carrying on. TLC has already posted a very informative website that does some good analysis work. The debunking 911 one..... if you cared about this topic at all you would take the time to read that site indepth. What they do is actual scientific and engineering investigative work, what the loonies do is pick apart one single photograph or video clip and go on and on about it ignoring all the other evidence.

maybe u just dont get it. did u read the journal article that proves that a material in the wtc dust reacts at 430C to produce enough heat to melt the iron content in the material to form iron microspheres. if u want to call it paint, then i bet u money this stuff would NOT pass new york codes. and from that line of thought, we need to find who made this stuff and could it be in any more buildings. some people talk about the fires in the towers. well just picture this stuff spayed on/painted on/wrapped on the wtc steel. iron melts at a hotter temp than steel......are u getting the picture.

try reading the article again-
http://www.bentham-open.org/pa...02/00000001/7TOCPJ.SGM

"Abstract: We have discovered distinctive red/gray chips in all the samples we have studied of the dust produced by the
destruction of the World Trade Center. Examination of four of these samples, collected from separate sites, is reported in
this paper. These red/gray chips show marked similarities in all four samples. One sample was collected by a Manhattan
resident about ten minutes after the collapse of the second WTC Tower, two the next day, and a fourth about a week later.
The properties of these chips were analyzed using optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray energy
dispersive spectroscopy (XEDS), and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC). The red material contains grains approximately
100 nm across which are largely iron oxide, while aluminum is contained in tiny plate-like structures. Separation
of components using methyl ethyl ketone demonstrated that elemental aluminum is present. The iron oxide and aluminum
are intimately mixed in the red material. When ignited in a DSC device the chips exhibit large but narrow exotherms occurring
at approximately 430 °C, far below the normal ignition temperature for conventional thermite. Numerous iron-rich
spheres are clearly observed in the residue following the ignition of these peculiar red/gray chips. The red portion of these
chips is found to be an unreacted thermitic material and highly energetic."

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: KlokWyze
It's just the mirror image of a professional controlled demotion & the reaction from the blindly pro authority people is just "that is absolutely definitely not a controlled demotion ('because the government told me so')". Statement in the parenthesis is the thought to go along with the spoken part.

I rely on the opinion of people that know what they are talking about. The guy I posted about earlier said it was NOT a controlled explosion. He is a very down to earth guy and I doubt he is part of some cover up. If someone who has blown up hundreds of structures says it isn't done with explosives, I tend to believe them.

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: event8horizon


maybe u just dont get it. did u read the journal article that proves that a material in the wtc dust reacts at 430C to produce enough heat to melt the iron content in the material to form iron microspheres. if u want to call it paint, then i bet u money this stuff would NOT pass new york codes. and from that line of thought, we need to find who made this stuff and could it be in any more buildings. some people talk about the fires in the towers. well just picture this stuff spayed on/painted on/wrapped on the wtc steel. iron melts at a hotter temp than steel......are u getting the picture.

I'm curious as to how people think this 'thermite' was distributed in the building. Did no workers notice guys applying it to everything ? They have already said that the fire proofing paint that was supposed to be applied to all the steel was not applied on some areas because the contractor was pushed for time. The idea that they applied 'thermite' instead of fire retardant is funny.

The retardant they use does not contain the metals from their 'analysis". It is made up of compounds designed to burn. The burning creates carbon, carbon is an excellent insulator of heat.

 

[event8horizon]

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: KlokWyze
It's just the mirror image of a professional controlled demotion & the reaction from the blindly pro authority people is just "that is absolutely definitely not a controlled demotion ('because the government told me so')". Statement in the parenthesis is the thought to go along with the spoken part.

I rely on the opinion of people that know what they are talking about. The guy I posted about earlier said it was NOT a controlled explosion. He is a very down to earth guy and I doubt he is part of some cover up. If someone who has blown up hundreds of structures says it isn't done with explosives, I tend to believe them.

email the guy and ask if he ever worked with nanothermite.

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: event8horizon

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: KlokWyze
It's just the mirror image of a professional controlled demotion & the reaction from the blindly pro authority people is just "that is absolutely definitely not a controlled demotion ('because the government told me so')". Statement in the parenthesis is the thought to go along with the spoken part.

I rely on the opinion of people that know what they are talking about. The guy I posted about earlier said it was NOT a controlled explosion. He is a very down to earth guy and I doubt he is part of some cover up. If someone who has blown up hundreds of structures says it isn't done with explosives, I tend to believe them.

email the guy and ask if he ever worked with nanothermite.

As soon as you tell me how they applied it to the building without any of the hundreds of construction workers noticing it.

Thermite also does not explode, not ever. It burns. It also takes extreme temps to even ignite. So unless every square inch of the steel was at extreme temps, there would be patches, large areas on the steel that still had it intact.

 

[event8horizon]

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: event8horizon


maybe u just dont get it. did u read the journal article that proves that a material in the wtc dust reacts at 430C to produce enough heat to melt the iron content in the material to form iron microspheres. if u want to call it paint, then i bet u money this stuff would NOT pass new york codes. and from that line of thought, we need to find who made this stuff and could it be in any more buildings. some people talk about the fires in the towers. well just picture this stuff spayed on/painted on/wrapped on the wtc steel. iron melts at a hotter temp than steel......are u getting the picture.

I'm curious as to how people think this 'thermite' was distributed in the building. Did no workers notice guys applying it to everything ? They have already said that the fire proofing paint that was supposed to be applied to all the steel was not applied on some areas because the contractor was pushed for time. The idea that they applied 'thermite' instead of fire retardant is funny.

The retardant they use does not contain the metals from their 'analysis". It is made up of compounds designed to burn. The burning creates carbon, carbon is an excellent insulator of heat.

"There appears to be a remarkable correlation between the floors upgraded for fireproofing in the WTC towers, in the years preceding 9/11/01, and the floors of impact, fire and failure. The fireproofing upgrades would have allowed for shutdown of the affected floors, and the exposure of the floor assemblies and the columns for a significant period of time. Exactly what work was done during that time?"
http://www.911blogger.com/node/13272

 

[Modelworks]

Originally posted by: event8horizon

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: event8horizon


maybe u just dont get it. did u read the journal article that proves that a material in the wtc dust reacts at 430C to produce enough heat to melt the iron content in the material to form iron microspheres. if u want to call it paint, then i bet u money this stuff would NOT pass new york codes. and from that line of thought, we need to find who made this stuff and could it be in any more buildings. some people talk about the fires in the towers. well just picture this stuff spayed on/painted on/wrapped on the wtc steel. iron melts at a hotter temp than steel......are u getting the picture.

I'm curious as to how people think this 'thermite' was distributed in the building. Did no workers notice guys applying it to everything ? They have already said that the fire proofing paint that was supposed to be applied to all the steel was not applied on some areas because the contractor was pushed for time. The idea that they applied 'thermite' instead of fire retardant is funny.

The retardant they use does not contain the metals from their 'analysis". It is made up of compounds designed to burn. The burning creates carbon, carbon is an excellent insulator of heat.

"There appears to be a remarkable correlation between the floors upgraded for fireproofing in the WTC towers, in the years preceding 9/11/01, and the floors of impact, fire and failure. The fireproofing upgrades would have allowed for shutdown of the affected floors, and the exposure of the floor assemblies and the columns for a significant period of time. Exactly what work was done during that time?"
http://www.911blogger.com/node/13272

uhm, maybe they actually applied fire retardant to the floors most likely to cause structural failure in a fire ?

The one thing these people do not answer is, if there is a way to combine thermite and fire retardant together and apply it to steel, then melt the steel like they say, then have it produce these 'chips', why haven't they re-created it ?

It is a simple experiment, make up this mystery paint and apply it to an old steel structure. Heat it up to ignite and test the results.

Whats that ? They cant ?

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: event8horizon

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: event8horizon


maybe u just dont get it. did u read the journal article that proves that a material in the wtc dust reacts at 430C to produce enough heat to melt the iron content in the material to form iron microspheres. if u want to call it paint, then i bet u money this stuff would NOT pass new york codes. and from that line of thought, we need to find who made this stuff and could it be in any more buildings. some people talk about the fires in the towers. well just picture this stuff spayed on/painted on/wrapped on the wtc steel. iron melts at a hotter temp than steel......are u getting the picture.

I'm curious as to how people think this 'thermite' was distributed in the building. Did no workers notice guys applying it to everything ? They have already said that the fire proofing paint that was supposed to be applied to all the steel was not applied on some areas because the contractor was pushed for time. The idea that they applied 'thermite' instead of fire retardant is funny.

The retardant they use does not contain the metals from their 'analysis". It is made up of compounds designed to burn. The burning creates carbon, carbon is an excellent insulator of heat.

"There appears to be a remarkable correlation between the floors upgraded for fireproofing in the WTC towers, in the years preceding 9/11/01, and the floors of impact, fire and failure. The fireproofing upgrades would have allowed for shutdown of the affected floors, and the exposure of the floor assemblies and the columns for a significant period of time. Exactly what work was done during that time?"
http://www.911blogger.com/node/13272

The guys fudges his numbers on the impact zones and this "remarkable correlation" neglects to acknowledge that only 1 upgraded floor of WTC2 was in the impact zone (floor 78).

btw, only the floor trusses were originally fireproofed and eventually upgraded, not the columns. That's why you don't see fireproofing on any of the columns in any pictures of the WTC debris. So how were the towers brought down by thermite if none of the columns, the primary support structures of the buildings, had no thermite on them?

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: event8horizon

Originally posted by: CLite

Originally posted by: wwswimming

Originally posted by: event8horizon
well, its about time they came out with this. prof jones and company put this out just a few days ago. seems like jones sent some of his red chip thermite to different labs yrs ago. for those inquiring minds:

Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe

pp.7-31 (25)

Authors: Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley, Bradley R. Larsen

round of applause for Event Horizon !

for having the nerve to discuss forbidden subjects in P&N.

forbidden? Do you see anyone locking topics? We are too busy laughing at your stupidity, I can't believe this post is still carrying on. TLC has already posted a very informative website that does some good analysis work. The debunking 911 one..... if you cared about this topic at all you would take the time to read that site indepth. What they do is actual scientific and engineering investigative work, what the loonies do is pick apart one single photograph or video clip and go on and on about it ignoring all the other evidence.

maybe u just dont get it. did u read the journal article that proves that a material in the wtc dust reacts at 430C to produce enough heat to melt the iron content in the material to form iron microspheres. if u want to call it paint, then i bet u money this stuff would NOT pass new york codes. and from that line of thought, we need to find who made this stuff and could it be in any more buildings. some people talk about the fires in the towers. well just picture this stuff spayed on/painted on/wrapped on the wtc steel. iron melts at a hotter temp than steel......are u getting the picture.

try reading the article again-
http://www.bentham-open.org/pa...02/00000001/7TOCPJ.SGM

"Abstract: We have discovered distinctive red/gray chips in all the samples we have studied of the dust produced by the
destruction of the World Trade Center. Examination of four of these samples, collected from separate sites, is reported in
this paper. These red/gray chips show marked similarities in all four samples. One sample was collected by a Manhattan
resident about ten minutes after the collapse of the second WTC Tower, two the next day, and a fourth about a week later.
The properties of these chips were analyzed using optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray energy
dispersive spectroscopy (XEDS), and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC). The red material contains grains approximately
100 nm across which are largely iron oxide, while aluminum is contained in tiny plate-like structures. Separation
of components using methyl ethyl ketone demonstrated that elemental aluminum is present. The iron oxide and aluminum
are intimately mixed in the red material. When ignited in a DSC device the chips exhibit large but narrow exotherms occurring
at approximately 430 °C, far below the normal ignition temperature for conventional thermite. Numerous iron-rich
spheres are clearly observed in the residue following the ignition of these peculiar red/gray chips. The red portion of these
chips is found to be an unreacted thermitic material and highly energetic."

And all this analysis was done on chips that nobody can account for, supposedly found around New York City by random people. There's no evidence that any of this crap came from the WTC or that any of this stuff wasn't just made up.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: KlokWyze
What fuels these theories is the alarming amount of anomalies that were particular to that day coupled with the obvious use of the event in order to push war & legislation. For a person to not @ least be suspicious (just a little bit) after just looking over basic information on this day is incredibly inept. There are people who immediate say inside job without looking @ much information & there are people who rationalize even the most obviously suspicious aspects of the event in ridiculous ways... constantly changing their rationalizations to suit whatever state of argument they are in.

How many of you can look @ the collapse of building 7 & not see controlled demolition? I'm not saying it is & I'm not saying it isn't. It's just the mirror image of a professional controlled demotion & the reaction from the blindly pro authority people is just "that is absolutely definitely not a controlled demotion ('because the government told me so')". Statement in the parenthesis is the thought to go along with the spoken part.

If WT#7 was a controlled demolition; why did it need to be taken down vs the other two towers. What was the benifit. And again answer, how the explosives could have been planted over time without the changes being detected and inquired upon. We all the maintence people also involved to keep their mouth shut about unauthorized / unscheduled maintence work being done.

And how come the truthers completely ignore the flights that headed to DC?

there are many more holes in their theory thn they are able to punch in using 20/20 hindsight in the original/offical version

 

[Babbles]

The samples have no meaningful integrity. Without a chain of custody the nature of those samples is inconclusive; the data is worthless. I'm having trouble downloading the article, but I suppose it doesn't really matter in that I don't care too much. I was going to mention that in the abstract the DSC data seems irrelevant.

When using a DSC you essentially put in some material and heat the sucker up then determine if there was any phase change. The fact that it has an exotherm at 430º is somewhat meaningless. That could be any sort of material; there would be such a mix of material in any alleged sample the temperature on the exotherm would not convey any sort of significant data. Typically the DSC is applied when you have a known reference material and want to compare an unknown or manufactured material to determine purity. Based on the abstract, to draw any sort of definitive conclusion on this material being some sort of special thermite is intellectually dishonest.

As a way of background I have ten years of experience in the analytical chemistry world. A few years doing project management stuff where in many instances I evaluated DSC exotherms - to be fair I am not a DSC 'operator' or analyst, but I am somewhat familiar with the instrumentation and data. Furthermore I have had countless firsthand experiences dealing with chain of custody issues. My knee-jerk opinion is that any conclusion in this article is bogus and not based on any reasonable interpretations.

 

[Beanie46]

So, if it was a missle that hit the Pentagon, I guess that jet liner that was flying just over the rooftops of the buildings lining Glebe Road and heading down Glebe Road in the direction of the Pentagon (the plane was using Glebe Road as a "map" to the Pentagon since Glebe Road heads right to it....), was just a figment of everyone's imagination that day.

But after personally seeing that particular jet flying that particular flight path at that insanely low height, I guess I'm part of the coverup conspiracy, too. How did I see it? My brother is manager of an auto repair shop on Glebe Road and we were standing outside the shop, having a break, when we heard a roaring sound, looked up just in time to see the jet pass overhead at about 100ft., maybe lower. But never mind that fact....it was a decoy, I suppose.

 

[event8horizon]

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: event8horizon

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: KlokWyze
It's just the mirror image of a professional controlled demotion & the reaction from the blindly pro authority people is just "that is absolutely definitely not a controlled demotion ('because the government told me so')". Statement in the parenthesis is the thought to go along with the spoken part.

I rely on the opinion of people that know what they are talking about. The guy I posted about earlier said it was NOT a controlled explosion. He is a very down to earth guy and I doubt he is part of some cover up. If someone who has blown up hundreds of structures says it isn't done with explosives, I tend to believe them.

email the guy and ask if he ever worked with nanothermite.

As soon as you tell me how they applied it to the building without any of the hundreds of construction workers noticing it.

Thermite also does not explode, not ever. It burns. It also takes extreme temps to even ignite. So unless every square inch of the steel was at extreme temps, there would be patches, large areas on the steel that still had it intact.

what are u saying about thermite not being able to explode??

The Top Ten Connections Between NIST and
Nano-Thermites

http://journalof911studies.com...an_NIST_and_Nano-1.pdf

"The high surface area of the reactants within energetic sol-gels allows for the far higher
rate of energy release than is seen in ?macro? thermite mixtures, making nano-thermites
?high explosives? as well as pyrotechnic materials (Tillitson et al 1999). Sol-gel nanothermites,
are often called energetic nanocomposites, metastable intermolecular
composites (MICs) or superthermite (COEM 2004, Son et al 2007), and silica is often
used to create the porous, structural framework (Clapsaddle et al 2004, Zhao et al 2004).
Nano-thermites have also been made with RDX (Pivkina et al 2004), and with
thermoplastic elastomers (Diaz et al 2003). But it is important to remember that, despite
the name, nano-thermites pack a much bigger punch than typical thermite materials.
It turns out that explosive, sol-gel nano-thermites were developed by US government
scientists, at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories (LLNL) (Tillitson et al 1998,
Gash et al 2000, Gash et al 2002). These LLNL scientists reported that --
?The sol-gel process is very amenable to dip-, spin-, and spray-coating
technologies to coat surfaces. We have utilized this property to dip-coat various
substrates to make sol-gel Fe,O,/ Al / Viton coatings. The energetic coating dries
to give a nice adherent film. Preliminary experiments indicate that films of the
hybrid material are self-propagating when ignited by thermal stimulus?
(Gash et al 2002)."

 

[event8horizon]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: event8horizon

Originally posted by: Modelworks

Originally posted by: event8horizon


maybe u just dont get it. did u read the journal article that proves that a material in the wtc dust reacts at 430C to produce enough heat to melt the iron content in the material to form iron microspheres. if u want to call it paint, then i bet u money this stuff would NOT pass new york codes. and from that line of thought, we need to find who made this stuff and could it be in any more buildings. some people talk about the fires in the towers. well just picture this stuff spayed on/painted on/wrapped on the wtc steel. iron melts at a hotter temp than steel......are u getting the picture.

I'm curious as to how people think this 'thermite' was distributed in the building. Did no workers notice guys applying it to everything ? They have already said that the fire proofing paint that was supposed to be applied to all the steel was not applied on some areas because the contractor was pushed for time. The idea that they applied 'thermite' instead of fire retardant is funny.

The retardant they use does not contain the metals from their 'analysis". It is made up of compounds designed to burn. The burning creates carbon, carbon is an excellent insulator of heat.

"There appears to be a remarkable correlation between the floors upgraded for fireproofing in the WTC towers, in the years preceding 9/11/01, and the floors of impact, fire and failure. The fireproofing upgrades would have allowed for shutdown of the affected floors, and the exposure of the floor assemblies and the columns for a significant period of time. Exactly what work was done during that time?"
http://www.911blogger.com/node/13272

The guys fudges his numbers on the impact zones and this "remarkable correlation" neglects to acknowledge that only 1 upgraded floor of WTC2 was in the impact zone (floor 78).

btw, only the floor trusses were originally fireproofed and eventually upgraded, not the columns. That's why you don't see fireproofing on any of the columns in any pictures of the WTC debris. So how were the towers brought down by thermite if none of the columns, the primary support structures of the buildings, had no thermite on them?

maybe u need to look into fuji bank alittle more closely.....the same floor as that liquid metal was seen pouring out of the wtc.

 

[event8horizon]

Originally posted by: Babbles
The samples have no meaningful integrity. Without a chain of custody the nature of those samples is inconclusive; the data is worthless. I'm having trouble downloading the article, but I suppose it doesn't really matter in that I don't care too much. I was going to mention that in the abstract the DSC data seems irrelevant.

When using a DSC you essentially put in some material and heat the sucker up then determine if there was any phase change. The fact that it has an exotherm at 430º is somewhat meaningless. That could be any sort of material; there would be such a mix of material in any alleged sample the temperature on the exotherm would not convey any sort of significant data. Typically the DSC is applied when you have a known reference material and want to compare an unknown or manufactured material to determine purity. Based on the abstract, to draw any sort of definitive conclusion on this material being some sort of special thermite is intellectually dishonest.

As a way of background I have ten years of experience in the analytical chemistry world. A few years doing project management stuff where in many instances I evaluated DSC exotherms - to be fair I am not a DSC 'operator' or analyst, but I am somewhat familiar with the instrumentation and data. Furthermore I have had countless firsthand experiences dealing with chain of custody issues. My knee-jerk opinion is that any conclusion in this article is bogus and not based on any reasonable interpretations.

so would u like to see a more through investigation concerning these samples. the USGS found iron spheres in their samples. the rj lee group also found these same iron spheres and said that very high temps were attributed to their creation. so i guess what u are saying is that someone must of planted this nanothermite in the wtc dust samples?
hahaha!!