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

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: event8horizon
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.

Fuji bank? WTF? Now it's not only Bush, Clinton, the Jews, and the ISI; the Yakuza was behind 9/11 too?

Do the conspiracy theorists ever halt their Hollywood-fueled imaginations for a nanosecond to contemplate how stupid their claims sound?

 

[KlokWyze]

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

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

You're missing the point entirely. Just look up Building #7 collapse on youtube. It blatantly looks like a controlled demolition. I'm not saying it is. It just looks like one. That's my point.

It's not fact, or "truth". It's just people's normal reactions. The normal American's initial response to watching building #7 fall is "that is NOT a controlled demolition", when it clearly looks like one. Do you think it looks like a controlled demolition without considering the planting of the explosives, etc.?

If we have to argue about simple obvious points like this, than we don't understand what is going on. Why trust groups so faithfully when they obviously lie to people & use people?

 

[event8horizon]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: event8horizon
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.

Fuji bank? WTF? Now it's not only Bush, Clinton, the Jews, and the ISI; the Yakuza was behind 9/11 too?

Do the conspiracy theorists ever halt their Hollywood-fueled imaginations for a nanosecond to contemplate how stupid their claims sound?

i was just talking about the 81st floor being upgraded as well. that is where the liqiid metal was seen streaming out of the towers.

 

[event8horizon]

Originally posted by: KlokWyze

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

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

You're missing the point entirely. Just look up Building #7 collapse on youtube. It blatantly looks like a controlled demolition. I'm not saying it is. It just looks like one. That's my point.

It's not fact, or "truth". It's just people's normal reactions. The normal American's initial response to watching building #7 fall is "that is NOT a controlled demolition", when it clearly looks like one. Do you think it looks like a controlled demolition without considering the planting of the explosives, etc.?

If we have to argue about simple obvious points like this, than we don't understand what is going on. Why trust groups so faithfully when they obviously lie to people & use people?

NIST Finally Admits Freefall (highschool physics teacher has to help nist along)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...eature=player_embedded

NIST Finally Admits Freefall (Part II)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtKLtUiww80

NIST Finally admits freefall (Part III)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...aynext_from=PL&index=2

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: event8horizon

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: event8horizon
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.

Fuji bank? WTF? Now it's not only Bush, Clinton, the Jews, and the ISI; the Yakuza was behind 9/11 too?

Do the conspiracy theorists ever halt their Hollywood-fueled imaginations for a nanosecond to contemplate how stupid their claims sound?

i was just talking about the 81st floor being upgraded as well. that is where the liqiid metal was seen streaming out of the towers.

You were talking about the Fuji Bank and said I should look into it more closely. According to the conspiracy theorists, thermite was "disguised" as backup batteries and they allege that the Yakuza were behind it. Oh, and the Yakuza was working with the Jews.

http://www.iamthewitness.com/F...Stanley-Praimnath.html

Their ridiculousness knows no bounds.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: event8horizon
NIST Finally Admits Freefall (highschool physics teacher has to help nist along)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...eature=player_embedded

NIST Finally Admits Freefall (Part II)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtKLtUiww80

NIST Finally admits freefall (Part III)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...aynext_from=PL&index=2

Erm, NIST doesn't admit free-fall. That irritating bonehead making the commentary in those videos distorts what NIST has in their documentation and makes the grandiose claim that NIST admits free-fall when they did nothing of the sort.

Here's something for the CTs to chew on as well. Even with a demolition there's still going to be resistance. Demolitions don't completely blow all support. It blows enough support to sufficiently weaken the structure to permit a controlled collapse. So even a demolition can't occur at free-fall speeds. But little facts like that won't prevent those fools from glomming onto to their little catch-phrases.

 

[event8horizon]

tlc-
read the new wtc7 report.

on page 45 they state "this FREE FALL drop continued for approximately 8 stories".

 

[Capt Caveman]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: event8horizon
NIST Finally Admits Freefall (highschool physics teacher has to help nist along)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...eature=player_embedded

NIST Finally Admits Freefall (Part II)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtKLtUiww80

NIST Finally admits freefall (Part III)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...aynext_from=PL&index=2

Erm, NIST doesn't admit free-fall. That irritating bonehead making the commentary in those videos distorts what NIST has in their documentation and makes the grandiose claim that NIST admits free-fall when they did nothing of the sort.

Here's something for the CTs to chew on as well. Even with a demolition there's still going to be resistance. Demolitions don't completely blow all support. It blows enough support to sufficiently weaken the structure to permit a controlled collapse. So even a demolition can't occur at free-fall speeds. But little facts like that won't prevent those fools from glomming onto to their little catch-phrases.

Correct. NIST did not admit freefall but one dumbass will lie and say they did and all of the other nuts will clamor onto any hope of a conspiracy.

 

[event8horizon]

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: event8horizon
NIST Finally Admits Freefall (highschool physics teacher has to help nist along)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...eature=player_embedded

NIST Finally Admits Freefall (Part II)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XtKLtUiww80

NIST Finally admits freefall (Part III)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...aynext_from=PL&index=2

Erm, NIST doesn't admit free-fall. That irritating bonehead making the commentary in those videos distorts what NIST has in their documentation and makes the grandiose claim that NIST admits free-fall when they did nothing of the sort.

Here's something for the CTs to chew on as well. Even with a demolition there's still going to be resistance. Demolitions don't completely blow all support. It blows enough support to sufficiently weaken the structure to permit a controlled collapse. So even a demolition can't occur at free-fall speeds. But little facts like that won't prevent those fools from glomming onto to their little catch-phrases.

Correct. NIST did not admit freefall but one dumbass will lie and say they did and all of the other nuts will clamor onto any hope of a conspiracy.

Read the new report page 45. look at figure 3-15 on page 46. if u watched the vids i linked, then you will understand why nist said "free fall".

 

[event8horizon]

ill link the new report to u guys.
http://wtc.nist.gov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR%201A.pdf

 

[spacejamz]

it's a crying shame that we can't do the emoticon of the smiley face banging his head against the wall...

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: event8horizon
tlc-
read the new wtc7 report.

on page 45 they state "this FREE FALL drop continued for approximately 8 stories".

That doesn't mean the entire building collapsed at free-fall speeds. They are talking specifically about the north face (the first point of structural failure which initiated the eventually complete collapse) and a brief period of time when a portion of the north face collapsed at free fall speed, and which happened very briefly because the failure occured at a lower story of the building. There was nothing under that section to support the sections above it. Note also that the falure of the north face did not initially start at free-fall speed. That indicates that there was a momentary load redistribution before that particular section failed completely.

http://www.nist.gov/public_aff...eet/wtc_qa_082108.html

This analysis showed that the 40 percent longer descent time?compared to the 3.9 second free fall time?was due primarily to Stage 1, which corresponded to the buckling of the exterior columns in the lower stories of the north face. During Stage 2, the north face descended essentially in free fall, indicating negligible support from the structure below. This is consistent with the structural analysis model which showed the exterior columns buckling and losing their capacity to support the loads from the structure above. In Stage 3, the acceleration decreased as the upper portion of the north face encountered increased resistance from the collapsed structure and the debris pile below.

iow, the truthers are taking the analysis of one small section of WTC 7 and projecting it as an admission that the building itself was in "free-fall." Not only is that incorrect, it's a distortion and an example of the blatant dishonesty of the type truthers frequently engage in. That's not to mention that the entire "free-fall" argument from the truthers is a big, stinky red herring to begin with.

 

[event8horizon]

tlc-
from page 48 of the nist report:

2) "a freefall descent over approximately eight stories ...."

it wasnt just some part like u are trying to make it sound like. it was the whole damn building not meeting any RESISTANCE. just imagine how much steel and concrete along with all the connection/welding points there are in 8 stories of the wtc 7. free fall means that it did not meet any resistance!!!! all it meet was air resistance. that is what free fall means. 8 stories is almost 20% of the wtc 7 building FYI. it wast just some small part.

and nist admitted it....

 

[event8horizon]

so what could knock out all those connection points??? maybe this:

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.

http://www.bentham-open.org/pa...02/00000001/7TOCPJ.SGM

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: event8horizon
so what could knock out all those connection points??? maybe this:

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.

http://www.bentham-open.org/pa...02/00000001/7TOCPJ.SGM

There is zero chain of custody. ALL the analysis done in your magical paper is useless because we have no idea where the fuck any of the stuff they studied came from. Keep spouting quotes from it, but the truth is that their analysis is worthless and meaningless because the stuff they analyzed could have come from anywhere.

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: event8horizon
tlc-
from page 48 of the nist report:

2) "a freefall descent over approximately eight stories ...."

it wasnt just some part like u are trying to make it sound like. it was the whole damn building not meeting any RESISTANCE. just imagine how much steel and concrete along with all the connection/welding points there are in 8 stories of the wtc 7. free fall means that it did not meet any resistance!!!! all it meet was air resistance. that is what free fall means. 8 stories is almost 20% of the wtc 7 building FYI. it wast just some small part.

and nist admitted it....

I have incontrovertible proof the building didn't fall at free fall speeds.

Follow these easy steps:
1) Go to your favorite university, YoutubeU, and pick any 911 collapse video. Any video your heart desires.
2) Mute the volume
3) Watch the collapse
4) Watch the collapse again
5) Watch it again
6) QED

For example, take this video I found:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...561FB51E79B16&index=28

I picked it at random. At the 13 second mark we can clearly see pieces of debris falling faster than the rest of the tower. Hence, the building could not have possibly fallen at "free fall speeds."

Want more proof?

http://www.911myths.com/assets/images/Collapse.jpg

Look at that photo. What do you see? I see debris falling much faster than the core of the building which means that the core could not have been falling at free fall speeds!

QED

Want even more proof? Let's do some math!

The towers were 1,368 feet tall (417 meters).

417 = .5 gt ^2

g (gravity) = 9.8 m/s^2

So we have 417 = .5 (9.8)t^2 which works out to t = 9.22 seconds.

Okay, so the towers would have had to fall in 9.22 seconds to be at free fall speeds. Did they?

I certainly don't think so after timing the fall on various home videos. The one I linked to indicates it took at least 11 seconds. This video puts the time between 14 and 15 seconds http://www.youtube.com/v/qLShZOvxVe4, nowhere near free fall speeds.

Seems like the collapse took at least ten seconds.

QED

 

[event8horizon]

Originally posted by: BeauJangles

Originally posted by: event8horizon
tlc-
from page 48 of the nist report:

2) "a freefall descent over approximately eight stories ...."

it wasnt just some part like u are trying to make it sound like. it was the whole damn building not meeting any RESISTANCE. just imagine how much steel and concrete along with all the connection/welding points there are in 8 stories of the wtc 7. free fall means that it did not meet any resistance!!!! all it meet was air resistance. that is what free fall means. 8 stories is almost 20% of the wtc 7 building FYI. it wast just some small part.

and nist admitted it....

I have incontrovertible proof the building didn't fall at free fall speeds.

Follow these easy steps:
1) Go to your favorite university, YoutubeU, and pick any 911 collapse video. Any video your heart desires.
2) Mute the volume
3) Watch the collapse
4) Watch the collapse again
5) Watch it again
6) QED

For example, take this video I found:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...561FB51E79B16&index=28

I picked it at random. At the 13 second mark we can clearly see pieces of debris falling faster than the rest of the tower. Hence, the building could not have possibly fallen at "free fall speeds."

Want more proof?

http://www.911myths.com/assets/images/Collapse.jpg

Look at that photo. What do you see? I see debris falling much faster than the core of the building which means that the core could not have been falling at free fall speeds!

QED

Want even more proof? Let's do some math!

The towers were 1,368 feet tall (417 meters).

417 = .5 gt ^2

g (gravity) = 9.8 m/s^2

So we have 417 = .5 (9.8)t^2 which works out to t = 9.22 seconds.

Okay, so the towers would have had to fall in 9.22 seconds to be at free fall speeds. Did they?

I certainly don't think so after timing the fall on various home videos. The one I linked to indicates it took at least 11 seconds. This video puts the time between 14 and 15 seconds http://www.youtube.com/v/qLShZOvxVe4, nowhere near free fall speeds.

Seems like the collapse took at least ten seconds.

QED

that nist quote was for wtc 7 man.....

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: event8horizon
tlc-
from page 48 of the nist report:

2) "a freefall descent over approximately eight stories ...."

it wasnt just some part like u are trying to make it sound like. it was the whole damn building not meeting any RESISTANCE. just imagine how much steel and concrete along with all the connection/welding points there are in 8 stories of the wtc 7. free fall means that it did not meet any resistance!!!! all it meet was air resistance. that is what free fall means. 8 stories is almost 20% of the wtc 7 building FYI. it wast just some small part.

and nist admitted it....

how about we quote the whole thing:

The observed descent time of the upper 18 stories of the north face of WTC 7 (the floors clearly visible in the video evidence) was 40 percent greater than the computed free fall time. A more detailed analysis of the descent of the north face found three stages: (1) a slow descent with acceleration less than that of gravity that corresponded to the buckling of the exterior columns at the lower floors, (2) a freefall descent over approximately eight stores at gravitational acceleration for approximately 2.24 s, and (3) a decreasing acceleration as the north face encountered resistance from the structure below.

that paragraph is clearly talking about the upper 18 stories of the north face. not the whole building. the paragraph clearly supports TLC. it clearly does not support your contention that the "whole damn building" did not meet any resistance.

 

[Ns1]

Originally posted by: ElFenix
how about we quote the whole thing:

The observed descent time of the upper 18 stories of the north face of WTC 7 (the floors clearly visible in the video evidence) was 40 percent greater than the computed free fall time. A more detailed analysis of the descent of the north face found three stages: (1) a slow descent with acceleration less than that of gravity that corresponded to the buckling of the exterior columns at the lower floors, (2) a freefall descent over approximately eight stores at gravitational acceleration for approximately 2.24 s, and (3) a decreasing acceleration as the north face encountered resistance from the structure below.

that paragraph is clearly talking about the upper 18 stories of the north face. not the whole building. the paragraph clearly supports TLC. it clearly does not support your contention that the "whole damn building" did not meet any resistance.

fucking owned

 

[event8horizon]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: event8horizon
tlc-
from page 48 of the nist report:

2) "a freefall descent over approximately eight stories ...."

it wasnt just some part like u are trying to make it sound like. it was the whole damn building not meeting any RESISTANCE. just imagine how much steel and concrete along with all the connection/welding points there are in 8 stories of the wtc 7. free fall means that it did not meet any resistance!!!! all it meet was air resistance. that is what free fall means. 8 stories is almost 20% of the wtc 7 building FYI. it wast just some small part.

and nist admitted it....

how about we quote the whole thing:

The observed descent time of the upper 18 stories of the north face of WTC 7 (the floors clearly visible in the video evidence) was 40 percent greater than the computed free fall time. A more detailed analysis of the descent of the north face found three stages: (1) a slow descent with acceleration less than that of gravity that corresponded to the buckling of the exterior columns at the lower floors, (2) a freefall descent over approximately eight stores at gravitational acceleration for approximately 2.24 s, and (3) a decreasing acceleration as the north face encountered resistance from the structure below.

that paragraph is clearly talking about the upper 18 stories of the north face. not the whole building. the paragraph clearly supports TLC. it clearly does not support your contention that the "whole damn building" did not meet any resistance.

you have got to be kidding. do u see just the north face dropping. no, the whole damn building is falling. if it were just the north face, we would see the east, west, and south face still standing. do u see that. talk about being owned!!! thats about the dumbest thing i think i have read lately.

notice what u have typed:
(2) a freefall descent over approximately eight stores at gravitational acceleration for approximately 2.24 s.....

so are eight stories now just eight floors of the north face?? did u see that happen?
hell no. it was the whole building for 8 stories according to the nist who also said there was "FREEFALL DESCENT" for eight stories.....not just 8 stories of the north face.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: event8horizon
tlc-
from page 48 of the nist report:

2) "a freefall descent over approximately eight stories ...."

it wasnt just some part like u are trying to make it sound like. it was the whole damn building not meeting any RESISTANCE. just imagine how much steel and concrete along with all the connection/welding points there are in 8 stories of the wtc 7. free fall means that it did not meet any resistance!!!! all it meet was air resistance. that is what free fall means. 8 stories is almost 20% of the wtc 7 building FYI. it wast just some small part.

and nist admitted it....

It is exactly as I'm making it sound. The report spells it out and you are trying to distort what that report says. Anyone in here can read the report and discover you are fos, and some already have.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: event8horizon
so what could knock out all those connection points??? maybe this:

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.

http://www.bentham-open.org/pa...02/00000001/7TOCPJ.SGM

Prove any of those samples came from WTC7; or WTC1 or 2 for that matter. You can't. Neither can Jones.

 

[event8horizon]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: event8horizon
tlc-
from page 48 of the nist report:

2) "a freefall descent over approximately eight stories ...."

it wasnt just some part like u are trying to make it sound like. it was the whole damn building not meeting any RESISTANCE. just imagine how much steel and concrete along with all the connection/welding points there are in 8 stories of the wtc 7. free fall means that it did not meet any resistance!!!! all it meet was air resistance. that is what free fall means. 8 stories is almost 20% of the wtc 7 building FYI. it wast just some small part.

and nist admitted it....

It is exactly as I'm making it sound. The report spells it out and you are trying to distort what that report says. Anyone in here can read the report and discover you are fos, and some already have.

here is a simple question for ya. is nist correct when they state that there was freefall speed for 8 stories?
they just measured from the north face. they are not saying that just the north face fell at free fall speed.

 

[event8horizon]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: event8horizon
so what could knock out all those connection points??? maybe this:

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.

http://www.bentham-open.org/pa...02/00000001/7TOCPJ.SGM

Prove any of those samples came from WTC7; or WTC1 or 2 for that matter. You can't. Neither can Jones.

so would the usgs gov report on wtc dust be null and void then. how about the rj lee report concerning the wtc dust? would u like to see a more through investigation into this considering u are basically saying jones put thermite into the samples. that sounds like a felony count with yrs and yrs in jail if u can prove that!!

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: event8horizon

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: event8horizon
so what could knock out all those connection points??? maybe this:

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.

http://www.bentham-open.org/pa...02/00000001/7TOCPJ.SGM

Prove any of those samples came from WTC7; or WTC1 or 2 for that matter. You can't. Neither can Jones.

so would the usgs gov report on wtc dust be null and void then. how about the rj lee report concerning the wtc dust? would u like to see a more through investigation into this considering u are basically saying jones put thermite into the samples. that sounds like a felony count with yrs and yrs in jail if u can prove that!!

No! Because the government's studies provide a chain of custody! Your study could been on mars moon dust for all we know. Why do you not understand that it doesn't matter what the study says because it's FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED. There is a fatal error. Do not pass go. Do not collect $200. Not without a chain of custody. Not without a shred of proof that any of that junk comes from the WTC.