PopularFX
Home Help Search Login Register
Welcome,Guest. Please login or register.
2017-08-17, 10:49:06
News: Check out the Benches; a place for people to moderate their own thread and document their builds and data.
If you would like your own Bench, please PM an Admin.
Most Benches are visible only to members.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 ... 88
Author Topic: 9/11 debate - enter at your own risk!  (Read 297956 times)
Group: Guest
These steel columns were incredibly thick - each wall measuring 2.5 inch (6.35 cm), so the entire thickness of either of the columns was 5 inch (12.7 cm).

 

To imagine how thick this is, here is a good example to compare with: front armor of the best tank of the WWII period - T-34 - was only 1.8 inch (4.5 cm) and it was single-walled. Yet there were practically no armor-piercing artillery shell available that time that would be capable of penetrating such front armor.

 

Of course, no explosives whatsoever would ever be able to tear throw such front armor of a tank either (except only a hollow-charge shell which would still not be able to tear a complete piece of such armor, but only to burn some narrow hole through an armor plate).

 

Considering that the Twin Towers' steel frames consisted of double-walled steel columns that were almost trice as thick compare to the T-34 tanks' front amour, it would not be possible to find any solution to break such columns simultaneously in many spots in order to achieve an "implosion" effect - the basic goal of any controlled demolition.

 

It was, of course, technically possible to break some of these columns in certain spots, using exceptionally huge amounts of hollow-charges attached to each individual column, but even such an incredible solution would not help to achieve the desired "implosion effect".

 

The Towers were simply too high and too rigid - their steel cores would have been simultaneously broken in too many spots on every floor, which no one could afford.

 

And even if they could, still, such a solution would not lead to the desired effect - there would not be any guarantee that such a high-raised structure would fall strictly down to its foot print - it might as well scatter its debris as far as a quarter of a mile, considering its mere height.

 

So, it was impossible to bring the WTC Towers down by any kind of traditional controlled demolition.

The same thing could be said about the WTC building # 7 and of the Sears Tower in Chicago. Either of them was constructed using similar thick double-walled steel frame that was impossible to break at once due to reasons described above.

 

However, in accordance with the US laws governing construction of skyscrapers buildings designers had to submit some satisfactorily demolition project before their construction project could be approved by the Department of Buildings. No one could be allowed to build a skyscraper that can't be demolished in the future.

This is the main point of the skyscrapers' in-built nuclear demolition features.

 

Ironically, such a nuclear demolition scheme of a skyscraper is not meant to actually demolish the respective skyscraper, especially considering that no one has any practical experience in demolishing skyscrapers by such means - it is only intended to convince the Department of Buildings to permit the skyscraper's construction whatsoever.

 

It appears that all designers and proponents of such nuclear demolition schemes sincerely hope that their ideas would not be put to use during their life-time.

Anyhow, "Controlled Demolition Inc." began to study possibilities of demolishing modern skyscrapers by underground nuclear explosions at the end of 60s, at request of the then New York Sate Governor Nelson Rockefeller - when it became necessary to get a legal approval from the New York Department of Buildings for the WTC Twin Towers construction.

 

After some research, a final solution was found and approved by the Department of Buildings and "Controlled Demolition Inc." got its nuclear demolition know-how patented.

Part 3. How does a modern nuclear demolition work? http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_uranium26.htm
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2122
To get back on topic, I'll express some doubts I have about the red chips found in the WTC dust samples examined by Dr Jones, et. al.,  Here's why:


1)   The uniform thickness of these red chips, across various samples, imply they are some sort of a coating or paint applied to a metallic backing.

Where did you get this notion?  This is incorrect -- the red material does not exhibit uniform thickness across various samples.

2)   If they are part of an explosive, and that explosive went off, how come they are found unexploded or burnt up?  An explosion or rapid burn will burn off ALL the explosive.  

There should not be explosive material found in the dust of the World Trade Center destruction... leading to my request (with many others) for an investigation of what happened that day.  At AE911Truth.org you will find that over 1,500 architects and engineers have joined in the petition for such an investigation.

In my talk in Australia, referenced before, and in many other talks I stated my studied opinion that this red material, which has the properties of nano-thermite, was likely used as a trigger for more conventional explosives such as RDX.  Have you taken the time to listen to my remarks on the red/gray chips from this talk?   Los Alamos Nat'l Lab has an article which speaks of super-thermite "matches" and notes that this material can indeed be used to ignite high explosives for demolitions.
It is quite possible, IMO, for the high-explosive (RDX class) to have blown off the trigger material before ALL of the triggering material (red material) was completely burnt.


3)  If by chance some separate explosive did not go off, we should see various thicknesses of explosive and even pieces NOT attached to metal, perhaps pieces from the center of the bulk of the explosive "pack" that this material belonged to.

Again, we do see various thicknesses of the red material and even pieces NOT attached to metal, just as you say should occur.

4)  If the inferred explosive was meant to be only a thin layer of coating, I don't see how that can damage a sturdy steel beam, it's impossible for even the most energetic materials at that small thickness, as these chips exhibit, so the explosive would have to be a much thicker "pack", but then the samples don't support this theory.

NO, the high-explosive material would likely be set in cutter charges as usual in demolitions, with the red material as the trigger as I have said.

5)  I'm assuming "organic" material found in the red chips can come from a number of places,  perhaps even during the attack when jet fuel absorbs into the red coating.  (isn't jet fuel considered an organic compound?)   Lot's of answers that could have been explored.

Chemist Kevin Ryan finally has succeeded in making a nanothermite similar to the one we observed in the WTC dust, but this required the painstaking process in the laboratory explained in the extant literature by scientists from Lawrence Livermore Lab.  You really should take the time to listen to my talk given in Australia.

6)  On the subject of "energetic" materials,  even wheat flower can burn rapidly and appear to blow up.  Most compounds and mixtures seem to be energetic to some degree or level if their combustion temperatures are reached, so can we say that wood chips are explosives?   How many remember the Hindenburg disaster?  The coating on that blimp is what burned rapidly ignited by static electricity, it had the wrong mixture of compounds, oops!


We showed in the paper (have you read it?  I think not) that the thermal trace very nearly matches that found with known nanothermite -- in a study published by Lawrence Livermore Lab. (a US military lab).  Except that the red material from the WTC dust was MORE energetic than that made at LLNL.  However, if you wish to do an experiment in a Differential Scanning Calorimeter as we did with wheat flour -- or whatever you choose -- and get a trace that comes so close to matching known nanothermite, I would be happy to look at your data.  We did the experiments using SEM/XEDS and TEM methods... have you done any work like this?

In conclusion, my general feeling is that the red chips are not very significant, and certainly should not be used to imply explosives were planted in the WTC buildings prior to the attacks.   This kind of leap of faith and conclusion, in my opinion, ends up obscuring the good science that was performed and casts the researchers into a "bad light".

EM


I can see where you might reach this conclusion given your INCORRECT remarks-- I have corrected a number of your remarks above and correspondingly disagree with your conclusion.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2122
PPT slide from my talk, discussing the use of superthermite (aka nanothermite) matches for "triggering explosives for demolition" -- from a report of the Los Alamos National Laboratory. 
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1150
Professor, I read the paper and listened to the Australia talk, but I'll read it again more carefully.   If the research points to explosives, I'm wondering is there absolute chemical proof of exploded material? (your claiming nano thermite is just the trigger ) If there was an explosion there has to be biproducts left behind.

EM

PS. Claiming this material is only the trigger, introduces more difficulty, because 1) a trigger is a smaller quantity, and 2) it burns off or should.  What the authors are asking us to believe is that they found a "needle in a hay stack" and I have a hard time believing that.  Just so there's no misunderstanding, I like the research that was done, I just object jumping to conclusions about bombs in the buildings.
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2913
tExB=qr
I also have trouble believing that explosives were placed in the WTC buildings, except, maybe, bldg 7.

1. Why use nanothermite?  Explosive are typically and easily set-off with expoding foils or bridgewires (i.e. detonators).

2. The alumium cladding that seemingly exploded off the steel columns was known to have corroded.  This would leave a layer of aluminum deposited on the rusted steel columns.  As for the organic material, which contained carbon, could this have been on the surface of the steel when it was milled?  After all, the steel is "carbon steel".

3.  Was there any evidence of fractured structural steel that had been exposed to explosives?

4.  Steel comuns were found to have been extremely corroded by sulfur and heat.  It was shown that the sulfur came from the materials in the building.

I believe that the building was ripe for collapse if a fire of strong magnitude could be started in the upper half of the building.  A passenger jet full of fuel guaranteed success.
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3493


Buy me some coffee
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zoAD8HlrLZg&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]


The core column shown above the firefighter was discovered after the collapse. The angled cut occurs in exactly the manner that shaped charges slice through steel beams to control the way they fall. Notice the hardened once liquid metal. Was thermite used with the shaped charge?

   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2913
tExB=qr
I don't buy it. 

How do I know that the column was not cut after the collapse?  What guarantees do we have?  It looks like it was cut with plasma.

Also, cutting with an exothemic material and fracturing with explosives are two entirely different scenarios, and cutting is not practical.
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2913
tExB=qr
This page has a nice scenario explained and interesting evidence is presented:

http://gordonssite.tripod.com/id2.html

Like I keep saying though, even if they did drop it on purpose, they will not admit it, and it matters only as a base to make predictions for their next move.

Scenario: tactical nuclear attacks on US soil by "terrorist"...
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1150
The slanted cut on that beam is very interesting, what other explanations are there besides it was done during cleanup.  Was it an attempt to weaken the structure before the attacks?  This is more plausible then the explosion theory and harder to detect.  Also, the cut on that beam is too straight and sharp to be shaped charges, it is a plasma torch cut which I've personally done in the welding Class years ago.  So, if it was not cut during the cleanup effort, it's criminal evidence of tampering and sabotage.  IMFHO. :)

But what do I know ...


EM
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2122
Professor, I read the paper and listened to the Australia talk, but I'll read it again more carefully.   If the research points to explosives, I'm wondering is there absolute chemical proof of exploded material? (your claiming nano thermite is just the trigger ) If there was an explosion there has to be biproducts left behind.

EM

PS. Claiming this material is only the trigger, introduces more difficulty, because 1) a trigger is a smaller quantity, and 2) it burns off or should.  What the authors are asking us to believe is that they found a "needle in a hay stack" and I have a hard time believing that.  Just so there's no misunderstanding, I like the research that was done, I just object jumping to conclusions about bombs in the buildings.


EM-- glad that you will take another look at the paper.  Please note in particular the formation of iron-aluminum-rich spheres in the residue from our igniting the red material in the laboratory, in the DSC.  These spheres are the bi-product expected.  Their formation implies a high-temperature reaction involving aluminum and iron (since both of these elements are present in the final spheres, and observed when we ignite thermite for comparisons).  There is also a large quantity of these spheres in the WTC dust.

  Again, the sense of the authors after performing this study is --
 the presence of active thermitic material in the WTC dust raises suspicions sufficient to mandate a call for a new and thorough investigation of 9/11.

We do not have all the answers of exactly how nanothermite/thermite was used in the WTC destruction,
and we cannot expect to find out HOW and WHY and WHO without a criminal investigation with subpoenaed witnesses.

Note that over 99.5% of the steel was rapidly shipped to Asia and melted, thus destroying a great deal of evidence.  This was done over the loud objections of scientists and engineers.  "Criminal evidence tampering" is indeed a possibility.  In particular, we do not have the column noted by Peterae with the gray residue on it for testing.  There is similar gray residue on steel samples obtained by scientists from Worscestor Polytechnic Institute, discussed in a paper by them, but they declined a request from one of our scientific team (Dr. Jeffrey Farrer) to permit testing of this gray residue.  

However, we do have a fair amount of the WTC dust which we tested, leading to our observations of anomalous active thermitic material in the dust, which merits further investigation.

Note also that some steel was recovered from WTC 7, and yet NIST admits that they did not look at ANY of the steel from WTC7 for their study -- instead relying on a computer model in which they set the thermal conductivity of steel to zero, but which they refuse to release to other engineers for checking.

Again, an investigation with subpoena power will be needed to get at the facts.
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2122
I also have trouble believing that explosives were placed in the WTC buildings, except, maybe, bldg 7.

1. Why use nanothermite?  Explosive are typically and easily set-off with expoding foils or bridgewires (i.e. detonators).

Note the LANL report regarding the safety of nanothermite matches:
Quote
“The Super-Thermite electric matches… are safer to use because they resist friction, impact, heat… thereby minimizing accidental ignition. “
“Applications include triggering explosives for demolition”

http://awards.lanl.gov/PDFfiles/Super-Thermite_Electric_Matches_2003.pdf
This may be the reason for using super-thermite triggers.  Again, we see the need for an investigation with subpoena power.[/color]

Grumpy -- my responses to you point-by-point were lost on posting, sigh.  

Let me just note that with over 99.5% of the steel from the WTC tragedy shipped quickly to Asia for melting, a lot of the evidence was destroyed (evidence tampering?) -- including evidently the steel column noted by Peterae.  
NIST did have steel from WTC7, but they state that they did NOT look at this steel in doing their report on WTC7.
Further, NIST admits that they did not even look for residues of explosives in the WTC steel or dust.
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3493


Buy me some coffee
That beam was not cut by a torch, how do i know this, well it's very easy really, why cut at an angle, you have twice as much metal to cut at an angle so if using a torch you would cut straight horizontal and then lift using a Crane.

Also if you look carefully it can be clearly seen the molten metal is only in the middle 3/4 of each side with the corner mechanically fractured due to force, if you used a torch you would start from a corner and proceed until the far corner is met. charges of Thermite were obviously attached to burn through the central 3/4 of each side to weaken it enough to not be able to take a load, the charge is at an angle to cause a failure mode which aims the falling girder into the center structure this way you can to a degree controll which way it falls, if these beams were coated in cement or plaster or some coating material which they would be then all that was needed was for a drill to drill a hole at 45 degrees in the plaster and fill with thermite and place a fuse of magnesium, hell you could even leave ignition to the flames from the plane, remember all the white smoke, well to ignite thermite you need burning magnesium, burning magnesium creates loads of white smoke.

thermite is the only way any steel would melt, there is no way for the temperatures to reach this high otherwise, no matter how intense the fire was, there was a case of a skyscraper burning for weeks and still it stood


This building did not collapse
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1150
@Professor,   good points.

@Peter,
Quote
thermite is the only way any steel would melt,

OK, I like this theory a little better now.  

The Thermite was not a trigger for an explosion, but placed there so that it would light up when the plane struck, and it's intense heat would weaken the beams, thus ensuring the collapse.   I can believe that.    However,  one objection I can think of is, why didn't they fall faster, within seconds of the airplane hit?   Thermite lights up and burns quickly, that's why so much heat is generated. 


EM
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3493


Buy me some coffee
Hi EM
Thermite is very hard to light, it needs a high temperature, now imagine if the charges of Thermite were in place even years before, drill down through the concrete or plaster which is butted against the beam you want to cut pour in your thermite and fill hole, touch of paint if in a place that can be seen, it would stay there forever until enough heat was present which would first need to heat up the plaster or concrete enough to ignite the thermite, you could also place the thermite is a high temperature ceramic flask to help govern the way it burns and is held against the beam, the top would ignite first so this could have a magnesium fuse nearer to the surface of the plaster or concrete finish, so what i am saying is these charges could have been introduced over a long maintenance period as work was done in different area's.

Thermite has a sole purpose of melting steel, it's used in the UK for joining railway steel rails together see vid
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjU5ixlyZtw&feature=related[/youtube]
   
Group: Elite
Hero Member
******

Posts: 3056
It's turtles all the way down
@Professor,   good points.

@Peter,
OK, I like this theory a little better now.  

The Thermite was not a trigger for an explosion, but placed there so that it would light up when the plane struck, and it's intense heat would weaken the beams, thus ensuring the collapse.   I can believe that.    However,  one objection I can think of is, why didn't they fall faster, within seconds of the airplane hit?   Thermite lights up and burns quickly, that's why so much heat is generated.  


EM

That's where remote detonation using concentrated high power microwaves from building 7 makes sense. Those fuses the prof showed earlier could easily be formed into a dipole or loop antenna. A small tuned circuit could also have been applied, with the leads acting as antenna. I'm certain this has been developed to a fine degree by government research labs such as Livermore. Even MH agrees this is technically feasible. It takes as little as 350 milliamps to trigger some of these igniter fuses, easily had with a GHz tuned circuit.

I will not argue the issue of 9/11 anymore as I'm convinced it is impossible to budge those entrenched in status quo "government conspiracy theories". They lack or refuse to apply a creative mind to how alternative theories might have some merit, yet will supply the most outlandish and fantastic opinions to support their own belief system or the governments "Hollywood Style" conspiracy theory.

 So be it.

A short true story:

This occurred many years after the Warren Commission Report.
 
A friend of mine, a very conservative engineer that does not believe in any conspiracy theories worked in a lab where there were forensic audio specialists. They worked for a company that designed a well known brand of  spectrum analyzer equipment.

They were given the police radio tape of the motorcycle cop present and part of the parade that had his radio on during the Kennedy assassination. They were asked to analyze the tape as best they could.

These gentlemen believed in the official single bullet theory yet could not account for what they found on the tape.

It turns out that the differing echo patterns on the tape clearly revealed shots from at least two other directions besides the Texas school book depository. Their analysis went a little deeper but I am not privy to that information at this time. I will ask my friend for more information.


---------------------------
Just because it has a patent application or is patented does not always mean it really works.
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2913
tExB=qr
goods points on the cutting of beams, use of thermite, etc.

Demolition expert Brent Blanchard's comments are interesting too.



Next move: EMP Pulse?
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3493


Buy me some coffee
I have to say there's a lot that just does not add up, offcourse proving it is another thing, i have to remain neutral until it's proven either way if not just for the poor victims of this or to put it another way i cannot be conclusive without verified evidence.

I'm done with this thread also, now where did i put my free energy device  :)
   
Group: Guest
  However,  one objection I can think of is, why didn't they fall faster, within seconds of the airplane hit?   
EM

Well, if you were to plan out such a thing, in order to make it as real as possible, would you take down the building just after the planes hit?  ;]

Great pic of the severed beam.  ;]  And I agree that if it were cut for removal, why go through the extra work cutting more than need be.  What, are they lumberjacks?     Heck, just taking out those in the middle at those angles, might have done the deed.  

Also great pic of the fully engulfed building that didnt drop.

But here, 3 buildings went down in a single day.  Go figgy.   ;]

Mags
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 2122
That's where remote detonation using concentrated high power microwaves from building 7 makes sense. Those fuses the prof showed earlier could easily be formed into a dipole or loop antenna. A small tuned circuit could also have been applied, with the leads acting as antenna. I'm certain this has been developed to a fine degree by government research labs such as Livermore. Even MH agrees this is technically feasible. It takes as little as 350 milliamps to trigger some of these igniter fuses, easily had with a GHz tuned circuit.

I will not argue the issue of 9/11 anymore as I'm convinced it is impossible to budge those entrenched in status quo "government conspiracy theories". They lack or refuse to apply a creative mind to how alternative theories might have some merit, yet will supply the most outlandish and fantastic theories to support their own belief system or the governments Hollywood conspiracy theory.


Good points, ION, Peterae, Mags, EM. 
 
My sincere hope is that facts regarding breakthrough energy source(s) will cut their way to the light of day.
Expect a bit of a battle in this arena, also...  

   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1170
This Presentation

will help understanding why some are simply
not able to accept anything other than the
"official" story regarding 9/11.

For many the Truth is just too fearful a
proposition.  The paradigm is shattered.

Fortunately, time heals all wounds and there
is hope that even the most fearful will one
day be able to face reality.


---------------------------
"Truth: the most deadly weapon ever discovered by humanity. Capable of destroying entire perceptual sets, cultures, and realities. Outlawed by all governments everywhere. Possession is normally punishable by death." - John Gilmore (1935- ) Author
   
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1150
that's right D,


YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH !

  ;D
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3493


Buy me some coffee
The main problem is that anyone breaking the law will try everything in their power to cover it up, when they have so much power there's little chance of proving it, you can imagine if there was one witness that was able to verify that it was rigged , i wonder how long they would live, bit like the bus bombing in London, anyone remember the foreign guy shot in the head 10 times or so by the police because he supposedly was running away, had a ruck sack on and was refusing to stop when the police tried stopping him, turns out he didn't have a ruck sack, and then eye witnesses say he was executed by the police. I wonder what he found out. Guess we will never know for sure again.

Not one camera verified the plane crashing into the Pentagon WHAT, it's probably the most heavily guarded and filmed building on the planet LOL, and even then there was a camera in a petrol station pointing in the right direction and guess what the tape went missing LOL. you cant make it up  ;D
   
Group: Guest

The core column shown above the firefighter was discovered after the collapse. The angled cut occurs in exactly the manner that shaped charges slice through steel beams to control the way they fall. Notice the hardened once liquid metal. Was thermite used with the shaped charge?


Picture posted, the angled cut?

http://www.debunking911.com/thermite.htm

Hmm. People refusing to believe these things are all suffering denial, huh, due to trauma?  

 ;)
 
   

Group: Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Posts: 3493


Buy me some coffee
There's a couple of problems with that website.

I don't see the core still smoldering, it was well documented the core smoldered for a long period, you can see this smoke still in the picture i posted coming from under the wreckage.

Also in the photo on that website they show a beam partly cut through, notice he went up hill and started at a corner, the reason for this is he was working from below the beam, due to gravity and the closeness of the beam to him it is perfectly natural to do this, in the picture i posted, the cut was started a couple of inches into the beam not on the corner, i don't think any welder would start there it's just not the logical thing to do, it takes too much heat to start the cut.

Seriously so he was going to fell this multi ton iron beam from below by felling it like a tree. WHAT, you use a crane, attach the top of the beam to the crane, take the weight and cut horizontally.
   

Hero Member
*****

Posts: 1170
Getting to the Truth is always a tedious and
painstaking process when dealing with agencies
of deception.

Much of what appears on the web is distorted
dis-info to elevate the noise level and mislead
many.

But, have no fear.  The Truth is gradually becoming
known and will in due time rise to the surface.

Those who are dedicated to exposing the Truth
are relentless.  Those who refuse to acknowledge
the Truth may not be easily persuaded initially but
even they, in due time, will come to understand.



---------------------------
"Truth: the most deadly weapon ever discovered by humanity. Capable of destroying entire perceptual sets, cultures, and realities. Outlawed by all governments everywhere. Possession is normally punishable by death." - John Gilmore (1935- ) Author
   
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 ... 88
« previous next »


 

Home Help Search Login Register
Theme © PopularFX | Based on PFX Ideas! | Scripts from iScript4u 2017-08-17, 10:49:06