THE MOST SOPHISTICATED MASTERPIECE OF DEMOLITION

[borrofburi]

We've debunked your bogus claim, so please PLEASE stop repeating it!

This is waza's style, there's a 20 page thread that's a testament to how many times he can repeat a debunked claim (though I suppose he did technically bring other claims that were debunked that he continued to repeat).

 

[ImprobableJoe]

We've debunked your bogus claim, so please PLEASE stop repeating it!

This is waza's style, there's a 20 page thread that's a testament to how many times he can repeat a debunked claim (though I suppose he did technically bring other claims that were debunked that he continued to repeat).

Well, I don't have to worry about not getting enough posts each day, do I? :lol:

 

[Waza-Minooo44]

This entire documentary is evidence. But I suppose you want proof? The presence of Powdered Aluminium and Iron Oxide, Sulphur and Barium in the dust from the collapsed towers is proof of the, military grade Thermate. The only question that remains is: Who put it there?

Why do you keep repeating that nonsense? It isn't true, the one paper is bunk published by non-experts where they make stuff up, no one uses thermite for demolitions, you can't explain why this super thermite didn't catch on fire as soon as the buildings were soaked in jet fuel and caught on fire...


We've debunked your bogus claim, so please PLEASE stop repeating it!

This entire documentary is evidence. But I suppose you want proof? The presence of Powdered Aluminium and Iron Oxide, Sulphur and Barium in the dust from the collapsed towers is proof of the, military grade Thermate. The only question that remains is: Who put it there?

Why do you keep repeating that nonsense? It isn't true, the one paper is bunk published by non-experts where they make stuff up, no one uses thermite for demolitions, you can't explain why this super thermite didn't catch on fire as soon as the buildings were soaked in jet fuel and caught on fire...


We've debunked your bogus claim, so please PLEASE stop repeating it!

Photomicrographs of active thermitic material found in samples of the WTC dust.

"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."-Nano-thermite expert Prof Niels Harrit

But anyway the evidence is completely weak .... really can a mere fire have the capability to destroy steel structure ??? By the way this documentary debunk the idea of fire . Your idea doesn't make any sense because no where in history that fire have the capability of manipulate steel structure . If the airplane is the real cause then why the construction manager said these words ???? is he lying or what exactly ? Your argument has many fatal flew . The fire doesn't explain fully why the steel structure fall at almost free fall ??

"We designed the buildings to resist to the impact of one or more jetliners."-Frank De Martini

 

[IBSpify]

This entire documentary is evidence.

A documentary is not evidence, if you wish to present evidence post a link to a scientific paper which shows traces of barium nitrate and aluminum oxide were present at the 9/11 site.

But I suppose you want proof? The presence of Powdered Aluminium and Iron Oxide, Sulphur and Barium in the dust from the collapsed towers is proof of the, military grade Thermate.

Please point to the paper which states that barium nitrate was present at the sight, Stephen Jones paper makes no mention of Barium Nitrate, the present of aluminum, rust (iron oxide) and sulfur is easily explained by the fact that the sight is where a plane crashed into a building, all three of those would be in ready supply (drywall is nearly 19% sulfur), and I would actually think there was something off if they were not present in the dust.

The only question that remains is: Who put it there?

I'll give you this, your the first truther I've ever seen say that Dubbya and the Gubment might not have done set up the bombs in those there towers. Unless of course the point of that sentence was to make the readers infer that it had to be the government at which point I reserve the right to revoke what little respect the question may have earned you.

 

[Anachronous Rex]

 

[Finger]

 

[ImprobableJoe]

Sweet Satan, he posted it AGAIN!!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Guys, help me out here: is "thermitic" even a word used by chemists or materials scientists?

 

[IBSpify]

Sweet Satan, he posted it AGAIN!!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Guys, help me out here: is "thermitic" even a word used by chemists or materials scientists?

Thermitic isn't even a word period. not only that, but when you actually read the paper of the Chemist he is quoting it's quite laughable. All he is doing is quoting the abstract, I actually doubt he's even read the paper itself.

It's hard for me...or anyone with a modicum of common sense to take this report seriously when the items they based this report on were given to them by residents of Lower Manhattan almost SIX YEARS after the Towers fell. These samples were not kept in sterile environments by any stretch of the imagination and were handled by ordinary, non-scientist New Yorkers.

Referring to these samples, the report itself states the following:

"The resulting spectrum, shown in Fig. (14), produced the expected peaks for Fe, Si, Al, O, and C. Other peaks included calcium, sul-fur, zinc, chromium and potassium. The occurrence of these elements could be attributed to surface contamination due to the fact that the analysis was performed on the as-collected surface of the red layer. The large Ca and S peaks may be due to contamination with gypsum from the pulverized wall-
board material in the buildings."

So by their own admission the scientists are saying that in SIX YEARS that the samples, which were hanging out in lay peoples' homes they MAY have been contaminated. Wow, really?

The paper also never actually says that material in question is nanothermite or even regular thermite...rather that...

"These observations reminded us of nano-thermite fabricated at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and elsewhere"

So it REMINDED them of a substance that no one aside for 9/11 conspiracy people apparently knows anything about. Can they conclusively say exactly what it is? Well...

"We would like to make detailed comparisons of the red chips with known super-thermite composites, along with comparisons of the products following ignition, but there are many forms of this high-tech thermite, and this comparison must wait for a future study."

...not really. You see they can't really get their hands on this nano stuff because we're not sure it really exists. Ok. And further...

"All these data suggest that the thermitic material found in the WTC dust is a form of nano-thermite"

How incredibly conclusive! I have some suggestions of my own. Well at least they're not jumping to any conclusions right?

"We make no at-tempt to specify the particular form of nano-thermite present until more is learned about the red material and especially about the nature of the organic material it contains."

Why bother making an attempt to actually identify this substance, right?

Well that's ok, at least we know for sure it's not paint chips right? Well of course not! Because...

"we have shown that the red material contains both elemental aluminum and iron oxide"

Oh. I see. There's iron oxide (rust) and aluminum in this mixture. There's no WAY that rust or aluminum could possibly have gotten into the Twin Towers. Except of course that the Twin Towers had tons upon tons of aluminum and every building in history that had iron it also had oxidized iron (rust) in it.

How totally convincing. It's stunning even! How could anyone ignore this incredibly conclusive evidence!

The material they found, that had been contaminated over six years, reminded them of nanothermite or regular thermite but probably nanothermite no really it's almost definitely the nano kind. Or it might be just regular paint. Except that it also has rust and aluminum in it. Which may be a result of the contamination or it may just be because those two substances are present in just about every structure in the history of construction.

 

[Anachronous Rex]

Sweet Satan, he posted it AGAIN!!! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Guys, help me out here: is "thermitic" even a word used by chemists or materials scientists?

Thermitic isn't even a word period. not only that, but when you actually read the paper of the Chemist he is quoting it's quite laughable. All he is doing is quoting the abstract, I actually doubt he's even read the paper itself.

It's hard for me...or anyone with a modicum of common sense to take this report seriously when the items they based this report on were given to them by residents of Lower Manhattan almost SIX YEARS after the Towers fell. These samples were not kept in sterile environments by any stretch of the imagination and were handled by ordinary, non-scientist New Yorkers.

Referring to these samples, the report itself states the following:

"The resulting spectrum, shown in Fig. (14), produced the expected peaks for Fe, Si, Al, O, and C. Other peaks included calcium, sul-fur, zinc, chromium and potassium. The occurrence of these elements could be attributed to surface contamination due to the fact that the analysis was performed on the as-collected surface of the red layer. The large Ca and S peaks may be due to contamination with gypsum from the pulverized wall-
board material in the buildings."

So by their own admission the scientists are saying that in SIX YEARS that the samples, which were hanging out in lay peoples' homes they MAY have been contaminated. Wow, really?

The paper also never actually says that material in question is nanothermite or even regular thermite...rather that...

"These observations reminded us of nano-thermite fabricated at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and elsewhere"

So it REMINDED them of a substance that no one aside for 9/11 conspiracy people apparently knows anything about. Can they conclusively say exactly what it is? Well...

"We would like to make detailed comparisons of the red chips with known super-thermite composites, along with comparisons of the products following ignition, but there are many forms of this high-tech thermite, and this comparison must wait for a future study."

...not really. You see they can't really get their hands on this nano stuff because we're not sure it really exists. Ok. And further...

"All these data suggest that the thermitic material found in the WTC dust is a form of nano-thermite"

How incredibly conclusive! I have some suggestions of my own. Well at least they're not jumping to any conclusions right?

"We make no at-tempt to specify the particular form of nano-thermite present until more is learned about the red material and especially about the nature of the organic material it contains."

Why bother making an attempt to actually identify this substance, right?

Well that's ok, at least we know for sure it's not paint chips right? Well of course not! Because...

"we have shown that the red material contains both elemental aluminum and iron oxide"

Oh. I see. There's iron oxide (rust) and aluminum in this mixture. There's no WAY that rust or aluminum could possibly have gotten into the Twin Towers. Except of course that the Twin Towers had tons upon tons of aluminum and every building in history that had iron it also had oxidized iron (rust) in it.

How totally convincing. It's stunning even! How could anyone ignore this incredibly conclusive evidence!

The material they found, that had been contaminated over six years, reminded them of nanothermite or regular thermite but probably nanothermite no really it's almost definitely the nano kind. Or it might be just regular paint. Except that it also has rust and aluminum in it. Which may be a result of the contamination or it may just be because those two substances are present in just about every structure in the history of construction.

This should be /thread.

It won't be, of course, but it should.

 

[IBSpify]

Of course it wont be, I have 10 to 1 odds that Waza comes back and will post the exact same quote from the abstract within the next 5 days.

 

[Anachronous Rex]

Of course it wont be, I have 10 to 1 odds that Waza comes back and will post the exact same quote from the abstract within the next 5 days.

Yeah... he's sort of adorable that way... like a kitten endlessly scratching on a door in the vain hope you'll let it in, or a puppy returning to its vomit.

 

[ImprobableJoe]

Yeah... he's sort of adorable that way... like a kitten endlessly scratching on a door in the vain hope you'll let it in, or a puppy returning to its vomit.

As I was reading that, one of my cats was scratching at my office door... :lol:

Thanks for the post IBSpify... I'd noted some of those bits before, but you really laid down the start-to-finish smackdown.

And, since that was Waza-WooWoo's best piece of "evidence" I guess he should stop posting now, right? I know, not going to happen. At least we can kick him... my wife gets mad when I kick a cat. :twisted:

 

[Deleted member 1004]

If he cant settle with actual evidence then I'm will to push fire to fire here.

DPR's videos regarding the twin towers and the conspiracies should be more than sufficient. To have a public debate and say (to my best memory):

"A woman was looking at the memorial using steel from the towers, and sure this powder. So she decided to collect this power in a bucket, but left it for * extended time*, until reading up on the inquest, and sending in for analysis." Steven E. Jones.

DPR's response to this is more than enough.

 

[Lallapalalable]

Hey, Waza, if you do decide to come back, let me know what you think of this:

http://www.loosechangeguide.com/LooseChangeGuide.html

Just about every single conspiracy theory on 9/11 ever is debunked in this single presentation, for the towers, the pentagon and shanksville, as well as why the alleged conspirators would have to be borderline retarded to ever even try this, let alone believe there would be any gain to doing so.

As a personal note, the whole False Flag idea is just trash. Bush wanted to go to Iraq since 1991, when his father left unfinished business. A war in afghanistan would put a serious damper on his plans, and so he used that war to gain support for Iraq. He wanted nothing to do with fighting terrorism until it came to the door with a gun.

 

[Duvelthehobbit666]

There are major differences between the recorded fires in steel framed buildings and the events of 9/11. I shall name a few

The other buildings did not have planes smash into them at high speeds. The impact of the planes to the WTC was a huge contributing factor to their collapse. The outer columns were completely severed at the point of impact, so too were many of the interior columns, so the whole distribution of weight etc was affected by the impact and was a huge factor in the chain of events that led to the collapse.

The other buildings most probably had their fire proofing intact. The impact of the planes on 9/11 knocked off the spray on fire proofing and exposed the steel to the full force of the fires. Also the sprinkler system was damaged in the impact.

The impact of the planes made a HUGE difference, if there was just fires in the WTC the chances are it wouldn't have collapsed. However the planes damaged the structure, the fireproofing and the sprinkler system, which basically allowed the fires to do their worst, and bring the towers to the ground.

I also heard that the fireproofing was already inadequate to begin with. Not sure if it is true that the fireproofing was inadequate but I remember seeing this on a documentary shown on the discovery channel. This could also explain why the whole building collapsed instead of the top floors. And didn't bin Laden pretty much admit being responsible for the attack of 911.

 

[Finger]

I also heard that the fireproofing was already inadequate to begin with. Not sure if it is true that the fireproofing was inadequate but I remember seeing this on a documentary shown on the discovery channel. This could also explain why the whole building collapsed instead of the top floors. And didn't bin Laden pretty much admit being responsible for the attack of 911.

The fireproofing was the spray-on kind. It's cheap and quick, but not very consistent. It also, arguably, makes it easier for the fireproofing to be shaken off. Which is what happened when the planes slammed into each building. But one thing that's misleading about fireproofing is it's name. It doesn't actually make the stuff it covers fire proof. It makes it fire resistant. The degree of resistance can vary, but it's never 100%.

bin Laden never made a video saying "I did it." Truthers act like this is proof that he didn't, but he's never really done that for his organization's attacks before. Usually, he'll praise the attack and act like it was an act of Allah, but admit to everything privately. That's exactly what he did for 9/11. The purpose behind this is very deliberate. If he admitted responsibility, then the US would have a clear-cut case to go into whatever country he might be hiding in. Leaving it ambiguous creates political uncertainty and slows any response.

But journalists who have gotten close to bin Laden (including his biographer) have quoted him and other Al Qaeda officials as having privately admitted responsibility for 9/11. On top of that, the suicide videos of some of the hijackers refer to bin Laden as "teacher," and there's a candid video where bin Laden calls the hijackers "our boys." In some interviews, they go into detail about the planning and execution of the attack and they even made threats against Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for calling 9/11 "a Jewish conspiracy."

 

[Duvelthehobbit666]

Thanks for clarifying that Finger.

 

[Duvelthehobbit666]

I was a metallurgical lab technician for over three years. I can tell you from experience that steel is compromised at temperatures well below 1000,°C. Steel has various transformation temperatures well below the melting point, and several of those points involve chances for the steel to absorb or emit carbon. In either case, the steel loses its strength or resilience, and would not be able to bear the full loads for which it was designed.

Is it possible to tell me from which from which type of steel to the other type of steel the transition happened in the twin towers? Just curious and it would be nice to link it to my study. The steel in the twin towers would have changed to pearlite if I am correct, right? Just think it might be interesting and I can always use it in an argument.

 

[Deleted member 1004]

Channel 4 in the uk is currently airing a "documentary" (unediting footage from multiple sources) from New York on 9/11/01. I'm wondering if supposedly new "evidence" iflikely to crop up following this airing:

http://www.channel4.com/programmes/102-minutes-that-changed-america