Has the "truth" movement made any progress in 8 years?

[SFC Ollie]

Still haven't seen these cooled pools of molten steel, or heard anyone testify to seeing them......

 

[eots]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZFIabl7Di8]Controlled Demolition Squibs in the Twin Towers - YouTube[/ame]

 

[eots]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdt5b0Qi4oU]Collapses - Molten metal - Eye witness testimony - YouTube[/ame]

 

[SFC Ollie]

We know that thermite does not explode, yet here we have eots with one video claiming that the dust and smoke being pushed out the lower windows is explosions, and in the next video claiming that it was thermite.


Can't have it both ways...
And thermite would not have cause molten pools of steel, Unless it was an aweful lot of thermite in one place along with a lot of steel in the same place. I don't think all those cuts that would have had to been made all over the buildings in very diverse areas in perfect timing would have all the molten steel move together into one place.... Of course I'm not a truther.....

So since you want to believe there was molten pools of steel, what made it hot enough to stay molten for days or even weeks? Thermite can't do it.....

And where are those big clumps of steel now that they are cooled off? Did they sneak them out of there in front of hundreds of witnesses?

 

[SAYIT]

Some type of explosive that is unseen, unheard, and erases all proof of its existence........

it was heard you just deny the testimony and you cant see what you refuse to look for

NIST STATEMENT: "NIST did not test for the residue of these compounds in the steel."

Because there is no rational reason to believe explosives or a gov't conspiracy were involved in the destruction on 9/11. I may believe that the moon is made of Swiss Cheese and the lunar landings either proved it or never occurred but that doesn't make it factual.
Nano-thermite is not the source of destruction.
9/11 findings are not subject to your "personal intuition, gut feelings, hairs on the back of your neck, little devils or angels sitting on your shoulder..." - Crimson Tide

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Is there any progress in terms of accomplishments? If so, what are they?

I guarantee you that 9/11 Was an Inside Job will not be the first person to respond to this or add anything other than a "yeah buddy" if he does respond. He's a zero

Well? Any accomplishments?

There never will be any accomplishments or progress – that’s the whole point.

 

[PredFan]

they NIST report defies logic..the use of some form of explosives is the only answer

then that leaves any form of thermite out.

A Nano-thermite or "super-thermite"[1] is a metastable intermolecular composite (MICs) characterized by a particle size of its main constituents, a metal and a metal oxide, under 100 Nanometers. This allows for high and customizable reaction rates. Nano-thermites contain an oxidizer and a reducing agent, which are intimately mixed on the nanometer scale. MICs, including nano-thermitic materials, are a type of reactive materials investigated for military use, as well as for general applications involving propellants, explosives, and pyrotechnics.
What distinguishes MICs from traditional thermites is that the oxidizer and a reducing agent, normally iron oxide and aluminium, are in the form of extremely fine powders (nanoparticles). This dramatically increases the reactivity relative to micrometre-sized powder thermite. As the mass transport mechanisms that slow down the burning rates of traditional thermites are not so important at these scales, the reactions become kinetically controlled and proceed much more quickly.

Nano-thermite - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

We've all seen buildings come down with explosives, I've seen it up close and personal. There are obvious explosions all over the building, it's entire length. No matter how many times I watch the Towers come down I see NO explosions, not one.

You expect us to believe that a demolition team rigged both towers to explode and drop without anyone noticing? Not a single secretary, businessman, maintenance man, or floor sweeper? Dude that is the lamest theory ever. Makes the NIST's account seem rock solid.

 

[PredFan]

it was heard you just deny the testimony and you cant see what you refuse to look for

NIST STATEMENT: "NIST did not test for the residue of these compounds in the steel."

because there was no evidence of there use.... cherry picker!

how can there be evidence if you don't test for it ??


but I see you use NIST logic


NIST STATEMENT

13. Why did the NIST investigation not consider reports of molten steel in the wreckage from the WTC towers?

The condition of the steel in the wreckage of the WTC towers (i.e., whether it was in a molten state or not) was irrelevant to the investigation of the collapse since it does not provide any conclusive information on the condition of the steel when the WTC towers were standing.

There was no molten steel other than the slag left over from the cutting torches that the rescue and cleanup teams used.

 

[PredFan]

Controlled Demolition Squibs in the Twin Towers - YouTube

Those aren't explosions, it is very obviously debris being expelled under pressure from the falling floors.

Really? Some numbskull actually made a video trying to say that?

 

[SFC Ollie]

Controlled Demolition Squibs in the Twin Towers - YouTube

Those aren't explosions, it is very obviously debris being expelled under pressure from the falling floors.

Really? Some numbskull actually made a video trying to say that?

They have a lot of time on their hands..........

 

[daws101]

it was heard you just deny the testimony and you cant see what you refuse to look for

NIST STATEMENT: "NIST did not test for the residue of these compounds in the steel."

because there was no evidence of there use.... cherry picker!

how can there be evidence if you don't test for it ??


but I see you use NIST logic


NIST STATEMENT

13. Why did the NIST investigation not consider reports of molten steel in the wreckage from the WTC towers?

The condition of the steel in the wreckage of the WTC towers (i.e., whether it was in a molten state or not) was irrelevant to the investigation of the collapse since it does not provide any conclusive information on the condition of the steel when the WTC towers were standing.

and you use no logic at all.......
nist is right...
only an obsessed asshole would insist on testing nothing ...

 

[eots]

because there was no evidence of there use.... Cherry picker!

how can there be evidence if you don't test for it ??


But i see you use nist logic


nist statement

13. Why did the nist investigation not consider reports of molten steel in the wreckage from the wtc towers?

The condition of the steel in the wreckage of the wtc towers (i.e., whether it was in a molten state or not) was irrelevant to the investigation of the collapse since it does not provide any conclusive information on the condition of the steel when the wtc towers were standing.

and you use no logic at all.......
Nist is right...
Only an obsessed asshole would insist on testing nothing ...

you stalk these post for years with your drivel and i am obsessed ?

 

[eots]

Controlled Demolition Squibs in the Twin Towers - YouTube

Those aren't explosions, it is very obviously debris being expelled under pressure from the falling floors.

Really? Some numbskull actually made a video trying to say that?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9c3gyprsa9Y]9/11: WTC basement explosion witness Phillip Morelli - YouTube[/ame]


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kH5L8rWsGw]New Eyewitness To WTC Basement Level Explosions - YouTube[/ame]


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_LlJzR2oYI]9/11 - Explosion Witness William Rodriguez - YouTube[/ame]

 

[eots]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbbZE7c3a8Q]Barry Jennings' account of WTC 7 explosions - YouTube[/ame]

 

[SAYIT]

And here we are, 11+ years later and there is still no evidence of explosives and none of a conspiracy to cover-up that which did not exist. Keep pissin' into the wind, Princess, and all you'll get for your effort is wet.
"But if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao / You ain't going to make it with anyone, anyhow." - J. Lennon

 

[eots]

it keeps you and daws employeed

 

[PredFan]

But I can see in the videos, no explosions. If we are to believe that there were explosions enough to bring down the towers, we would see them and not have to rely on the "I heard what sounded like explosions". 3 or 4 explosions aren't going to bring those towers down.

 

[SFC Ollie]

And the one guy was sooooo very convincing.... "It was about 8:46"

Now who says that? It was about quarter to 9, or maybe 8:45. but about 8:46?

Coached.......

 

[daws101]

how can there be evidence if you don't test for it ??


But i see you use nist logic


nist statement

13. Why did the nist investigation not consider reports of molten steel in the wreckage from the wtc towers?

The condition of the steel in the wreckage of the wtc towers (i.e., whether it was in a molten state or not) was irrelevant to the investigation of the collapse since it does not provide any conclusive information on the condition of the steel when the wtc towers were standing.

and you use no logic at all.......
Nist is right...
Only an obsessed asshole would insist on testing nothing ...

you stalk these post for years with your drivel and i am obsessed ?

you said it.. 1st symptom of obsession is not recognizing you are obsessed.

 

[daws101]

Barry Jennings' account of WTC 7 explosions - YouTube

another half truth by eots
there is no question that Barry Jennings heard explosions ..fire does cause anything under pressure to explode....however what he heard is no evidence of explosives.
also he was rescued several hours before the collapse of wtc7...any event after his rescue in no way proves any linkage to his story.