911 facts no theories

[Mr. Jones]

you claimed the NIST said "fires alone" brought down WTC7. The NIST never said that. you lied. it was your own stupid ******* interpretation of the NIST report and you were WRONG.

now you claim the NIST said explosives could take out column 79 (not colum, you illiterate dickhead) and cause the collapse. The NIST never said that. You lied. once again, it's your own stupid ******* interpretation of the NIST and you are simply WRONG!!

deal with it!!

That is precisely the very first and main reason given in this video for the collapse, you really don't seem to comprehend THAT? They are saying that this is the first instance known that fire is the reason for the failure of the building. If you have trouble hearing, my apologies, perhaps someone could listen and tell you what they are saying for you. Just the first 20 secs. And it's about wtc7.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSnjyZNYlW8[/ame]

Again here the first 13 secs. or so.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=paF0rBNksDM&feature=related[/ame]

 

[Mr. Jones]

SO you've heard controlled demolitions but you think the collapses on 9-11 were similar?

I would check in with an audiologist if I were you.

You surly have heard a shotgun blast.. that's how loud the NIST spokesman said it would be? There were explosions, and there are witnesses that heard them! The explosion wouldn't have to be as loud as NIST claims in the video, if thermate was used. Again, the other side have valid reasons for questioning, and calling them out on this BS. These people aren't kooks, they have valid points, and make good arguments against the official version. NIST has to say a never before phenomena occurred to explain it away. Bullshit.

I guess ignorance is not bliss. You sound really pissed.

How about a narrative in your own words describing what happened that day from your stand point?

I'll wager you're too scared to write one.

Man up for a change.

You want me to write you a ******* narrative? You are delusional. If you don't want to do your own research, don't expect people here to do it for you. It's sad enough folks take the time to post videos and links that you probably don't even look at, or refuse to acknowledge. If you want alternative theories to what happened, look it up. You man up for a change.

 

[Wayne1954]

it says exactly what I claim.. If column 79 was blasted the collapse would occur but they claim the noise would be to great "as loud as a shot gun blast" and that was not heard or reported... Therefore it never happened

=========================
Sounds of Explosions! Why Yes!

"Newly obtained 9/11 eyewitness footage that NIST fought tooth and nail to keep secret contains what appears to be the sound of explosions coming from the vicinity of WTC 7 after the collapse of the twin towers, offering yet more startling evidence that the building, which was not hit by a plane yet collapsed demolition style, was deliberately imploded.

The clip was released by NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) as part of a 3 terabyte package of video and photo data in response to a lawsuit brought by the International Center for 9/11 Studies. As we highlighted in our previous report, almost every single video studied as part of the release thus far contains damning evidence of controlled demolition on both the twin towers and WTC 7."

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrnmbUDeHus[/ame]

for the full story with more explosions that were not screened out:

http://www.infowars.com/new-911-footage-reveals-wtc-7-explosions/

 

[Wayne1954]

Mr. SFC Ollie:

It is clear from the you-tube video that you linked to that you have no idea about the rigorous physical analysis that was done. Mr Jones' (and many other authors) paper didn't just look at random meterials that were found, they were looking at specific remnants of chips of a nanothermite.

What you are saying is like saying "that when you cross an active battlefield, why should you be afraid of anything, after all, lead copper and steel are everywhere." In fact the ways that those elements are present in the battlefield is far different than the next day. Same with the red-gray chips ... those atoms dont just don't land together like that and be so highly energized that they are "explosive."

Do some technical research before posting something that technically unsound.

 

[SFC Ollie]

Mr. SFC Ollie:

It is clear from the you-tube video that you linked to that you have no idea about the rigorous physical analysis that was done. Mr Jones' (and many other authors) paper didn't just look at random meterials that were found, they were looking at specific remnants of chips of a nanothermite.

What you are saying is like saying "that when you cross an active battlefield, why should you be afraid of anything, after all, lead copper and steel are everywhere." In fact the ways that those elements are present in the battlefield is far different than the next day. Same with the red-gray chips ... those atoms dont just don't land together like that and be so highly energized that they are "explosive."

Do some technical research before posting something that technically unsound.

That's funny, you guys are really really bad at this.

Nano chips that are explosive but didn't explode in the middle of the disaster of 9-11-01, and who is it that somehow finds this?

And the experts at NIST flat out told you that they found no evidence of demolitions. But hey they represent the government right? So they must be lying. I wonder what the total count is up to now of the people who were involved but haven't spoke out..... Must be nearing 10,000 by now if not more.

BTW, there was no explosion as building 7 fell. There is the sound of a building falling. Notice it is over 5 seconds from the time the penthouse falls before the camera man even realizes that the building was coming down.

DO play again.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

The responses in this thread by people that refuse to even think the official 9-11 conspiracy is bullshit clearly illustrates just how irrational some peoples' defenses can be. It's like they are faced with the possibility that their beloved old uncle Sam, is the prime suspect of decades long serial murders. It's fear, and cowardice and lack of objectivity. Some people will never accept the possibility that they have been duped all their lives, and they are hopeless and are a waste of time. Polls are showing more and more people are questioning the official account of 9-11 so, you shouldn't spend a lot of time and effort on those who strongly resist change. You only have to help and protect those who want to change.
"The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists." ~ J. Edgar Hoover, Director of the FBI
"Such reactions are emotionally based. 9/11 is a very emotionally charged issue. The source of the denial and resistance is FEAR. The implications of 9/11 Truth are very scary for most people to take in. Given that a part of our government's job description is keeping its citizens safe, it's terrifying to consider that a secret rogue part of our government will do just the opposite -- mass murder those very citizens, in order to advance dark agendas -- like wars for corporate empire. To further consider that associated 'secret teams' would then put out corporate media cover-up stories, in the form of an elaborate fantasy story backed up with planted evidence, and to think that story was nearly universally accepted without question -- this is the stuff of nightmares."
The intensity of fear brought up by these vast implications causes defense mechanisms to take over our rational thought processes. Such denial most often overrides rationality.
Questioning the official story of 9/11 threatens the foundations of our society, or at least seems to. It challenges our fellow citizens' belief systems regarding the nature of our government, and even the very nature of our nation. Such questioning is far more profound than, say, questioning a war. Accepting the truth of 9/11 is, for many, a major paradigm shift, an inverting of their worldview. Such shifts risk a period of chaos and uncertainty, which many find scary.

In his book As If We Were Grownups, author Jeff Golden's thoughtful assertion is that, "We consistently elect [political] candidates who tell us what children would want to hear. Children want to hear that everything is okay, that little is required of them, that they can go out and play or watch TV, and that they'll be taken care of and protected. In exchange, they are expected to be seen and not heard, to pay their taxes, to take their flu shots, and to not question the authorities."

To believe 9/11 Truth, one also has to believe many other difficult truths, such as:

* Parts of our corporate media must be incredibly corrupt to be complicit in such a massive cover-up;
* There must be a powerful, secret, hidden government that is capable of planning and executing such a horrible and unthinkable act;
* Some of our leaders are more corrupt and malicious than most of us would want to believe.
""Most people prefer to believe their leaders are just and fair even in the face of evidence to the contrary, because once a citizen acknowledges that the government under which they live is lying and corrupt, the citizen has to choose what he or she will do about it. To take action in the face of a corrupt government entails risks of harm to life and loved ones. To choose to do nothing is to surrender one's self-image of standing for principles. Most people do not have the courage to face that choice. Hence, most propaganda is not designed to fool the critical thinker but only to give moral cowards an excuse not to think at all."

The Truth is Not Enough: How to Overcome Emotional Barriers to 9/11 Truth
The Truth is Not Enough: How to Overcome Emotional Barriers to 9/11 Truth - 911truth.org

you my friend are making way too much sense for the Bush dupes to comprehend.They wont read this post.they will just cover their ears and close their eyes to it im afraid.thats what they always do when confronted with well thought out posts like this one.

 

[Mr. Jones]

One more time, this is what a controlled demolition looks like and sounds like.

Notice there is a series of explosions before the building starts to move, it begins to fall with the second series of explosions.

Your mention of thermite we will simply have to hide a smile and pretend you didn't mention it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79sJ1bMR6VQ

Hey I'm not a scholar, architect, nor an engineer, and I'm assuming neither are you, so we have to put our faith in people that have the knowledge and skill to look at this situation objectively. There are 2 sides that are competing for your approval of their presentation of the facts. One is the government, who has not presented a viable story IMO, according to the science presented and has often lied to its citizens, in many peoples opinions. The other side are people who are not government appointed, non biased, and are under no pressure to produce or manufacture evidence, at the govs. behest, and come from all over the fields of science and technology, aviation, military etc.. And they present a compelling counter point, that the NIST, and the gov. have not even considered on many points. Countless people are saying the collapse looked looked a CD, the collapse exhibited all the trademarks of a CD, but one that was brought down by an unconventional agent, thermite. NIST doesn't mention the pools of molten metal in the sub structures of the buildings that lingered for months afterward! WTF? NIST didn't talk to eyewitnesses, and left a lot of things out of the investigation. That doesn't sound like a thorough investigation to a lot of people, myself included.

Notice there is a series of explosions before the building starts to move, it begins to fall with the second series of explosions.


NIST left out what?

NIST conducted an extremely thorough three-year investigation into what caused the WTC towers to collapse, as explained in NIST’s dedicated Web site, NIST and the World Trade Center. This included consideration of a number of hypotheses for the collapses of the towers.

Some 200 technical experts—including about 85 career NIST experts and 125 leading experts from the private sector and academia—reviewed tens of thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000 segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse.

Based on this comprehensive investigation, NIST concluded that the WTC towers collapsed because: (1) the impact of the planes severed and damaged support columns, dislodged fireproofing insulation coating the steel floor trusses and steel columns, and widely dispersed jet fuel over multiple floors; and (2) the subsequent unusually large jet-fuel ignited multi-floor fires (which reached temperatures as high as 1,000 degrees Celsius) significantly weakened the floors and columns with dislodged fireproofing to the point where floors sagged and pulled inward on the perimeter columns. This led to the inward bowing of the perimeter columns and failure of the south face of WTC 1 and the east face of WTC 2, initiating the collapse of each of the towers. Both photographic and video evidence—as well as accounts from the New York Police Department aviation unit during a half-hour period prior to collapse—support this sequence for each tower.

NIST's Investigation of the Sept. 11 World Trade Center Disaster - Frequently Asked Questions

All of which has been argued against with compelling counter points and facts.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Oh yes there are so many out there who want to believe this is an inside job. You know if you guys could produce some physical evidence instead of "Because I said so" BS, then maybe some of the rest of us could look at it without laughing. And if you could argue a point without calling people liars that might help too.

I don't mind admitting that I could be wrong, but I never lie. So show us some real physical evidence instead of BS made up stuff., because we will first debunk anything you present, with real facts.

There are polls suggesting that the official version of 9-11 is not as accurate. 54% in this one. Some opinions in this poll are divided as to who, and many aren't sure, but it shows they aren't convinced that the govs. story is true.

"Theorizing about what happened on 9/11, when you're not being given answers to your questions about that day by the people who SHOULD be able to do so, is PERFECTLY normal. As is suspecting that the reason these answers aren't being given is "sinister" in nature. After 9 plus years of obfuscation, spin, lies, and cover-ups regarding the 9/11 attacks, it is unavoidable to think that criminal complicity is the reason why. we have not proven it beyond the shadow of doubt. We do not have documentation that shows they planned it. We do not have a signed confession from someone. We have pieces of the puzzle, and to most of us that have been doing this a long time, those pieces point to more than just Osama Bin Laden, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and 19 hijackers.
I would like to say that I am convinced some elements within our Government, and others were complicit in the attacks of 9/11. The information that exists today clearly points in that direction. We have pieces to the puzzle, and we KNOW who refuses to give up the other pieces."
Here's a link to 50 facts that all concerned might find interesting about 9-11. Yeah it's what you all call a truther site. I hope your anger and disdain for the people you argue with on here can be put aside for a while and you take the time to read it with an open mind, the page has links to the information sources. This shouldn't be a war between us citizens, it should be us against those that want to keep the truth covered up. The more this issue divides us the less chance we will have of getting answers and finding out what really happened.

The Facts Speak For Themselves - 911truth.org

I read the first 15 or so of your facts. They can mostly either be dismissed as having little or nothing to do with the attacks or they can be explained. There is no prove there of any Government involvement. Oh and I am not angry with anyone on here. I simply will not be called a liar by anyone. I think that is rather reasonable.

funny because thats all you ever do is lie in your posts all the time.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

THAT WAS THE POINT OF THE THREAD 911 FACTS NO THEORIES.

Here's the SFC OLLIE QUOTE, "I read the first 15 or so of your facts. They can mostly either be dismissed as having little or nothing to do with the attacks or they can be explained."

Let's see you refute any fact listed with credible proof. NO THEORIES, NO BULLSHIT.

thats all Gomer and the Bush dupes can do or use to defend it,is theories and bullshit.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

1,682 VIEWS SO FAR.

There hasn't been 1 of the 15 facts sited that has ever been mentioned let alone proved false.

All they have are baseless name calling -- idiot, moron -- and outright lies.

BRAINWASHED LOSERS. They won't consider they are brainwashed and manipulated by the media which hid more than 40 warnings to Bush. Massoui was arrested before 911, tried and convicted in a court of law as one of the terrorists. The entire crime was filmed. 118 fire fighters witnessed explosions. Steel beams landed on roofs 200 yards from the WTC. See the explosion of the south tower while the north tower is burning. All 3 towers dropped at free fall speed. None toppled. All 3 dropped straight into their basements.

Great stuff there,all so true and accurate,yeah the Bush dupes here wont ever consider the fact that they were brainwashed and lied to ,they just want to live in denial and keep covering their ears and closing their eyes when they are proven wrong all the time.

 

[SFC Ollie]

There are polls suggesting that the official version of 9-11 is not as accurate. 54% in this one. Some opinions in this poll are divided as to who, and many aren't sure, but it shows they aren't convinced that the govs. story is true.

"Theorizing about what happened on 9/11, when you're not being given answers to your questions about that day by the people who SHOULD be able to do so, is PERFECTLY normal. As is suspecting that the reason these answers aren't being given is "sinister" in nature. After 9 plus years of obfuscation, spin, lies, and cover-ups regarding the 9/11 attacks, it is unavoidable to think that criminal complicity is the reason why. we have not proven it beyond the shadow of doubt. We do not have documentation that shows they planned it. We do not have a signed confession from someone. We have pieces of the puzzle, and to most of us that have been doing this a long time, those pieces point to more than just Osama Bin Laden, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and 19 hijackers.
I would like to say that I am convinced some elements within our Government, and others were complicit in the attacks of 9/11. The information that exists today clearly points in that direction. We have pieces to the puzzle, and we KNOW who refuses to give up the other pieces."
Here's a link to 50 facts that all concerned might find interesting about 9-11. Yeah it's what you all call a truther site. I hope your anger and disdain for the people you argue with on here can be put aside for a while and you take the time to read it with an open mind, the page has links to the information sources. This shouldn't be a war between us citizens, it should be us against those that want to keep the truth covered up. The more this issue divides us the less chance we will have of getting answers and finding out what really happened.

The Facts Speak For Themselves - 911truth.org

I read the first 15 or so of your facts. They can mostly either be dismissed as having little or nothing to do with the attacks or they can be explained. There is no prove there of any Government involvement. Oh and I am not angry with anyone on here. I simply will not be called a liar by anyone. I think that is rather reasonable.

funny because thats all you ever do is lie in your posts all the time.

That's the last time you call me a liar. Now you can come up with a lie That I have said I may forget about this. But I was,am, and will always be a professional NCO, I do not lie. Say it again it's the last time you respond to me. Capice?

 

[DiveCon]

I read the first 15 or so of your facts. They can mostly either be dismissed as having little or nothing to do with the attacks or they can be explained. There is no prove there of any Government involvement. Oh and I am not angry with anyone on here. I simply will not be called a liar by anyone. I think that is rather reasonable.

funny because thats all you ever do is lie in your posts all the time.

That's the last time you call me a liar. Now you can come up with a lie That I have said I may forget about this. But I was,am, and will always be a professional NCO, I do not lie. Say it again it's the last time you respond to me. Capice?

hes a ******* moron, all he ever does is cheer-lead for other morons

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Ever heard and seen a controlled demolition? I thought not.

Woah, You didn't even give me a chance to answer you with the " I thought not" remark. Hell yes I've seen and heard a controlled demolition, more then once. They paved the way for new buildings right down the street from my home years ago. Not to mention all the times on the tv. We've all seen those right? That's another reason why I, from a personal viewpoint, was shocked to see the similarities of what I saw on 9-11. As a matter of fact I knew a man who owns a demolition company, he has a side business selling memorabilia he took from the buildings, a real pack rat who should be on the hoarders tv show. It's like a museum walking in his business. Anyway, the whole thing just doesn't look right, the buildings fell too fast, even if it wasn't at free fall speed the entire way down, and the way the investigation was handled, and the way the evidence was swiftly hauled away, and the way the gov. didn't even want to look into it so as to provide undisputed proof that the people they blamed for it, did indeed do it, it doesn't make them look credible.

SO you've heard controlled demolitions but you think the collapses on 9-11 were similar?

I would check in with an audiologist if I were you.

you and your fellow Bush dupes have been taken to school stupid moron.this post below was taken from a demolitions experts on 9/11 google search.Even Tom Sullivan the lead team member of CDI-CONTROLLED DEMOLITION INCORPORATED,has said the destruction of the towers could have only happened from a controlled demolition.He has said that MANY times. You 9/11 offical conspiracy theory apologists love making morons out of yourselves by blatantly ignoring credible sources such as Tom Sullivan obviously. "rolls on floor laughing."

The video is nearly 2 hours long, but the details start early. Physicists,engineers,fire and demolition experts, explain how some of the official versions contradict the laws of Physics
The Third WTC building WTC 7 is not mentioned much. 7 hours after the first two towers collapsed, this building 48 stories high collapsed in 6.8 seconds. an apple dropped from that height takes 6. It was reinforced, and there was insufficient damage to cause such a collapse.
The post 9/11 dust was reported to be safe. it was loaded with Mercury from flurescant lights, and Asbestos. Tests found It had a Ph (Alkalinity) of 12 .Ammonia 11.5 and Bleach 12.5 are a comparison.
Rescue workers were told this dust was SAFE. They were told NOT to wear masks as it would alarm the public. It was "essential" to get the money flowing through Wall St no matter what the cost to the people. Particularly the rescuers. Engineers drew from facts, instead of declaring a conclusion, and finding evidence to confirm i

 

[Wayne1954]

Nano chips that are explosive but didn't explode in the middle of the disaster of 9-11-01, and who is it that somehow finds this?

And the experts at NIST flat out told you that they found no evidence of demolitions. But hey they represent the government right? So they must be lying. I wonder what the total count is up to now of the people who were involved but haven't spoke out..... Must be nearing 10,000 by now if not more.

DO play again.

http://www.hopeoutloud.org/images/AdvancedPhysics.png

Hmmm ... Actually they said that they did not look for explosives, because there was no evidence that they were there ... so why waste time looking for something they "knew" wasn't there.

So the pictures on this panel are from the Stephen Jones (et al) Paper on the red-gray chips from the WTC dust. If we look at the last figure we see the results from a Differential Scanning Calorimeter (DSC) test. A differential scanning calorimeter is a device in which you put a small sample of material. You then put a known amount of heat energy into it. If the temperature increase is greater that the heat you put in, the material is reacting and giving off heat. If you look at the red trace, this is for the best nano-thermite that has been described in the literature. It was from Tillison in 2001. From this graph, you can see that the red-line is relatively flat until about 540 degrees C when it becomes exothermic and gives off a lot of extra energy. By the time 600 degrees C is reached, all of the material is completely reacted. If you were to do the same test with the tiny red-gray chips you would see that the material becomes exothermic at a lower level and there is a much narrower temperature range starting at 440 degrees C. This much narrower and more energetic band suggest that there is an even finer mixing, at the atomic level, of the iron, oxygen and aluminum. These shorter distances between the atoms increases the reaction speed and with this much energy, the material could be considered to be explosive. If this were to be so energetic as to explode, the elemental iron from the reaction that I just described, would be exploded out into the air and then it would cool in the atmosphere creating lots of tiny iron spheres.

So other than saying "Wayne ... it ain't so" what physical evidence do you have of the official story whereby fire cause the complete destruction of the three skyscrapers?

 

[SFC Ollie]

Woah, You didn't even give me a chance to answer you with the " I thought not" remark. Hell yes I've seen and heard a controlled demolition, more then once. They paved the way for new buildings right down the street from my home years ago. Not to mention all the times on the tv. We've all seen those right? That's another reason why I, from a personal viewpoint, was shocked to see the similarities of what I saw on 9-11. As a matter of fact I knew a man who owns a demolition company, he has a side business selling memorabilia he took from the buildings, a real pack rat who should be on the hoarders tv show. It's like a museum walking in his business. Anyway, the whole thing just doesn't look right, the buildings fell too fast, even if it wasn't at free fall speed the entire way down, and the way the investigation was handled, and the way the evidence was swiftly hauled away, and the way the gov. didn't even want to look into it so as to provide undisputed proof that the people they blamed for it, did indeed do it, it doesn't make them look credible.

SO you've heard controlled demolitions but you think the collapses on 9-11 were similar?

I would check in with an audiologist if I were you.

you and your fellow Bush dupes have been taken to school stupid moron.Even Tom Sullivan the lead team member of CDI-CONTROLLED DEMOLITION INCORPORATED,has said the destruction of the towers could have only happened from a controlled demolition.You 9/11 offical conspiracy theory apologists love making morons out of yourselves by blatatnly ignoring credible sourse such as Tom Sullivan obviously. "rolls on floor laughing."

The video is nearly 2 hours long, but the details start early. Physicists,engineers,fire and demolition experts, explain how some of the official versions contradict the laws of Physics
The Third WTC building WTC 7 is not mentioned much. 7 hours after the first two towers collapsed, this building 48 stories high collapsed in 6.8 seconds. an apple dropped from that height takes 6. It was reinforced, and there was insufficient damage to cause such a collapse.
The post 9/11 dust was reported to be safe. it was loaded with Mercury from flurescant lights, and Asbestos. Tests found It had a Ph (Alkalinity) of 12 .Ammonia 11.5 and Bleach 12.5 are a comparison.
Rescue workers were told this dust was SAFE. They were told NOT to wear masks as it would alarm the public. It was "essential" to get the money flowing through Wall St no matter what the cost to the people. Particularly the rescuers. Engineers drew from facts, instead of declaring a conclusion, and finding evidence to confirm i

Wrong, wrong wrong. But keep trying.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

I HAVE GIVEN YOU THE SOURCE OVER AND OVER AND YOUR QUESTION SHOWS YOUR COMPLETE LACK OF UNDERSTANDING OF THE NIST PROGRESSIVE COLLAPSE THEORY


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=paF0rBNksDM&playnext=1&list=PL7366B73F9A934166&index=3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kcaxvQGdmtw&list=PL7366B73F9A934166&index=5&playnext=2

In the first video, the spokesman states that fire was the reason this particular building came down. He also states that clearly no building is created to withstand a collision by an airplane which goes against what information is available. There are numerous occasions when hirise buildings burned for even longer periods of time, without collapsing. The other side contradicts these statements, and have a reasonable argument to ask for another investigation. A new phenomena that causes building collapse has just been discovered! What a bunch of bullshit!

Mr Jones your wasting your time with Gomer Pyle Ollie and Ditzcon.

Ollie,Candycorn troll boy,Slackjawed,and Fizz are all disinformation agents that have penetrated this site,they would never keep coming back here for their constant ass beatings they get if they were not well paid for it,they would never post for free.Ditzcon, he is just a kid troll who is here just to troll and call people names cause he has no life,nothing more.

 

[DiveCon]

*******&

RAH RAH RAH SIS BOOM BAH GOOOOOO!!! TEAM!!!!!!!!!!!!!

thats all you said

 

[SFC Ollie]

Nano chips that are explosive but didn't explode in the middle of the disaster of 9-11-01, and who is it that somehow finds this?

And the experts at NIST flat out told you that they found no evidence of demolitions. But hey they represent the government right? So they must be lying. I wonder what the total count is up to now of the people who were involved but haven't spoke out..... Must be nearing 10,000 by now if not more.

DO play again.

www [dot] hopeoutloud.org/images/AdvancedPhysics.png

Hmmm ... Actually they said that they did not look for explosives, because there was no evidence that they were there ... so why waste time looking for something they "knew" wasn't there.

So the pictures on this panel are from the Stephen Jones (et al) Paper on the red-gray chips from the WTC dust. If we look at the last figure we see the results from a Differential Scanning Calorimeter (DSC) test. A differential scanning calorimeter is a device in which you put a small sample of material. You then put a known amount of heat energy into it. If the temperature increase is greater that the heat you put in, the material is reacting and giving off heat. If you look at the red trace, this is for the best nano-thermite that has been described in the literature. It was from Tillison in 2001. From this graph, you can see that the red-line is relatively flat until about 540 degrees C when it becomes exothermic and gives off a lot of extra energy. By the time 600 degrees C is reached, all of the material is completely reacted. If you were to do the same test with the tiny red-gray chips you would see that the material becomes exothermic at a lower level and there is a much narrower temperature range starting at 440 degrees C. This much narrower and more energetic band suggest that there is an even finer mixing, at the atomic level, of the iron, oxygen and aluminum. These shorter distances between the atoms increases the reaction speed and with this much energy, the material could be considered to be explosive. If this were to be so energetic as to explode, the elemental iron from the reaction that I just described, would be exploded out into the air and then it would cool in the atmosphere creating lots of tiny iron spheres.

So other than saying "Wayne ... it ain't so" what physical evidence do you have of the official story whereby fire cause the complete destruction of the three skyscrapers?

I never have said and I don't believe that anyone competent has ever said that fire brought down three skyscrapers. There is a small matter of 2 airliners crashing into two of the largest (or tallest) man-made structures in the world and causing massive damage to the integrity of those buildings. You see when you add that fact to the mix, how do you hit those buildings just so perfectly so that you don't screw up the pre-planted explosives or without setting off the thermite too soon? Because if you set off the thermite at the time of collision the buildings would have fell right then. So please explain how they delayed the demolition.

SO now go ahead and add the planes and the damage they did to the buildings and the timing into the mix, and then tell me how it worked.

And Sorry I'm not looking for it again right now but I did read a report about these particles being found, but they were in the wrong combinations to actually be thermite. Because as we all should know, all the components of thermite are in most any office building.

 

[eots]

Nano chips that are explosive but didn't explode in the middle of the disaster of 9-11-01, and who is it that somehow finds this?

And the experts at NIST flat out told you that they found no evidence of demolitions. But hey they represent the government right? So they must be lying. I wonder what the total count is up to now of the people who were involved but haven't spoke out..... Must be nearing 10,000 by now if not more.

DO play again.

www [dot] hopeoutloud.org/images/AdvancedPhysics.png

Hmmm ... Actually they said that they did not look for explosives, because there was no evidence that they were there ... so why waste time looking for something they "knew" wasn't there.

So the pictures on this panel are from the Stephen Jones (et al) Paper on the red-gray chips from the WTC dust. If we look at the last figure we see the results from a Differential Scanning Calorimeter (DSC) test. A differential scanning calorimeter is a device in which you put a small sample of material. You then put a known amount of heat energy into it. If the temperature increase is greater that the heat you put in, the material is reacting and giving off heat. If you look at the red trace, this is for the best nano-thermite that has been described in the literature. It was from Tillison in 2001. From this graph, you can see that the red-line is relatively flat until about 540 degrees C when it becomes exothermic and gives off a lot of extra energy. By the time 600 degrees C is reached, all of the material is completely reacted. If you were to do the same test with the tiny red-gray chips you would see that the material becomes exothermic at a lower level and there is a much narrower temperature range starting at 440 degrees C. This much narrower and more energetic band suggest that there is an even finer mixing, at the atomic level, of the iron, oxygen and aluminum. These shorter distances between the atoms increases the reaction speed and with this much energy, the material could be considered to be explosive. If this were to be so energetic as to explode, the elemental iron from the reaction that I just described, would be exploded out into the air and then it would cool in the atmosphere creating lots of tiny iron spheres.

So other than saying "Wayne ... it ain't so" what physical evidence do you have of the official story whereby fire cause the complete destruction of the three skyscrapers?

I never have said and I don't believe that anyone competent has ever said that fire brought down three skyscrapers. There is a small matter of 2 airliners crashing into two of the largest (or tallest) man-made structures in the world and causing massive damage to the integrity of those buildings. You see when you add that fact to the mix, how do you hit those buildings just so perfectly so that you don't screw up the pre-planted explosives or without setting off the thermite too soon? Because if you set off the thermite at the time of collision the buildings would have fell right then. So please explain how they delayed the demolition.

SO now go ahead and add the planes and the damage they did to the buildings and the timing into the mix, and then tell me how it worked.

And Sorry I'm not looking for it again right now but I did read a report about these particles being found, but they were in the wrong combinations to actually be thermite. Because as we all should know, all the components of thermite are in most any office building.

bullshit

 

[DiveCon]

www [dot] hopeoutloud.org/images/AdvancedPhysics.png

Hmmm ... Actually they said that they did not look for explosives, because there was no evidence that they were there ... so why waste time looking for something they "knew" wasn't there.

So the pictures on this panel are from the Stephen Jones (et al) Paper on the red-gray chips from the WTC dust. If we look at the last figure we see the results from a Differential Scanning Calorimeter (DSC) test. A differential scanning calorimeter is a device in which you put a small sample of material. You then put a known amount of heat energy into it. If the temperature increase is greater that the heat you put in, the material is reacting and giving off heat. If you look at the red trace, this is for the best nano-thermite that has been described in the literature. It was from Tillison in 2001. From this graph, you can see that the red-line is relatively flat until about 540 degrees C when it becomes exothermic and gives off a lot of extra energy. By the time 600 degrees C is reached, all of the material is completely reacted. If you were to do the same test with the tiny red-gray chips you would see that the material becomes exothermic at a lower level and there is a much narrower temperature range starting at 440 degrees C. This much narrower and more energetic band suggest that there is an even finer mixing, at the atomic level, of the iron, oxygen and aluminum. These shorter distances between the atoms increases the reaction speed and with this much energy, the material could be considered to be explosive. If this were to be so energetic as to explode, the elemental iron from the reaction that I just described, would be exploded out into the air and then it would cool in the atmosphere creating lots of tiny iron spheres.

So other than saying "Wayne ... it ain't so" what physical evidence do you have of the official story whereby fire cause the complete destruction of the three skyscrapers?

I never have said and I don't believe that anyone competent has ever said that fire brought down three skyscrapers. There is a small matter of 2 airliners crashing into two of the largest (or tallest) man-made structures in the world and causing massive damage to the integrity of those buildings. You see when you add that fact to the mix, how do you hit those buildings just so perfectly so that you don't screw up the pre-planted explosives or without setting off the thermite too soon? Because if you set off the thermite at the time of collision the buildings would have fell right then. So please explain how they delayed the demolition.

SO now go ahead and add the planes and the damage they did to the buildings and the timing into the mix, and then tell me how it worked.

And Sorry I'm not looking for it again right now but I did read a report about these particles being found, but they were in the wrong combinations to actually be thermite. Because as we all should know, all the components of thermite are in most any office building.

bullshit

no, it isnt
but then you post bullshit so much its not surprising you dont know what is and what isnt