911 WTC 7 Silent Thermate Demolition, Debunkers Grab Your Ankles!

[KokomoJojo]

do you think that maybe its because the kid who built it in his back yard didnt construct it according to the patents?

No. I think its because there would have to be tens of thousands, hundreds of which would have been dislodged by the planes crashing into the towers. And because the patented version wouldn't even self consume.

Don't worry yourself with such details as 'self consuming'. Koko has a completely different thermite diagram to show you of a completely different 'cutter' that supposed to self consume. Its not actually a cutter, but an igniter. And it can't even remotely cut through a girder.
But when you point this out, Koko will go back to the original cutter. That doesn't self consume.
When you point this out, Koko returns to the self consuming model that doesn't cut shit.
Brainwash. Rinse. Repeat.

So what do you think it is? You've been observing the nature and methods of these 9/11 "Truthers." What drives them to make such silly arguments and half-baked conclusions?

They've internalized their conspiracy. They've Jack Burton'd their narrative. And made their imagined ability to 'see what no one else can see, do what no one else can do' part of their identity.

So if you point out holes in their theories, they get wildly defensive or evasive. As you're essentially attacking a piece of who they are. Equally, they need to perpetuate their stories to maintain this feeling of having 'special knowledge'.

Which is why most 'Truthers' are so invulnerable to contrary evidence. Acknowledging the holes in their theory is often seen as a personal failure or an almost blasphemous attack. As if you were talking shit about their religion. They shut down. And they will ignore anything, from any source, even their own....that contradicts their narrative.

problem is you havent punched holes in anything I posted, if you think you have by all means cite them and I will be happy to explain the facts to you.

how do you punch holes in a gigantic hole. nothing you 've posted ever is based on fact...

it seems to work on the amoeba you call a brain as you manage to demonstrate in every post. Now if you could only a find a few more maybe you could conjure up a coherent post.

 

[KokomoJojo]

I saw the buildings collapse-----they neither imploded
as one sees in a controlled demolition-----nor did anything
SHOOT outward----horizontally-----until the collapse hit bottom
when the energy of the collapse propelled stuff all over
the city-----from the bottom outward-----bodies were not thrown
out THEY JUMPED------some fell out and down-----nothing got TOSSED out from the upper end

Might be an awesome post if you can PROVE IT

Lets see your EVIDENCE and examine how you conjured up your assumptions.

Oh btw the whole world saw the building collapse DUH!

 

[KokomoJojo]

You retard. I challenged you for proof that a "thermate cutter" existed in 2001 -- not proof of a drawing of one.

Making an ass of yourself does not impress anyone.

Both thermate cutters and thermate welders existed when they made the railroad.

Face it you should have stayed in school instead of doing so many drugs.

The thermite (thermit) reaction was discovered in 1893 and patented in 1895 by German chemist Hans Goldschmidt.[7] Consequently, the reaction is sometimes called the "Goldschmidt reaction" or "Goldschmidt process". Goldschmidt was originally interested in producing very pure metals by avoiding the use of carbon in smelting, but he soon discovered the value of thermite in welding.[8]

The first commercial application of thermite was the welding of tram tracks in Essen in 1899.[9]

Actually making an ass out of myself would shock many people, making an ass out of you on the other hand is another story, with both brains tied behind my head.

Have a wonderful day

Holyfuckingshit!!

After all your posting, it turns out you don't know the difference between "thermite welding" and a "thermate cutter."



That would be like you saying the Chinese had AK-47s in the 1300's because they invented gunpowder in the 9th century.

geezus yer a dumbass.

why dont you tell us what you think is so vastly different outside the way it is applied to the material.

Dont hold your breath people the dumbass cant answer that.

The difference is a cutter, as you insanely claim was employed to bring down the Twin Towers, didn't exist yet. Again, this is akin to my gun powder analogy. What a pity you're not equipped with the necessary tools to grasp it.

And of course, where were they in the wreckage. The cutter would have been enormous, obvious, the source of huge quantities of slag, and numbered by the 10s of thousands.

Yet.....jack shit.

and you base that on what? as usual your wild imagination?

 

[KokomoJojo]

US4216721.pdf describes a "thermite penetration device" that was patented on August 12, 1980 (after having been filed for in 1972).

US5698812.pdf describes a "thermite destructive device" patented in 1997, which improved on the former device by venting the top (note that the potential for use with thermate-th3 is explicitly mentioned in the document).

Both devices could serve the purpose of a "thermate cutter charge", and both had long been available to military contractors on 9/11/01.

true.

thermate cutters are made with highly doped incendiary materials, very little thermate is required and it operates like a cety torch for all intents and purposes, only can slich through virtually any reasonable thickness of steel as low as milliseconds, and of course like a torch you need very little gas.

 

[KokomoJojo]

Then where were they? Tocut a girder, you'd need something roughly the size of a compact car. And you'd need them by the thousands. ...

Not to concede the point as to the size or number of military-grade cutter charge devices required to account for the observable aspects of the "collapses", but where were many things that should have been present in the debris piles, absent the use of incendiaries/pyrotechnics? Several witnesses and participants in the clean-up efforts remarked on the virtual lack of recognizable pieces from the enormous quantity of office equipment, furniture, ETC., particularly from the vast majority of the lower floors of the Twins, which, according to the official story, experienced few or no fires prior to the "collapses". What were discovered at the bottom of the piles (indicating self-contained oxygen sources) were streams and pools of molten metals, which should lead any rational person to wonder whether that's where many of the conspicuously missing objects ended up.

It's also perfectly reasonable to suspect that any badly mangled remnants of demolition devices that may have been recovered (perhaps unknowingly) during the clean-up stages were likely shipped-out (in quick fasion) along with the bulk of the crime scene evidence.

Regarding the majority of the "thermitic reactions", they took place from the inside-out and were therefore covered, first by the intact building materials/components and then by the horizontally ejected clouds of pulverized building materials/components (along with everything else in the buildings, including human beings). This was particularly effective in the top-down initiations of the "collapses" of buildings 1 and 2, because the laterally-ejected debris clouds also cascaded downward due to gravity, providing some cover for what was going on with lower portions of the buildings at the time of their respective destructions. Having said all of that, there were possible thermitic reactions caught on tape during what may have been either an intentional pre-weakening ignition or an unintentional one of the pre-coated interior columns/walls. I'm talking about the videos of yellow/reddish molten metal pouring out from exploded windows prior to the "collapses". There were also a number of "squibs" caught on camera during the "collapses", which are typical of top-down implosions (I think there's a video out there of a known top-down demolition of a high-rise building in China, in which all the characteristics observed in the destructions of buildings 1 and 2 are visible, as well).

As for how my beliefs are working out for me, all I can say is that remaining true to my core principles is its own reward, yes, even in the face of heavy ridicule from sell-outs like you and others on this board.

 

[Faun]

Both thermate cutters and thermate welders existed when they made the railroad.

Face it you should have stayed in school instead of doing so many drugs.
Actually making an ass out of myself would shock many people, making an ass out of you on the other hand is another story, with both brains tied behind my head.

Have a wonderful day

Holyfuckingshit!!

After all your posting, it turns out you don't know the difference between "thermite welding" and a "thermate cutter."



That would be like you saying the Chinese had AK-47s in the 1300's because they invented gunpowder in the 9th century.

geezus yer a dumbass.

why dont you tell us what you think is so vastly different outside the way it is applied to the material.

Dont hold your breath people the dumbass cant answer that.

The difference is a cutter, as you insanely claim was employed to bring down the Twin Towers, didn't exist yet. Again, this is akin to my gun powder analogy. What a pity you're not equipped with the necessary tools to grasp it.

And of course, where were they in the wreckage. The cutter would have been enormous, obvious, the source of huge quantities of slag, and numbered by the 10s of thousands.

Yet.....jack shit.

and you base that on what? as usual your wild imagination?

 

[Faun]

Then where were they? Tocut a girder, you'd need something roughly the size of a compact car. And you'd need them by the thousands. ...

Not to concede the point as to the size or number of military-grade cutter charge devices required to account for the observable aspects of the "collapses", but where were many things that should have been present in the debris piles, absent the use of incendiaries/pyrotechnics? Several witnesses and participants in the clean-up efforts remarked on the virtual lack of recognizable pieces from the enormous quantity of office equipment, furniture, ETC., particularly from the vast majority of the lower floors of the Twins, which, according to the official story, experienced few or no fires prior to the "collapses". What were discovered at the bottom of the piles (indicating self-contained oxygen sources) were streams and pools of molten metals, which should lead any rational person to wonder whether that's where many of the conspicuously missing objects ended up.

It's also perfectly reasonable to suspect that any badly mangled remnants of demolition devices that may have been recovered (perhaps unknowingly) during the clean-up stages were likely shipped-out (in quick fasion) along with the bulk of the crime scene evidence.

Regarding the majority of the "thermitic reactions", they took place from the inside-out and were therefore covered, first by the intact building materials/components and then by the horizontally ejected clouds of pulverized building materials/components (along with everything else in the buildings, including human beings). This was particularly effective in the top-down initiations of the "collapses" of buildings 1 and 2, because the laterally-ejected debris clouds also cascaded downward due to gravity, providing some cover for what was going on with lower portions of the buildings at the time of their respective destructions. Having said all of that, there were possible thermitic reactions caught on tape during what may have been either an intentional pre-weakening ignition or an unintentional one of the pre-coated interior columns/walls. I'm talking about the videos of yellow/reddish molten metal pouring out from exploded windows prior to the "collapses". There were also a number of "squibs" caught on camera during the "collapses", which are typical of top-down implosions (I think there's a video out there of a known top-down demolition of a high-rise building in China, in which all the characteristics observed in the destructions of buildings 1 and 2 are visible, as well).

As for how my beliefs are working out for me, all I can say is that remaining true to my core principles is its own reward, yes, even in the face of heavy ridicule from sell-outs like you and others on this board.

You are truly demented. Only a fruit loop dingus is incapable of noticing the demolitions you post exhibit explosions before the structures begin to collapse. Unlike the Twin Towers.

That you have to resort to lying exposes just how vacuous your insane claims are.

 

[irosie91]

I saw the buildings collapse-----they neither imploded
as one sees in a controlled demolition-----nor did anything
SHOOT outward----horizontally-----until the collapse hit bottom
when the energy of the collapse propelled stuff all over
the city-----from the bottom outward-----bodies were not thrown
out THEY JUMPED------some fell out and down-----nothing got TOSSED out from the upper end

Might be an awesome post if you can PROVE IT

Lets see your EVIDENCE and examine how you conjured up your assumptions.

Oh btw the whole world saw the building collapse DUH!

"prove" WHAT? -----as you say--- "the whole world saw it"
I really did not know that. then the whole world knows that there was no visible evidence of implosion and
people and objects were not jettisoned outward as one would
see in an EXPLOSION ---of the kind used in demolitions---- to what "assumptions" do you allude?

 

[SAYIT]

an inability to deal with reality mostly

Yeah, I've read that but sometimes I think it's something more.

true it is more

some people can not deal with the fact that a few people

or in some cases one person could do such horrible things

so they assign governmental conspiracies

in a way of dealing with it

read the footer below, pshychologists warn us that posers/debunkers/huggers are bat shit crazy losers.

Correspondence from James Bennett to Laurie Manwell with Responses
(06/17/07 to 06/17/07):
James Bennett:
I was reading your paper published at the Journal of 9/11 Studies, and I was wondering
why you misrepresented the Angus-Reid poll on page 16:
"An Angus-Reid poll comparing responses from 2002 and 2006 found similar results, and
that in 2006, only 16% of Americans believed that the government is telling the truth

about the events of 9/11[16].” "
If you go to the poll, which you footnote, you find that that question does not even ask
people whether they believe "the government is lying about the events of 9/11":
81. When it comes to what they knew prior to September 11th, 2001, about possible

terrorist attacks against the United States, do you think members of the Bush
Administration are telling the truth, are mostly telling the truth but hiding something, or
are they mostly lying?
On the contrary, it very specifically asks people whether they believe that government
was lying about warnings of terrorist attacks, not the attacks themselves. This becomes
even more obvious when you read the previous two poll questions, which ask whether
they believe the Clinton and Bush administrations paid enough attention to terrorism.
So I have to ask, why did you entirely change the premise of the question for your paper,
and are you going to issue a correction?
Laurie Manwell:
I must respectfully disagree with your interpretation. I did state in my paper that it was
regarding the "events of 9/11" which, in fact, includes prior knowledge of the attacks.
I would also argue that this fact itself, foreknowledge of the attacks, is the single most
important fact, because if properly dealt with, all of the events of 9/11 could have been

prevented.
Moreover, it speaks to the fact that the majority of people believe that George W. Bush is
lying about many things and consider such behavior to be above the law. Below are some
of the other questions that I also considered in making my statement. Misrepresentation
of the events of 9/11 – both before, during and after – have been well documented and
many people are becoming more and more aware that the official account of the events of
9/11 is full of lies.

not credible! any scientist making the above statements is erroneously speculating !
http://www.journalof911studies.com/letters/a/Correspondence from James Bennett to Laurie Manwell with Responses.pdf

James Bennett:
Thanks for the response, but I think you are being somewhat disingenuous. No
honest person is going to think that "what they knew prior to 9/11" and the
"events of 9/11" are synonymous. In fact even you indicate that you think
they are two different issues when you state that with prior knowledge of
the attacks "all of the events of 9/11 could have been prevented." If you
actually regarded these as interchangeable, that statement would be
illogical.
Incidentally that logic is also based on the assumption that the attacks were
carried out by a third party, not by the US government, as one does not
receives "warnings" from oneself, which seems to contradict your main
thesis.
Laurie Manwell:
It seems that you have an agenda here rather than open discussion of the topic of my
paper. Nowhere do I say that the US government "did it" and nor is my main thesis that.
All research is subject to interpretation and I include all of my sources for
verification.
If you strongly disagree I would encourage you to write a letter or article
for submission to the Journal of 9/11 Studies where we can debate this issue within an
academic - rather than personal - domain, as I am not sure what your point is other than
to attack me personally by calling me disingenuous.
If you wish to discuss the research professionally that is fine but I am not interested in
responding to questions regarding my character, especially since we do not even know
each other.
James Bennett:
Actually I would argue that you have a personal agenda, otherwise you would
not have changed the wording from "what they knew prior to September
11th, 2001," to "the events of 9/11". There is no reason to do that except to advance an
agenda.
I have already had letters posted on the Journal. I have no interest in
having any articles posted to what is essentially a crackpot echo
chamber without academic or intellectual standards.

great post dawes, too bad it doesnt have one damn thing to do with this thread.

C'mon, KooKoo, you're not stupid. 9/11HandJob has no options ... his whole world collapses without his 9/11 beliefs. So just what is it that causes you to cling so desperately to your 9/11 CT silliness even as so many of your comrades have bailed out? Fear that you are nothing without it? Just trying to get laid? Doing it for the laughs?

 

[KokomoJojo]

Then where were they? Tocut a girder, you'd need something roughly the size of a compact car. And you'd need them by the thousands. ...

Not to concede the point as to the size or number of military-grade cutter charge devices required to account for the observable aspects of the "collapses", but where were many things that should have been present in the debris piles, absent the use of incendiaries/pyrotechnics? Several witnesses and participants in the clean-up efforts remarked on the virtual lack of recognizable pieces from the enormous quantity of office equipment, furniture, ETC., particularly from the vast majority of the lower floors of the Twins, which, according to the official story, experienced few or no fires prior to the "collapses". What were discovered at the bottom of the piles (indicating self-contained oxygen sources) were streams and pools of molten metals, which should lead any rational person to wonder whether that's where many of the conspicuously missing objects ended up.

It's also perfectly reasonable to suspect that any badly mangled remnants of demolition devices that may have been recovered (perhaps unknowingly) during the clean-up stages were likely shipped-out (in quick fasion) along with the bulk of the crime scene evidence.

Regarding the majority of the "thermitic reactions", they took place from the inside-out and were therefore covered, first by the intact building materials/components and then by the horizontally ejected clouds of pulverized building materials/components (along with everything else in the buildings, including human beings). This was particularly effective in the top-down initiations of the "collapses" of buildings 1 and 2, because the laterally-ejected debris clouds also cascaded downward due to gravity, providing some cover for what was going on with lower portions of the buildings at the time of their respective destructions. Having said all of that, there were possible thermitic reactions caught on tape during what may have been either an intentional pre-weakening ignition or an unintentional one of the pre-coated interior columns/walls. I'm talking about the videos of yellow/reddish molten metal pouring out from exploded windows prior to the "collapses". There were also a number of "squibs" caught on camera during the "collapses", which are typical of top-down implosions (I think there's a video out there of a known top-down demolition of a high-rise building in China, in which all the characteristics observed in the destructions of buildings 1 and 2 are visible, as well).

As for how my beliefs are working out for me, all I can say is that remaining true to my core principles is its own reward, yes, even in the face of heavy ridicule from sell-outs like you and others on this board.

You are truly demented. Only a fruit loop dingus is incapable of noticing the demolitions you post exhibit explosions before the structures begin to collapse. Unlike the Twin Towers.

That you have to resort to lying exposes just how vacuous your insane claims are.

yeh if you were not a dumb ass youd be nothing at all! LOL



Capstone was kind enough to post a couple very well written explanations that obviously were wasted on ass helmets.

just watch the pretty sparklies

 

[KokomoJojo]

I saw the buildings collapse-----they neither imploded
as one sees in a controlled demolition-----nor did anything
SHOOT outward----horizontally-----until the collapse hit bottom
when the energy of the collapse propelled stuff all over
the city-----from the bottom outward-----bodies were not thrown
out THEY JUMPED------some fell out and down-----nothing got TOSSED out from the upper end

Might be an awesome post if you can PROVE IT

Lets see your EVIDENCE and examine how you conjured up your assumptions.

Oh btw the whole world saw the building collapse DUH!

"prove" WHAT? -----as you say--- "the whole world saw it"
I really did not know that. then the whole world knows that there was no visible evidence of implosion and
people and objects were not jettisoned outward as one would
see in an EXPLOSION ---of the kind used in demolitions---- to what "assumptions" do you allude?

yeh on tv dumb ass.

I suppose you are one of the idjits that believe everything you see on tv.

 

[KokomoJojo]

Yeah, I've read that but sometimes I think it's something more.

true it is more

some people can not deal with the fact that a few people

or in some cases one person could do such horrible things

so they assign governmental conspiracies

in a way of dealing with it

read the footer below, pshychologists warn us that posers/debunkers/huggers are bat shit crazy losers.

Correspondence from James Bennett to Laurie Manwell with Responses
(06/17/07 to 06/17/07):
James Bennett:
I was reading your paper published at the Journal of 9/11 Studies, and I was wondering
why you misrepresented the Angus-Reid poll on page 16:
"An Angus-Reid poll comparing responses from 2002 and 2006 found similar results, and
that in 2006, only 16% of Americans believed that the government is telling the truth

about the events of 9/11[16].” "
If you go to the poll, which you footnote, you find that that question does not even ask
people whether they believe "the government is lying about the events of 9/11":
81. When it comes to what they knew prior to September 11th, 2001, about possible

terrorist attacks against the United States, do you think members of the Bush
Administration are telling the truth, are mostly telling the truth but hiding something, or
are they mostly lying?
On the contrary, it very specifically asks people whether they believe that government
was lying about warnings of terrorist attacks, not the attacks themselves. This becomes
even more obvious when you read the previous two poll questions, which ask whether
they believe the Clinton and Bush administrations paid enough attention to terrorism.
So I have to ask, why did you entirely change the premise of the question for your paper,
and are you going to issue a correction?
Laurie Manwell:
I must respectfully disagree with your interpretation. I did state in my paper that it was
regarding the "events of 9/11" which, in fact, includes prior knowledge of the attacks.
I would also argue that this fact itself, foreknowledge of the attacks, is the single most
important fact, because if properly dealt with, all of the events of 9/11 could have been

prevented.
Moreover, it speaks to the fact that the majority of people believe that George W. Bush is
lying about many things and consider such behavior to be above the law. Below are some
of the other questions that I also considered in making my statement. Misrepresentation
of the events of 9/11 – both before, during and after – have been well documented and
many people are becoming more and more aware that the official account of the events of
9/11 is full of lies.

not credible! any scientist making the above statements is erroneously speculating !
http://www.journalof911studies.com/letters/a/Correspondence from James Bennett to Laurie Manwell with Responses.pdf

James Bennett:
Thanks for the response, but I think you are being somewhat disingenuous. No
honest person is going to think that "what they knew prior to 9/11" and the
"events of 9/11" are synonymous. In fact even you indicate that you think
they are two different issues when you state that with prior knowledge of
the attacks "all of the events of 9/11 could have been prevented." If you
actually regarded these as interchangeable, that statement would be
illogical.
Incidentally that logic is also based on the assumption that the attacks were
carried out by a third party, not by the US government, as one does not
receives "warnings" from oneself, which seems to contradict your main
thesis.
Laurie Manwell:
It seems that you have an agenda here rather than open discussion of the topic of my
paper. Nowhere do I say that the US government "did it" and nor is my main thesis that.
All research is subject to interpretation and I include all of my sources for
verification.
If you strongly disagree I would encourage you to write a letter or article
for submission to the Journal of 9/11 Studies where we can debate this issue within an
academic - rather than personal - domain, as I am not sure what your point is other than
to attack me personally by calling me disingenuous.
If you wish to discuss the research professionally that is fine but I am not interested in
responding to questions regarding my character, especially since we do not even know
each other.
James Bennett:
Actually I would argue that you have a personal agenda, otherwise you would
not have changed the wording from "what they knew prior to September
11th, 2001," to "the events of 9/11". There is no reason to do that except to advance an
agenda.
I have already had letters posted on the Journal. I have no interest in
having any articles posted to what is essentially a crackpot echo
chamber without academic or intellectual standards.

great post dawes, too bad it doesnt have one damn thing to do with this thread.

C'mon, KooKoo, you're not stupid. 9/11HandJob has no options ... his whole world collapses without his 9/11 beliefs. So just what is it that causes you to cling so desperately to your 9/11 CT silliness even as so many of your comrades have bailed out? Fear that you are nothing without it? Just trying to get laid? Doing it for the laughs?

your lies.

 

[SAYIT]

Then where were they? Tocut a girder, you'd need something roughly the size of a compact car. And you'd need them by the thousands. ...

Not to concede the point as to the size or number of military-grade cutter charge devices required to account for the observable aspects of the "collapses", but where were many things that should have been present in the debris piles, absent the use of incendiaries/pyrotechnics? Several witnesses and participants in the clean-up efforts remarked on the virtual lack of recognizable pieces from the enormous quantity of office equipment, furniture, ETC., particularly from the vast majority of the lower floors of the Twins, which, according to the official story, experienced few or no fires prior to the "collapses". What were discovered at the bottom of the piles (indicating self-contained oxygen sources) were streams and pools of molten metals, which should lead any rational person to wonder whether that's where many of the conspicuously missing objects ended up.

It's also perfectly reasonable to suspect that any badly mangled remnants of demolition devices that may have been recovered (perhaps unknowingly) during the clean-up stages were likely shipped-out (in quick fasion) along with the bulk of the crime scene evidence.

Regarding the majority of the "thermitic reactions", they took place from the inside-out and were therefore covered, first by the intact building materials/components and then by the horizontally ejected clouds of pulverized building materials/components (along with everything else in the buildings, including human beings). This was particularly effective in the top-down initiations of the "collapses" of buildings 1 and 2, because the laterally-ejected debris clouds also cascaded downward due to gravity, providing some cover for what was going on with lower portions of the buildings at the time of their respective destructions. Having said all of that, there were possible thermitic reactions caught on tape during what may have been either an intentional pre-weakening ignition or an unintentional one of the pre-coated interior columns/walls. I'm talking about the videos of yellow/reddish molten metal pouring out from exploded windows prior to the "collapses". There were also a number of "squibs" caught on camera during the "collapses", which are typical of top-down implosions (I think there's a video out there of a known top-down demolition of a high-rise building in China, in which all the characteristics observed in the destructions of buildings 1 and 2 are visible, as well).

As for how my beliefs are working out for me, all I can say is that remaining true to my core principles is its own reward, yes, even in the face of heavy ridicule from sell-outs like you and others on this board.

You are truly demented. Only a fruit loop dingus is incapable of noticing the demolitions you post exhibit explosions before the structures begin to collapse. Unlike the Twin Towers.

That you have to resort to lying exposes just how vacuous your insane claims are.

yeh if you were not a dumb ass youd be nothing at all! LOL



Capstone was kind enough to post a couple very well written explanations that obviously were wasted on ass helmets.

just watch the pretty sparklies

OK ... so maybe my last post was a bit optimistic. Perhaps you really are just as stupid as 9/11HandJob.

 

[Skylar]

Both thermate cutters and thermate welders existed when they made the railroad.

Face it you should have stayed in school instead of doing so many drugs.
Actually making an ass out of myself would shock many people, making an ass out of you on the other hand is another story, with both brains tied behind my head.

Have a wonderful day

Holyfuckingshit!!

After all your posting, it turns out you don't know the difference between "thermite welding" and a "thermate cutter."



That would be like you saying the Chinese had AK-47s in the 1300's because they invented gunpowder in the 9th century.

geezus yer a dumbass.

why dont you tell us what you think is so vastly different outside the way it is applied to the material.

Dont hold your breath people the dumbass cant answer that.

The difference is a cutter, as you insanely claim was employed to bring down the Twin Towers, didn't exist yet. Again, this is akin to my gun powder analogy. What a pity you're not equipped with the necessary tools to grasp it.

And of course, where were they in the wreckage. The cutter would have been enormous, obvious, the source of huge quantities of slag, and numbered by the 10s of thousands.

Yet.....jack shit.

and you base that on what? as usual your wild imagination?

The fact that there's never been one report, photograph or video of even one of these car sized cutters. Before, during or after the collapse. Not by the port authority bomb squad that searched the plaza only a week before 911. Not by any of the fire fighters, janitors, engineers or building managers during the attack. And nothing at any part of the clean up. Ever.

And your theory requires thousands. Tens of thousands if you include WTC 1 and 2. Yet absolutely nothing.

So where were the thousnads and thousands of truck sized canisters? This isn't a trivial detail. But a great big, huge bleeding hole in your silly conspiracy. One of many.

 

[Skylar]

Not to concede the point as to the size or number of military-grade cutter charge devices required to account for the observable aspects of the "collapses", but where were many things that should have been present in the debris piles, absent the use of incendiaries/pyrotechnics?

Several enormous problems with that analysis. If we're talking about WTC 7, Koko has imagined that they went off on the top floors. Meaning they would have been near the top of the debris pile. Yet....nothing. None was ever found. And there would have had to have been thousands. These would have been huge, enormously heavy canisters each about 10 to 12 feet long and about 3.5 to 4 feet in diameter, sticking sideways off the side of each girder. On each floor. By the thousands.

Yet there were none.

Second, thermite is intensely, ludicrously, insanely bright. So bright that it will literally damage your eyes if you look directly at it. With nano-thermite being even more laughably bright, being used in fire works. Meaning that any thermite reaction of the magnitude being described would have been seen for miles. And there would have been thousands and thousand and thousands of them. Yet, nothing. Not one.

Third, thermite provides its own oxygen. It can't be extinguished. So once it started burning, it would have kept burning until all thermite is consumed. And yet even after the building had collapsed, there were no thermite reactions. Despite girders splattered across 9 square blocks and embedded in nearby buildings, there were no thermite reactions.Unless you're arguing that every single one of tens of thousands of individual reactions just happened to land jam side down and be invisible to the naked eye, then the theory dies again.

Fourth WTC 1 and 2 fell exactly opposite of controlled demolition. Controlled demolition starts at the bottom with the entire buildling falling at once to the ground. The WTC 1 and 2 fell top to bottom. With the collapse initiating on the floors hit by the planes, and then falling one story at a time all the way to the ground. Meaning that each and every floor, from the point the collapsed initiated all the way to the ground would have been subject to thermite demolition per the thermite conspiracy.

Yet, nothing.

Fifth, half of the WTC's load bearing girders were on the outside of the building. Open to the office space on one side and open air on the other. With roughly 250 outer panels per floor and 47 core columns per floor, that means that 5 in 6 thermite reactions would have been visible on the outside of the building per the thermite theory. Yet...there were no such reactions. .

Sixth, thermite MELTS metal. THere were no girders cut in a manner consistent with thermite. None. There were twisted girders. There were bent girders. There were no cut girders. Quite simply obliterating the absurd thermite theory yet again.

Seventh, the buildings were on fire. With building fires scattered across the WTC 1 and 2. And WTC fully engaged with fires on virtually all floors. Any aparatus of explosive demolition, timers, det cord, radio receivers, control boards, etc.....would have melted. Yet per the thermite theory, they went off in perfect sequence. There's simply no way for this type of coordination to have been accomplished in a burning building.

Eight, these buildings weren't museums. They were occupied. They were regularly inspected. They were maintained. They were cleaned. With each floor having 249 outer panels and 47 core columns, and there being 90 floors to the ground from the impact site on the north tower and 79 to the ground on the south......that means that there would have had to have been over 50,000 car sized thermite canisters sticking sideways in WTC 1 and 2.

50,000. And no one ever saw 1. Not even the port authority bomb squad that inspected the building only 1 week before it came down. There's no plausible way this many devices, or any number close to it could have been hidden. Rendering the theory more useless idiocy.

Several witnesses and participants in the clean-up efforts remarked on the virtual lack of recognizable pieces from the enormous quantity of office equipment, furniture, ETC., particularly from the vast majority of the lower floors of the Twins, which, according to the official story, experienced few or no fires prior to the "collapses". What were discovered at the bottom of the piles (indicating self-contained oxygen sources) were streams and pools of molten metals, which should lead any rational person to wonder whether that's where many of the conspicuously missing objects ended up.

There were such reports 3 months after the WTC came down. So...if your explanation is thermite, and thermite can't be extinguished, and the reactions began on 911 when the tower fell, that means that upto 50,000 different thermite reactions would have had to have been burning for 2,160 hours, none stop. The quantity of thermite necessary to burn that long would have been roughly the size of the WTC itself.

But it gets so much worse. Because the standing theory is NANO thermite. Which burns so, so much faster than thermite. Meaning that it would consumed about an order of magnitude more nano-thermite over that same 2,160 hours of time than thermite. Meaning the pile of nano-thermite would have been roughly the size of the WTC plaza itself. You would have been able to see the pile from orbit.

And it was burning, with fire work intensity.......for 3 months. Yet no one ever saw a single thermite reaction, not an ounce of thermite, not a single charge, not a single canister, not a single inch of det cord, nor any apparatus of controlled demolition.

Ever.

Demonstrating the physical impossibility of the thermite theory. And the ludicrous absurdity of it.

It's also perfectly reasonable to suspect that any badly mangled remnants of demolition devices that may have been recovered (perhaps unknowingly) during the clean-up stages were likely shipped-out (in quick fasion) along with the bulk of the crime scene evidence.

Something the size of a small car, sticking sideways off the girders every 12 feet or so? Um, not its not reasonable to assume those would have been missed. Especially in the quantities that the thermite theory requires. 50,000 of them.

And of course, there were no cut girders. Not one. Your theory doesn't work. Its an awful, awful explanation that's factually baseless, ludicrously complicated, insanely elaborate, contradicted by overwhelming evidence, and doesn't make the slightest sense.

Regarding the majority of the "thermitic reactions", they took place from the inside-out and were therefore covered, first by the intact building materials/components and then by the horizontally ejected clouds of pulverized building materials/components (along with everything else in the buildings, including human beings).

Ah, but your theory mandates molten metal 3 MONTHS after the collapse. So the reactions would have been burning still, even AS the building collapsed. And for months afterwards. We would have seen thousands upon thousands of such reactions as the building came apart even if they were only on the inside. As they are insanely bright....being the primary ingredients in FIREWORKS. They would have been absolutely impossible to miss and there would have been dozens of videos of them from every conceivable angle.

Yet there were none. Absolutely none. Not at any point before, during or after the collapse. Despite your theory requiring tens of thousands.

And of course, there were no girders cut. Which just beats the rotting carcass of a dead horse that is your silly conspiracy.

Your theory just sucks. Its an awful explanation of events. And there's exactly dick to back it up. Your story might as well begin with 'once upon a time'.

This was particularly effective in the top-down initiations of the "collapses" of buildings 1 and 2, because the laterally-ejected debris clouds also cascaded downward due to gravity, providing some cover for what was going on with lower portions of the buildings at the time of their respective destructions.

The thermite reactions you're describing would have been like small suns in the building by the 10s of thousands. Even if you assume ONLY the core columns (which carry only half the gravity load of the structure), that's still 8000 separate reactions between the towers. Which your theory mandates burned for 3 months. Any one of which would have burned so brightly that it would have easily been seen the dust. And 8000 of them would have been so ludicrously obvious that anyone looking at the towers probably would have substained permenant damage to their eyes from the overwhelming brightness.

Yet we saw absolute none. Not a single reaction. Not a single cut girder. Not a single canister. Not a single charge.

Nothing. Which is what your theory is worth.

 

[Faun]

Then where were they? Tocut a girder, you'd need something roughly the size of a compact car. And you'd need them by the thousands. ...

Not to concede the point as to the size or number of military-grade cutter charge devices required to account for the observable aspects of the "collapses", but where were many things that should have been present in the debris piles, absent the use of incendiaries/pyrotechnics? Several witnesses and participants in the clean-up efforts remarked on the virtual lack of recognizable pieces from the enormous quantity of office equipment, furniture, ETC., particularly from the vast majority of the lower floors of the Twins, which, according to the official story, experienced few or no fires prior to the "collapses". What were discovered at the bottom of the piles (indicating self-contained oxygen sources) were streams and pools of molten metals, which should lead any rational person to wonder whether that's where many of the conspicuously missing objects ended up.

It's also perfectly reasonable to suspect that any badly mangled remnants of demolition devices that may have been recovered (perhaps unknowingly) during the clean-up stages were likely shipped-out (in quick fasion) along with the bulk of the crime scene evidence.

Regarding the majority of the "thermitic reactions", they took place from the inside-out and were therefore covered, first by the intact building materials/components and then by the horizontally ejected clouds of pulverized building materials/components (along with everything else in the buildings, including human beings). This was particularly effective in the top-down initiations of the "collapses" of buildings 1 and 2, because the laterally-ejected debris clouds also cascaded downward due to gravity, providing some cover for what was going on with lower portions of the buildings at the time of their respective destructions. Having said all of that, there were possible thermitic reactions caught on tape during what may have been either an intentional pre-weakening ignition or an unintentional one of the pre-coated interior columns/walls. I'm talking about the videos of yellow/reddish molten metal pouring out from exploded windows prior to the "collapses". There were also a number of "squibs" caught on camera during the "collapses", which are typical of top-down implosions (I think there's a video out there of a known top-down demolition of a high-rise building in China, in which all the characteristics observed in the destructions of buildings 1 and 2 are visible, as well).

As for how my beliefs are working out for me, all I can say is that remaining true to my core principles is its own reward, yes, even in the face of heavy ridicule from sell-outs like you and others on this board.

You are truly demented. Only a fruit loop dingus is incapable of noticing the demolitions you post exhibit explosions before the structures begin to collapse. Unlike the Twin Towers.

That you have to resort to lying exposes just how vacuous your insane claims are.

yeh if you were not a dumb ass youd be nothing at all! LOL



Capstone was kind enough to post a couple very well written explanations that obviously were wasted on ass helmets.

just watch the pretty sparklies

When are you going to show a video of a demolished build that doesn't start with visible explosions?

 

[irosie91]

I saw the buildings collapse-----they neither imploded
as one sees in a controlled demolition-----nor did anything
SHOOT outward----horizontally-----until the collapse hit bottom
when the energy of the collapse propelled stuff all over
the city-----from the bottom outward-----bodies were not thrown
out THEY JUMPED------some fell out and down-----nothing got TOSSED out from the upper end

Might be an awesome post if you can PROVE IT

Lets see your EVIDENCE and examine how you conjured up your assumptions.

Oh btw the whole world saw the building collapse DUH!

"prove" WHAT? -----as you say--- "the whole world saw it"
I really did not know that. then the whole world knows that there was no visible evidence of implosion and
people and objects were not jettisoned outward as one would
see in an EXPLOSION ---of the kind used in demolitions---- to what "assumptions" do you allude?

yeh on tv dumb ass.

I suppose you are one of the idjits that believe everything you see on tv.

I saw it from my living room window. I was getting ready to
go to work -------on the subway ----A LINE----the one that passes right under the World Trade Center-------the mossad
had forgotten to call me and tell me to STAY HOME THAT DAY

 

[KokomoJojo]

I saw the buildings collapse-----they neither imploded
as one sees in a controlled demolition-----nor did anything
SHOOT outward----horizontally-----until the collapse hit bottom
when the energy of the collapse propelled stuff all over
the city-----from the bottom outward-----bodies were not thrown
out THEY JUMPED------some fell out and down-----nothing got TOSSED out from the upper end

Might be an awesome post if you can PROVE IT

Lets see your EVIDENCE and examine how you conjured up your assumptions.

Oh btw the whole world saw the building collapse DUH!

"prove" WHAT? -----as you say--- "the whole world saw it"
I really did not know that. then the whole world knows that there was no visible evidence of implosion and
people and objects were not jettisoned outward as one would
see in an EXPLOSION ---of the kind used in demolitions---- to what "assumptions" do you allude?

yeh on tv dumb ass.

I suppose you are one of the idjits that believe everything you see on tv.

I saw it from my living room window. I was getting ready to
go to work -------on the subway ----A LINE----the one that passes right under the World Trade Center-------the mossad
had forgotten to call me and tell me to STAY HOME THAT DAY

saw what?

 

[KokomoJojo]

Not to concede the point as to the size or number of military-grade cutter charge devices required to account for the observable aspects of the "collapses", but where were many things that should have been present in the debris piles, absent the use of incendiaries/pyrotechnics?

Several enormous problems with that analysis. If we're talking about WTC 7, Koko has imagined that they went off on the top floors. Meaning they would have been near the top of the debris pile. Yet....nothing. None was ever found. And there would have had to have been thousands. These would have been huge, enormously heavy canisters each about 10 to 12 feet long and about 3.5 to 4 feet in diameter, sticking sideways off the side of each girder. On each floor. By the thousands.

Yet there were none.

Second, thermite is intensely, ludicrously, insanely bright. So bright that it will literally damage your eyes if you look directly at it. With nano-thermite being even more laughably bright, being used in fire works. Meaning that any thermite reaction of the magnitude being described would have been seen for miles. And there would have been thousands and thousand and thousands of them. Yet, nothing. Not one.

Third, thermite provides its own oxygen. It can't be extinguished. So once it started burning, it would have kept burning until all thermite is consumed. And yet even after the building had collapsed, there were no thermite reactions. Despite girders splattered across 9 square blocks and embedded in nearby buildings, there were no thermite reactions.Unless you're arguing that every single one of tens of thousands of individual reactions just happened to land jam side down and be invisible to the naked eye, then the theory dies again.

Fourth WTC 1 and 2 fell exactly opposite of controlled demolition. Controlled demolition starts at the bottom with the entire buildling falling at once to the ground. The WTC 1 and 2 fell top to bottom. With the collapse initiating on the floors hit by the planes, and then falling one story at a time all the way to the ground. Meaning that each and every floor, from the point the collapsed initiated all the way to the ground would have been subject to thermite demolition per the thermite conspiracy.

Yet, nothing.

Fifth, half of the WTC's load bearing girders were on the outside of the building. Open to the office space on one side and open air on the other. With roughly 250 outer panels per floor and 47 core columns per floor, that means that 5 in 6 thermite reactions would have been visible on the outside of the building per the thermite theory. Yet...there were no such reactions. .

Sixth, thermite MELTS metal. THere were no girders cut in a manner consistent with thermite. None. There were twisted girders. There were bent girders. There were no cut girders. Quite simply obliterating the absurd thermite theory yet again.

Seventh, the buildings were on fire. With building fires scattered across the WTC 1 and 2. And WTC fully engaged with fires on virtually all floors. Any aparatus of explosive demolition, timers, det cord, radio receivers, control boards, etc.....would have melted. Yet per the thermite theory, they went off in perfect sequence. There's simply no way for this type of coordination to have been accomplished in a burning building.

Eight, these buildings weren't museums. They were occupied. They were regularly inspected. They were maintained. They were cleaned. With each floor having 249 outer panels and 47 core columns, and there being 90 floors to the ground from the impact site on the north tower and 79 to the ground on the south......that means that there would have had to have been over 50,000 car sized thermite canisters sticking sideways in WTC 1 and 2.

50,000. And no one ever saw 1. Not even the port authority bomb squad that inspected the building only 1 week before it came down. There's no plausible way this many devices, or any number close to it could have been hidden. Rendering the theory more useless idiocy.

Several witnesses and participants in the clean-up efforts remarked on the virtual lack of recognizable pieces from the enormous quantity of office equipment, furniture, ETC., particularly from the vast majority of the lower floors of the Twins, which, according to the official story, experienced few or no fires prior to the "collapses". What were discovered at the bottom of the piles (indicating self-contained oxygen sources) were streams and pools of molten metals, which should lead any rational person to wonder whether that's where many of the conspicuously missing objects ended up.

There were such reports 3 months after the WTC came down. So...if your explanation is thermite, and thermite can't be extinguished, and the reactions began on 911 when the tower fell, that means that upto 50,000 different thermite reactions would have had to have been burning for 2,160 hours, none stop. The quantity of thermite necessary to burn that long would have been roughly the size of the WTC itself.

But it gets so much worse. Because the standing theory is NANO thermite. Which burns so, so much faster than thermite. Meaning that it would consumed about an order of magnitude more nano-thermite over that same 2,160 hours of time than thermite. Meaning the pile of nano-thermite would have been roughly the size of the WTC plaza itself. You would have been able to see the pile from orbit.

And it was burning, with fire work intensity.......for 3 months. Yet no one ever saw a single thermite reaction, not an ounce of thermite, not a single charge, not a single canister, not a single inch of det cord, nor any apparatus of controlled demolition.

Ever.

Demonstrating the physical impossibility of the thermite theory. And the ludicrous absurdity of it.

It's also perfectly reasonable to suspect that any badly mangled remnants of demolition devices that may have been recovered (perhaps unknowingly) during the clean-up stages were likely shipped-out (in quick fasion) along with the bulk of the crime scene evidence.

Something the size of a small car, sticking sideways off the girders every 12 feet or so? Um, not its not reasonable to assume those would have been missed. Especially in the quantities that the thermite theory requires. 50,000 of them.

And of course, there were no cut girders. Not one. Your theory doesn't work. Its an awful, awful explanation that's factually baseless, ludicrously complicated, insanely elaborate, contradicted by overwhelming evidence, and doesn't make the slightest sense.

Regarding the majority of the "thermitic reactions", they took place from the inside-out and were therefore covered, first by the intact building materials/components and then by the horizontally ejected clouds of pulverized building materials/components (along with everything else in the buildings, including human beings).

Ah, but your theory mandates molten metal 3 MONTHS after the collapse. So the reactions would have been burning still, even AS the building collapsed. And for months afterwards. We would have seen thousands upon thousands of such reactions as the building came apart even if they were only on the inside. As they are insanely bright....being the primary ingredients in FIREWORKS. They would have been absolutely impossible to miss and there would have been dozens of videos of them from every conceivable angle.

Yet there were none. Absolutely none. Not at any point before, during or after the collapse. Despite your theory requiring tens of thousands.

And of course, there were no girders cut. Which just beats the rotting carcass of a dead horse that is your silly conspiracy.

Your theory just sucks. Its an awful explanation of events. And there's exactly dick to back it up. Your story might as well begin with 'once upon a time'.

This was particularly effective in the top-down initiations of the "collapses" of buildings 1 and 2, because the laterally-ejected debris clouds also cascaded downward due to gravity, providing some cover for what was going on with lower portions of the buildings at the time of their respective destructions.

The thermite reactions you're describing would have been like small suns in the building by the 10s of thousands. Even if you assume ONLY the core columns (which carry only half the gravity load of the structure), that's still 8000 separate reactions between the towers. Which your theory mandates burned for 3 months. Any one of which would have burned so brightly that it would have easily been seen the dust. And 8000 of them would have been so ludicrously obvious that anyone looking at the towers probably would have substained permenant damage to their eyes from the overwhelming brightness.

Yet we saw absolute none. Not a single reaction. Not a single cut girder. Not a single canister. Not a single charge.

Nothing. Which is what your theory is worth.

you kids really need to educate yourselves before playing investigator

Yeh they had a hell of a time, it just flares up worse!



The evidence left behind from thermate cutters is melted metal DUH


you neandrathals just a little behind the times eh.


yep its pretty brite

yep quite brite indeedie





sure thats normal every day steel! LMAO

 

[KokomoJojo]

Then where were they? Tocut a girder, you'd need something roughly the size of a compact car. And you'd need them by the thousands. ...

Not to concede the point as to the size or number of military-grade cutter charge devices required to account for the observable aspects of the "collapses", but where were many things that should have been present in the debris piles, absent the use of incendiaries/pyrotechnics? Several witnesses and participants in the clean-up efforts remarked on the virtual lack of recognizable pieces from the enormous quantity of office equipment, furniture, ETC., particularly from the vast majority of the lower floors of the Twins, which, according to the official story, experienced few or no fires prior to the "collapses". What were discovered at the bottom of the piles (indicating self-contained oxygen sources) were streams and pools of molten metals, which should lead any rational person to wonder whether that's where many of the conspicuously missing objects ended up.

It's also perfectly reasonable to suspect that any badly mangled remnants of demolition devices that may have been recovered (perhaps unknowingly) during the clean-up stages were likely shipped-out (in quick fasion) along with the bulk of the crime scene evidence.

Regarding the majority of the "thermitic reactions", they took place from the inside-out and were therefore covered, first by the intact building materials/components and then by the horizontally ejected clouds of pulverized building materials/components (along with everything else in the buildings, including human beings). This was particularly effective in the top-down initiations of the "collapses" of buildings 1 and 2, because the laterally-ejected debris clouds also cascaded downward due to gravity, providing some cover for what was going on with lower portions of the buildings at the time of their respective destructions. Having said all of that, there were possible thermitic reactions caught on tape during what may have been either an intentional pre-weakening ignition or an unintentional one of the pre-coated interior columns/walls. I'm talking about the videos of yellow/reddish molten metal pouring out from exploded windows prior to the "collapses". There were also a number of "squibs" caught on camera during the "collapses", which are typical of top-down implosions (I think there's a video out there of a known top-down demolition of a high-rise building in China, in which all the characteristics observed in the destructions of buildings 1 and 2 are visible, as well).

As for how my beliefs are working out for me, all I can say is that remaining true to my core principles is its own reward, yes, even in the face of heavy ridicule from sell-outs like you and others on this board.

You are truly demented. Only a fruit loop dingus is incapable of noticing the demolitions you post exhibit explosions before the structures begin to collapse. Unlike the Twin Towers.

That you have to resort to lying exposes just how vacuous your insane claims are.

yeh if you were not a dumb ass youd be nothing at all! LOL



Capstone was kind enough to post a couple very well written explanations that obviously were wasted on ass helmets.

just watch the pretty sparklies

When are you going to show a video of a demolished build that doesn't start with visible explosions?

how many times do I have to show it? Pull your heads out of yer asses and , wipe off your glasses!

ok here goes! Are you ready?



they lit that ****** right up.

not a lame cheapo demo like this one.