Conspiracy theorists' dream comes true

[eots]

how are facts conspiracy?

the facts you are presented with... fact this is a apple ..really it is !!

WTC7 - This is an Orange

http://video.google.com/videosearch...=en&emb=0#hl=en&emb=0&q=wtc7 this is a orange

 

[Navy1960]

You misinterpreted my comment brother .. which should have read "I'm too lazy to post the plethora of stuff that's missing and wrong with the FISA Report.

I apologize for not being more clear, but surely you recognize I have great respect for you and your thoughts .. and I'd never purposely try to insult you.

My point to you was there are credible, experienced, and higly patriotic individuals who do not believe the fairy-tale and who cannot simply be put in the box of "loonies."

Also, I disagree with your assertion that "it would not have remained secret this long" .. which makes the deception of Pearl Harbor all the more timely. 67 years later, many still don't believe the truth .. and if I'm not mistaken, that includes you.

Without going through everything you've said .. there is one undeniable truth ..there are no exceptions to impossible and what you seem to believe is impossible.

Building 7 only had small fires, yet collaped into it's own footpring at free fall speed .. and you don't have any idea how this was even possible. No steel-frame building has EVER collapsed from fire in the history of history .. yet it happened three times that day. It's not possible.

Why? because it's not possible and there is NO SCIENCE that says it's possible.

If you would .. do not avoid building 7 in your response

You did not address how the roof could have possibly remained intact.

You did not address why the lawn had no skid marks, burn marks, or craters .. given that the roof remained intact.

You did not address how the same type plane that melted giant buildings carrying approximately about the same amount of fuel. flying at about the same speed could have only left a 16x14ft hole and lwhere the wings .. where the fuel is stored .. leave no visible marks on the building and cause so little damage .. couldn't even burn the paper pages of an open book.

You did not address why no pictures of the crash were released when they have plenty of pictures.

You did not address where the 7ft engines where .. or for that matter, where the planes is. If you believe the plane passengers, engines, luggage, and all vaporized .. that would be interesting indeed .. not believeable, but interesting.

Are you of the belief that untrained cavemen could climb behind the wheel of large aircraft and fly them flawlessly and make manuevers even combat pilots cannoit make. .. I'm not .. neither are the combat pilots I posted.
Of all the evidence, Building 7 stands as the most clear indication that this was a fraud.

Any idea why the Bush Admninistration removed critical evidence from the crime scenes?

Any idea why the report you cited did not include thermite evidence found by FEMA?

Additionally, are you aware of how many gag orders have been issued by the Bush Administration regarding 9/11? They even gagged the NYPD and NYFD. FIVE YEARS if you talk. SEE: Sibel Edmonds.

There are a thousand question about the events of 9/11 that you can't answer .. mostly because they are IMPOSSIBLE to have occured as you've been told.

Steel does not melt from kerosene.

Collapsing structures from weakening do not uniformly fall at free fall speed.

BEFORE .. the Madrid Fire

AFTER

Even the heavy crane is still on top of the building.

Steel frame buildings do not collapse from fire .. it's impossible .. that's why it has NEVER happened .. EVER.

WTC7 fires 32 minutes before it collapsed ..

It's absolutely mindboggling to me that anyone, especially someone as intelligent as you, would believe this bullshit. I'm amazed.

Buildings do not melt from fire .. post just ONE that ever has in the history of Man.

Let me put it to you this way BaC there were enough aircraft components at the Pentagon crash site to make a positive identification that it was indeed a Boeing 757-200. While I don't call into question anyone's ability to ask questions that the nature of finding the truth in any situation . As to the qualifications of those that are making those allegations if you will notice none of those prior to making those statements had any chance whatsoever to review those sites in detail nor have they since revised those statements since the final NTSB report on AA-77 came out. Anyone can look at a crash scene from a distance and that includes professional aviators and come to the wrong conclusion when they do not have access to all the data prior to making that conclusion. An aircrafts impact upon a structure has many related factors as to the amount of damage to that structure and I believe in my previous post I tried to point that out to you.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB196/doc02.pdf

Here is something else worth mentioning as well. as some of you are very fond of quoting former Military aviators as sources that call into question the events on 9-11 then perhaps you would be interested in knowing that the aircraft Capt. of AA-77 was a for mer Navy Aviator who's funeral I attended. Chic was a great guy and good father to his daughter. There is no way in the world he would have been involved in anything that was not above aboard and I know for a fact during his autopsy that there was plenty of evidence showing that he struggled. Oh, did I tell you, there were actual remains recovered from the Pentagon site? or was that overlooked by those that are advocating this nonsense. I'm sorry BaC while I have great respect for anyone and respect for their rights to call into question their government. In this case, no matter how much many do not like to hear this, when anyone calls into the question these facts. They dishonor the memories of those people like Chic and can tell you it implies that the good people all of them that who's lives were taken from them on 9-11 for only doing one thing, "living and innocent life", that they all part of some big lie and in part are calling into question they very essence of the character of these good people.

The same can be said for the building 7 issue, in order to have a structure of that size fall in a controlled demolition it would need take a lot of pre-planning and pre-placement of a LOT of high-explosives and then coordinate that drop and time it with the impact of one Boeing 757 and one Boeing 767. First, for any kind of conspiracy to work you need to limit the number of people that have knowledge of that conspiracy. Do you know why? because people talk, it's their nature to talk, and I can assure you the very size and scope and time it would take just to bring down a structure the size of building 7 would involve many many people. From professional demolition teams, to security, to building management, to key employee's. The facts are as they are presented in this case BaC. while yes I know that the Bush Administration has caused many to question this, but that does not make the facts any less than what they are. The final report on this event to the 9-11 comission makes it quite clear as to the cause of this and it has been confirmed by many engineering experts and architects the world over. You wish even further proof there is plenty of Video evidence of FDNY firefighters in Building 7 during the entire 9-11 event and up until the whole structure was abandoned.

"The most important operational decision to be made that afternoon was the collapse (Of the WTC towers) had damaged 7 World Trade Center, which is about a 50 story building, at Vesey between West Broadway and Washington Street. It had very heavy fire on many floors and I ordered the evacuation of an area sufficient around to protect our members, so we had to give up some rescue operations that were going on at the time and back the people away far enough so that if 7 World Trade did collapse, we [wouldn't] lose any more people. We continued to operate on what we could from that distance and approximately an hour and a half after that order was [given], at 5:30 in the afternoon, World Trade Center collapsed completely" - Daniel Nigro, Chief of Department

"Then we found out, I guess around 3:00 [o'clock], that they thought 7 was going to collapse. So, of course, [we've] got guys all in this pile over here and the main concern was get everybody out, and I guess it took us over an hour and a half, two hours to get everybody out of there. (Q. Initially when you were there, you had said you heard a few Maydays?) Oh, yes. We had Maydays like crazy.... The heat must have been tremendous. There was so much [expletive] fire there. This whole pile was burning like crazy. Just the heat and the smoke from all the other buildings on fire, you [couldn't] see anything. So it took us a while and we ended up backing everybody out, and [that's] when 7 collapsed.... Basically, we fell back for 7 to collapse, and then we waited a while and it got a lot more organized, I would guess." - Lieutenant William Ryan

I'm sorry BaC the same can be said in this case as can be said in the AA-77 case and that is when people take evidence and twist it around much like Alex Jones has with his taking the comment by the FDNY scence commanders comment to pull building 7 and to take that meaning as pulling the building down is again complete nonsense. Go to your local firehouse and ask any firefighter what the word "pull" means to a firefighter and they will tell you it means to withdraw. It is very consistant with the facts. Again, BaC while I completely respect your freedom to voice your views in the case I cannot help but think that to perpetuate these "unsupported and debunked" theories do nothing but cause great emotional harm to the memories of all those who lost their lives on 9-11 .

 

[Uknow_me72]

how are facts conspiracy?

It was by creating Facts, the Conspiracies started.

The conspiracy is lying to you and telling you its the Truth, they did this with false facts.

It is the perfect drug for the neo-government/science religion.

 

[Navy1960]

Important characters in this discussion.

Undecideds see a Navy and a RGS handle talking and agreeing against EOTS.

Undecideds often play the safe move and go conservative. They will respect the authority that the 2 military names project and move on.

Did I pull that right out of the playbook?

Maybe the sheep will one day look at their shepherds instead of being scared of them.

Interesting take on my posts, however let me return the favor. Rather than express an opinion on your own or engage those that you disagree with in a debate, you would rather make an editorial on others. When you wish to engage in a civil conversation or wish to add to this conversation with a view even if it differs from my own, and based on your posts here it may be, one never knows, then I will be happy to engage you in a civil debate. However until such time as you know me and have read ALL my posts I would not ASSUME what ALL my views are based on your LIMITED knowledge of me. I will do you the same kindness and do them same.

 

[Navy1960]

Main Entry:fact
Pronunciation:\ˈfakt\
Function:noun
Etymology:Latin factum, from neuter of factus, past participle of facere
Date:15th century
1: a thing done: as aobsolete : feat b: crime <accessory after the fact> carchaic : action
2archaic : performance , doing
3: the quality of being actual : actuality <a question of fact hinges on evidence>
4 a: something that has actual existence <space exploration is now a fact> b: an actual occurrence <prove the fact of damage>
5: a piece of information presented as having objective reality
&#8212; in fact: in truth


Main Entry:con·spir·a·cy
Pronunciation:\k&#601;n-&#712;spir-&#601;-s&#275;\
Function:noun
Inflected Form(s)lural con·spir·a·cies
Etymology:Middle English conspiracie, from Latin conspirare
Date:14th century
1: the act of conspiring together
2 a: an agreement among conspirators b: a group of conspirators

So let me get this right, the facts are the act of conspiring together, well in one sense thats true. The facts are that Several aircraft were taken over by muslim-fanatics that trained in aviation schools in this country prior to the act. They as a group made an agreement to die for their cause and then entered this nation and took over commercial flights bound for various destinations and purposly crashed those aircraft into the WTC North and South Tower, The Pentagon, and one aborted attempt in Pa. , resulting in the deaths of over 3000 people. So if those facts are the conspiracy you refer too then of course in that respect the facts can be considered that.

 

[Uknow_me72]

Sure when empirical evidence is the fact it becomes absolute.

So Fact Check me right now on this alright,

It is a fact that there can be lies involved in a truth. A lie about the truth is also a FACT right?

Because it what the truth is not....

So the Truth is a Fact can be a lie, so in regards to the 9/11 what are the truths or lies?

Here are the empirical facts that you know about 9/11
It ******* happened.... That is it

This is the facts that are not proven
How it happened.... That is it


The rest is speculation.You only know if you were involved in the plot. Who knows who is pulling what strings and what strings have been pulled until you have the evidence for yourself.


Empirical Fact about 9/11
You really do not know, you only know what someone told you about it and made your own conclusion.

 

[Navy1960]

Well I can see now that things such as bodies, , audio, video, downed buildings, twisted steel, aircraft parts, photo evidence, 1000's of funerals, and the literally 1000's of families that lost a love one do not constitue evidence or facts for some here in this thread, So I will quietly withdraw from this thread and let this debate continue among those who would believe that 9-11 is the result of some vast conspiracy as was the Apollo program was too I suppose. For those of you who still believe that there is an alien in some hanger at Area 51 I hate to busrt your bubble, there isn't one no matter how badly you wish it to be. The same is true for 9-11 when you take a stance that the Govt. is the enemy and they must have had something to do with it before looking at the data you have in front of you it is like painting your eyes with black paint, it blinds you. When all you have to do is each time an election comes around if you mistrust your govt. that much then elect someone that you do trust, but do not call into question and dishonor someone I knew personally and know when, how, and where he met his end.

 

[Uknow_me72]

Well I can see now that things such as bodies, , audio, video, downed buildings, twisted steel, aircraft parts, photo evidence, 1000's of funerals, and the literally 1000's of families that lost a love one do not constitue evidence or facts for some here in this thread, So I will quietly withdraw from this thread and let this debate continue among those who would believe that 9-11 is the result of some vast conspiracy as was the Apollo program was too I suppose. For those of you who still believe that there is an alien in some hanger at Area 51 I hate to busrt your bubble, there isn't one no matter how badly you wish it to be. The same is true for 9-11 when you take a stance that the Govt. is the enemy and they must have had something to do with it before looking at the data you have in front of you it is like painting your eyes with black paint, it blinds you. When all you have to do is each time an election comes around if you mistrust your govt. that much then elect someone that you do trust, but do not call into question and dishonor someone I knew personally and know when, how, and where he met his end.

Obviously you have it wrong...

We all know a lot of people died on 9/11...

We would like to not have that happen again just as much as you would, but our goals is to disseminate and create unity so it won't be on our watch, while the governments goal is to kill more people...they may not be Americans but they are people also, they have rights as well, eye for an eye is completely unacceptable when it deals with peoples lives.

 

[Againsheila]

While I did not support President-elect Obama during the election he was elected president this issue has been debunked at least several times that I know of. The state of Hawaii has declared his COB to be valid so that was the end of it and the last I checked Hawaii was part of the United States when Barack Obama was born. I no more care for this kind of tripe than I do for the fake moon landing or building 7 issues. It takes away from the real issues at hand, the man is the going to be sworn in as the next president of the United States so get over it people and understand that he will be the president , if he gives you a reason while in office to call into question his ability then criticize his policies and actions as they apply to the nation and not something that regardless even in the remote possibility if it were true at this point would be easy to prove.

Considering how easy it would be to just pull out the original birth certificate and show it to the public, I think the fact that Obama has refused and actually go the governor of Hawaii to seal his original birthcertificate to be suspect. I'm not surprised the supreme court refused to hear the case. We are no longer being ruled by we the people, we are being ruled by a small elite class of people behind the scenes.

If I were an Obama supporter, I would be questioning why he wasn't putting all this talk of his not being an American born citizen to rest. In fact, I know an Obama supporter that just learned of this and is only now questioning if he really is eligible to be president. She is saying that it would be so easy to put all this talk to rest and doesn't understand why Obama refuses to provide his original birth certificate. Oh, and she and her husband are from Kenya and are naturalized citizens.

I still doubt Obama's eligibility to be our president but he was elected and it looks as if he will serve. I will give him my support until he does something to cause me to take that support back.

 

[Uknow_me72]

I could careless where he is from and I would rather take a homeless person of the street and make them president.

 

[BlackAsCoal]

Let me put it to you this way BaC there were enough aircraft components at the Pentagon crash site to make a positive identification that it was indeed a Boeing 757-200. While I don't call into question anyone's ability to ask questions that the nature of finding the truth in any situation . As to the qualifications of those that are making those allegations if you will notice none of those prior to making those statements had any chance whatsoever to review those sites in detail nor have they since revised those statements since the final NTSB report on AA-77 came out. Anyone can look at a crash scene from a distance and that includes professional aviators and come to the wrong conclusion when they do not have access to all the data prior to making that conclusion. An aircrafts impact upon a structure has many related factors as to the amount of damage to that structure and I believe in my previous post I tried to point that out to you.
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB196/doc02.pdf

Here is something else worth mentioning as well. as some of you are very fond of quoting former Military aviators as sources that call into question the events on 9-11 then perhaps you would be interested in knowing that the aircraft Capt. of AA-77 was a for mer Navy Aviator who's funeral I attended. Chic was a great guy and good father to his daughter. There is no way in the world he would have been involved in anything that was not above aboard and I know for a fact during his autopsy that there was plenty of evidence showing that he struggled. Oh, did I tell you, there were actual remains recovered from the Pentagon site? or was that overlooked by those that are advocating this nonsense. I'm sorry BaC while I have great respect for anyone and respect for their rights to call into question their government. In this case, no matter how much many do not like to hear this, when anyone calls into the question these facts. They dishonor the memories of those people like Chic and can tell you it implies that the good people all of them that who's lives were taken from them on 9-11 for only doing one thing, "living and innocent life", that they all part of some big lie and in part are calling into question they very essence of the character of these good people.

The same can be said for the building 7 issue, in order to have a structure of that size fall in a controlled demolition it would need take a lot of pre-planning and pre-placement of a LOT of high-explosives and then coordinate that drop and time it with the impact of one Boeing 757 and one Boeing 767. First, for any kind of conspiracy to work you need to limit the number of people that have knowledge of that conspiracy. Do you know why? because people talk, it's their nature to talk, and I can assure you the very size and scope and time it would take just to bring down a structure the size of building 7 would involve many many people. From professional demolition teams, to security, to building management, to key employee's. The facts are as they are presented in this case BaC. while yes I know that the Bush Administration has caused many to question this, but that does not make the facts any less than what they are. The final report on this event to the 9-11 comission makes it quite clear as to the cause of this and it has been confirmed by many engineering experts and architects the world over. You wish even further proof there is plenty of Video evidence of FDNY firefighters in Building 7 during the entire 9-11 event and up until the whole structure was abandoned.

"The most important operational decision to be made that afternoon was the collapse (Of the WTC towers) had damaged 7 World Trade Center, which is about a 50 story building, at Vesey between West Broadway and Washington Street. It had very heavy fire on many floors and I ordered the evacuation of an area sufficient around to protect our members, so we had to give up some rescue operations that were going on at the time and back the people away far enough so that if 7 World Trade did collapse, we [wouldn't] lose any more people. We continued to operate on what we could from that distance and approximately an hour and a half after that order was [given], at 5:30 in the afternoon, World Trade Center collapsed completely" - Daniel Nigro, Chief of Department

"Then we found out, I guess around 3:00 [o'clock], that they thought 7 was going to collapse. So, of course, [we've] got guys all in this pile over here and the main concern was get everybody out, and I guess it took us over an hour and a half, two hours to get everybody out of there. (Q. Initially when you were there, you had said you heard a few Maydays?) Oh, yes. We had Maydays like crazy.... The heat must have been tremendous. There was so much [expletive] fire there. This whole pile was burning like crazy. Just the heat and the smoke from all the other buildings on fire, you [couldn't] see anything. So it took us a while and we ended up backing everybody out, and [that's] when 7 collapsed.... Basically, we fell back for 7 to collapse, and then we waited a while and it got a lot more organized, I would guess." - Lieutenant William Ryan

I'm sorry BaC the same can be said in this case as can be said in the AA-77 case and that is when people take evidence and twist it around much like Alex Jones has with his taking the comment by the FDNY scence commanders comment to pull building 7 and to take that meaning as pulling the building down is again complete nonsense. Go to your local firehouse and ask any firefighter what the word "pull" means to a firefighter and they will tell you it means to withdraw. It is very consistant with the facts. Again, BaC while I completely respect your freedom to voice your views in the case I cannot help but think that to perpetuate these "unsupported and debunked" theories do nothing but cause great emotional harm to the memories of all those who lost their lives on 9-11 .

I'm sorry for the loss of a friend .. but his being dead does not validate the fairy-tale, nor does it imply that he was part of it.

You missed a lot of my questions that you can't answer .. but let's deal with those you did.

First, the pilots did not just use visual evidence to arrive at their conclusions. Through the Freedom of Information Act, they used the exact same evidence the Bush Administration had. In your opinion, do these pilots possess the knowledge to make such a determination? Does Bowman?

They're ex-combat pilots .. do you believe they possess the wisdom to determine if a non-pilot can make the manuevers the cavemen supposedly made?

I'll ask again .. are you aware an FBI informant lived with two of the cavemen for a year?

"The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown at this time. Although the total diesel fuel on the premises contained massive potential energy, the best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence.&#8221;

Who said that? .. Alex Jones? .. Nope, FEMA did. There were no massive fires in WTC7. Look at pictures of the building as it's going down .. as it collapses in the center first, just as an imploded building would.

Where is the massive fire? The smoke behind it is coming from the collapsed towers. Notice that buckle in the middle?

What's this? ..

It's THERMITE and the molten steel it produces. In other words, cutter charges used in demolition. .. and this is what FEMA had to say about it Appendix C of its World Trade Center Building Performance Study ...

Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure. A liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel... The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified.

The NIST Report, which used the findings of FEMA, never mentioned thermite and sulfur discovered by FEMA.

Take a close look at WTC7 as it's going down. Do you seriously believe this is even possible? A NEVER before happened event. You believe that?

Some things are just too damn obvious to ignore or mask with "patriotism."

 

[Andrew2382]

It's THERMITE and the molten steel it produces. In other words, cutter charges used in demolition. .. and this is what FEMA had to say about it Appendix C of its World Trade Center Building Performance Study ...

Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure. A liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel... The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified.

The NIST Report, which used the findings of FEMA, never mentioned thermite and sulfur discovered by FEMA.

Take a close look at WTC7 as it's going down. Do you seriously believe this is even possible? A NEVER before happened event. You believe that?

Some things are just too damn obvious to ignore or mask with "patriotism."

One of the pieces of evidence conspiracy theorists use to say the buildings were brought down is a photo with something they interpret as being left behind by a thermite reaction.

There are a number of things they claim with this photo. One is the timeline. They say the photo has firemen which means this was during the rescue operation which only lasted two weeks. Why would they have fireman after the rescue operations? This suggests to them that the cut on the columns were made very close to September 11. The suggestion here is that it was done during the collapse.

They claim that the angle of the cut can't be created by a welding tool and/or is designed to have the building fall in a certain direction.

The other is a yellow substance they claim is residue from a thermite reaction.

Let's examine these claims one by one to see where the evidence takes us...

Timeline and Firemen

The rescue operation took about two weeks. They figured anyone left alive would have died by then anyway, so they started clean up operations and body recovery. During this time there was always at least 50 policemen and 50 firemen left on the scene to recover their fallen brothers. There were even more than that on ground zero until the city of NY told them to leave in November 2001. The city couldn't justify risking the health of 150 police and fireman for body recovery. In fact there was a protest about it which ended with the mayor allowing 50 members of each department on the scene.

Citing safety concerns, Giuliani had sought to scale back the number of firefighters working at ground zero to 25. At one point there had been as many as 150 firefighters and police officers at the site.

The decision angered firefighters still mourning the loss of 343 colleagues in the attacks. Many bodies have not been recovered, and the firefighters said they wanted to help find the remains of their friends and colleagues.

The number of firefighters working at the site was increased to 50 on Thursday.

Firehouse.Com News - 11/10/01 - WTC Firefighter Protest Charges to Be Dropped

Below are photos of firemen well after September 11.

October

Dec 15 2001

So the fact that there are firemen in the photo doesn't mean anything. That cut could have been done at any time during the clean up and recovery. Lets not forget the building went down some 6 stories underground. The firemen were recovering bodies mainly from the core and some were in the lobby when it happened. So it's not unreasonable to expect firemen there well after the event. Long enough for an ironworker to cut the column.

Angle and yellow residue

Another point is the angle of the cut. The argument here is that it suggests the column was cut at an angle so the building fell in a certain direction, like a tree. But is it possible the column was cut at an angle so just the column fell in a certain direction during cleanup? This can't be, surely the scholars would have asked an ironworker or someone else on the scene. I bet there isn't one photograph someone can find on the internet of a column which is cut at an angle. Remember, we're talking about "Scholars" here.

A close up

Maybe I'm being a little unfair. Maybe I just happened to get this from some obscure site. Maybe I work for the government and have a stash of photos the scholars aren't privy to... No, actually I got this from the same place the scholars got their photo.

Scholars Photo:
Here Is New York

The above photo
Here Is New York

Note the yellow smoke and residue left behind by the ironworker.

Thermite in general makes an ugly hole with molten metal drips/blobs. It doesn't make clean cuts. It's a powder that undergoes a violent chemical reaction as seen in the video below.

Thermite VS Car - Cool Video

Note how much thermite is used. The pot is about a liter, but how much thermite is that?

Stoichiometric thermite requires 2 moles of Al per 1 mole of Fe2O3

2Al + Fe2O3 = Al2O3 + 2Fe


2 moles of Al weigh 54 g
1 mole of Fe2O3 weighs 160 g

density of Al=2.64 g/cc
density of Fe2O3=5.24 g/cc


54 grams of Al is equivalent to 20.5 cc of Al.
160g of Fe2O3 is equivalent to 30.5 cc of Fe2O3

Therefore, 51 cc of fully dense powder of 20.5 cc Al and 30.5 cc Fe2O3 weighs (54+160) g = 214 g.

A volume of 1000 cc would weigh (1000/51)*214 = 4.2 kg

For a powder packing density of 50%, the powder would weigh:

0.5*4.2 kg = 2.1 kg = 4.8 lb

That much just to burn a small hole in a small car engine. I bet it's even an aluminum block but lets say it isn't. How much do you think it would take to burn a massive core column? Then add enough to burn for 6 weeks! You see where we're going. You'd need tons.

Here's a Debunking911 Fun Fact!

How much mass would be required to produce molten iron from thermite equal to the same volume of molten aluminum droplets shown flowing from the south tower window:


A mole of Fe weighs 54 g. For every mole of Fe produced by thermite, one mole of Al and 0.5 mole of Fe2O3 is needed.

2Al + Fe2O3 = Al2O3 + 2Fe


One mole of Al weighs 27 g. 0.5 mole of Fe2O3 weighs 80 g.

Therefore, (27 + 80) g = 107 g of Al and Fe2O3 is needed to produce 54 g of Fe.

That means the mass of the reactants to that of Fe produced is a ratio of 107/54 = 2. The mass of thermite reactants (Al, Fe2O3) is twice that of the molten iron produced.

Comparing the weight of molten aluminum droplets compared with iron:

Iron is 7.9 g/cc. Aluminum is 2.64 g/cc. Fe is denser than Al by a factor of 3. For the same volume of droplets, Fe would have three times the mass as Al.

To produce the iron from thermite requires a reactant mass that is a factor of 2 more than the iron produced. Also, Fe is 3 times as dense as Al. So, it would take 2*3 = 6 times as much mass to produce the same volume of molten iron droplets from thermite compared with molten aluminum droplets.


Example:

Assume 3000 lbs of aluminum fell from the towers. If it had been molten iron produced by thermite, then 6*3000 = 18,000 lbs of thermite reactants would have been required to produce that same volume of falling mass.

Suppose 10 tons of molten aluminum fell from the south tower, about 1/8th of that available from the airplane. If it had been molten iron produced from thermite, 60 tons of thermite reactants would have to have been stored in Fuji Bank to produce the same volume spilling out of the south tower. The section of floor would have to hold all of that plus the aircraft.

*Amount of aluminum can be ascertained by counting the droplets and measuring their size compared to the known size of the window. It's not easy to get a good number on this. It's based on the number of slugs seen in video stills, their size relative to the window width which was about 22 inches, and the density of aluminum, assuming this was aluminum.

Density of metals

The weight of a gallon of aluminum is about 22.5 pounds. A hundred of these would already be 2250 lbs. A gallon size is not unlike the size of the slugs that were pouring out the window. Look at them relative to the window size. They look small at first, but when you realize how big the towers were, the slugs were fairly large. It must have been in the thousands of pounds.

Some of the video stills show what look like 50 to 100 slugs in just one frame.

The thermite wouldn't have only needed to make a clean cut like the photo above, it would have also needed to cut sideways. Not an easy feat for thermite. You see, it's a powder which burns chaotically. Maybe with some device but no working device has been proven to me to work to cut a vertical column. You can direct it with a canister but that method wouldn't work to cut a column. The canister only makes a small hole. Nano-thermite has been talked about but its uses fall far short of cutting these massive columns. It's in its research stage. They include possible uses for welding molecular devices and possible use as a heat signature flare decoy. Then there is a patent of a device which has been brought up but as of yet, there is no evidence the idea went any further. Does it even work? Even if it did, they are "Ganged" together to make the cut. You would still need these boxes all over the columns. Once again the answer to this from the "scholars" is "rationalized technology". They need this technology to exist so it exists. There is some secret super thermite which can be placed in a canister which can survive 1,100 degree C so the primary charge doesn't go off. "Gee debunking, you're so dumb."

Update:

Steven Jones:

Actually, the metal-cutting device employing thermite is well known and documented; see the paper by Robert Moore published three months ago (January 2007) in the Journal of 9/11 Studies:
Furthermore, there is a demonstration of a “device employing thermite” cutting through a metal rod, here.
Yet another absurd comparison from Jones. A small metal rod is NOT the same as a large column. See how large that canister is compared to that small metal rod? The canister in that video, while being enough to cut the vertical rod, will only cut a small hole into a vertical WTC column. (Something I said long ago. See bold text above) For the towers columns to have been cut by a similar device you would need much larger canisters wrapped around the buildings at this scale. Absurd!

If Jones wants to salvage what credibility he thinks he has left, he MUST show us a working device which uses thermite and cuts a sizable hollow column. It MUST also be small enough to do the job yet hide from the average World Trade Center worker. Anything less is an attempt to deceive the public


Another of the many examples of deceptive photos produced by the "scholars" and cataloged on this site is the photo of firemen hovering over what they suggest is molten steel glowing from the use of thermite.

As you can see there are firemen standing in this glow. Unless you think the fire department is issued boots which can withstand 2000C, it's a safe bet we are not looking at molten steel. The other absurd logic is that the firemen would be standing around looking at a clump of molten steel while their brothers are trapped or buried. It's obvious they are looking at something which I reasonably suspect is a hole which they shinned a lantern in looking for their fallen brothers.

If anyone's ever hovered over a 200C barbeque in their backyard, they know hovering over a 2000C block of steel would radiate enough heat to make them think twice about putting their face over it. Yet one fireman is almost laying on the floor with his face very close to the glow. Another obvious point is the debris which looks like paper all over the place. Would at least [some] fall on 2000C steel and catch fire? Such careless firemen? Or careless conspiracy theorists?

Alex Jones, professional conspiracy theorist radio host, has said Jones found evidence of thermite. This isn't true. What Jones found was something which would have been in the debris pile anyway. Sulfur...

WTC Thermite

Sulfur

In Steven Jones' PDF "Answers to Objections and Questions", to support his claim for Sol-gels/Thermite he states:

"One molecule, described by the EPA's Erik Swartz, was present at levels "that dwarfed all others": 1,3-diphenylpropane. "We've never observed it in any sampling we've ever done,"

However when you look at the link he uses
Full Effects of WTC Pollution May Never Be Known -- Newsday.com

You find out Mr. Jones edits out the VERY next line which states

"He said it was most likely produced by the plastic of tens of thousands of burning computers."

Apparently, Jones felt this was not important enough for his readers to know

If you still need convincing that the angled cut was done by workers cleaning up ground zero then please read his excellent page on the subject.

11 Settembre: Real-world tests cut through steel, shatter thermite "evidence"

He also explains the method used in cutting steel in ground zero.

11 Settembre: Technical details on thermal cutting of steel

Jones continues to defend the indefensible. In a reply to Screw Loose Change Blog, Jones defends this deception by quote and photo mining while pointing out the obvious.

Jones writes:

The angle-cut beam in the first photo above has been the subject of much discussion. Recently, a first-responder has stated that he saw this particular cut-column (it is rather remarkable in appearance) when he arrived at the GZ scene on 9/11/2001. We are seeking a written statement from him to this effect to hopefully settle this issue. An analysis of the slag seen clinging to the inside and the outside (both) of this angle-cut column would also do much to answer questions about what did the cutting. I think you will agree that in the second photo, the worker is using an oxyacetylene torch to cut the steel.

INCREDIBLE! His argument for using the top photo as evidence seems to be that he has no evidence it's made without thermite... Incredibly, he argues that the photo of the iron worker cutting the column I uncovered is all the evidence he needs for THAT column and that column only. With his absurd logic he is at the same time suggesting that because there is no photo of the iron worker cutting the iron in his original photo, the original photo is evidence of thermite! To put it plainly, if it walk and talks like a duck that doesn't mean it isn't thermite. He doesn't even have a source for the quote from the alleged first responder saying the photo was taken on 9/11, never mind evidence that he was actually there. Because we all know, if there is no photo on the internet then he wasn't there using Jones' logic. And yet this passes Kevin Ryan's peer review! (Editor of "scholars for 9/11 studies.") I say again, INCREDIBLE!

Had he been just an average internet poster I would let this go as gross ignorance of how the scientific method works, but not a professor. I am left to draw no other conclusion than Steven Jones is purposely deceiving his flock or he has a serious mental disease. What other conclusion can a one draw?

Listen to "Demo Dave" Griffin and his crew talk about ground zero and evidence of pancaking.

"For it being two hundred and ten story buildings, the pile wasn't an enormous pile. We were expecting it to be - I think a lot of the guys were expecting it to be a lot more. I cut away a section of the wall - my gang cut into a section of the wall and we - we counted 14 floors compressed into 8 feet."

He also points to perimeter columns with angled cuts which he says his men cut.

"You can see where they made the cuts along - [Dave points to columns with angled cuts] right above - that's the bow tie connection they're cutting at about 3 to 5 foot above the bow tie connection before it starts in to the forming of the candle stick. They've got three candles left to cut."

 

[Skeptik]

So, starting with a few crazy theories about the president elect, we've now gone on to more crazy theories about 9/11 being a conspiracy.

Can we merge those two under one tinfoil hat, and blame 9/11 on Barack Obama? Maybe that would help clarify the discussion.