Two New Yorkers who moved to my area saw explosions bring down World Trade Centers

FEMA found this heavy steel flange in WTC7's rubble pile which displayed "evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including rapid oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting..."
link to the actual photo and not a PDF file
or at least give page reference
Republic Magazine Vol. 16 P,24
there are at least 3 or 4 images on that page, if you are referring to the one at the top, it doesn't even say where its from
an d i saw a load of total fucking bullshit in that PDF from that fucking moronic asshole Alex Jones

you want some credibility, dont use anything connected to THAT asshole
 
And this George?

You seem to believe that thermite was used on that column. So tell me how thermite created the above scenario?
Are you saying the interior surface of the left plate along with the exterior surfaces of the top and right plates are visible in this photo?

This is the second time I've asked you this simple question.
My mistake.
This was NOT the second time I posted the question.
It WAS the first.

Now tell me if the interior of the left plate along with the exterior surfaces of the top and right plates are visible in this photo?

No they are not.

Now explain something to me. Why is there slag on the EXTERIOR of the bottom plate, but there is NO slag on the EXTERIOR of the left plate? Please explain.
 
BTW Georg, you STILL haven'tt addressed this post:

Can you quote me the first time you asked this? I seem to have missed it.

Now follow closely and please answer the questions pertaining to what you believe the photo shows.

1. What type of thermite cutting was used based on the photo above? Was it a cutting charge or did it "burn through" the steel?

2. If it was a cutting charge, there would not be grooves oriented 45 degrees to the face of the plate as shown in this marked up photo here using red lines. The force of the charge would have made lines PERPENDICULAR lines (if any) to the face as that would have been the direction the force of the charge would have gone.
cut3patternlines.jpg


3. If you claim a thermite "burn through" process was employed then why is there no slag on the outside face on the left plate, but there is slag on the outside face of the bottom plate? If you are trying to tell me that the slag appears on the opposite face of where the thermite "burn through" process was started, then how did the slag get on the outside face of the bottom plate? You're not being consistent.
columnfaces.jpg

I'm also still waiting for you to quote the first time you asked me the "simple question" you mentioned above. Where is that question anyways? I may have missed it.
I don't know what type of thermite cutting was used.
Perhaps Dick or Dubya could shed light on that question also?

When you make the statement "If it was a cutting charge, there would not be grooves oriented 45 degrees to the face of the plate...The force of the charge would have made line PERPENDICULAR to the face...you need to supply a credible source for your opinion as you did with Flames and Temps on page 32; post #472.

I'm also waiting for your observations of visible slag on the interior of the left plate and exteriors of the top and right plates in your photo?

It's simple physics George. If you have a linear shape charge go off on a piece of metal plate, the force of the blast would go in what direction THROUGH the plate? Would the "blast force" go 45 degrees from the plane of the charge or perpendicular? You're trying to tell me that if I fire a bullet from gun, the bullet will leave the gun at 45 degree angle.

I have also provided you with photos of what a torch cut looks like. I have provided you with photos of people cutting beams with torches. I have provided you with a video of a worked who POINTS at column that were cut with torches that have angled cuts.

What have you provided as proof of it being thermite? Where are YOUR photos of a themite cut?
 
3. A free-fall drop of 2.25 seconds officially acknowledged.

Hold on a second George.

You say the roof-line took 6.5 seconds to collapse, yet freefall happened for only 2.23 seconds of it.

What happened that it didn't free-fall the ENTIRE 6.5 seconds???

Least resistance, right George? So what resisted the other 4+ seconds, if all the beams and connections were cut?
 
3. Multi-ton steel sections ejected laterally 600 feet at 50mph.

Proof of this? Photos? Video?

4. Mid air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete.

Proof of this? Can you provide me proof that it was concrete that was pulverized in mid-air and not the gypsum planking, drop ceiling tiles, or fir proofing?

I'd LOVE to see how you came up with such a 100% positive claim like this.
 
link to the actual photo and not a PDF file
or at least give page reference
Republic Magazine Vol. 16 P,24
there are at least 3 or 4 images on that page, if you are referring to the one at the top, it doesn't even say where its from
an d i saw a load of total fucking bullshit in that PDF from that fucking moronic asshole Alex Jones

you want some credibility, dont use anything connected to THAT asshole
How many of those 3 or 4 images look like Swiss cheese?

The content I referenced was authored by Richard Gage, David Chandler, and Gregg Roberts NOT by Alex Jones.

When a timid dim-wit like you raises "credibility" issues, it's hard to stop laughing.
 
Hey George.

Didn't Steven Jones admit in a conversation with Dr. Greening that the amount of thermite needed to melt or cut the steel columns was unreasonable and he now suggests that thermite was used as detonators for actual explosives?

You're a little behind in your "proof" aren't you?
 
Last edited:
3. A free-fall drop of 2.25 seconds officially acknowledged.

Hold on a second George.

You say the roof-line took 6.5 seconds to collapse, yet freefall happened for only 2.23 seconds of it.

What happened that it didn't free-fall the ENTIRE 6.5 seconds???

Least resistance, right George? So what resisted the other 4+ seconds, if all the beams and connections were cut?
According to David Chandler's calculations the 2.25 seconds of free fall covered a distance of approximately 8 stories.

The destruction of the remaining 39 floors were slowed by 40,000 tons of structural steel and 90,000 tons of concrete not to mention the gypsum planking, drop ceiling tiles and fire proofing.

Do you think there's any connection between the collapse of the mechanical penthouse and those eight stories of free fall?
 
3. A free-fall drop of 2.25 seconds officially acknowledged.

Hold on a second George.

You say the roof-line took 6.5 seconds to collapse, yet freefall happened for only 2.23 seconds of it.

What happened that it didn't free-fall the ENTIRE 6.5 seconds???

Least resistance, right George? So what resisted the other 4+ seconds, if all the beams and connections were cut?
According to David Chandler's calculations the 2.25 seconds of free fall covered a distance of approximately 8 stories.

The destruction of the remaining 39 floors were slowed by 40,000 tons of structural steel and 90,000 tons of concrete not to mention the gypsum planking, drop ceiling tiles and fire proofing.

Do you think there's any connection between the collapse of the mechanical penthouse and those eight stories of free fall?

Are you saying that the only way to create free-fall is to cut the columns and beams completely and that failing steel columns/beams in a structure, due to loss of strength or thermal expansion caused by heat, cannot cause the same thing?
 
Sorry George. You'll need to change your stance now that thermite was used to cut the columns. Even Steven Jones admits it in this quote from this site:

Steven Jones and Frank Greening (and others) correspond - April-May, 2009. | 911Blogger.com

Steven Jones said:
A number of FG’s straw-man arguments were also identified and dispelled. On May 11, 2009, I wrote to FG: “Nor is your conflation of "thermate" with "nanothermite" valid. Nor did I EVER write or say that thermate alone would suffice to bring down the Towers, but rather wrote that explosives would be needed (in addition).”

During the discussion, I briefly expressed my hypothesis that nanothermite served as an igniting agent, as in the “super-thermite matches” described in our paper, to ignite more conventional explosives such as C4 or HMX, in the destruction of the WTC buildings. Thermate (sulfur plus thermite and possibly the form thermate-TH-3) was ALSO in evidence and probably intended to weaken critical steel members (e.g., residue/ material flowing with orange glow from the So. Tower just minutes before its collapse and the sulfidation of WTC steel reported in the FEMA report but ignored by NIST). Thermite incendiary without sulfur is not in evidence at the WTC to date.

But sulfur is NOT needed for the function of explosive nanothermite and would not be expected to appear in the red/gray chips. Reliable and robust super- or nano-thermite ignitors would each be ignited by an electrical pulse generated by a radio-receiver, in turn igniting shaped charges to cut steel, the sequence beginning near where the planes went in for the Towers and computer-controlled, so that the destruction wave would proceed via explosives in top-down sequence. Thus, this was no conventional (bottom first) controlled demolition, agreeing on this with B. Blanchard, but I never claimed it was! (For the Towers; the demolition of WTC7 appears to be bottom-first and more conventional.) The top-down destruction of the Towers in this model would doubtless require more explosives than would a conventional controlled demolition. Thermate (an incendiary, not an explosive) is not the “be all and end all” explanation (FG’s terminology), nor did I ever claim it was – I have consistently pointed to evidence that explosives were used in bringing down the Towers.

So thermite/thermate was used to ignite SHAPE CHARGES????? I thought you said it was thermite that CUT the columns George?

:lol::lol::lol::lol:
 
Are you saying the interior surface of the left plate along with the exterior surfaces of the top and right plates are visible in this photo?

This is the second time I've asked you this simple question.
My mistake.
This was NOT the second time I posted the question.
It WAS the first.

Now tell me if the interior of the left plate along with the exterior surfaces of the top and right plates are visible in this photo?

No they are not.

Now explain something to me. Why is there slag on the EXTERIOR of the bottom plate, but there is NO slag on the EXTERIOR of the left plate? Please explain.
I don't have an explanation for the lack of slag on the exterior of the left plate.
 
My mistake.
This was NOT the second time I posted the question.
It WAS the first.

Now tell me if the interior of the left plate along with the exterior surfaces of the top and right plates are visible in this photo?

No they are not.

Now explain something to me. Why is there slag on the EXTERIOR of the bottom plate, but there is NO slag on the EXTERIOR of the left plate? Please explain.
I don't have an explanation for the lack of slag on the exterior of the left plate.
its because it WASNT cut by thermite or a shape charge
it was cut by a torch as part of the cleanup
 
How many of those responding regularly to this thread believe there is NO good reason for an INDEPENDENT investigation into the terrorist attacks of 9/11/2001?
if we had not already been through over 8 YEARS of dishonest troofers denying the facts, i would have supported a full and open investigation
in fact i have called the 9/11 commission report nothing but a political CYA
at this point, no investigation would ever satisfy the troofers so it would be a waste of time
basically because the facts THEY question would remain the same
the things they question would not change
 
Hold on a second George.

You say the roof-line took 6.5 seconds to collapse, yet freefall happened for only 2.23 seconds of it.

What happened that it didn't free-fall the ENTIRE 6.5 seconds???

Least resistance, right George? So what resisted the other 4+ seconds, if all the beams and connections were cut?
According to David Chandler's calculations the 2.25 seconds of free fall covered a distance of approximately 8 stories.

The destruction of the remaining 39 floors were slowed by 40,000 tons of structural steel and 90,000 tons of concrete not to mention the gypsum planking, drop ceiling tiles and fire proofing.

Do you think there's any connection between the collapse of the mechanical penthouse and those eight stories of free fall?

Are you saying that the only way to create free-fall is to cut the columns and beams completely and that failing steel columns/beams in a structure, due to loss of strength or thermal expansion caused by heat, cannot cause the same thing?

apparently only on 9/11
 

Forum List

Back
Top