Study concludes explosives used on 911

a reply to: pteridine

Burn the witch! No wonder you guys don't get anywhere with this collective punishment of 'truthers'.

Go ahead and try to debunk the OP then? You never get into details, who's supposed to take your witch-hunt seriously then? No, really! I'll try but I can't. All I see is this gigantic balloon, filled with smelly gasses, that you've either made up yourself (congrats!) or copypasted straight from 911-myths, the zealots hotspot.
How much blatant PR-management do you think we could take without things getting out of hand?

At least try to do a decent job here! Group think reinforcement is any nagging without factual debate. And you've lost lotta tears about this, may I speak to your superior now?

addictions to conspiracies

Physician, heal yourself!



a reply to: face23785

Find the GIANT KILLER tapes and come back to me when you've lost them as well (again). Thanks to the military, eh?

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: pteridine

Burn the witch! No wonder you guys don't get anywhere with this collective punishment of 'truthers'.

Go ahead and try to debunk the OP then? You never get into details, who's supposed to take your witch-hunt seriously then? No, really! I'll try but I can't. All I see is this gigantic balloon, filled with smelly gasses, that you've either made up yourself (congrats!) or copypasted straight from 911-myths, the zealots hotspot.
How much blatant PR-management do you think we could take without things getting out of hand?

At least try to do a decent job here! Group think reinforcement is any nagging without factual debate. And you've lost lotta tears about this, may I speak to your superior now?

addictions to conspiracies

Physician, heal yourself!

 

a reply to: face23785

Find the GIANT KILLER tapes and come back to me when you've lost them as well (again). Thanks to the military, eh?

The OP refers to an opinion piece that has no evidence. Jones is famous for exceptionally bad science with his paper that claimed thermite. Of course, he is completely clueless when it comes to chemistry and analytical protocols. If you would like to defend the abomination that is his paper, let me know.

a reply to: PublicOpinion

Jones the guy that claimed Jesud visited the Americas NO MORE needs to be said..

Not a chemist not a structural engineer and not much common sense.

a reply to: wmd_2008

All I see is vague adhoms in avoidance of a factual debate. If you think strong language and grippy slogans are enough to make the Haris paper or LeeGroup study disappear as well, you're simply mistaken.

This alleged "opinion" piece has more evidence to offer than your Nist report, chew on that for a brief moment. Guess what, hot air and groupthink pitchforking don't change a thing.

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: wmd_2008

All I see is vague adhoms in avoidance of a factual debate. If you think strong language and grippy slogans are enough to make the Haris paper or LeeGroup study disappear as well, you're simply mistaken.

This alleged "opinion" piece has more evidence to offer than your Nist report, chew on that for a brief moment. Guess what, hot air and groupthink pitchforking don't change a thing.

What evidence does it offer?

a reply to: PublicOpinion

One thing is certain if you think Jones was right you are one deluded individual. SO I will ask again do you think those truss seats could withstand the dynamic load generated by the falling mass simple question even for YOU.

a reply to: wmd_2008

Ya know... Nist conducted a microstructural analysis to verify the "fire weakened steel" theory and didn't find any. Which is the reason why I'm asking for evidence.

Instead of coming up with an answer to your oversimplified question, I'd rather like to see a conclusive answer to the riddle why the mass was falling to begin with. Which is why we have this explosive thread btw, you know where you're at?

Stick to your own thread with irrelevant questions, how's that?

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: wmd_2008

Ya know... Nist conducted a microstructural analysis to verify the "fire weakened steel" theory and didn't find any. Which is the reason why I'm asking for evidence.

Sampling has a lot to do with finding something. I'm asking for evidence of demolition.
Dropping a target structure consists of removing key supports and letting gravity do the rest. A top down event would have challenged the perpetrators of such a plan and would have required knowledge of the building weaknesses. The collapse time was such that each floor had to be cleared in under200 milliseconds. The amount of explosives necessary to do this to a structurally sound building would be obvious to all. Our clever perps would know this and would have arranged for a structural failure and a gravitational collapse via other means. Thermite can't be timed, so thermite could only have started the collapse. Given the design of the building, once the collapse was initiated, there is no way to stop it. After initiation, gravity is the fastest way down.
Note also that the core structure remained standing for seconds after the main collapse, so any demolitions were not in the core. If the conspiracists knew enough about the building to know that the core didn't need explosive charges, they also knew that the outer structure would fail in a cascade once collapse was initiated.
There is no evidence for explosives and if you want to claim that the plotters used many tons of thermite to initiate the collapses exactly where the planes hit, all you have to do is find evidence of the thermite. [Jones' paper is not evidence of anything but primer paint and exceptionally poor analytical chemistry and complete misunderstanding of thermodynamics.] Not finding physical evidence would then require explaining the difference between a fire induced gravitational collapse and a thermite induced gravitational collapse.

When they need to, they can be right along side
the aircraft in question, in 20 min.
This one wasn't even listed as highjacked and they intercepted it twice
in the time it took to scramble on 9/11.
en.m.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: PublicOpinion

Yet again avoiding the question the trouble with the internet is that individuals who's most technical question of the day is do you want fries with that post on threads when they have NO experience or knowledge about the subject so do you want to answer the question re the truss sests

Or do we just assume your level of knowledge.

a reply to: pteridine

Explosive paint is kinda funny, go back to 911 myths and try again. Shallow hogwash, care to substantiate anything you just wrote? Every building tends to come down, one way or the other, once the collapse is initiated. What are you even trying to say? Gravity rules? Sounds about right, some might even say it transcends time and space. Interstellar performance!

Let's forget tons of iron-spheres, aluminum oxide and a tad hi-temp silicates in the dust, or heat hydrolyzed concrete for that matter. There's líterally tons of stuff to have you at the edge of the seat or fiat. And this design-flaw angle goes straight to Skilling and the structural engineers. Why should the tree care when a few kids are having a piss at him?

Find the LeeGroup piece in my older post when you have your weird issues with Jones and Haris, or simply try one of the other cited papers and go for it?

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: pteridine

Explosive paint is kinda funny, go back to 911 myths and try again. Shallow hogwash, care to substantiate anything you just wrote? Every building tends to come down, one way or the other, once the collapse is initiated. What are you even trying to say? Gravity rules? Sounds about right, some might even say it transcends time and space. Interstellar performance!

Let's forget tons of iron-spheres, aluminum oxide and a tad hi-temp silicates in the dust, or heat hydrolyzed concrete for that matter. There's líterally tons of stuff to have you at the edge of the seat or fiat. And this design-flaw angle goes straight to Skilling and the structural engineers. Why should the tree care when a few kids are having a piss at him?

Find the LeeGroup piece in my older post when you have your weird issues with Jones and Haris, or simply try one of the other cited papers and go for it?

I am saying that there is no evidence for demolition in any WTC building. I am saying that thermite cannot do what many have claimed. I am saying that when a structure is demolished, supports are removed and the structure falls.

I'll be glad to ignore the iron spheres. If any welding was done on the building during construction, there should be lots of iron spheres within the structure. Aluminum is a common material and heating it in air produces.....aluminum oxide. "Hi temp silicates" is undefined. What do you mean by a "tad hi-temp silicates" in the dust and what are you claiming as the source? What "tons of stuff to have you at the edge of the seat or fiat" are you referring to?
What papers would you like to discuss? None I have read has any evidence for demolition. Until there is evidence for another mechanism, the collapse must be considered to be the result of impact and fires.

a reply to: pteridine

The thermite's a red-herring. It's the reinforced concrete infill panels.

originally posted by: Kester
a reply to: pteridine

The thermite's a red-herring. It's the reinforced concrete infill panels.

What concrete infill panels

a reply to: wmd_2008

It took me 4,000 hours to work this out. Time well spent. www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: Kester

There was NO concrete infill panels pure fantasy.

a reply to: UnderKingsPeak

The Payne Stewart intercept did not take 20 min as you claim - it took an 1 1/2 hour

Plane crossed time zone into Central time

At 1327:18Z (0927:18 EDT), the pilot acknowledged the clearance by stating, "three nine zero bravo alpha." This was the last known radio transmission from the airplane

About 1454Z (now 0954 CDT due to the flight's crossing into the Central Time zone), a U.S. Air Force F-16 test pilot from the 40th Flight Test Squadron at Eglin AFB in western Florida, who happened to be in the air nearby, was directed by controllers to intercept N47BA

Also the fighter sent to intercept was already airborne at time and was diverted to check the aircraft

Big difference in having fighter already airborne and in vicinity than launching cold from ground and time required
to fly to intercept

Did you bother to actually READ THE ARTICLE YOU POSTED.....???? DO YOU LACK READING COMPREHENSION.....??

a reply to: pteridine

The amount of energy introduced during the generation of the WTC Dust and the ensuing conflagration caused various components to vaporize. Vapor phase components with high boiling point and high melting point would have, as they cooled, tended to form precipitated particles or thin film deposits on available surfaces through condensation mechanisms. The results of this process would be the presence of a thin layer of deposited material on the surfaces of the dust particulate matter. Many of the materials, such as lead, cadmium, mercury and various organic compounds, vaporized and then condensed during the WTC Event.

WTC Dust Signature Report Composition and Morphology P.21

Fires vaporizing lead? 2022 K ​(1749 °C, ​3180 °F) - the boiling-point of lead. Take a lead on that now!

Sir Letsbelievealot,
there's your evidence for the use of explosives.

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: pteridine

The amount of energy introduced during the generation of the WTC Dust and the ensuing conflagration caused various components to vaporize. Vapor phase components with high boiling point and high melting point would have, as they cooled, tended to form precipitated particles or thin film deposits on available surfaces through condensation mechanisms. The results of this process would be the presence of a thin layer of deposited material on the surfaces of the dust particulate matter. Many of the materials, such as lead, cadmium, mercury and various organic compounds, vaporized and then condensed during the WTC Event.

WTC Dust Signature Report Composition and Morphology P.21

Fires vaporizing lead? 2022 K ​(1749 °C, ​3180 °F) - the boiling-point of lead. Take a lead on that now!

Sir Letsbelievealot,
there's your evidence for the use of explosives.

There is your evidence for fires. If you actually read the report, they call out fires, not explosives. Lead does not have to boil to produce particles from condensation. Look up the term "vapor pressure."

a reply to: pteridine


There's a new term for this, they call it the WTC Event. Fires simply don't cut it. Read the whole piece if you like, you'll find things like 5.89% iron spheres in the WTC dust vs. 0.04% in Background buildings. Your "spherules are regular in this environment" take is thoroughly debunked due to their sheer abundance.
And don't forget that Nist has no evidence for fire weakened steel, vaporized during this WTC Event as well I'd reckon. There's no other explanation, is it?

To vaporize lead below said 1900°C you would need another atmosphere with different vapor pressures. Extreme heat and a shockwave can do that, yes. Office-fires not so much, no.