Trying to resolve 9/11

a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

You keep insisting there no evidence of controlled demolition. We already recognize it past history a usual strange phenomenon was identified and communicated about in an analysis paper from 2002- steel from WTC7 had softened and melted. Debunkers claimed steel did not melt that not a true factual statement

You cited same very isolated examples of steel undergoing a chemical attack sitting in a toxic pile of smoldering computes, batteries from everything from emergency lighting, generators, electronics. Office furniture. AC units. And who else knows what to react with steel to make compounds with lower melting points.


And there is still no evidence of over six hundred thermite charges flashing, sparking, burning at the exterior columns right in view of the facade windows.

This is thermite in action.

1/2 ton of thermite VS SUV mythbusters

www.dailymotion.com...

1000 ponds of thermite couldn’t even totally cut the roof of an SUV laying horizontally.

Thermite burns slow. The load of the structure would push the molten cuts back together. Thermite burns too slow and inconsistent to cause 84 columns to instantly and simultaneously fail.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

Need to consider the components of thermite IE ground aluminium + iron oxide. Not exactly shocking to find those materials in a steel framed building clad in aluminium is it?

The thermite theory was only ever considered as an attempt to explain the absence of evidence of actual explosives and, almost 20 years later, there's still no evidence of explosive demolition.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

WTC7
Demolitions don't function like that. There short burst high strength low energy level explosions that destroy around the space of the ignition. They're not bombs going off. It all depends on what the cutting charges contain how high of a bang it will make. You hear loud demolitions on video because there using low-speed demolition cord and TNT. TNT very intense, and powerful, and it's cheap to use.

False assertion by you. Explosives cut steel by a pressure wave. No mater what type of explosive used, it still has to generate the minimum pressure wave to cut steel if used to cut columns. That pressure wave no mater the explosive is going to make an Audio signature that is going to be indicative of a pressure wave with the force to cut steel columns, and would echo about Manhattan.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

There absolutely is no evidence WTC7 was devastated by nanothermite, if I studied the material in the truth movement correctly? You can contemplate it, but I

Then why mention nano thermite?

You

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Truth movement never asserted that. They claim Nano-thermite was adopted so the temps inside the building were excessive. This mainly is theories about the twin towers.

Any who?

GOVERNMENT
9/11 destruction “controlled demolition” — fact or fiction?

canada.constructconnect.com...

The most probable explanation is a controlled explosion and mostly likely using thermite,

You do understand the truth movement was forced in to fizzle no flash bombs because there is no evidence of audio indicative of a detonation with the force to cut steel columns.

Please quote Architects and Engineers where they whole heartily stated only nano thermite was used? And rule out thermite.

You

Twin towers- i tend to concur with the explantation it was a nuclear or chemical trigger that led to the collapse.

Sorry. Nukes are an idiotic fantasy based in pseudoscience. Again. No indication of an underground nuke. The core columns were cut from their foundations during cleanup. The slurry wall was was not breached. The bedrock is supporting new high-rises. There was no fission products or radioactivity or contamination associated with a nuclear detonation.

Chemical reactions? The thermite study is a fraud. There is no way a CD system would survive the jet impacts and fires where the jets hit which is were the collapse of WTC 1 and WTC 2 initiated. Impacts that cut columns, electrical services, and left floor panels hanging.

Nonsense. They claimed nano-thermite was applied based on detection of nano- sized chips in the dust. That why they insist nano-thermite was utilized. They don't see it  as a belief or ideology.
I never heard them claim WTC7 was taken down by nanothermite. You can hand over evidence if you determine that wrong.
Individuals are getting sick from cancers including tyroid cancer ( thyroid cancer is associated to radiation poisoning)  responders and ordinary people are dying by their thousands in New York. Don't be claiming there no sick from this event. 
You have no understanding of how nanothermite would ignite. What do you think happens when nano-thermite chips are exposed to fire? You waffle wthout pondering it over logically. 

originally posted by: Pilgrum
a reply to: Hulseyreport

Need to consider the components of thermite IE ground aluminium + iron oxide. Not exactly shocking to find those materials in a steel framed building clad in aluminium is it?

The thermite theory was only ever considered as an attempt to explain the absence of evidence of actual explosives and, almost 20 years later, there's still no evidence of explosive demolition.

the problem is the chip are nano sized.
So how can these chips be perfectly sized by natural means?
That impossible thermite ingredients would uniformly form in pockets on steel. Nobody would use thermite primer paint for trusses and steel.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

So where all is the extra heat coming from?

I guess not from over 600 thermite charges fueling thermite fires?

WTC 7
These office fires were not enough to heat a column weighing 15,000 pounds per floor to 1000° F.

There is no evidence of thermite causing offices fires to burn over 2000c. If over 600 thermite charges were burning on 84 columns over 8 floors, that would make one hell of an office fire.

Remember. 1000 pounds of thermite could even melt the top of an SUV in half.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

They too claim there was a very hot fire on Floor 12 near the time of collapse- but visual evidence demonstrates the fires are out.

And there is no evidence WTC 7 relit from the burning of over 600 thermite charges that would be obvious.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

If they adopted a faster wiring system example fiber optics the demolition would be fast and speedy with no lag.

How do you use fiber options with blasting caps for explosives? Or Magnesium igniters for thermite. You need current and amps. Not light pulses.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

So where all is the extra heat coming from?

I guess not from over 600 thermite charges fueling thermite fires?

WTC 7
These office fires were not enough to heat a column weighing 15,000 pounds per floor to 1000° F.

There is no evidence of thermite causing offices fires to burn over 2000c. If over 600 thermite charges were burning on 84 columns over 8 floors, that would make one hell of an office fire.

Remember. 1000 pounds of thermite could even melt the top of an SUV in half.

You have no experience or understanding of nano-technology.
Nanothermite is super-advanced thermite that releases higher intensity energy.
Thermite was never a believe the truthers community stated.
When there claiming nano-thermite was used you declaring an exotic military engineering material was used. This material from black project area of restricted projects. 
Again read what i said Ae911 work is nano-thermite was found in tower dust samples.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

Plus we have no clue what the explosive used was to recognize how silent or loud it would be.

Doesn’t mater what explosive was used if it cut steel by a pressure wave. It still has to make the minimum strong enough pressure wave to cut steel columns. It’s still going to be really loud and echo about Manhattan. It doesn’t really matter where the camera is because the echoes should be bouncing around. There are people talking in one WTC 7 collapse video were you can hear the conversation over the collapse. There is no audible explosions indicative of a force to cut steel columns. Another WTC 7 collapse video shows where the cameraman has to tell the reporter with her back turned to WTC 7 the building is collapsing.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

If they adopted a faster wiring system example fiber optics the demolition would be fast and speedy with no lag.

How do you use fiber options with blasting caps for explosives? Or Magnesium igniters for thermite. You need current and amps. Not light pulses.

Fiber optics- is communication signal travels along. Do you know how the internet works?
Blasting caps are metal, there literally going to be nothing left when the demolition occurs. You think they going to find perfect melt cabs in the rubble, come of it. And if they did find something was covered up like everything else.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

Twin Towers
In my view was not a typical controlled demolition. It would be a time consuming job to plant explosives inside this building it too massive. The devices used are likely to be energy based to cause a chemical/gas blast.

Based on what evidence from the video, audio, seismic evidence. The collapse of WTC 1 and WTC 2 initiated on the floors of the jet impacts. There is no way a controlled demolition system is going to survive the impacts and fires to initiate.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

Twin Towers
In my view was not a typical controlled demolition. It would be a time consuming job to plant explosives inside this building it too massive. The devices used are likely to be energy based to cause a chemical/gas blast.

Based on what evidence from the video, audio, seismic evidence. The collapse of WTC 1 and WTC 2 initiated on the floors of the jet impacts. There is no way a controlled demolition system is going to survive the impacts and fires to initiate.

I have already taken apart the progressive collapse fire hypothesis.
The debunker own video proves 100 percent the Penthouse debris came through the roof at free-fall speeds.
You and your friends will just ignore NIST own model of progressive collapse shows that scenario to be impossible.
That a problem with some humans deny evidence that undisputable.
Debunkers are actually helping the conspirators get away with this crime. I hope you know that.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

Discovery process?
The defined precisely the experiments they performed here.

You tell me. What outside/independent lab reproduced / confirmed the results.

You

Not correct- it was peer-reviewed by others.

False statement.

en.m.wikipedia.org...

In April 2009, Jones, along with Niels H. Harrit and 7 other authors published a paper in The Open Chemical Physics Journal, titled, 'Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe'.[47] The editor of the journal, Professor Marie-Paule Pileni, an expert in explosives and nano-technology,[48][49] resigned. She received an e-mail from the Danish science journal Videnskab asking for her professional assessment of the article's content.[50][51] According to Pileni, the article was published without her authorization. Subsequently, numerous concerns arose regarding the reliability of the publisher, Bentham Science Publishers. This included the publishing an allegedly peer reviewed article generated by SCIgen [52] (although this program has also successfully submitted papers to IEEE and Springer [53]), the resignation of multiple people at the administrative level,[54][55] and soliciting article submissions from researchers in unrelated fields through spam.[56] With regard to the peer review process of the research conducted by Jones in The Open Chemical Physics Journal, David Griscom identified himself as one of the reviewers.[57] The paper which Jones co-authored referenced Griscom, and multiple scientists studying 9/11, in the acknowledgements for "elucidating discussions and encouragements".[19] Almost four years prior to identifying himself as a reviewer and the welcome he received from Jones for speaking out boldly,[58] Griscom published a letter in defense of evidence-based 9/11 studies;[59] of which Jones was an editor.[60]

I showing you again, it 100 per cent impossible that wave could have happened if you believe the building progressively collapsed by fire.

Go ahead and explain how the wave on the video you showed travelled at free speeds with structural components still there?

originally posted by: Hulseyreport


Thermite was never a believe the truthers community stated.

Yes it was. You are obviously new to this. There is a whole evolution of explosives and incendiaries that truthers have used to explain their beliefs.

The incendiaries evolution went like this:

Thermite > Thermate > Nano Thermite

There were some other small short lived off shoots like Super Nano Thermite Gell, Paint on Thermite, Ceiling tile Thermite. Too many and too silly to remember them all.

originally posted by: Hulseyreport

I have already taken apart the progressive collapse fire hypothesis.

You have yet to address Momentum Transfer as a cause of for the 2.4 sec of free fall acceleration.

originally posted by: waypastvne

originally posted by: Hulseyreport


Thermite was never a believe the truthers community stated.

Yes it was. You are obviously new to this. There is a whole evolution of explosives and incendiaries that truthers have used to explain their beliefs.

The incendiaries evolution went like this:

Thermite > Thermate > Nano Thermite

There were some other small short lived off shoots like Super Nano Thermite Gell, Paint on Thermite, Ceiling tile Thermite. Too many and too silly to remember them all.

Provide a source they claimed thermite.
All the lectures I read they claim nano-thermite.
Debunkers own evidence showing the Penthouse coming straight through to the bottom at freefall speeds, is impossible based off the NIST model .
Debunkers should go away and try to explain that.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

That false also - independents have analysed the chips and affirmed there was thermite materials embedded in the skin of the chips.

And there it is. Your blatant falsehoods I will net let you forget. So cite an a actual source with link. Or admit your wrong.

Is this how you want it to go down. You posting proven falsehoods?

And I think this sums up you comprehension on controlled demolitions systems...

You

If they adopted a faster wiring system example fiber optics the demolition would be fast and speedy with no lag.

You understand fiber optics doesn’t care Amos to set off blasting caps or magnesium fuses?

originally posted by: waypastvne

originally posted by: Hulseyreport

I have already taken apart the progressive collapse fire hypothesis.

You have yet to address Momentum Transfer as a cause of for the 2.4 sec of free fall acceleration.

Do you know what momentum transfer is? Why would it be a cause? Explain with more than one line.