It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Thermite and explosives

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 20 2006 @ 12:19 AM
link   
OK. heres the deal with explosaives in my highly pretigious and definitve opinion
. If you were to plant explosaves in the towers then you'll need to make sure they arn't blown up when the plane hits. and a plane did hit. Or a large cruse missle. But an actual physical object hit them. No disagreing with this point. So you have to make sure the explosiaves are A.) denated by remote as the damage might destroy any wires, B.) not dentinated by heat, like a fire cracker, so that you don't bring down the tower the instant of impact. So this means that the explosaves have to be planted on multiple floors because you can't be one hundred percent sure where the plane will hit, and having the building crack well above or below the impact point will ruin your day. Lets assume that you use the ever popular suspect, Thermite. Thermite is destreamly difficult to ignite, usualy people use magnesaim strips which can only be ignited in the best of circumstances. And Magnesium takes a lot to get going. So maybe they just left thermite strapped to the core beams and let the heat of the explosion set them off right? Well if its hot enough to set of thermite, it'll melt steal pretty good. So they have to use a real explosive, probally deep in the center of the building as to not show the explsion. But this creates the problem that the beams here are thicker and stronger there fore more explosaive is needed. So why not just take a plane loaded with jet fuel, hijack it right after takeoff so it has plenty of fuel, and ram it in as low as you can go? No thermite needed. No set up no clean up just one two three and its off to Iraq




posted on Nov, 20 2006 @ 01:37 AM
link   
Problem is according to NIST and FEMA the buildings would have withstood the impact from the planes.

Most of the fuel was burned off in the intial explosion, and what fuel that was left would have burned off pretty quick.



posted on Nov, 20 2006 @ 01:43 AM
link   
Ultima,

The NIST report also details fires raging hot enough to bring down the towers regardless of the fuel.

The problem with the thermite theory is that you would have to find thermite that can:

a) Survive a plane impact
b) Survive fires
c) Can cut horizontally
d) Is extremley compact

The amount of thermite requited to cut through enough metal to bring down one floor is far more than most people think.



posted on Nov, 20 2006 @ 11:14 AM
link   
exactly. Thats why if there was explosave it would need to be located in the planes



posted on Nov, 20 2006 @ 02:18 PM
link   
^If the explosives were in the plane, then wouldn't the towers have fallen right after the impacts, not an hour later? We can see in the vids the only areas significantly damaged were where the plane impacted, not the lower floors that gave way as the top collapsed.

And where Dr in the NIST report does it say the fires would have got hot enough regardless of the fuel? What would have been different with the WTC fires than say the Windsor Tower? How could the WTC fires have been hotter than any other office fire if the jet fuel wasn't involved? We know no office fire has ever caused a steel frame building to collapse, let alone 3 on the same day. And just to add, I don't think the jet fuel would have made much diff anyway, most of it burned up in the initial impact and what was left would have evaporated fairly quickly.

From what I read it says no area got much hotter than 250??


Observations of paint cracking due to thermal expansion. Of the more than 170 areas examined on 16 perimeter column panels, only three columns had evidence that the steel reached temperatures above 250 ºC: east face, floor 98, inner web; east face, floor 92, inner web; and north face, floor 98, floor truss connector. Only two core column specimens had sufficient paint remaining to make such an analysis, and their temperatures did not reach 250 ºC. ... Using metallographic analysis, NIST determined that there was no evidence that any of the samples had reached temperatures above 600 ºC. (p 90/140)

Source



posted on Nov, 20 2006 @ 04:08 PM
link   
This is soley speculation.
Wouldn't it be possible to have the thermite charges set in the fireproofing (which would hide it) and have select charges set off electronically? Say the guy on the button waited untill the planes hit and distinguished which floors were hit untill he/she hits which floors to implode. Multiple videos shows only the floors below the plane crash collapsed first. I say thermite because it is an old technlogy and could have been instaled at time of build, just charges not ignighters. I mean it could have been lasers for all I know.



posted on Nov, 20 2006 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Brand403
This is soley speculation.
Wouldn't it be possible to have the thermite charges set in the fireproofing (which would hide it) and have select charges set off electronically? Say the guy on the button waited untill the planes hit and distinguished which floors were hit untill he/she hits which floors to implode. Multiple videos shows only the floors below the plane crash collapsed first. I say thermite because it is an old technlogy and could have been instaled at time of build, just charges not ignighters. I mean it could have been lasers for all I know.


Why would the explosave be built in to the buildng at the time of construction? They weren't planning the attack that far in the future. Besides most of the fire proofing was blown off by the impact.



posted on Nov, 20 2006 @ 06:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by doctorfungi
Ultima,

The NIST report also details fires raging hot enough to bring down the towers regardless of the fuel.

The problem with the thermite theory is that you would have to find thermite that can:

a) Survive a plane impact
b) Survive fires
c) Can cut horizontally
d) Is extremley compact

The amount of thermite requited to cut through enough metal to bring down one floor is far more than most people think.


But how did the fires get that hot without any help. Also the 911 commission report that used the NIST reports stated the fires were isolated, and lots of photos and videos shows the fires were pretty well burned out before the towers collapsed.

Also you have several eyewitnesses that stated thier were molten steel in the basements of buildings 1,2,6, and 7. No planes hit builindg 6 or 7.

Ever think about the plane itself created thermite reactions, with the molten aluminum reactiing with other material in the plane and the builidng.



posted on Nov, 20 2006 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by squidbones
Besides most of the fire proofing was blown off by the impact.


Do you realize how much fire proofing was in those buildings? How does a plane impacting only, what 6 floors out of 110, blow off most of the fire proofing?

Don't believe the crap NIST tells you and put it into perspective.



posted on Nov, 20 2006 @ 06:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by doctorfungi
The NIST report also details fires raging hot enough to bring down the towers regardless of the fuel.


NIST suggests this, but nowhere do they show it possible. They even set up their own lab, trusses and all, and couldn't get a failure such as what would be required. And trusses only carried FLOOR loads, so don't even bring up insufficient loads. You can say we're left without answers if you want but you can't say that NIST proven a damned thing by failing to successfully test their theories.



posted on Nov, 20 2006 @ 06:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Ever think about the plane itself created thermite reactions, with the molten aluminum reactiing with other material in the plane and the builidng.


Thermite is a measured mix of aluminum powder and iron oxide. Where did the iron oxide come from? Don't say rust, because there was not enough loose rust to do that, and rust does not make very good thermite.

How would it manage to mix together in the chaos of an impact?

Also how would it be set off, you know it takes about 4000F direct heat to set off thermite?


...Conventional thermite reactions require very high temperatures for initiation. These cannot be reached with conventional black-powder fuses, nitrocellulose rods, detonators, or other common igniting substances. Even when the thermite is hot enough to glow bright red, it will not ignite as it must be at or near white-hot to initiate the reaction. It is possible to start the reaction using a propane torch if done right, but this should never be attempted for safety reasons. The torch can preheat the entire pile of thermite which will make it explode instead of burning slowly when it finally reaches ignition temperature.
Often, strips of magnesium metal are used as fuses. Magnesium burns at approximately the temperature at which thermite reacts, around 2500 kelvin (4000 °F)...

Source



posted on Nov, 20 2006 @ 06:53 PM
link   
But the towers were standing for an hour or so. Maybe it is possible that some Thermite was created. It diserves some consideration. The plane it self is mostly alumium, the best substance for the reaction. With impact with the steel, which has thrity years of oxidation. On impact the kenitic engery alone could have created heat enough to genterate a some thermite which would have been flung away from the explosion. Maybe? Any opinions?



posted on Nov, 20 2006 @ 07:17 PM
link   
What if thermite was created by the impacts rubbing off on rust and then somehow igniting on their own at extreme temperatures?

The chances of it being enough (since we can all agree it would not be superthermite, which is NANOTECH thermite with extremely fine particles), and falling into the right places to cause a uniform global failure in spite of the fires and impact damages, would be virtually non-existant. No chance. I would sooner believe fire did it alone.



posted on Nov, 20 2006 @ 07:26 PM
link   
NIST although a government agency, had around over 200 investigators working on the collapse. Of the over 200, 125 were leading experts from the private sector and academia.

As I have stated in previous posts, not ONE credible Engineer has come forward publicly to discredit the NIST investigation. If you do some research, you will find that all of the Engineers that DO comment on the NIST report, all agree with its findings.

This thermite and thermate hypothisis is unfounded. There is ZERO evidence that there was thermite or thermate invloved. (Yes I know NIST didn't test the beams.)

wtc.nist.gov...

This is a picture of some of the beams that were examined.

We better throw the Canadians in there with the controlled demolition cover up since there was a Canadian company that did the investigation into what role the fire resistance played in the collapse. NRC - CNRC
nuke.crono911.org...

Controlled Demolition INC. as everyone knows is the leader in our country with Controlled Demolitions. I'm curious to know who is aware of the world records they have with certain buildings.

The one I found most interesting is the J.L. Hudson department building. This was the tallest department store in the country with 2.2 million square feet. With 33 levels.

www.controlled-demolition.com...

CDI’s 12 person loading crew took twenty four days to place 4,118 separate charges in 1,100 locations on columns on nine levels of the complex. Over 36,000 ft of detonating cord and 4,512 non-electric delay elements were installed in CDI’s implosion initiation system, some to create the 36 primary implosion sequence and another 216 micro-delays to keep down the detonation overpressure from the 2,728 lb of explosives which would be detonated during the demolition.

This is for a building with 2.2 million square feet. 33 levels. Combined, world trade center 1 & 2 had over 10 million square feet of office space. Each over 110 stories, with 7 underground levels. Considering how much explosives it took to take down the Hudson building...Think of how much it would have taken to bring down WTC 1,2,&7. Not just the explosives, but the TIME and man power it would take.

Some are considering that the explosives were there when the building was built. Now, stories about LASERS are popping up in here.

Again... How long must we sing this song? The evidence does NOT support a controlled demolition. Was NIST perfect? NO...but thats does not however mean that there is evidence that supports CD. CD theory is 100% speculation with 0% proof.



posted on Nov, 21 2006 @ 01:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by doctorfungi
Ultima,

The NIST report also details fires raging hot enough to bring down the towers regardless of the fuel.


I.E. controlled fire. And no, they don't detail a fire hot enough to bring the towers down. All they proved in their report is that the trusses could have bowed. The NIST didn't go any futher to prove ANYTHING about global collapse.


The problem with the thermite theory is that you would have to find thermite that can:

a) Survive a plane impact


Who says the thermite needed to be at the impact zones? I guess I'll have to say this AGAIN. Taking out the core would lead to a failure of the outside columns at their weakest point. After the plane impacts, the weakest point would be the holes left behind. Taking out the core (even just at the bottom) would cause the outside to collapse at the impact zones.


b) Survive fires


See above.


c) Can cut horizontally


Actually it wouldn't be horizontal but at a near 45 degree angle (easier to let gravity do it's job). Look into Aero-gel.


d) Is extremley compact


I don't know what you mean by this but using nanothermate or whatever, you can make it more "compact"


The amount of thermite requited to cut through enough metal to bring down one floor is far more than most people think.


But yet, a fire on a few floors IS enough?

[edit on 11/21/2006 by Griff]

[edit on 11/21/2006 by Griff]



posted on Nov, 21 2006 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK


Observations of paint cracking due to thermal expansion. Of the more than 170 areas examined on 16 perimeter column panels, only three columns had evidence that the steel reached temperatures above 250 ºC: east face, floor 98, inner web; east face, floor 92, inner web; and north face, floor 98, floor truss connector. Only two core column specimens had sufficient paint remaining to make such an analysis, and their temperatures did not reach 250 ºC. ... Using metallographic analysis, NIST determined that there was no evidence that any of the samples had reached temperatures above 600 ºC. (p 90/140)

Source


I never understood the bolded part of this. What happened to the paint on the core columns?



posted on Nov, 21 2006 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by CameronFox
As I have stated in previous posts, not ONE credible Engineer has come forward publicly to discredit the NIST investigation. If you do some research, you will find that all of the Engineers that DO comment on the NIST report, all agree with its findings.


Who do you find credible? There are many engineers who do not feel the NIST report was worth the paper it was printed on (exageration). Anyway, I guess because they are CTer's, they are now not credible?


CDI’s 12 person loading crew took twenty four days to place 4,118 separate charges in 1,100 locations on columns on nine levels of the complex. Over 36,000 ft of detonating cord and 4,512 non-electric delay elements were installed in CDI’s implosion initiation system, some to create the 36 primary implosion sequence and another 216 micro-delays to keep down the detonation overpressure from the 2,728 lb of explosives which would be detonated during the demolition.


And why do they take all this time and use all these explosives? Because they know that a few floors failing will NOT bring a building down.


Again... How long must we sing this song?


Until people start to wake up.



posted on Nov, 21 2006 @ 02:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
Ever think about the plane itself created thermite reactions, with the molten aluminum reactiing with other material in the plane and the builidng.


Thermite is a measured mix of aluminum powder and iron oxide. Where did the iron oxide come from? Don't say rust, because there was not enough loose rust to do that, and rust does not make very good thermite.



The fire from the plane would have been hot enough to cause molten aluminum, What do you think would happen when it hit the oxygen generators, tanks and flammable metals like magnesium. Molten aluminum can also have a reaction to concrete.

There are also other hazardous materials on the plane like the carbon materials.

www.tpub.com...

Unfortunately, carbon or graphite fibers can be released into the atmosphere if their epoxy binder burns. Once free, these small lightweight fibers can be transported up to several miles by air currents and, because of their high electrical conductivity, can damage unprotected electrical/electronic equipment.





CONTENT -- HAZARD

Air (under pressure) -- PHDAN
Alcohol -- FLAM
Carbon dioxide -- PHDAN
Freon -- PHDAN
Gaseous oxygen -- PHDAN
Liquid nitrogen -- PHDAN
Liquid oxygen -- PHDAN
LPG (liquid petroleum gas) -- FLAM
Nitrogen gas -- PHDAN
Oils and greases -- FLAM
JP-5 -- FLAM
Trichloroethylene -- AAHM


[edit on 21-11-2006 by ULTIMA1]

[edit on 21-11-2006 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Nov, 21 2006 @ 03:34 PM
link   
I know what materials planes are made of, I was a jet engine mechanic for 6 yrs in the Navy. I just don't buy the 'natural' thermite reaction theory to explain molten steel and signs of thermite on the columns, and I douby many other ppl do either.

I'm not sure but I don't think molten aluminum will create thermite anyway. The aluminum has to be a fine powder which is very flamable. That's what caused the Zepelin to burn up, powdered aluminum used in the paint. And again the lack of iron oxide. I can't see how the columns could have created enough iron oxide 'rust' when they weren't open to the elements.

And I don't see your point with molten aluminum reacting with concrete, how does that corelate to signs of thermite on the columns and molten steel in the rubble?

Do you see rust flaking off these columns?



No you see a discoloration caused by oxidation, just a stain, not loose flaking rust that could mix with anything.



posted on Nov, 21 2006 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK
I know what materials planes are made of, I was a jet engine mechanic for 6 yrs in the Navy. I just don't buy the 'natural' thermite reaction theory to explain molten steel and signs of thermite on the columns, and I douby many other ppl do either.

I'm not sure but I don't think molten aluminum will create thermite anyway. The aluminum has to be a fine powder which is very flamable. That's what caused the Zepelin to burn up, powdered aluminum used in the paint. And again the lack of iron oxide. I can't see how the columns could have created enough iron oxide 'rust' when they weren't open to the elements.

And I don't see your point with molten aluminum reacting with concrete, how does that corelate to signs of thermite on the columns and molten steel in the rubble?

Do you see rust flaking off these columns?




No you see a discoloration caused by oxidation, just a stain, not loose flaking rust that could mix with anything.


I know what planes are made of too, i was a Crew Chief in the Air Force for 4 years.

I am just stating that the planes could have been responsable for some thermite reactions due to the molten aluminum and caused more heat then the fire alone would have created.

www.firehouse.com...

Molten aluminum has a 4-digit UN identification number of 9260. When referenced in the ERG it refers to guide 77 for hazards of the material. Guide 77 was an addition to the 1993 version of the ERG. Molten aluminum is the only material that refers to this guide. The guide indicates that the material is above 1300? F, and will react violently with water, which may cause an explosion, and release a flammable gas. The molten material in contact with combustible materials may cause ignition, if the molten material is above the ignition temperature of the combustible material. For example, gasoline has an average ignition temperature of around 800? F. Diesel fuel has an average ignition temperature of around 400? F, depending on the blend, and additives. In an accident gasoline or diesel fuel could be spilled. The molten material could be an ignition source for the gasoline or diesel fuel if it came in contact. When contacting concrete on a roadway, or at a fixed facility, molten materials could cause spalling and small pops. This could cause pieces of concrete to become projectiles.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join