Professor Steven Jones; X-ray spectrometry

Professor Steven Jones has finised his X-ray sectrometry of samples taken from the world trade center site, and has found a perfect match for thermate, a form of explosive used to cut through steal which could have been used to bring down the twin towers and building seven.

You can view the videos of his presentation here:

Steven Jones Lecture

For those who still doubt that something more than planes brought down the twin towers and building 7, despite the many, many pieces of evidence found, I would like to hear your specific rebuttle to the information presented in these videos. Please show us where Professor Jones is wrong in his scientific method, or math, or chemistry, or physics. If you can't, well, then I'd say this new evidence is pretty damning.

Happy hunting (and arguing)!

editted for spelling


[edit on 25-4-2007 by Athenion]

If you think it's thermite, the tons needed and the horizontal cut would make it near impossible, even for the government, to do covertly. Canisters – for which there is no evidence of existence other than a patent, and for which there is no evidence whatsoever that they would work on vertical columns – would have to be wrapped around each column, using conspiracy theorist logic. Remember, they say all the connections were cut, which is (according to them) the only way the building could have fallen as fast as they did. No resistance, remember? All of the office workers came in and never questioned the drywall around the columns, which would have been widened to accommodate the canisters? Or is the suggestion they were all murderous NEO-CONS working in the building, who saw the covert work done as part of the master plan? How huge is this conspiracy? It seems to grow by the thousands per month. All of the news reporters and now all of the workers in the WTC7? With all due respect, how much can you swallow?

debunking911.com...

Sorry to say but the need for "cannisters" is utter bullocks.

Controlled demolition crews use shaped charges to cut support beams in structures and they are nothing more then thick cords that get wrapped around the beam that needs cutting.

Using cannisters or barrels of explosives doesn't cut anything, it simply blows up in all directions.

And for the method used to apply the explosives?

Many withnesses have said that there was construction activity in the building outside of normal routine in the weeks before 911.


What amfirst is saying is imho pure disinfo of the oldest kind.

Exaggerating the means and work needed for installation and exaggeration of the in the loop amount of people.

Originally posted by thematrix
What amfirst is saying is imho pure disinfo of the oldest kind.

Exaggerating the means and work needed for installation and exaggeration of the in the loop amount of people.

Damn straight...

He ignores that "thermite" is the bulkiest and weakest of the aluminothermics.

He als ignores two US patents for devices that are used to direct the cutting/melting power of an aluminothermic. Much like a shaped charge filled with HE.

Both of these are FACTS that he ignores to mislead.

His post here is purposely misleading and against the terms of use of this site.

Also I feel it's important to point out that there's a big difference between thermate, what Steven jones found, and thermite. Thermate is much more potent.

You can read about it here:

Thermate Explanation

Also, stating that it would be difficult for someone to use thermate to cut the beams, doesn't really address how and why thermate was found at the site. That's like saying no one shot JFK, because it would have been such a hard shot to make. Well, the bullet was found, so someone must have shot it. Same with the thermate. If it wasn't used to blow the buildings, how did it get there?

So we've had one, really bad attempt to debunk. Any other takers?

Now i'm definitely a believer that somethings not right on 911

But I just have to say.
Larry Silverstien admitted on tv to pulling wtc 7.
That was controlled demolition, admitted (though how he could plan it in advance of 9/11 he didn't say lol )

The thermate could possibly be contamination from pulling building 7?

Originally posted by amfirst
debunking911.com...

Even the site is disinfo, here's an example (skimmed the page for 2 seconds to find the usual tactics used on such sites)

I suspect that what Rosie doesn't know is that the fires didn't need to melt the steel to collapse the building as the conspiracy sites she links to suggest. They only had to weaken the steel. Even at 300C, steel loses 20% of its strength. Scientific studies, even from other countries, say that a normal office fire can reach over 1,100C.

No "conspiracy sites" suggest the steel had to melt. But, what they NEVER mention is that the steel not only melted, it EVAPORATED, this happens at 5000°F!
Debunking sites always miss the point of the entire discussing, which leads me to believe they're willfully ignorant or just not getting it through their skull.

David

Good point, but considering the molten metal and hot spots beneath all three buildings long after, I would think whatever was used was used in all 3 buildings.

This is a long but worthy read imho.. i'm halfway through
Seems to me like a logical type o guy, physicist, steady with his feet on the ground but still he can't get past controlled demolition.

impactglassman.blogspot.com...
He seems to be debunking the official story thoroughly, I'm just readin the part where he is exposing Dr. garcia's assumptions and errors which shows it can not have been 'natural' collapse..

PS. I thought the wtc might have been built for demolition from the start (big, in the future troublesome buildings, would have been smart tbh).
If true they wouldn't have needed time in advance to plan and prep the demolition. Haven't read about that yet much so haven't made my mind up about it yet.

But silverstein priming wtc 7 and being able to on a whim demolish it on that day.. almost says enough for me.. someone was planning something anyway. because the wtc 7 was prepped and ready to go.
But I get the feeling I might be straying a little bit off topic.
Really off to bed now lol

Originally posted by amfirst
Canisters – for which there is no evidence of existence other than a patent, and for which there is no evidence whatsoever that they would work on vertical columns

You need to educate yourself...

www.youtube.com...

Mr. Jones was placed on leave because of his views by the college that he taught at BYU.

He has since retired.

If his evidence was so good, I don't think that he would have essentially been forced out of his job.

Originally posted by Wildbob77
If his evidence was so good, I don't think that he would have essentially been forced out of his job.

Actually I would say the oposite is true...

www.journaltimes.com...

www.prweb.com...

When it comes to 9-11 people are scared to death of the truth. For many reasons.

Originally posted by Wildbob77
Mr. Jones was placed on leave because of his views by the college that he taught at BYU.

He has since retired.

If his evidence was so good, I don't think that he would have essentially been forced out of his job.

Briefly... BYU gets TONS of money from government grants... all colleges and universities do. All it takes is ONE PHONE CALL to a dean or president threatening grant funding and you are freaking OUT. Period.

I'm sure everyone has seen this picture before...




Notice the slag melted down on the interior of the beam on the right hand side close-up. Also notice how the beam seems to be cut at a nearly perfect 45 degree angle.

Was thermite ever really disputed by anyone intelligent?

MystikMushroom - That picture - Shows clearly How intense the heat was - on that cut.

It's a cut.

Also see that the rest of that beam has no sign of being molten in any way.

Isn't it just logic - how the cut needs to be almost 45 degee - Better more than 45 degree.
So the steel would slide away from each other? when the concrete was blown away?

How do such a peice of Explosives look like when planted on a steel beam like that? do we have pictures of such devices?

Maybe that is actually why WTC7 had fires before it collapsed - Cuz the thermate needs time to cut through the beams - and that means it would/could fall on the floor - Or goes through the floors - starting fires - inside an office - ect.

[edit on 26-4-2007 by Ram]

Originally posted by Shroomery

Originally posted by amfirst
debunking911.com...

Even the site is disinfo, here's an example (skimmed the page for 2 seconds to find the usual tactics used on such sites)

I suspect that what Rosie doesn't know is that the fires didn't need to melt the steel to collapse the building as the conspiracy sites she links to suggest. They only had to weaken the steel. Even at 300C, steel loses 20% of its strength. Scientific studies, even from other countries, say that a normal office fire can reach over 1,100C.

No "conspiracy sites" suggest the steel had to melt. But, what they NEVER mention is that the steel not only melted, it EVAPORATED, this happens at 5000°F!
Debunking sites always miss the point of the entire discussing, which leads me to believe they're willfully ignorant or just not getting it through their skull.

They also link to a blog that has a guy cutting a 2 foot thick slab of steel with an industrial blowtorch saying that you don't need termite to get the visual result you see in MystikMushroom's pictures.

Noone ever said you needed termite or termate to cut a beam or slab in 2 did they?

Steven Jones said in one of his lectures that he was interviewed by a science journal a while back, and when he read the article he saw the exact same debunking method applied to his story.

They simply give the result of the findings, without the details that back up and led to the findings. Which usualy results in the findings either making no sense or being possible to be explained by other means.

But the explanation by other means in these cases is false, because they only take the simplyfied parameters of te results, while the problem with the result is in the details and bigger picture.


Its like the following:

Your driving your bike and all of the sudden your chain breaks.

With that information, all you can conclude is that your chain broke, something that happens alot. No biggy, # happens.

Now, you start doing some research.

1: You find that the composition of the metal that the pin was made of (the pin that held the chain together in the place where it broke), you find that the metals composition is softer then the normal ones, you initialy notice this because that one pin, not looking at the damage, looks brand new, while you've been driving at least a douzen competitions on that same chain.

2: You were driving your bike in a tournament.

3: The night before the competition, someone broke into the van that has your bike and materials in it.

4: Someone in the tournament needs to win desperatly or they'll loose their sponsors.

With those 4 details, you can go from "# happens" to "might be foul play".


RAM: The time to cut trough a beam is nearly instantly actualy, I've seen basic termite (while the one used according to Steven Jones' studies is the more reactive version termate) go trough an engine block in 0 seconds flat.

And search the net for "shaped charge" you'll see how they look.

Also, the steel structure of a building like the WTC 1 and 2 is not accessible or visible to the people in the offices of a building like that.

[edit on 26/4/07 by thematrix]

How could a steel beam be molten (seen on picture) - If it explodes?

How does a thermate device look like - Any ideas?

Looks like it has been melting for some time before the actual detonation of the concrete took place.

There is a difference between melting and exploding things.

In this case - Im sure they didn't melt the concrete.

-
Many times I have been thinking of the planes actually had tons of Thermate - Thermite - loaded onboard the passenger cabin. Where the passengers was suppose to be.
Fill a plane with Thermate and the story unfolds. That would be the most logical thing to do. If the Government actually did it.
How else did they get floods of molten Iron? -
- speculation on my part -

[edit on 26-4-2007 by Ram]

Originally posted by Ram
How does a thermate device look like - Any ideas?

One way of cutting with thermite is to set up a contraption facing the column, that shoots an intense, rapid jet of thermite at the column.

Another way, that doesn't need such a device, is to utilize nanotechnology, creating a sol-gel and applying the thermite directly to the column without needing any extra equipment.

Neither of those, however, melt steel in large quantities. They simply melt where they make the cut. Unless a thermite reaction found additional fuel in the rubble pile and sustained itself in the insulated environment (for over 6 months?), it wouldn't be the culprit, and you'd have to investigate more intensely exothermic devices.

A shaped charge has all its explosive power or heat directed/focused in a specific direction or place, they can either cut or melt, depending on what you need them to do and depending on the "agent" used, thermite and termate aren't really explosives, they are reaction agents that generate extreme heat.

I'm thinking your a bit confused with the explosive part. A termite or termate charge doesn't really explode and isn't an explosive, it creates a reaction that generates extreme heat which cuts trough the target by melting trough it. The result might look a bit like explosives, but its a secondary effect, with the primary effect being an extreme heat melting of the target material.

Nukes that use the explosive casing method instead of the bullet method work with shaped charges too. The energy of the blast is directed towards the plutonium core, bringing the presure and heat of the core to critical mass, initiating the nuclear explosion.

As for designs of devices, google it. ATS doesn't like us posting details about explosives on here (I posted the composition of some homemade explosives once and they removed it quite swiftly)

Just google for "shaped charge" and like said earlyer in this thread, there have been some patents issued for termate and termite shaped charge devices.

Originally posted by MystikMushroom
I'm sure everyone has seen this picture before...




Notice the slag melted down on the interior of the beam on the right hand side close-up. Also notice how the beam seems to be cut at a nearly perfect 45 degree angle.

Was thermite ever really disputed by anyone intelligent?

If course. Saw it on CNN. But you can't tell anyone anything even if the proof is about a foot and a half in front of them.

You did a good job on this.

And people are going to dispute your claims until their blue in the face because they don't want to believe our government was behind the attacks on 9-11.