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.

 

rethinking thermite

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2007 @ 11:04 PM
link   
There's a reasonable degree of concensus on charges being remotely detonated because it obviates the need for a jungle of cabling to the detonators ffrom a central 'firing' point. The further suggestion that various types and positions of charges would need to be fired in sequence making even further complications needing more time to set up.

So all these detonators would require individual radio/cellphone receivers to set them off which raises a number of problems.

Let's say the charges and detonators were inside the columns as suggested earlier. How well does a receiver operate inside a solid steel container? IE ever heard of a faraday shield? - no it wouldn't work at all inside a solid ferromagnetic container.

So the receivers would have to be outside (and fairly well clear of) the columns to have any hope of succeeding. =more wiring requiring more dismantling/repairing of walls so lots of time to set it up

Now for simplicity let's say each receiver is a cheap cellphone and you guessed it there's problems there too.
Firstly - how long does a cellphone last on standby? THis gives an idea of the maximum timeframe available to set it all up. I mean EVERY charge.
Secondly - better pray that no-one dials a wrong number or sends a global spam text message before the scheduled time arrives.

On the subject of thermite - a major component of that is aluminium dust. I don't suppose a massive aluminium object had just slammed into the building at high speed shredding and pulverising a lot of aluminium against steel structural components?

If the 'signature' of thermite was detected what would that 'signature' be? I suggest there'd be evidence of aluminium oxide residue (fine white powder) which wouldn't seem out of place considering the circumstances. The thermite reaction of iron oxide (rust) and aluminium powder releases molten iron, aluminium oxide and a vast amount of heat so it's very possible that any thermite evidence is simply a case of mistaken identity or that isolated thermite reactions did occur although accidental because all the ingredients for it were there without needing to be planted deliberately.

The cuts on the lowest and thickest walled column sections were possibly done with a thermal lance which is a messy process at the best of times.

Cheers to the OP for providing such compelling evidence

But I doubt the various 'camps' will ever converge no matter what gets presented.




posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 02:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Haroki
 

You are correct, I'm sorry my mistake. I'm trying to
locate that video link fer ya



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 06:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Unplugged
 



-There is at least one witness saying he heard constant drilling and movement of heavy objects in off limits sections
-The same witness said his office are was full of very fine dust every morning for a few weeks before 9/11 (drilling byproduct?)


These two items sound EXACTLY like remodeling to me. This is EXACTLY what you would expect during the course of remodeling offices so I don't think this information would be necessarily applicable.



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 09:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by jfj123
These two items sound EXACTLY like remodeling to me. This is EXACTLY what you would expect during the course of remodeling offices so I don't think this information would be necessarily applicable.


Why would their be remodeling on floors that were not being occupied?



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by ULTIMA1
 


In preparation of them being occupied in the imediate future perhaps? A new tenant might not want the current configuration or may need an upgrade to the floor plan to better accomodate the perspective use.



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by jfj123
These two items sound EXACTLY like remodeling to me. This is EXACTLY what you would expect during the course of remodeling offices so I don't think this information would be necessarily applicable.


Why would their be remodeling on floors that were not being occupied?


That's the best time to do any type of remodeling including tearouts.



posted on Nov, 18 2007 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by jfj123
These two items sound EXACTLY like remodeling to me. This is EXACTLY what you would expect during the course of remodeling offices so I don't think this information would be necessarily applicable.


Why would their be remodeling on floors that were not being occupied?


More importantly, why not remodel unused area's while they're being unused? Again, why not do it and it would explain those 2 listed items above EXACTLY.



posted on Nov, 20 2007 @ 03:08 PM
link   
Please "debunk" the following for me as soon as you can get around to it.

1. Marvin Bush, as Security director, directed the WTC closed for security upgrades on Sept 10th for the first time in WTC history.

2. Seismic recorders in a nearby University recorded explosive events during the fall of the towers.

3. All evidence of the crime was removed and destroyed by the possible criminals before any independent civilian authority could conduct a proper investigation.

4. Why have the FBI not released the many video angles that were confiscated from the locations that had security cameras looking at the Pentagon attack?

5. Why were such a high number of options taken on stocks and bonds that were directly effected by the attacks before the attacks took place?

6. Why was the entire WTC complex leased just before the attacks with an insurance policy for double indemnity in case of terrorist attacks?



posted on Nov, 20 2007 @ 05:54 PM
link   
reply to post by syrinx high priest
 


I have never posted here because there is no need to, however, this begs for it--

The picture you show, syrinx, of the cut beam, is accurate as to what a demolition team does to bring down a steel frame building. Get real, people. It's not so mysterious.

LOGIC VS THEORY
forum.911movement.org...

Will you guys even post this?
Let the banning begin. I'm ready. It will actually help my reputation to get banned from here.



posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 07:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Leisa


I have never posted here because there is no need to, however, this begs for it--

The picture you show, syrinx, of the cut beam, is accurate as to what a demolition team does to bring down a steel frame building. Get real, people. It's not so mysterious.

even less mysterious to those of us who've used both high explosives and cutting torches.

HE doesnt leave slag to speak of (theres slag on the beam in the pic) more importantly, it doesnt leave slag OUTSIDE the beam, the HE blows its debris inward.

Thermite/mate would have left MORE slag than is shown in teh pic.

NEITHER of them HE or thermite, would leave "torch groves"

so, who needs to get real again?



posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 07:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Damocles
even less mysterious to those of us who've used both high explosives and cutting torches.


Have you used chemical cutter charges?



posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 07:47 PM
link   
no, we've discussed this in the past.

ive yet to see any specs on them, any compositional listings, not even any photos of them. the most ive seen of them were from a few lines on a website you linked a few months ago and nothing i personally saw in their literature made me think they would do anything along the lines you suggest.

so if you have more or new information on them id love to read it. always looking to learn. but if its the same info youve had for some time now, i dont see anything that would indicate they are even a contender as a fringe possibility.



posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 07:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Damocles
ive yet to see any specs on them, any compositional listings, not even any photos of them. .


Yes, i do have information on them. Oil pipe companies use them. I will see if i can find the info again.



[edit on 23-11-2007 by ULTIMA1]



posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 09:01 PM
link   
well like i said, when u find yer links throw em over my way, see if this is the same stuff i was reading about before...cuz im simply too lazy to dig up that old thread wehre we discussed them before.

or i cuold be thinking of something else entirely lol



posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 09:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Damocles
well like i said, when u find yer links throw em over my way, see if this is the same stuff i was reading about before...cuz im simply too lazy to dig up that old thread wehre we discussed them before.

or i cuold be thinking of something else entirely lol


They do have some thermite beam cutters, i believe there is a patant out for them.

Oil pipe companies use chemical cutters too.



posted on Nov, 24 2007 @ 04:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by ULTIMA1


They do have some thermite beam cutters, i believe there is a patant out for them.

Oil pipe companies use chemical cutters too.


Thats not entirely accurate. theres an application for a patent but its not been approved yet. and just having a patent on something doesnt mean it works or is feasable...after all follow this link and you get a patent for a flying saucer...dont see many of those tooling around anywhere.

and yes, we've established that oil companies use chemical cutters. youve provided a link to them in the past. following those links all those months ago i read what literature was available and at least to me, they dont seem to fit the criteria for anything that could have been used anywhere on 9/11.

so, i was wondering if you had any NEW information on them, something that might make them seem more feasable, OR if youre simply reminding us that they do in fact exist and leaving it up to us to decide if that little fact means anything at all...

cuz if youve read anythign about them that makes them seem feasable that i havnt, id love to read it. always looking to learn something new.



posted on Nov, 24 2007 @ 05:57 PM
link   
went looking. found this information on chemical cutters.

so, how exactly did they use these?



posted on Nov, 26 2007 @ 04:25 PM
link   
Also...The govt has lots of tech...especially mil-tech we prolly dont know about...how do we know if they dont have a type of explosive that they didnt need thousands of lbs to do it with....Just saying.




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join