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.

 

Study claims 'highly engineered explosive' found in WTC rubbl

page: 32
218
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 7 2009 @ 12:49 AM
link   
31 pages. 31 pages of arguing over a spark jumping from a torched paint chip. I mean, where is the video evidence of this "highly engineered explosive'. If they have enough, they should be able to at least take out a small cubicle or maybe a Starbucks....

Sad part is we have forgotten what 9/11 was...very sad.

[edit on 7-5-2009 by esdad71]




posted on May, 7 2009 @ 12:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Exuberant1
 


Why don't you start with these guys..real scientists who work to better the world through safety improvements and not chasing rabbits through the looking glass.

Link

Nobel

Take a look at the accomplishments of these guys. A few Nobel prize winners...not teachers laid off for having radical views.How much of the paper did you read?



[edit on 7-5-2009 by esdad71]



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 01:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ansiroth
Let's also not forget that 3 to 4 weeks after the towers came down, the clean-up crew found a molten river of steel flowing underneath the wreckage, People actually claim it looked like some kind of foundry.

911research.wtc7.net...

I'm not a thermite expert but iv'e known of it for over a decade and im pretty sure that jet fuel isnt capable of creating molten steel, especially not if the jet fuel created a chain fire.


Why do you believe this? Ancients had technology sufficient to melt iron ore using wood.



Thats something else that never added up for me either, they say jet fuel burns at a certain temperature that can collapse the towers, but it seems like the fires that are reported to have collapsed the towers would have been the building and its contents burning, not the jet fuel.

Do office supplies burn at 2000 degrees?


What else would they do?

The fact that in some equilibrium configuration jet fuel burns at X degrees doesn't mean that it wouldn't burn at X+Y degrees. Furthermore the fact that "jet fuel at X degrees makes black smoke and it doesn't at Y degrees" and the fact that there was black smoke means that some of the fuel was burning at temperature X. Other parts could have been hotter.

And finally, if explosives blew up the WTC, what's up with the airplanes?

And if it were supposedly a deep Cheney conspiracy, why wouldn't they have put a big truck bomb in the basement and blamed it on Saddam? They didn't care about Afghanistan one little bit. They wanted Iraq.

[edit on 7-5-2009 by mbkennel]



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 01:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by Exuberant1

In the area of peer-review, Objections are not even considered until the 'Objector' publishes his objection in an established journal. Until the objector does this - his objections are not even considered by his peers in the peer-review forums.


This isn't true in the slightest.



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 01:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by mbkennel

Originally posted by Exuberant1

In the area of peer-review, Objections are not even considered until the 'Objector' publishes his objection in an established journal. Until the objector does this - his objections are not even considered by his peers in the peer-review forums.


This isn't true in the slightest.


A bold claim you make....

Please link us to a scientific journal that treats unpublished and undesignated objections in the same manner in which they treat those objections that are both designated and published.

Thanks in advance.


From the Department of Information Science at Loughborough University - Concerning Peer Review:

The Peer Review Process
*Please read.



[edit on 7-5-2009 by Exuberant1]



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 02:00 AM
link   
Dr Jones taught physics at Brigham Young University which currently has 25 doctoral degree programs. Thousands have received their Phd from this institution.

Taught as history by hundreds of professors from this establishment is that in 1823 in New York state, Joseph Smith Jr was shown, by the angel Moroni, a buried box containing a book of bound golden plates. The engraved writings on these golden plates were transcribed and became the foundation of Mormonism or the Church of Latter Day Saints.

Only Smith and 11 associates claim to have actually seen these golden plates which describe technologically advanced cultures living in the Americas over 2500 years ago.

To date there is not a shred of physical evidence to support the existence of these golden plates. No traces of the inscribed detailed advanced civilizations, their buildings or artifacts, have ever been found by archeologists or historians.

Three and a half million Mormons accept the existence of these as articles of faith.

No scientist or historian has published a peer review papers disputing the existence of the gold plates, the ancient civilizations, or the angel Moroni.

This does not mean they are unable to disprove these things.

Scientists attempt to demonstrate fallacies to further advance knowledge. But when people choose to hold onto their special beliefs despite them being shown to have no basis in fact, there is little else one can do about it.

Scientists are not obliged to deliver a verdict on the authenticity of the golden plates allegedly dug up by Joseph Smith in New York State. They are not obliged to deliver a verdict on suspicious paint flakes allegedly dug up at the site of the World Trade Center.



Mike



[edit on 7-5-2009 by mmiichael]



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 07:01 AM
link   
Ya but these are not golden plates,matters of religious dogma nor paint flakes.They're thermate.With tiny round iron balls,with no other explanation as to how they got in the rubble of the largest crime scene in our lifetimes where the evidence was taken by what now appears to be the perp's.This is all that escaped the sanitizers,but it is enough to warrant a real investigation,which is where we stand,in need of a real re-do.
Would you decry the skills of your surgeon if you found out he/she learned the Art at a Catholic institution,where,by the way,they happen to believe they ate human/divine flesh?After all there is no physical evidence for Transubstantiation.



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 09:06 AM
link   
reply to post by trueforger
 


It is unlikely that the chips are thermate. there is no evidence of any other oxidizers or elemental sulfur. There is no evidence for nano-engineered particles. Jones did not examine the carbonaceous binder. There is clay filler present which would reduce the effectiveness of any thermal reaction.



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 10:00 AM
link   
This sort of back and forth is why we need a real conclusive investigation.With unimpeachable experts.The issue is far from conclusively settled.



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 11:07 AM
link   
reply to post by trueforger
 


The problem is as it always has been. If the chips turn out to be paint on oxidized metal, those who need a conspiracy will cry foul and demand a redo using the original samples, if any are left to analyze.
I find it unlikely that there are paint-on thermites in the dust. The paper proves nothing because the chemistry was botched by the researchers. Therm*te in such a thin layer would do nothing but warm the beam a bit. You'd need a lot of therm*te to demolish a building. Tons. The other problem with thermal demolitions is that they can't be timed like cutter charges. They are too slow acting to do what has been claimed. Jones is wrong and doesn't know why he is wrong.
It is time for the demolition CTer's to find a new leader.



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by evil incarnate
 


Your phrase "corner them with logic" is not logical. You have not proven anything other than the fact that you have a "feeling" that something was amiss.


I suggest that you get a dictionary. Maybe for Christmas I will give them out to all members of ATS since knowledge of word meaning is severely lacking here.

I made a logical statement and it scared off my little friend. I never said I proved anything, I said I made a logical statement. There is quite a difference and beside that, it worked didn't it?



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 12:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
Jones has nothing and his paper in a vanity journal is so bad that it will be disregarded by anyone with a technical background while being highlighted as "proof" by those who do not understand how it was botched. If you want to believe in a 911 conspiracy, find one with a better shill.


Are you two different people? You are now the second one to refute this jones guy that I have not ever mentioned once. I have not referred to any of his work or him as a man.

Why do you 'official' story believers have to make things up to try and sound like you have an intelligent point. So far, most of you that have responded to me, have just said random things and not actually responded to anything that I have said.

I guess if you have to lie to convince us of your truth...well that says it all.



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 12:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by evil incarnate
Actually, I agree for the most part but I very much like having the last word because I really enjoy watching these 'official' story folks fade into the shadows whenever you corner them with logic.


I’ve read through the whole thread.
What’s with the patting yourself on the back? You haven’t done as good of a job as you think.







[edit on 7-5-2009 by SLAYER69]



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 01:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by trueforger

Ya but these are not golden plates,matters of religious dogma nor paint flakes.They're thermate.With tiny round iron balls,with no other explanation as to how they got in the rubble of the largest crime scene in our lifetimes where the evidence was taken by what now appears to be the perp's.This is all that escaped the sanitizers,but it is enough to warrant a real investigation,which is where we stand,in need of a real re-do.




I responded to the point that a handful of people with phd accredition were said to sing in unison with Jones.

The point of my analogy, coincidentally two widely held beliefs that emanate from Brighman Young University are that some magic metal is the basis of a popular myth cycle.

In one Joseph Smith ,also coincidentally in New York, finds a hidden golden book on which the prehistory of America is inscribed.

On the other, Jones finds hidden traces of thermite implying a controlled demolition of the Towers by the US government.

No substantiation of the golden book or the prehistory. But believers adhere to the story - millions of them. No substantiation of the elusive thermite, but the faith of the true believers cannot be shaken.

After a while, rational people begin to see this invocation of chemistry is actually just another desperate attempt to reinforce a government demonization myth rather than about determining facts.

Amusingly, some true believers take an unwillingness to further discuss their fantasies as a capitulation.


Mike



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 01:35 PM
link   
reply to post by mmiichael
 


The difference is that FEMA never offered supporting evidence for the religious stuff, but they DID find a eutectic mixture applied to the surface of columns that had eaten holes through them, did a chemical analysis and included it in their report.

There is science behind what this group of scientists is publishing, you just keep calling names, using weasel-words, trying to discredit, etc., instead of looking at it from a purely scientific and objective perspective and criticizing it that way. Why not grow up and be a little more mature and respectful about this? Some people are here to learn, not just to get sick enjoyment out of deriding others constantly.



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by mmiichael
 

Actually it is the Official Story apologists who are clinging to unsupported theories.We want another investigation,a real one,doesn't have to exclude Governmental elements.We'd also like evidence.And how's about those security tapes from the pentacon?

I'm sure we don't know the truth of this matter,that's the point.But there are physical laws that dictate that certain things could not happen.And if certain substances are found they point only one way.Like the iron balls you havn't explained away.Or all the paper that littered the ground but which would have burned in a real steel framework weakening fire.Too many physics defying singularities that day.



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 02:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69
I’ve read through the whole thread.
What’s with the patting yourself on the back? You haven’t done as good of a job as you think.


Umm....I have to say you must not have really read the entire thread then. What was I patting myself on the back for? Oh it was someone with a terrible argument who was being rude, off topic, and nonsensical arguing with me. I retorted with an on topic logical statement and he went away. Unless you are Warbaby under a different name, I accomplished exactly what I said and therefore, I feel very free to pat myself on the back. I know the pattern, I have seen it before.

Please tell me I am wrong. I know you want to attack me for being arrogant but I was simply proud of myself for making sense, using facts, using logic, to make some ignorant, beligerant poster to go away. I did what I said I did and I am proud of myself for it. If you have an issue with that, care to phrase it so it has at least SOMETHING to do with the thread?

How about I ask you...what is with the wasting a post to go off topic just to attack me.

I used to think it was interesting how in one thread two people could be so far apart and on another, they might as well be twins. That little off topic attack is beneath you, so I thought. Now I wish all those stars I have given you in other threads could be taken back.



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
reply to post by mmiichael
 


The difference is that FEMA never offered supporting evidence for the religious stuff, but they DID find a eutectic mixture applied to the surface of columns that had eaten holes through them, did a chemical analysis and included it in their report.

There is science behind what this group of scientists is publishing, you just keep calling names, using weasel-words, trying to discredit, etc., instead of looking at it from a purely scientific and objective perspective and criticizing it that way. Why not grow up and be a little more mature and respectful about this? Some people are here to learn, not just to get sick enjoyment out of deriding others constantly.



I deride people who I see getting sick enjoyment trying to foster a US government sponsored scenario of devastation and mass murder by blowing up destroyed buildings.

Thousands of chemical reactions happen in a brief span of time with unusual materials combined at extreme temperatures. You carefully narrow in on some residual evidence of a certain reaction and conflate that to some sort of proof of controlled demolition.

The fact that so much else in the way of substantiated evidence totally conflicts with this is summarily dismissed.

For the most part intelligent people laugh at or just ignore the controlled demolition mythology. I think it's become insidious as a new meme is created and a generation of kids, naturally mistrusting parental authority,
start taking this exotic alternate history as fact rather than seeing what it really is. Something of malign intent, a subversion of science, and vicious in execution.

On a conspiracy site discussion forum, the illusion is created that these theories are can be validated beyond doubt. Some of us attempt to discuss the claims and issues in the light of all evidence available, not just a handful of self-serving disputable points.

We end up besieged with acrimony like some persecuted minority, for our clearer headed non-agenda driven attempts at seeking truth.


Mike


[edit on 7-5-2009 by mmiichael]



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 02:45 PM
link   
reply to post by evil incarnate
 


Again don't flatter yourself.

I'm like many here who will read along without joining the arguments. I have been a long time lurker way before I ever joined the forums. People like myself just go away many times because there is no point arguing with people who cant look past their own opinion and never will.

So what you are basing your false sense of victory on is in many cases just others giving up on your hopelessness.

OH and by the way that was my opinion.

EDIT to add.

Thanks for all the stars they were not solicited however. My opinion would not be worth much if I changed it just to be popular or to be seen as popular in the latest Internet Conspiracy fads.


[edit on 7-5-2009 by SLAYER69]



posted on May, 7 2009 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69
OH and by the way that was my opinion.



And nothing more. You have no idea why that person left. I would say it is because they had absolutely NO RESPONSE worth giving. I made sense, he did not. Seems to me that he finally realized it. Since you want to jump in so badly, why don't you go back and take it up for him. Instead of just attacking me as a person, why don't you look at the topic of the thread and see if you can come even a little bit close to it.

If you want to go back and pick up where he left off, great!

If you just want to keep posting about me, i am flattered really, I suggest you start a thread about me. Otherwise, leave it alone.

You have your opinion and you are entitled to it but that does not make it true. You are not that poster, you are not psychic, you even admit it is just opinion. I believe along with your right to it, I also have the same right to mine. I believe that I made too much sense and he was too ignorant of the subject to respond.

Stop posting just about me or go start a thread about me.

There is a topic here and it is about the WTC, not me.


Thanks for all the stars they were not solicited however. My opinion would not be worth much if I changed it just to be popular or to be seen as popular in the latest Internet Conspiracy fads.


You are telling me that they were not solicited?

Do you not think I would know if the stars I gave you had been solicited?

Who are you saying it to, exactly since I know you did not ask for them. I think you are as confused as he is because that just makes no sense at all.

I gave them because more often than not, I feel you say things I either agree with or have educated me on something. But - that was another name, another time. Thank you for going so far out of your way to flatter me by trying to make a thread about the WTC rubble into a dedication page to me! I feel super special now.



new topics

top topics



 
218
<< 29  30  31    33  34  35 >>

log in

join