It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by CreeWolf
Linda Moulton Howe (On her "Coast to Coast AM" broadcast tonight) made a lot of sense with a pretty convincing case. IMO
Did anyone else listen?
This, of course, is what we are saying in our paper that with the finding of unexploded reactive material in the World Trade Center dust, there needs to be a serious follow up - not just to confirm our results. That's been done (by two other science labs to date), but to find out who made this material and why it was in the World Trade Center?
Originally posted by _BoneZ_
Originally posted by azureskys
So many explosive experts have been Yelling since September 11, 2001
that the films show explosive action that could only relate to Thermite explosions
Thermite is not an explosive, it's an incendiary:
Originally posted by dicksamson
reply to post by _BoneZ_
While thermite is an incendiary, not an explosive, NANO or SUPER thermite is indeed an explosive -- in fact, an extremely powerful one. Nano thermite is the type found in the WTC dust and studied by the labs.
Nano-thermite can be mixed with additives to give off intense heat, or serve as a very effective explosive. It contains more energy than dynamite, and can be used as rocket fuel.
It can explode and break things apart, and it can melt things.
Originally posted by ipsedixit
I think the presence of this material in the dust makes it likely that the dust was responsible for burning all of those cars in the neighborhood around the WTC. If one checked the pattern of where the burned cars were found, it might well follow the flow of dust, being mostly downwind from the site.
A pattern like that would clinch a role for the dust in burning the cars, I think.