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.
Originally posted by exponent
I'm definitely not a legitimate source.
My issue with the paper is as I stated, I don't feel Jones et al really conducted their experiments with the intention of eliminating other causes, and instead decided to declare that it was definitely thermite, even though quite a lot of doubt remains.
'thermite' ignites at 400-500C, and it was to be used as a fuse
Why didn't they use regular fuse, which is surely cheaper, harder to detect and more reliable
How did it survive aircraft impacts, which undoubtedly produced temperatures very much in excess of 500C?
Originally posted by P1DrummerBoy
If anyone thinks its impossible for the hijackers to hit the towers with that accuracy, lets not forget how impossible it already is that they were even able to hit the towers as they did to begin with. It's been argued that what these hijackers did that day was nothing short of amazing. Even more so, think of the skill it required to hit the Pentagon. You may not like John Lear, but if THAT man can't do it, I don't think anyone could. Point is, if anyone argues how its possible that the hijackers did all the amazing stunts they did that day, you cant argue that they also hit the towers with enough precision to avoid the apparent thermite/explosives.
Or am I delusional?
Originally posted by P1DrummerBoy
Well I'll stop right here and say that regardless of what you say, you are the only credible person on this forum who's beliefs are different than mine. No one on the OS side has shown even a fraction of the level of knowledge you have. If YOU aren't legitimate, where does that leave poor Cameron??
That's fair. It's apparent that we need to wait for this new paper to be 100% sure.
I don't know what you would consider a 'good' answer to this, but I believe he only stated that it MAY have been used as a fuse, not that it WAS with certainty used in that fashion.
Originally posted by exponent
That's true, but is one of the problems that I see constantly within the truth movement. Dr Jones was of course guessing, because he has no other information to go on, and this is the case for most of the demolition hypotheses. Very few of these are based on a look at the evidence and analysing the collapse, more based on the author's personal preference for demolition material.
[...]
Science is a process which gradually refines theories to 'perfection', and that's what we see with the NIST report. Originally a whole load of different failure modes were proposed (Weidlinger column failure, FEMA pancaking etc) but with the application of science and the study of evidence, many of these were discounted and a dominant theory emerged.
This has yet to be the case with the Truth Movement.
[...]
I wanted to point out exactly where I see the problem in terms of the whole approach to 'truth'. It's not about finding things your opponents can't disprove, it's a case of finding what actually happened. If you've read my posts you know that I think NIST has by far the most complete and accurate theory of them all, and it's going to be tough to shoehorn Thermite in there.
If anyone thinks its impossible for the hijackers to hit the towers with that accuracy, lets not forget how impossible it already is that they were even able to hit the towers as they did to begin with.
You may not like John Lear, but if THAT man can't do it, I don't think anyone could.
Originally posted by weedwhacker
If this guy can do it, on a desktop flight simulator, I guarantee it is much easier in real life
Originally posted by exponent
For example, Dr Jones uses Thermite. Judy Wood uses her space beams, Gordon Ross used high explosive. Why do these theories exist, if there is any evidence to go off? Science is a process which gradually refines theories to 'perfection', and that's what we see with the NIST report. Originally a whole load of different failure modes were proposed (Weidlinger column failure, FEMA pancaking etc) but with the application of science and the study of evidence, many of these were discounted and a dominant theory emerged.
This has yet to be the case with the Truth Movement. Even now I see every day on this site completely contradictory claims, there are planers vs no planers, people claiming it fell in its own footprint vs very little fell in its own footprint. I mean now, even today you can find people claiming Marvin Bush was in charge of security, that he had bomb sniffing dogs removed. These are all falsehoods, and 911 truth has been slow to adopt the correct process for eliminating evidence and explaining what remains.
I don't doubt that sooner or later some conspiracy theorist is going to come up with a theory that there isn't any evidence to counter. Dr Greening made a good example a while ago by suggesting a perchlorate mix applied to the steel trusses. Of course there's no evidence for this, and no evidence (that I can think of) against it other than the impossibility of planting it. Still, this is the perfect theory as far as 911 truth is concerned, because the majority of people here seem only interested in proposing theories, rather than eliminating them.
...it's a case of finding what actually happened. If you've read my posts you know that I think NIST has by far the most complete and accurate theory of them all, and it's going to be tough to shoehorn Thermite in there.
Originally posted by P1DrummerBoy
It's still my understanding the Marvin Bush WAS in charge of security up until the 10th of September. If the security and dogs were pulled prior to that, wouldn't he have been the one who made the call? If I'm wrong here, please let me know.
if the Scientists doing the research contradicted their own theories, THAT would be a legitimate issue to bring up.
Björkman claims that no planes hit the Twin Towers or the Pentagon or crashed near Shanksville.
Björkman claims that all evidence of the aircraft impacts is fake and all witness accounts are invalid.
Björkman claims that all photo and video evidence showing severe fires and structural failure in the WTC buildings is fake.
Björkman believes that the authors of the NIST WTC reports don't
exist.
Thanks for the even-handed articulation of what really needs to be understood. The Truth Movement responds to criticism as an assault rather than an attempt to get rid of disinformation and unsubstantiated speculation.
Originally posted by turbofan
Dr. Jones step by step breakdown of science paper. This will put to rest
any doubts and it's a very clear, basic guide for non technical people:
www.911blogger.com...
THis video also discredits pterdine and exposes how very little he knows
about science and thermitic reactions.
Originally posted by jprophet420
the SEMS test says it was thermate. SEMS tests are highly accurate and all of the samples confirm the same thing.
In other words, for it to be incorrect, there would have to be a conspiracy from the manufacturer of the thermate down to all of the scientists involved.