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.

 

Steel Piece Proves Lie - NIST engineer John Gross denies WTC molten steel

page: 7
55
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 01:23 AM
link   
reply to post by GenRadek
 


Yeah, I got the name wrong, sorry about that, I'm going mostly from memory here. Arguing about molten steel isn't worth pulling up my 8 years worth of research files, it's already been proven, verified, reported and entered into the consciousness of those who don't blindly swallow your officiate bologna.
LOL, maybe there are no pictures of the molten pools of steel because they didn't allow cameras there and were actively arresting people who were photographing the site and siezing cameras.
Yes molten steel. Dripping Beams of it, flowing rivers of it, pools of it. There's more witnesses than what I listed there, but honestly it isn't worth the effort. You're in denial and I'm not a psychologist.
I'm not even going to bother with your straw man tactic of picking up blobs of molten steel. A man of your Bearing should know better.

"And no, it will not be "insulated" for so long by the debris."
That's when I realized what I'm dealing with here. Sorry, but you just debunked your entire arguement with that priceless little tidbit.
Your point is moot. There was molten steel at least 21 days later.
Until you find a precedent for month long MOLTEN STEEL in a conventional fire, or proove that these credible witnesses to that fact are lying, I'm done arguing with you about it.




posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 01:28 AM
link   
reply to post by GenRadek
 



Rather than blather on and on and on and on ad nauseum, asking questions that have been answered eons ago, how about paying attention for once to what is being brought forward to explain yoru questions?


Who are you, the ATS police?


I, along with others, have already put forward explanations, backed with known facts and evidences that answered those questions of the hotspots many times.


Funny I never seen you post anything but ridiculed and snide remarks against the truth and that my friend is the truth.


However, YOU ignore them constantly and return to asking the same question, as if the louder you yell and shout the question drowning out the good answer, the more likely you will get an answer that is more to your pre-determined idea.


Pot calling kettle!


I have posted numerous times to you explanations for the hot-spots in the pile.


Funny I have been a long time reader on the 911 forums before I joined up, and I have to say I do not recall you EVER given any explanations for hot spot to SPreston.


But you ignored and hand waved away every single one with incredulity and ridicule.


Why should that bother you, you do it all the time!


Rather than doing some real research into what I posted,


Maybe you should try doing the same.


you dismiss it outright because to you, anything intelligently giving answers that refute your ill-thought out scenarious, is a threat to your fantasy world preconceptions.


Hey Pal, you are not qualified to give medical advices, and as far as what other people think it really does not matter.
I have to say seeing Spreston wonderful presentations of the truth it’s really disturbing to you, to say the lease.
I love Spreston presentations, and more and more people believe what Spreston posts. Do you want to know why? It is because Spreston likes to give “creditable sources” and “links” and he is not obnoxious,or rude. Perhaps you may want to follow Spreston example, you might get people to listen to you.

After seeing the video of John Gross telling a ball face lie why on earth would YOU or anyone else support his hypothesis of lies? I mean it is clear to anyone who can read the NIST report and understand it will know that a lot of unanswered questions where deliberately left out. When real sciences are applied to the NIST report, it does not stand up, don’t you agree? The only science that NIST does support is “pseudo science” furthermore; I just love the way NIST plays with our intelligence as if everyone is ignorant and cannot do any critical thinking on their own. Any high school kid can do the math and see the NIST report is a lie. So I can imagine that most scientists have already rejected the NIST report and one of the main reasons is because, NIST has been approached by the scientific community from around the world and they have presented their finding (NIST mistakes) and have asked NIST to make the correct changes in their report. NIST refuses to address any of the complaints and letters showing how their science is impossible and simply defies physics. Most of us on ATS who have years of research in the NIST report already know this, however, I don’t believe you have ever read the NIST report in it’s entirety and even if you claimed you have, I don’t really believe you understand it. I have yet to see you show us anything of how NIST with its pseudo science is right, when they have already been proven wrong, in the scientific world of real sciences. If anyone lives in a fantasy world it surly is not the people who have already discovered the truth. So few support your beliefs maybe that should be telling you something, just maybe you are wrong, have you ever thought of that.
One must open his eyes and ears to learn the truth and sometimes one must step outside the box in critical thinking to find the answers, not everything is one-sided.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 01:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by impressme

Rather than blather on and on and on and on ad nauseum, asking questions that have been answered eons ago, how about paying attention for once to what is being brought forward to explain yoru questions?


Who are you, the ATS police?


It's exceedingly difficult to avoid personal remarks at times, especially here, but if I had to fill out a questionaire, I'd answer that one with "Probably, something very akin to that."
I'm off for the evening guys, I'm going to replace my heat sink on my CPU with a pile of debris and rubble. You learn something every day here, I swear



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 12:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by GenRadek
Maybe you Nutter, can explain how you can control a thermite reaction. Hmm? How about it? Also show us other instances of thermite being used in demolition of buildings. Also explain how thermite can cut horizontally and angles cleanly.


Look up SOL-GEL technology.

It is not my place to educate you.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 04:23 PM
link   

posted by GenRadek
Maybe you Nutter, can explain how you can control a thermite reaction. Hmm? How about it? Also show us other instances of thermite being used in demolition of buildings. Also explain how thermite can cut horizontally and angles cleanly.


posted by Nutter

Look up SOL-GEL technology.

It is not my place to educate you.


Apparently NIST had good reason not to test for explosive or thermite residue in the WTC remains. The NIST investigators themselves had an extensive experience in explosives and were required by law to test for explosives in the WTC investigation. But they did not.

NIST lead engineer Forman Williams is an expert on the deflagration of energetic materials and the ignition of porous energetic materials.

Nano-thermites are porous energetic materials.

Williams is also the most prominent engineering expert for Military Industrial Complex contractor Popular Mechanics, the foremost propaganda mouthpiece for the 9-11 perps and a favorite of our own pseudoskeptics and shills.

Science Applications International (SAIC) is the DOD and Homeland Security contractor that supplied the most investigators to the NIST WTC investigation.

SAIC has extensive links to nano-thermites.

Was NIST itself directly involved in the deliberate destruction of the World Trade Center?

SAIC was also the firm that investigated the 1993 WTC bombing.

Is this another classic example of the primary suspect investigating itself, and conveniently covering up its own crimes?



The Top Ten Connections Between NIST and Nano-Thermites

Kevin R. Ryan, 7-02-08


“Was the steel tested for explosives or thermite residues? … NIST did not test for the residue of these compounds in the steel.”


NIST Responses to FAQs, August 2006
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) has had considerable difficulty determining a politically correct sequence of events for the unprecedented destruction of three World Trade Center (WTC) buildings on 9/11 (Douglas 2006, Ryan 2006, Gourley 2007). But despite a number of variations in NIST’s story, it never considered explosives or pyrotechnic materials in any of its hypotheses. This omission is at odds with several other striking facts; first, the requirement of the national standard for fire investigation (NFPA 921), which calls for testing related to thermite and other pyrotechnics, and second, the extensive experience NIST investigators have with
explosive and thermite materials
.

One of the most intriguing aspects of NIST’s diversionary posture has been their total lack of interest in explosive or pyrotechnic features in their explanations. Despite the substantial evidence for the use of explosives at the WTC (Jones 2006, Legge and Szamboti 2007), and the extensive expertise in explosives among NIST investigators (Ryan 2007), explosives were never considered in the NIST WTC investigation. Only after considerable criticism of this fact did NIST deign to add one small disclaimer to their final report on the towers, suggesting they found no evidence for explosives.

source


Perhaps there is good reason for NIST John Gross to lie to us.



SAIC was responsible for evaluating the WTC for terrorism risks in 1986 as well (CRHC 2008). SAIC is also linked to the late 1990s security upgrades at the WTC, the Rudy Giuliani administration, and the anthrax incidents after 9/11, through former employees Jerome Hauer and Steven Hatfill.

source


SAIC is also directly involved with other primary suspects of the 9-11 crime.

Many NIST employees directly involved in the WTC Investigation are experts in nano-thermite technology.

Why did NIST engineer John Gross feel the need to lie and deny proven WTC molten steel? Yep, the U.S. Department of the Interior | U.S. Geological Survey still has the proof of molten metal under the WTC displayed on their very own website.

Images of the WTC Site Show Thermal Hot Spots on September 16 and 23, 2001

Any of you duhbunkers and pseudoskeptics care to defend the lying of John Gross?

National Security?

Perhaps keeping his neck out of a noose was reason enough for NIST Engineer John Gross to lie.




[edit on 8/27/09 by SPreston]



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 04:47 PM
link   
reply to post by SPreston
 


Thought you might find this list to be of interest preston...
forum.prisonplanet.com...
Most of the relevant names on the list are about 3/4ths of the way down the page.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 05:03 PM
link   
It is really bizarre how accessible all this information is...



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 05:30 PM
link   

posted by twitchy
reply to post by SPreston
 


Thought you might find this list to be of interest preston...
forum.prisonplanet.com...
Most of the relevant names on the list are about 3/4ths of the way down the page.


Indeed. Quite interesting. There is our NIST buddy, John Gross. A fairly complete, not exhaustive mind you, list of TRAITORS to the American people, and to the entire world.

William J. Gallagher is right on target.



The Perpe-traitors

"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banners openly. But the traitor moves among those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the galleys, heard in the very hall of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor -- He speaks in the accents familiar to his victims, and wears their face and their garment, and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation--he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city -- he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared."
Cicero, 42 B.C., Roman Statesman, orator, and author.

source


Devilvision: The World's New Wireless Grid


"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."
~ Thomas Jefferson p1801-1809

"If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy."
~ James Madison p1809-1817

"Government is not reason. It is not eloquence. It is a force, like fire: a dangerous servant and a terrible master".
~ George Washington p1789-1797

"Of all the enemies to public liberty, war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other."
~ James Madison p1809-1817



posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 09:13 AM
link   

posted by truthquest
The only thing missing from the initial posting was the unquestionable proof of molten concrete, which has a similar melting point to steel. I'd suggest people look into the unquestionable photos of the molten concrete. While I have not personally seen a photo of obviously molten steel, I've definitely seen a photo of molten concrete which was without a doubt at the 9/11 bomb site.

Anyone who sees this evidence who isn't convinced there was additional explosive power placed in the building is simply denying a proven reality. The thermal imaging shows extreme temperatures. The molten concrete is photographed. And nobody at the NIST would dare investigate those facts or they'd lose their job.


This melted concrete multi-ton compressed 4-floor sample was preserved for future scientific study. Let's get that investigation going, so we can hang the 9-11 perpetrators and their many co-conspirators and damage control artists and disinformation specialists.



Steel Beam Bent Like A Horsehoe From Extreme WTC Heat

WTC Remains At Hanger 17 at Kennedy Airport, Including Melted Concrete Meteor



Fire department personnel, recorded on video, reported seeing "molten steel running down the channel rails… like you're in a foundry – like lava from a volcano." Joe O'Toole, a Bronx firefighter, saw a crane lifting a steel beam vertically from deep within a pile. He said "it was dripping from the molten steel." Bart Voorsanger, an architect hired to save "relics from the rubble," stated about the multi-ton "meteorite" that it was a "fused element of molten steel and concrete."

source



posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 09:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Nutter

Look up SOL-GEL technology.

It is not my place to educate you.


SOL-GEL technology. That is your answer? *stifling a laugh*
Right right.

A still new technology, that is expensive and very much in the early stages of testing *as of 2000*, was somehow magically snuck into the WTCs and painted on all the beams, after the beams were exposed, without a soul noticing for weeks or months or years during application. Not to mention somehow surviving without decomposing or breaking down, becoming less effective over time.

And explain how a super thin layer can magically cut through thick beams, without running down the side of the beam after ignition? You really dont fully understand the basics of thermites do you?



posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by SPreston

Let's get that investigation going, so we can hang the 9-11 perpetrators and their many co-conspirators and damage control artists and disinformation specialists.




I say let's give all the terrorist apologist, treasonous, slanderous, libelous, troofers 2 more years to accomplish this.

If they fail, let them be subject to their own preferred punishment for these imaginary perps.

Would you go for this?

Also, you might want to use a more bolds and large fonts in your posts. It makes them look much more realstice.....



posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by GenRadek
without a soul noticing for weeks or months or years during application.


people noticed...

Just because you choose to ignore these people does not make them soulless...



posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 02:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Joey Canoli
I say let's give all the terrorist apologist, treasonous, slanderous, libelous, troofers 2 more years to accomplish this.


What a thought provoking, and compelling post you've written here Joey. How about we take all the terrorist apologist treasonous slanderous libelous pundits of the official lie and round them up and charge them for Aiding and Abetting, Accessory to Murder After the Fact and rendering aid and comfort to the enemy. Nah, because I think most of us realize that as fellow Americans, you're entitled to what's called 'your opinion', but I wonder what the opposite of 'truther' is?



posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 02:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by twitchy

What a thought provoking,


So then what are your thoughts about the twoofer's statement?

Sounds ok?

Or do you take exception to it also?

Why do our opinions of that day subject us to a hanging execution, while twoof's opinnions do not?



posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 02:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Joey Canoli
 


Well, way back in Kintergarten Joey, I was taught that when other people are talking we should at least try to listen to WHAT they are saying. Another thing they tried to instill in us was a sense of respect for other people, not to make childish insulting comments... and later we learned to think and research things objectively. It was crazy revolutionary stuff that apparently didn't last long. Come on man, TWOFERS? How mature do you reckon that sounds to people?
As to your question about hanging people, funny, I was kind of asking you the same thing...



posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 03:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by twitchy

Another thing they tried to instill in us was a sense of respect for other people, not to make childish insulting comments


So you agree that the twoof's statement's don't meet this criteria.



funny, I was kind of asking you the same thing...


Funny, I'm still waiting for you to chastize SPreston.

You'll be the first to do it to a Twoof for his outlandish statement.

Be a trailblazer.....



posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by daddio
 


you have my vote


now if we could just get all of the college professors together and start stating the truth about 9/11



posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Joey Canoli
So you agree that the twoof's statement's

I agree that John Gross lied about molten steel being found on site during the clean up. I also tend to think that anyone immature enough to throw 'twoof' around like it's some kind of real word is probably not going to be intellectual or mature enough to understand the implications of a NIST Engineeer lying to the public in regards to the largest single crime ever committed on US soil.
Oddly I find hope in your post however, because if you're any kind of typicality of the opposition 9-11 truth faces, then perhaps there is some hope after all.



posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 03:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by twitchy
I also tend to think that anyone immature enough to throw 'twoof' around like it's some kind of real word is probably not going to be intellectual or mature enough to understand the implications of a NIST Engineeer lying to the public in regards to the largest single crime ever committed on US soil.


Agreed.

It takes a certain amount of intellectual and emotional maturity to be able to restrain yourself from insulting others in every single one of your posts, and an even greater amount of maturity to not even feel the desire to insult others as you speak with them.

Someone who has so little confidence in themselves, that they feel a psychological need to insult and degrade others, is probably not going to be capable of dealing with social issues affecting many different people. They can't even get a grip on their own selves.



posted on Aug, 29 2009 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by twitchy

I agree that John Gross lied about molten steel being found on site during the clean up.


I'm quite sure you do.

Now prove that molten steel was found at GZ.

You have statements, but no analysis. The chunk in the video is available. Go do a study on it.

That would be proof.

My guess is that no twoof will ever do this...

BTW, where's your statement to SPreston? I guess if he agrees with your view, then it's fine to make statements about hanging people that have differing opinions?

[edit on 29-8-2009 by Joey Canoli]



new topics

top topics



 
55
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join