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.

 

Independent Researcher Confirms Active Thermitic Material In WTC Dust

page: 1
15
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 04:05 PM
link   
An independent reasercher, Mark Basile, is a long time chemical engineer from New Hampshire. He obtained his own sample of WTC dust and tested it in a lab. Mark Basile confirms what Dr. Jones and others have said: that there is active thermitic material in the WTC dust. That means this is repeatable by anyone, which further confirms what we already know.

How many independent researchers need to obtain a sample and confirm the active thermitic material before people start to believe?

Mark Basile was interviewed by George Corrette and Pat Riot of Keene, NH's student-run radio station, WKNH 91.3 FM on a program called "Empire Watch". Mark goes into great detail of his scientific analysis of the WTC dust and you can listen to the audio interview here.

If you don't want to listen to the interview, you can go here to read a transcript.

Thanks to "SnowCrash" at 9/11 Blogger for this great information.




[edit on 27-8-2009 by _BoneZ_]




posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 04:24 PM
link   
Right, now there needs to be an investigation into how exactly the government proposes that material became present.

From my limited knowledge of Thermite and Thermate, it is not possible to create this material "by accident". It would have to have been engineered, and placed on site for detonation.

If this material was blown all around ground zero, there has to be some of it still in evidence in drains, gutters, old air vents on neighbouring buildings...

Clearly, the PTB do not intend to conduct a true investigation into this, so I hope findings like this continue to push the truth movement and motivate them into fighting on. I also hope that it wakes up some of the dumb f**ks over there who still deny that their own government could possibly do something so evil, even given the history of the CIA and government agencies.

IMO, every government involved (i.e. all governments who lost citizens that day) should be demanding a multi-national investigation operated by a truly independent team. And the U.S. Govt. should be held responsible for supplying the evidence and allowing free and unfettered access to all information and physical evidence gathered at the time.

If evidence vital to an investigation has been destroyed (which we know it has) then the person or persons who ordered that destruction of evidence should be charged.

Ultimately, it comes down to Bush and his evil cronies across the board from the CIA to the FBI to the White House facing charges of mass murder, terrorism, obstruction of justice and conspiracy against the nation.

We know the above is not going to happen though, Obama has already made it clear that it is "business as usual". So it falls to the American public to force a response.

Come on America, get your act together and demand the truth for once!



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 04:59 PM
link   
Interesting indeed. This makes three researchers from different agencies that I know of, that have detected thermite in the dust.

The only problem I have is the integrity and verified source of the samples. Since the samples were taken from different locations by average people on the street, we have no way of verifying if these samples are indeed from the WTC, of the dust.

What I really would like to see is tests run on samples gathered by known parties that has been properly verified as being from the WTC, and not taken purely on faith.

I think then, it would be near impossible to refute.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 06:11 PM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


Mark has only done SEM and EDAX. He has not done the DSC so he can't confirm anything other than he sees the same unknown components in the chips.
No proof of thermitic materials. Confirmation of elemental composition, only.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 06:16 PM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 


And if he does the DSC like he said he's going to and it still confirms thermite/nano-thermite? Will you finally get interested or will you find another way to attack him and his research like you do Dr. Jones?

I already know your answer, but you can humor us if you like.



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 06:31 PM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


His motives and affiliation make his work suspect. If he were to run the DSC under inert and not find any reaction, what do you think he would report?



posted on Aug, 27 2009 @ 07:15 PM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


At least "twoofer" scientists are out in the field gathering physical data and performing independent chemical analyses in the first place. The only thing I have seen from NIST and "duhbunkers" is theoretical models forced to match certain data, at the cost of incorrectly predicting other data, just to try to prove the possibility of their theories. On the other hand we are looking at several people confirming independently that there is thermitic material in the dust.


Anyone still wondering why NIST never bothered to test for any sort of explosive or thermite residues? Or anyone else? Maybe because someone knew they would have found something if they looked hard enough, eh?

[edit on 27-8-2009 by bsbray11]



posted on Aug, 28 2009 @ 08:53 AM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 


Once again, you fail to grasp what is going on. Nothing has been proven with respect to thermitic material. Your science background is too limited to understand the details.



[edit on 8/28/2009 by pteridine]



posted on Aug, 28 2009 @ 08:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by bsbray11
 

Nothing has been proven with respect to thermitic material.


[edit on 8/28/2009 by pteridine]



really nothing , where is your source on that?



posted on Aug, 28 2009 @ 09:30 AM
link   
Just a quick point if I may. For the record I am NOT a beleiver in the Ommission Commission Report.
OK, here we go.
Lets define a thermitic reaction as a highly energized exothermic reaction using an oxidizer, a reduction agent and, in this case an "accelerator",such as any one of a number of fairly rarely occuring substances like, aluminum tungsten oxide hydrate for example. That is essentially why the reaction has been described as thermitic.
The simple fact of the matter is,and this is critical, is that the temperatures in the burning towers should not have been high enough to initiate a thermitic reaction. And secondly, trace amounts of these chemicals ( we must ignore the fact that they are simply not present in an office building, generally.) that may have been present in various computing devices,televisions and the like would not leave enough trace to be detected in dust on the ground hours after the incident. Only a larger and denser "device" would be able to do so.
Thats it. Period.End of story.
Try explaining this to 90% of the population and you will be called everything but human.
James


[edit on 28-8-2009 by jameslewin]

[edit on 28-8-2009 by jameslewin]

[edit on 28-8-2009 by jameslewin]



posted on Aug, 28 2009 @ 10:02 AM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 


Paaaaaleeeze!


According to your logic, anyone confirming the results is "biased" and has
an agenda.

Ain't it sad that science is science, but Pteridine thinks the colour of your
skin, or the people you hang with determine what chemicals should do
during tests?



posted on Aug, 28 2009 @ 10:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by turbofan
reply to post by pteridine
 


Paaaaaleeeze!


According to your logic, anyone confirming the results is "biased" and has
an agenda.

Ain't it sad that science is science, but Pteridine thinks the colour of your
skin, or the people you hang with determine what chemicals should do
during tests?


LOL......

What is sad are those "organizations" who believe that "thermite" is the cause of the collapse with other people in the "same organization" who say explosives are the causes of the collapse. You guys can't even get your wacky stories straight! What was it? Both?

I guess being off the cue ball with regards to aeronautical issues isn't enough to embarrass yourselves with - you needed something else.

Got that "impossible" lamp post issue settled yet, TF? Let me know when you can "categorically" and without any mental reservation and with a 100% certainty state that the aircraft/lamp pole/vehicle impact *could not have happened*. Until you do that, it remains the most logical and scientifically plausible course of events - as much as you and tezz and the rest of your team hate it.

Tell Capt Bob hi for me. His defense of John "Moonbase" Lear is absolutely hilarious.



posted on Aug, 28 2009 @ 10:51 AM
link   
reply to post by trebor451
 


Seem to have struck a nerve with ol' "Trebor" here...you know the guy
that was supposed to answer questions about the cab driver and chickened
out?

Thanks for reminding, me I'll get that thread back up for you to avoid
derail of this topic which you are clearly doing.



posted on Aug, 28 2009 @ 10:51 AM
link   

posted by pteridine
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 

Mark has only done SEM and EDAX. He has not done the DSC so he can't confirm anything other than he sees the same unknown components in the chips.

No proof of thermitic materials. Confirmation of elemental composition, only.


Some of the foremost nano-thermite experts in the entire world were working in the NIST so-called investigation of the World Trade Center.

Was NIST Itself Directly Involved In The WTC Destruction?

You stayed away from that thread didn't you pteridine?

So once again pteridine, what is your excuse for them not looking into nano-thermite technology or explosive use in the World Trade Center, when an investigation into terrorist or criminal activities would legally require such an investigation?

And once again, why did NIST lie and say they found no trace of explosives, when they did not even look for explosives?

And why did NIST Lead Engineer John Gross lie and state there was no evidence of molten pools of metal under the WTC?



You stayed away from that thread also didn't you pteridine?

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



posted on Aug, 28 2009 @ 11:34 AM
link   
Despite some theories presented by over-zealous "truthers" turning out to be gross exaggerations or outright lies that only discredit us. I don't understand how one can get around the governments attempts to avoid a proper investigation at all costs. Doesn't it just scream to you their trying to hide something? Why did bush lie and say he saw the first plane hit before going into the classroom? How does that not set off warning bells to you? 2 planes 3 buildings? It's good that we have "conspiracy theoritsts" questioning all aspects of every detail of the official account that clearly doesn't add up, because the government sure isn't. If they have nothing to hide, why don't they act like it?


[edit on 28-8-2009 by dnaobs]



posted on Aug, 28 2009 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by trebor451

Originally posted by turbofan
reply to post by pteridine
 


Paaaaaleeeze!


According to your logic, anyone confirming the results is "biased" and has
an agenda.

Ain't it sad that science is science, but Pteridine thinks the colour of your
skin, or the people you hang with determine what chemicals should do
during tests?


LOL......

What is sad are those "organizations" who believe that "thermite" is the cause of the collapse with other people in the "same organization" who say explosives are the causes of the collapse. You guys can't even get your wacky stories straight! What was it? Both?

I guess being off the cue ball with regards to aeronautical issues isn't enough to embarrass yourselves with - you needed something else.

Got that "impossible" lamp post issue settled yet, TF? Let me know when you can "categorically" and without any mental reservation and with a 100% certainty state that the aircraft/lamp pole/vehicle impact *could not have happened*. Until you do that, it remains the most logical and scientifically plausible course of events - as much as you and tezz and the rest of your team hate it.

Tell Capt Bob hi for me. His defense of John "Moonbase" Lear is absolutely hilarious.


Dude, thermite more specifically thermate IS an explosive...



posted on Aug, 28 2009 @ 12:55 PM
link   
I wonder how fast that Thermitic Material can eat down a column.
There were all these demonstrations on youtube eating through car engines.

The central core area must have been available to plant a series
of devices to chop the core columns because the floor straps
would give way with sheer weight. The outside beams just
popped off.


There must have been a lot of same sized beams taken out of the site.
Or were they coated with Thermate to sizzle away at the bottom of the
WTC pit.



posted on Aug, 28 2009 @ 07:46 PM
link   
reply to post by dino1989
 


Where is your source that thermite has been proved? Certainly not th Jones paper. No evidence, no thermite.



posted on Aug, 28 2009 @ 07:52 PM
link   
reply to post by turbofan
 


No turbo, I did not say that. Basile is Gage's man and he is biased: he wants the outcome to prove thermite. I don't know how much integrity he has so I asked you what he would report if there were no thermitic reaction.
Independent parties who are disinterested in the results should do the tests so as to remove all doubts of their validity.



posted on Aug, 28 2009 @ 08:04 PM
link   
reply to post by muggl3z
 


nope! thermite is not an explosive.
It is an incendiary.




top topics



 
15
<<   2 >>

log in

join