PROOF that Building 7 was demolished with explosives!!!

page: 104
153
<< 101  102  103    105  106  107 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 21 2010 @ 03:26 PM
link   
Continued...

Another of his lawyers told us Kurzberg had been reluctant to take the test because he had once worked for Israeli intelligence in another country.

Sources say the Israelis were targeting these fund-raising networks because they were thought to be channeling money to Hamas and Islamic Jihad, groups that are responsible for most of the suicide bombings in Israel. "[The] Israeli government has been very concerned about the activity of radical Islamic groups in the United States that could be a support apparatus to Hamas and Islamic Jihad," Cannistraro said.

The men denied that they had been working for Israeli intelligence out of the New Jersey moving company, and Ram Horvitz, their Israeli attorney, dismissed the allegations as "stupid and ridiculous."

Mark Regev, the spokesman for the Israeli Embassy in Washington, goes even further, asserting the issue was never even discussed with U.S. officials.

"These five men were not involved in any intelligence operation in the United States, and the American intelligence authorities have never raised this issue with us," Regev said. "The story is simply false."

No ‘Pre-Knowledge’

Despite the denials, sources tell ABCNEWS there is still debate within the FBI over whether or not the young men were spies. Many U.S. government officials still believe that some of them were on a mission for Israeli intelligence. But the FBI told ABCNEWS, "To date, this investigation has not identified anybody who in this country had pre-knowledge of the events of 9/11."

Sources also said that even if the men were spies, there is no evidence to conclude they had advance knowledge of the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11. The investigation, at the end of the day, after all the polygraphs, all of the field work, all the cross-checking, the intelligence work, concluded that they probably did not have advance knowledge of 9/11," Cannistraro noted.

As to what they were doing on the van, they say they read about the attack on the Internet, couldn't see it from their offices and went to the parking lot for a better view. But no one has been able to find a good explanation for why they may have been smiling with the towers of the World Trade Center burning in the background. Both the lawyers for the young men and the Israeli Embassy chalk it up to immature conduct.

According to ABCNEWS sources, Israeli and U.S. government officials worked out a deal — and after 71 days, the five Israelis were taken out of jail, put on a plane, and deported back home.

While the former detainees refused to answer ABCNEWS' questions about their detention and what they were doing on Sept. 11, several of the detainees discussed their experience in America on an Israeli talk show after their return home.

Said one of the men, denying that they were laughing or happy on the morning of Sept. 11, "The fact of the matter is we are coming from a country that experiences terror daily. Our purpose was to document the event."

ABCNEWS' Chris Isham, John Miller, Glenn Silber and Chris Vlasto contributed to this report.




posted on May, 21 2010 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


Oh that's right, it was thermal expansion. And how hot does steel need to get in order for it to "thermally expand" 20 feet and literally bend a giant steel support column?



posted on May, 21 2010 @ 04:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


The firefighters were pulled out because they knew the building was going to fall and there had already been "such a terrible loss of life." We all have videos to post.

Tell me, what caused these material ejections to occur on the NW side of WTC 7?

www.youtube.com...

Do you think these were window blinds?

[edit on 21-5-2010 by THE AQUARIAN 1]



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 12:01 AM
link   
reply to post by iamcpc
 


This is where you fail, you've stopped believing in truth and justice.



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 12:03 PM
link   
After reading hundreds of pages and posts on how “thermite” or “thermate” was used to bring down WTC 1, 2 and 7, I haven´t seen the “how” it was done theory.

So, I´d like to ask, downisreallyup or AQUARIAN, or any of the other posters that go on and on about thermite and the like, to give us please a THEORY.
I just want a hypothesis, HOW could it be explained, please.
1.- How would the thermite be used, or installed, or applied??
2.- Where??
3.- How much of it would be needed to see the result that we see??
4.- What would be the mechanism by which the thermite activation would coincide (or not) with the start of collapse, and:
5.- What would be the mechanism by which thermite would remain inactive in the airplane crash, and big fire??

Not even Prof. Jones has offered this theory to my knowledge. (If he has, I apologize, and would like to be pointed at a reference where I could look it up.)



[edit on 22-5-2010 by rush969]



posted on May, 22 2010 @ 10:21 PM
link   
reply to post by rush969
 


1. The tiny super thermite samples found in the dust were applied to the interior surfaces of the twin towers, probably the undersides of the floor pans and the elevator shafts. Cutter charges of thermite were used to cut the core columns, removing any resistance to the collapses.

With thermite, which is made up primarily of aluminum and iron oxide particles, the smaller the particles the bigger the bang. The particles in the super-thermite used on 9-11 were super small, i.e. nano-size - creating an incredibly powerful heat-producing incendiary - which were combined with an organic compound to create intense gas pressure.

This would suggest that the thermite was engineered by military specialists.

2. The two airplanes that struck the twin towers flew directly into secure computer rooms, in both buildings. Most likely these planes were honed on specific sections in the building by remote control, which was and is a well known technology.

North tower

"the fuselage was centered on the 96th floor slab and filled the 95th and 96th floors top to bottom," the NIST report says. So, what was on the 95th and 96th floors of the North Tower, which were occupied by Marsh & McLennan, Lewis Paul "Jerry" Bremer's company?

We all know Bremer's association with Henry Kissinger as well as the Bush administration during the Iraq war...well, hopefully you all know that.

On the 95th floor, Marsh & McLennan had a "large walled data center along north and east sides," according to the NIST report. And that's exactly where the plane hit – the north wall of the 95th floor.

When Marsh & McLennan were questioned about this they stated that "no, it wasn't really our data center. It was our computer center."

South Tower

Although Flight 175 went straight into the 81st floor of the South Tower, the NIST report provides no description of what was on the 81st floor.

While we know that the Fuji Bank was the tenant on floors 79-82 of WTC 2, the NIST report fails to describe the "tenant layout" of floors 79, 81, and 82.

As everyone knows by now, a large amount of molten metal was seen pouring out of the 81st floor.

What could have possibly melted in such large amounts on a normal floor to create several cubic meters of molten metal?

Extremely hot molten iron cascaded from the 81st floor shortly before the collapse of WTC 2.

If this was molten iron, as Professor Steven E. Jones of Brigham Young University says, and if this molten iron was caused by an aluminothermic reaction of Thermite or Thermate (steel-cutting explosives created from powdered aluminum, iron oxide, and sulfur), then somebody must have pre-loaded the 81st floor of WTC 2 with several tons of a form of Thermite.

The metal pouring out of the 81st floor was not silverish grey but clearly yellow.

A former bank employee came forward and explained that Fuji Bank had torn up the 81st floor and stripped it down to reinforce the trusses so that the floor could hold more weight. Then they had built a raised floor and filled the entire floor with server-size Uninterrupted Power Supply (UPS) batteries. These units were bolted to the raised floor which stood about 3 feet above the reinforced 81st floor. Beneath the raised floor ran the cables and power supply that connected the army of batteries. IT techies had to get down on all fours and crawl around beneath the raised floor to connect cables.

"The whole floor was batteries," he said, "huge battery-looking things." They were "all black" and "solid, very heavy" things that had been brought in during the night. They had been put in place during the summer prior to 9-11, he said. But were they really batteries? "It's weird," he said. "They were never turned on." So, what really was on the 81st floor of WTC 2?

"Nobody worked on that floor," the source said about Floor 81. The whole floor was taken up with a "whole bunch of batteries" and "enclosed server racks" that were so tall that one could not see over the top of them. The enclosed server racks were locked and the only people who could open them were employees of the Shimizu Corp., he said.

The NIST documents that accompany the final report confirm the source's information that Fuji Bank had reinforced the 81st floor. Documents dated 1999 say that reinforcements were added to the floor trusses "to accommodate the new UPS workspace." The structural engineering firm was noted as LERA, or Leslie E. Robertson and Associates.

Saw Teen See, a managing partner of LERA, said the firm was unable to comment on the work it had done on the 81st floor. "We are not at liberty to comment on this or to provide any further information," she wrote. "Please contact the PANYNJ who are the project owners." PANYNJ is the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey.

3. Tons.

4. I'm not sure what the mechanism would be exactly. The plane crash would certainly be one ignition point. Obviously cutter charges on the core columns would have to be ignited offsite.

5. When the buildings were demolished dust was ejected far outside of them, parts of which contained unreacted thermite, which was found by Steven Jones.

The remaining thermite samples probably went unnoticed in the cleanup of ground zero or were a part of the lakes of molten metal swimming in the two bases of the towers, months after the attacks.

Feel free to post more questions.

Yours,

THE AQUARIAN 1



posted on May, 23 2010 @ 09:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by THE AQUARIAN 1

I posted far more information than that.

[edit on 21-5-2010 by THE AQUARIAN 1]


You do, i suppose, understand that a major part of examining "evidence" in a forum like this is the practice of assessing each individual piece's merits? I merely pointed out that one of your "proofs" was rubbish.

Your response, in typical TM fashion, is not to answer the specific point, but to link to a lot of "truther" websites. Yawn.



posted on May, 23 2010 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by THE AQUARIAN 1
 


Well, for once, I thank you for taking the moment to try and give an idea of how it could have been done. I do commend you on that as many have failed to do so before.

Now to take a look through it all as you seem to go a little all over the place, so let me just clear some things up:

Applying any sort of thermite to the underside of anything is going to be most ineffective as almost immedately the material will drip down from the underside of the surface, having very little time to affect the steel members it was applied to. Remember, liquids behave according to the laws of physics, and will be under the affect of gravity.

Particle size of thermite will not make it any more "explosive" per se. It may make a more vigorous reactions that will burn faster and or hotter, but it will not have the same magnitude as a regular explosive device. Also, the "chips" found do not behave anything like a thermite should. Remember, thermite when ignited will only burn itself out once there are no more ingrediants left. When Jones tested a sample with a torch, it immediately stopped burning the moment the flame was removed and the rest was left over untouched. That is a sign it is not thermite.

A bank's computer system in a building is not going to be a homing beacon for an aircraft. If anything, the computer guidance system would have to be on board the aircraft and guided towards the target via GPS and/or other sattelite guided systems. That is how a missle is able to hit its target. yes there are radio-homing systems and radar homing systems on radar-killer missiles, but that is getting into rediculous complexity. Or there was a human on board the aircraft and manually piloted the aircraft in a suicide manner.

Associations that are somehow remotely connect to people in the Bush Administration or Kissenger is just a "connect the dot" desperation to show how somehow, somewhere, somewhere is connected to someone, who knows someone that somehow proves or suggests an inside job. That is using innuendo as a fact. Bad move. :down: If you dig deep enough you may find that Micky Mouse may have a connection with those people as well, and maybe The Pope. Where they also somehow part of the conspiracy?


Yes there was a large computer system for Fuji bank. The area where the molten MATERIAL was seen flowing was the location of the bank's UPS. Thats "Uninterruptible Power Supply".

Fuji Bank UPS battery bank

NIST mentions it here:
wtc.nist.gov...



Also see here:


As you can see, NIST does mention the tenant AND what systems it had on that floor in that sector. And the person above also gave us the location of the UPS area, and it is right where the molten material came from.

The molten material could have very well been molten aircraft aluminum mixed with the melted banks of batteries located on that floor and section. After all, that is the location of the aircraft and debris that got pushed up into that corner and burned to high temps. Also notice how when the molten material "drips" its not turning darker when cooling. Molten steel turns dark when cooled, and after falling that far, it should be getting darker. Also, anyone on the ground below it would have noticed solid chunks of cooling steel or iron dropping on their heads, and there were plenty of people below that would see and feel chunks of cooled steel dropping down. Plus molten iron/steel is very heavy. You also have molten glass as a possible source, molten aluminum paneling, the aircraft, the oxygen cannisters, batteries.

Pre-loading tons of thermite on the floor is going to do squat to the steel. Why? Did you forget the concrete decking? That thermite is not going to burn through the concrete to reach the floor trusses, and then somehow stick to the floor trusses long enough to make them get cut or fail. Liquids will flow downhill according to gravity. The Mythbusters part with the thermite and the car show that quite well. The molten iron from the thermite didnt all just go and cleave the car in half, but rather burned a hole or two in a few locations and then just flowed through it, while not cutting through the rest of the roof and car. Its a liquid acting like a liquid. You also forget that that particular room was re-enforced for the UPS banks. And as we know, batteries are heavy SOBs. And NO, you are not going to slip tons of thermite inside the batteries or around the batteries. And if there truely was such a large amount of thermite just everywhere, then we should have seen a cascade 100x bigger flowing from multiple windows all along that area. The floor trusses were sagging down in that area which allowed for the molten material to pour out the amount we saw, but if there was so much thermite as is being claimed, then there should have been a river of it pouring nonstop from multiple windows. Not a tiny trickle. And again, having a pool of molten steel on a concrete deck is going to do squat to the steel. Especially on a raised floor that was re-enforced for the UPS system. Also applying it somehow to the trusses is not going to work as it will simply slide right off the moment its molten. Think logically here AQUARIAN.

I do commend you for your effort, and its refreshing to see someone give a "how?" into the arguements.



posted on May, 23 2010 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by TrickoftheShade
 


You didn't say anything worth responding to.



...scuse me.



posted on May, 23 2010 @ 12:51 PM
link   
reply to post by GenRadek
 


I call BS on your logic. That much thermite would burn right through the floor in under twenty minutes, which was seen quite clearly in your oft quoted Mythbusters segment. If thermite was applied to the underside of the floor pans they would be ignited as the thermite from above burned through the floor.

Thermite could have also ran down the elevator shafts quite simply and made its way all through the buildings as they burned for an hour, which is the logic NIST uses discussing kerosene, which is also total BS.

Thermite can be dried after application.

Not sure what else needs to be responded to here...

Remote control can and often is centered at a computer station. Not sure what you're talking about.

If I missed anything let me know.

Yours,

THE AQUARIAN 1



posted on May, 23 2010 @ 12:52 PM
link   
"And NO, you are not going to slip tons of thermite inside the batteries or around the batteries."

Why the F not?



posted on May, 23 2010 @ 02:24 PM
link   
reply to post by THE AQUARIAN 1
 


AQUARIAN,
I have searched and searched and searched online using every combination of "thermite melts concrete". Nothing. Mostly how it cant happen or there is a very hard way to do so.

Nothing on Mythbusters about them melting concrete with thermite.

The only, ONLY one instance I found of someone doing something like that was here:
Gold Warriors

And that took a lot of time and high temps to cut through.

So no, back to square one for you. Putting thermite on a concrete floor that is four inches thick is not going to melt the steel trusses underneath.

Also, your logic fails with applying thermite to the trusses. Even if the thermite is dry and stick on, the moment, moment you ignite the thermite, the molten iron will immediatly pour down away from the steel. Remember, MOLTEN IRON IS A LIQUID. And a liquid will pour down and behave in accordance to the laws of gravity. DOWN. It will not turn into a liquid and stick onto the steel long enough to cut through. No way, no how. In liquid form it will find the fastest way down, and it is also very heavy. A heavy liquid mass of molten steel is not going to float around or stick horizontally to the steel. And dont forget, that was a four inch thick concrete slab on top of a corrugated metal deck, supported by steel trusses which had on fireproofing materials. Oh, and in that particular area of the UPS systems, there was ADDITIONAL RE-ENFORCEMENT done to the floor. Do you know what that means? A lot more stuff to cut through.

Thermite could have been flowing through the elevator shafts? really? Then why oh why didnt anyone ever notice huge solidified puddles of iron in the shafts of the WTC? Or for that matter, why didnt anyone in the WTCs lobby notice a cascade of molten iron flowing down the shafts before the collapses? Sorry, btu the only thing people saw and felt WAS the jet fuel fireballs coming down the shafts.

I fail to see how a computer system in the WTC would direct the plane into it. Jeeze isnt it easier to just personally fly the plane into the building? Why this Rube-Goldberg style of complexity that allows for so many points of possible failure or exposure? Even a remote control system would be a little complicated to use.

OH, and those batteries? Yeah I think someone would notice that the batteries are not doing their job when they are full of thermite. A battery is a battery, and why the hell would someone just stick the "thermite batteries" into that one corner of the building?


Sorry but you have a lot of thinking to do to clear this up. Critical thinking.



posted on May, 23 2010 @ 08:23 PM
link   
reply to post by THE AQUARIAN 1
 


As we have discussed before, the Jones paper is inconclusive.

Nano sizing only changes the rate of reaction and not the total theoretical energy available. Thermite applied as paint does not melt steel beams even if the particles are atomic in size.

Columns would need a coffer dam arrangement to keep a thermite charge in contact with the column for minutes while the steel melts. Thermite will not permit timed demolitions because the time to failure is unpredictable. This has to do with heat fluxes in the structure.

The ignited samples of super nano thermite were self extinguishing. This is inconsistent with thermite. Most likely these are paint chips.

FYI, Steven Jones was forced to retire from his physics professorship a few years ago and is no longer a professor of anything.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 04:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by THE AQUARIAN 1
reply to post by TrickoftheShade
 


You didn't say anything worth responding to.



...scuse me.


So you find it more convenient to ignore the criticisms of the video you link to, as opposed to trying to explain why you find it so persuasive? You can't just say "it's persuasive because other people think it is" or "it's good evidence because there is other evidence which suggests that the WTC was demolished".

It is either a genuine piece of the puzzle or it's a heavily edited, mistranslated video being pushed about by Truthers to maintain a controversy that doesn't exist.

Given your evasiveness I'm still with the latter.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by TrickoftheShade
 


There is no evasiveness, you didn't say anything that refuted it. These are three of the five Israelis admitting that they were detained and questioned and that they were there to document the event.

Is there more?

Yes there is. I posted more, this is my point. Look it over please.

Thanks so much.

Yours,

THE AQUARIAN 1



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 03:45 PM
link   
reply to post by GenRadek
 


Basic logic will tell you that the thermite will drip down onto the floors below. If it is applied to every single floor, you do the math. If it's applied to the underpan of the flooring, that means it's UNDER the floor and will drip down ONTO THE STEEL TRUSSES.

Kerosene fireballs? This could easily be confusion on the part of those who saw these alleged fireballs.

It might be easier to fly a plane directly into a building, unless you are trying to hit an exact point, which is what they would have been doing, if the theory I have posited is correct. Did you not understand that?

They would stick thermite batteries in that one corner of the building because that is where they planned the plane to strike the building. You're not to good at this are you?

I find it funny when you are discussing thermite the buildings SUDDENLY become the most durable in the world. With a "four inch thick concrete slab on top of a corrugated metal deck, supported by steel trusses which had on fireproofing materials," there is NO WAY that thermite could burn through THAT!

Yet, within the same breath you will say that a kerosene fire can bring the whole building down and that the steel had no fireproofing. Who are you kidding? Your position here is totally transparent. You hold one belief and you stick to it no matter what. You even bend the truth to fit a pre-scripted argument. That's why I feel like I'm talking to an F-ing wall every time I log in here.

How in the hell could fire have any effect on a concrete slab??? There's a reason why people think thermite was in play during these collapses. Do you know why? Because it's physically f-ing impossible for fire to weaken, melt, sag, or dramatically change the structural effectiveness of those buildings. You prove this point with fantastic clarity.

Wikipedia Entry On Concrete:
en.wikipedia.org...
“Fire-wall” tests, in which ICF walls were subjected to a continuous gas flame with a temperature of more than 1000°C for as long as 4 hours showed no significant breaks in the concrete layer or dangerous transmission of heat."

Now what burns at 1000 Celsius? Kerosene? No. But thermite does. And specific types of thermite burn at temperatures much hotter than that. Thermite can reach degrees upwards of 4500 degrees F, which is 2,500 degrees C.

You're going to sit there and tell me that 4500 plus degrees won't melt through concrete? Would you admit that it will melt through Iron and Steel? Or are those facts up for YOUR interpretation as well?

This was the first website on a Google search for "thermite melts concrete," but I still believe that you "searched and searched and searched." Total and complete BSer.

www.patentstorm.us...
"The thermite reaction on the surface of a concrete structure is so intensive that it easily melts concrete and rock with a melting point in the range of about 1200 to about 2500° C."

I'm done with you, but feel free to contact me anytime.

Yours,

THE AQUARIAN 1



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 03:46 PM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 


Prove your claims with scientific sources, otherwise, back to the ignore section.



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by THE AQUARIAN 1
reply to post by iamcpc
 


This is where you fail, you've stopped believing in truth and justice.


Yes I did. You should read my posts about truth. I recently got into a debate with someone who believed that New York City did not even exist on 9/11/2001 (as well as people who believe the earth is flat). I believed in truth. I believed that the truth was that new york city was real and did exist on 9/11/2001. I believed that the truth was the earth is round. I started citing sources to support the theory that NYC did exist on 9/11/2001.

www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

If you believe in truth and fact then it should be very very simple to PROVE that the truth was that NYC did, in fact, exist on 9/11/2001. I'll pay you 100 dollars if you can present one tiny reliable SHRED of evidence that supports the THEORY that NYC was real and did exist on 9/11/2001



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by iamcpc
 


As far as we know the world blinked into existence the moment we were born.

However I believe in something. These types of conversations, while intellectually stimulating on certain levels, are a complete waste of my precious time, as I believe that one day I will die.

theoccupation.info...
www.gettyimages.com...
www.beato.com...
www.time.com...

How would you like to make this monetary transaction? Paypal?

[edit on 24-5-2010 by THE AQUARIAN 1]

[edit on 24-5-2010 by THE AQUARIAN 1]



posted on May, 24 2010 @ 05:30 PM
link   
reply to post by THE AQUARIAN 1
 


Ah I see so if you somehow magically apply thermite underneath every floor pan, somehow that is going to cut the steel. But it drops down and its going to FLOW down to the floor below. Also you fail to recall, again, that with those amounts of thermite, it should have been cascading down from the windows like a lava-fall and should have been real noticable during the collapse as most certainly some would have forced out during the collapse's powerful winds.

Kerosene? Dont you mean JET FUEL? Yes the jet fuel is created from kerosene and therefore will smell like it. Its kerosene based. Didnt you know that already? we are talking about jet fuel here. Jet-A1 if I am not mistaken. Unless you know about explosives that leave behind a very powerful smell of jet fuel.............

And now, here you go with the Rube-Goldberg method of making this waayy more complicated than it really is. I mean really. In effect, this is what the TM does when it starts to overcomplicate these things:

It just ends up backfiring and shooting them in the foot.

Now hold on a sec. You are saying that somehow it was thermite somehow applied secretly below the floors, coating everything, and then when ignited it would somehow pour down and then cut through the floors below, concrete and all. And then in the same breath you redicule the fact that a massive fire managed to destroy the steel trusses and connections, while completely ignoring the fact that the failures occurred where a 767 impacted, damaged AND destroyed numerous floors, connections, trusses, fireproofing and columns, AND HAD MULTIPLE FLOORS BURNING in an inferno.

Who said anything about fire affecting the concrete? (Do you even know where concrete was used? At all?) It may have spalled, cracked, or something, in the flames, but they sure as hell were not holding the building up. That was assigned to the floor truss connections at each end, which in turn connected to the exterior and interior columns. It is here that damage from the impact AND fire helped cause the failure. NOT some magic painted on thermite locked up in a battery in a corner where the plane would have to hit for some reason........ The steel exposed to fires approaching 1800F, (which DO occur in "regular" fires, just ask ANY firefighter or fire chief. Oh and then ask em what the temp would be if a large plane was burning inside a building.) and under extra loads and stress from damaged sectors caused the steel to behave plastically. NO ONE here is talking about the concrete as being cause of WTC failure. Only you for some reason.

Oh by the way, i did read that website and patent application. Did you understand it? Is your reading comprehension up to spar? I doubt it. What are the key words one should see here?

"Plasma Arc and Torch"

Do you know what a PLASMA ARC is? Lets check with the experts:
www.cpeo.org...


A plasma arc operates on principles similar to an arc-welding machine, where an electrical arc is struck between two electrodes. The high-energy arc creates high temperatures ranging from 3,000 degrees to 7,000 degrees Celsius. The ”plasma” is highly ionized gas.


Do you know what plasma is?

en.wikipedia.org...(physics)

en.wikipedia.org...
A regular plasma torch can reach temps of 25,000C (thats 45,000F).

So yeah, geeze you put ANYTHING to a torch that is 25,000C and yeah, its gonna disintegrate quite rapidly.

So you used a patent website, that talks about possibly using a plasma arc with thermite to destroy concrete structures. But you ignore how high these temps will be from just the plasma torch alone.

And watching this video, that thermite doesnt even melt the flower pot, or the concrete bricks just under it!


So in effect this thermite claim has fallen on its face, as always. And you have a lot to get through in understanding what exactly you are trying to say. First off is doing some research. There is a difference between thermite and a plasma torch.





new topics
top topics
 
153
<< 101  102  103    105  106  107 >>

log in

join