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.

 

Thermite Proven! Jones Science Proves Red Thematic Material not just Red Paint Chips

page: 2
69
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 03:13 PM
link   
How the heck can someone fight a fire from below? The stairs were destroyed. And if the fire was so hot it melted steel then I'm not seeing how they can fight it from above either.

Oh yes, steel was melted because we saw it on video and no less than two dozen eyewitness reports prove it.




posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by impressme
reply to post by okbmd
 



The author of this thread has even told another poster , in the past , that it is okay to post false and misleading information on the subject of 9/11 . ( That only applies if you are a truther though ., all others must meet 'proof' requirements ) .


Please post the source to this information. Show the thread to were I made such a statement?

If I had ever made such an appalling statement as to what you claimed, you would have eagerly posted the source to back your statement.



What that poster said would be considered libel if he used the person's real name. At the very least, ATS should censure that person.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 03:22 PM
link   
All it takes is for ONE mega rich dude to buy off the airlines these terrorist were on. That's all it takes folks! Then put some dumb terrorist on the plane carrying a butt load of thermitic agents.

Sit back and collect your insurance check. Not blaming anyone but saying they are not above doing that.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 03:29 PM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 


Here are a few of the many failings of the paper: DSC done in air and not valid to prove thermitic reaction. Energy output inconsistent and shows simple combustion. "


“Not valid,” Please show with scientific proof not your opinions.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 03:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


I notice you did the math on the oldest poll and ignored the newer.
typical



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 03:40 PM
link   
Even with the massive amount of evidence that has accumulated over the past nine years since that terrible day, I don't believe those responsible will ever be brought to justice. Some of the stronger amongst the conspirers will have died from old age and other natural causes, whilst weaker links will be "terminated". Anyone else involved will remain under the protection of Obama and those who control him, and any possible future presidents. Time will pass, and the murderous implosions of those three buildings will be written into history as being the acts of middle eastern terrorists armed with the latest in box-cutter type weapons, who commandeered the planes and flew them into the Twin Towers. Perhaps the bit about box-cutters will be omitted, and substituded instead by grenades or guns.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 03:42 PM
link   

NIST's investigation is often cited as proving the official theory that the plane crashes and fires caused the collapses. Yet the Report does not explain why or how the buildings totally collapsed, despite the lack of a single historical precedent for a steel-framed skyscraper totally collapsing for any reason other than controlled demolition. And, in contrast to the Report's voluminous detail about the plane crashes, fires, and loss of life, it makes no attempt to characterize or explain the demolition-like features of the collapses -- such as their explosiveness, pulverization, verticality and nearly free-fall rapidity -- except for two sentences in a half-page section added to the Final Report to address criticisms of the Draft.



NIST simply avoids these troublesome issues by placing them outside the scope of its investigation, claiming that "global collapse" was "inevitable" after the "initiation of collapse."

www.911research.com...

gotta guard the opium gents
and BP needs that oil



[edit on 4-8-2010 by Danbones]



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 03:56 PM
link   
reply to post by impressme
 

Who is Jones? What is he to me? Why should I care about his opinion?

I heard that the Jones family down the street can make a good baby-back rib sandwich. Are they who you are talking about?

Seriously, you want me to take the opinion of a professor who I have absolutely no knowledge about?

[edit on 4-8-2010 by Section31]



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 04:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Danbones
 


Nope. only a third of Americans believe this silly conspiracy. But hey, a fourth of Americans think the sun revolves around the Earth.

So really, there's plenty of room for unreasonably ignorance to this subject from people just believing whatever they want.

The facts are simple. They've done video demonstrations showing Jet fuel causing the same amount of damage faster. Took slower in WTC because it's a closed environment. In the nearly 9 years since the incident, there's not been much proof at all. WTC7 took a lot longer to fall then they say and you can see it falling apart piece by piece before the big fall. We can also see the WTC falling at the speeds they did because we've done the math and work.

Hell, technology has gotten so good since then that any chap with a decent rig can run the same simulators.

Demo would not bring down that towers, and the towers would fall at those speeds.
Oh and before you try to bring it up, the fps are sped up to normal speed because they run ans half normal speed while simulating.





I got a gazillion other videos of physics simulator running pure math. Towers could not fall from demos alone, but a plane? Definably with an explosion and some jet fuel.

Welcome to the GPU era. anyone can simulate anything.

[edit on 4-8-2010 by Gorman91]



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by davidmann

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by impressme
 


Why doesn't the good professor go collect some paint chips from some metal structures from in and around Manhattan and put them to the same "rigorous" lab tests?

No control group - no science.


That's right. There is simply NO EVIDENCE! We all saw the real deal on our telescreens that day, and besides all the scientific journals explaining how kerosene melts huge steel beams, there are countless eyewitnesses, true patriots, supporting the official story. THESE ARE THE REAL AMERICANS!!!


Strawman alert!

Please show me where anyone has said that jet fuel "melts" steel.

The point at which steel loses half it's strength is well within the maximum temperature of jet fuel.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 04:23 PM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 


The conclusion is that thermite was not proven to be present. Jones must do the experiment correctly, if he can, to show what the red chips really are.


Your conclusion, your opinions, nothing more, you have not presented any science to validate your opinions.


If you'd like to debate the points of the paper, rather than make repeated demands about "evidences", let me know.


Debating the paper is the evidence, and you have shown nothing to prove Jones paper wrong.

I have back up every single allegation you made to me about Jones paper. I showed proof that you were making up garbage against Jones Thermite paper in my OP.

You and I are debating Jones paper, either put up or stop making fraudulent comments about something and someone you know nothing about. Show your science, or bail out.

How about answering my questions on this thread. you talk the talk but...



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 04:29 PM
link   
9/11 MADNESS
post removed because of personal attacks

Click here to learn more about this warning.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 04:36 PM
link   
"a paltry 16% of Americans thought the government was telling the truth about 9/11 "

thats about 5,1200,000
50 million people receive Social Security
about 7 million work for the US gov

so there it's as I said: about the same

debunker fail again

truthers have to post evidence, debunkers post opinion

Hey, I'll bet you guys still subscribe to the U-turn bullet in the Kennedy assassination..you would have to to buy the OS of 911.
Since the proven story of the assassination is connected to the Bush crime clan...who also supported the NAZIs as has been proven before congress..
and thats no joke.


edits for capitals commas and spelling as usual...etc
[edit on 4-8-2010 by Danbones]

[edit on 4-8-2010 by Danbones]

[edit on 4-8-2010 by Danbones]



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by impressme
 


Why doesn't the good professor go collect some paint chips from some metal structures from in and around Manhattan and put them to the same "rigorous" lab tests?

No control group - no science.



He did get paint samples from the trade center debris. The paints signature was way off from known nano thermite. Jone's chips are an exact match.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by truthcounts
 



I love America Dave because even garbage like you have freedom of speech.


What you have committed is called character assassination truthcounts and you cannot undo the damage you have done to GoodolDave.





posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 04:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Danbones
 


Well that's really an incorrect statement. Even I don't believe they told the truth about 9/11. Most anyone can tell you the government allowed it to happen by incompetence or desire for a war.

But that does not mean we believe the towers were purposely brought down or anything.

It simply means a corrupt government saw the opportunity to start a war, and so let its enemies attack it to get that war. In many ways the US did the same with Japan but that's another tale to tell.


The fact remains that terrorists attacked and brought down the towers with hijacked planes by flying them into the towers. Like most Americans I think the government let it happen. They did not get involved with it at all.

[edit on 4-8-2010 by Gorman91]



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


Well Gorman, than you and I are closer on this then I thought,
but you know I love good arguement and I suspect, so do you.

Have a nice day, and I do mean that sincerely



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 04:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


What relevance do those videos have to the topic at hand? All I see is a bunch of simulated boxes falling and flying about. They don't come close to simulating a solid object. Also you said:

"Towers could not fall from demos alone"

...uh, what? Buildings are brought down with "demos alone" every day. Again you said,


but a plane? Definably with an explosion and some jet fuel.


Really? How many times have you seen a plane bring a building down? If it's so much better than a demolitions crew I say we just fly planes into buildings all the time! I mean how else are we going to get buildings to fall into their own footprint? /sarcasm And:


"Definably"?


Are you serious?



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 05:01 PM
link   
Oh my God. I really hope that I am just deleriously tired and missed a sarcasm tag or something. Slander? Legal action? Really? I think some people are starting to take the message board a little too seriously. This isn't the real world. We are all hiding behind anonymous online avatars here. Any decent attorney would tell you to grow up, get off the computer, get some fresh air, take your wife out to dinner, or take a friend out for drinks.

Sorry to be off topic, but it had to be said...



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 05:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Doctor Smith

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by impressme
 


Why doesn't the good professor go collect some paint chips from some metal structures from in and around Manhattan and put them to the same "rigorous" lab tests?

No control group - no science.


He did get paint samples from the trade center debris. The paints signature was way off from known nano thermite. Jone's chips are an exact match.


No he didn't, from his paper:


On the other hand, paint samples in the same exposure to MEK solvent became limp and showed significant dissolution, as expected since MEK is a paint solvent.


He does not say what they were, where they came from or how they were obtained. Just "paint samples". Could be anything from anywhere.

No control = no science.



new topics

top topics



 
69
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join