Thermite Experiments and Evidence Summary

reply to post by Varemia


Not likely that the public has access to this sort of material. If you want to read studies and performance
characteristics of nano thermite, just look up any of the PDF links I supplied in the other thread written
by Tillotson (Lawrence Livermore National Lab Scientist):

"Jones' Dust Analysis: Common Arguments Addressed"

The data you seek is already available.

Originally posted by pteridineDid Jones claim to have found thermate? Was there elements of thermate or thermite present?

YOu can't be serious. You have obviously not read the paper if you're asking these questions.

Yes, there were elements of Thermate present; Sulphur namely.

What best represents what Jones found [other than my conclusion of red primer paint]?

Nano thermite as related to the evidence found by LLNL documents. Actually, the data is quite
compelling and even outperforms nano-thermite as tested by Tillotson pre Sept.11th.

I can't wait to debate you on the reasons the chips are not paint. It clearly highlights your lack
of scientific understanding in the face of your constant boasting.

I think that the best way to address Jones' paper is for me to post a thread reviewing the paper and let other counter. I will do so when I am in the US again.

I think the best way is for you to accept the challenge and respond to my thread which already
contests your previous accusations. I wrote that thread specifically for you as we agreed to have
this debate. Would you like me to post the caption where you agreed to have this discussion?

No need to wait unitl you're back in the US to respond. You're on here enough to conduct a fluid
conversation.

Originally posted by pteridine

Originally posted by snapperski

what it does prove is the Nat Geo documentry was highly flawed,and was pushing a OS agenda to the main stream public....and that very clear to see....and if you can't see that,then it no surpise you don't see all the other oddity's on 9/11.

This gives us a bit of latitude, doesn't it? Don't worry about evidence, I'm sure something will be misinterpreted and repeated until you believe it. After all, if it fits your predetermined conclusions, then it must be true.

talk about irony,surely you're the deluded one in this argument,you so blindly belive 9/11 happen as you govenment told you....it kinda feels pointless de-bateing with you,as you just pointed out "if it fits your predetermined conclusions, then it must be true."

It was a fun video to watch, especially the machinations that he went to to get a cut. The piston driven cutter was ingenious. Placing these in the building, filled with red paint chips of course, would have required some serious construction work given the number of stories and number of supporting columns. Getting the thousands of pistons might have been a logistical challenge, but junkyards could have been combed to get the biggest woosh for the buck.

and as for this statement,it tells me that these red highly reactive chips,are tech unknow to public domain,and my thoughs are that you would only need to drop about 10 or 15 floors and you would create a pancake effect with the rest of the building,so no you would'nt need to rig the whole building.
and with unlimited resources and a lot of smarter men then all of us taking care of its destruction.
i found demolition a very plausible answer as to how them towers dropped like they did.

don't panic,i belived what i was told for years,then the realization of what really happen and whats really going on hit me like a brick in the face...it will happen to you one day..

reply to post by turbofan


I am serious and I have read the paper. Note the lack of BaNO3 in the analyses. Note also that the Sulfur was likely from CaSO4.2H2O [gypsum from the drywall]. No thermate. Cole used the wrong stuff.

As I have many criticisms that have not yet been aired in detail, I will start a thread that begins with a review of the paper and you can post to it to rebut my claims. This way all the criticisms and responses will be in one place for ready reference.

Originally posted by snapperski
you would only need to drop about 10 or 15 floors and you would create a pancake effect with the rest of the building,so no you would'nt need to rig the whole building.
and with unlimited resources and a lot of smarter men then all of us taking care of its destruction.
i found demolition a very plausible answer as to how them towers dropped like they did.

don't panic,i belived what i was told for years,then the realization of what really happen and whats really going on hit me like a brick in the face...it will happen to you one day..

OK, so now 10 or 15 floors collapsing would pancake the rest. It seems that Gage is now off your list of acceptable theorists and cardboard box collectors.

How would you know which 10 or 15 to rig?

reply to post by turbofan


I am surprised that people can be so inventive with and diligent on uncovering something that common sense would explain. Building 7 was the home of the CIA, NSA, FBI, and many other secretive US agencies that I would like to remain secret. Building 7 I am sure was designed, and built specifically for these agencies. For this reason if I had a building that was a central location for the most secret and valuable information our country processed I would make sure that in the event of catastrophe be it war, terrorist, act of nature that I had the ability to destroy all evidence so that my enemies could not obtain that information. Information like the codes to launch all of our nuclear missiles, or the whereabouts of secret agents in Russia, China, Afghanistan etc.

I promise you that this building and many others have self destruction devices built in, to protect that information from falling into the wrong hands. Plus, I do not think I would advertise what buildings, or places have been designed with a self destruct system. So wake up and get over it. We all know who housed building 7 and most likely the other buildings. Just be happy we were smart enough to protect secrets that are vital to our self defense in a world of nut bars.

reply to post by rgzing


There's a new one! So you want to blow up a building in the event of a 'terrorist' attack to prevent files
from getting in the wrong hands?

Ever hear of a safe?

Please don't even get me into this aspect of your theory. If your idea held any water, they would have
blown up the Pentagon as it holds more sensitive information.

Pteridine, I've already explained twice that my thread contests all of your theories, so there's no need
for you to start another thread.

You have avoided this debate for too long with the excuse that "you are out of the USA", yet you have
replied fairly quickly to any points I've made thus far.

However, if you feel the need to start another thread to cover what I've already discussed, then please do
it quickly so we can put this to rest.

Originally posted by pteridineI am serious and I have read the paper. Note the lack of BaNO3 in the analyses. Note also that the Sulfur was likely from CaSO4.2H2O [gypsum from the drywall]. No thermate. Cole used the wrong stuff.

You are misleading the forum again.

Cole did not use Thermate/Thermite to prove/disprove Jones, he used Thermate/Thermite to prove NIST and Nat. Geo. incompetent.

Cole showed easily that steel can be melted, and cut using tiny portions of the thermite/thermate in a proper
configuration.

As for the science paper, you better read the conclusion over and over until you understand that Jones has
not claimed Thermite, or Thermate. The closing statement in the science paper is quite clear and if you
attempt to twist Jones' conclusion, I will expose you.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Ahem...presuming ten one pound charges per support column (I'm cutting you some slack because ten is an easier number to multiply by than twenty... and this whole bit is make believe anyway), with thrty nine columns per floor, at 110 floors, with two buildings, that's EIGHTY FIVE THOUSAND, EIGHT HUNDRED of these little packages that would need to be rigged up. There's no flipping way they could be planted in a month, two months, or even three months, particularly when they were sneaking around trying to place them without being noticed by the NYPA who were on the lookout for bombs ever since the *first* WTC bombing 1993.

1. It were 47 core columns.
2. No need for that ridiculous amount of explosive packets at all.
Just go to the third, highest mechanical floors, fill 47 boxed in columns and a few also hollow floor beams with a thermobaric explosive charge, and detonate them at will. It will shatter those columns like glass, and the onset for a global collapse is created.
You will not hear much of that event, they were capable of calculating exactly how much of the reactants were needed, to shatter that specific thickness of steel columns.

Then you do the same a few seconds later at the other two mechanical floors, shattering another few meters of the 47 core columns, which assures that the whole building will keep on thundering down in a natural-looking gravitational collapse proceeding and fed by the weight of the collapsing debris.

Of course, when it had been a real natural collapse, those 47 columns would have stopped any straight down proceeding of any collapse debris, and the debris would have toppled over, or split in several side streams away from the buildings, instead of the straight down trajectory as we all have seen happening in all three towers on 911.
And you still want us to believe in fairy tales.

I'm basing my statement on the FACT, not the speculation, that the NYPA had their own full time staff of security, electricians, inspectors, engineers, custodians, etc., many of them working there for years, so anyone just walking off the street claiming to be an electrician wouldn't have been allowed entry to sneak around reardless of what cover story they gave out. Nice try.

Those columns had wide inspection windows, covered by plates. Just stand on top of an elevator, screw those inspection windows open, lower the thermobaric packet with the ignition cable, shut the window, and glue the ignition sender in place on the wall.

??? At what time in any of world history has anyone ever been able to sneak in and plant secret demolitions in an occupied building without anyone noticing?

Easy answer?
On 9-11-2001.
And not to forget the Oklahoma City bombing, and the 1993 WTC parking garage bombing.
Want any more?

Originally posted by turbofan
Cole did not use Thermate/Thermite to prove/disprove Jones, he used Thermate/Thermite to prove NIST and Nat. Geo. incompetent.

Cole showed easily that steel can be melted, and cut using tiny portions of the thermite/thermate in a proper
configuration.

As for the science paper, you better read the conclusion over and over until you understand that Jones has
not claimed Thermite, or Thermate. The closing statement in the science paper is quite clear and if you
attempt to twist Jones' conclusion, I will expose you.

I "better read the conclusion" or you'll "expose me?" How compelling. Jones said "...unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material." Using his analytical techniques, he found what he thinks are elements of thermite in a matrix which we will call paint, for the time being. He claims that they are nanoparticulates and the matrix is some sort of highly energetic material. Note that the elements claimed are thermite, and do not include those materials which are in thermate, hence he claims thermite and Cole used the wrong material.
He also concludes "We note that it is likely also an energetic material, in that the total energy release sometimes observed in DSC tests exceeds the theoretical maximum energy of the classic thermite reaction." He has no clue what the material is and is covering the fact that there is combustion occurring because he botched the DSC by running it in air. [Yes, Turbo, it does matter.] He invokes a magical "energetic material" but fails to say that the matrix is mainly carbon with no nitrogen or fluorine which might be expected in an energetic material. Further, no combination of thermite and any energetic material shown in his paper as examples would produce the energies shown without combustion in air.

Combustion in the DSC occurred and his results are invalid. Hence, there is no evidence of thermite. Jones flunks Chemistry and Thermodynamics 101.

reply to post by turbofan


I seem to remember that I gave you time to write your thread after our proposed debate was aborted by the admin folks. Now, you want me to change my schedule to suit you. People in Hell want ice water, Turbo, and you both have the same chance of getting what you want.

Rebutting your claims is easy and 'off the cuff.' Jones' paper will take more time because I want to make sure I find every error and inconsistency so that we can have a fun discussion. Meanwhile, I will reply to individual posts and correct your misinterpretations.

reply to post by LaBTop


If what you claim is true, why were core columns standing after the outer colums had collapsed?

Originally posted by pteridine Note that the elements claimed are thermite, and do not include those materials which are in thermate, hence he claims thermite and Cole used the wrong material.

FIrst of all , what does COLE have to do with the science paper? Cole's experiment was against NIST and
National Geographic, not Jones' paper. You are mixing two distinct experiments for reasons I cannot even
begin to imagine.

Jones clearly outlines elements found, and does not claim thermite. YOu are assuming this and you are
wrong. If Jones claimed thermite he would have stated such a thing.

How much are you going to twist the wording in this paper? You're already off to a terrible start.

He has no clue what the material is and is covering the fact that there is combustion occurring because he botched the DSC by running it in air. [Yes, Turbo, it does matter.]

No PT, it DOES NOT matter.

Elemental iron was produced after the reaction which requires thousands of degrees of temperature.

I cannot wait for you to start your thread to explain where all this heat came from and how combustion
was a factor.

He invokes a magical "energetic material" but fails to say that the matrix is mainly carbon with no nitrogen or fluorine which might be expected in an energetic material. Further, no combination of thermite and any energetic material shown in his paper as examples would produce the energies shown without combustion in air.

I hope you're reading LLNL documentation because I have a few pages sourced that already prove this statement
wrong.

YOu should cut to the chase and begin with the calculations for your assumptions of combustion in air
contributing to the formation of iron rich spheres.

Further, no combination of thermite and any energetic material shown in his paper as examples would produce the energies shown without combustion in air.

I had to repeat this line. This is going to be the quote that exposes your ignorance.

Please do not reply here. I'd rather you take the time to start your thread; its obvious you have some twisting
and fudging ahead of you.

reply to post by turbofan


Hey, did you know that gas burns at around 3000 degrees? Did you know that the gas lines broke when the towers collapsed? Did you know that the gas was igniting constantly underground?

Just curious.

reply to post by pteridine


As in every demolition, mis-firings are the most feared events.

The spire did stand for several seconds, then someone re-fired, or, more logical, the already swinging spire collapsed, caused by its own, now freestanding weight and eventual additional human or natural damage to it at a much lower, out of sight position, which we will never know of.

I am still not sure if that spire was one column, or a set of core columns, or a long corner partition.
It's difficult to calculate from the existing grainy videos, where the core columns were situated, and where the corner partitions.
I believe I once saw such a calculation, but do not know anymore where to find it back, and on which site.
A new search could give now answers, where I did not find it anymore last year.

The corners however were build up from three Vierendaal-truss portions, bolded and welded together.
We have the NYPD helicopter photo's, lately posted again by _BoneZ_, which show a very long spire-like, triangular connected construction falling down, with white smoke trails at the broken ends.
So, perhaps the spire was part of these kind of constructions.
It looked like a part of a big crane, the load bearing part with the cables at the end, also constructed from three long beams held together with short steel parts, thus forming a long construction, held together with small triangular parts.

_BoneZ_ his post, with the TWO photo's in it :
www.abovetopsecret.com...



It could be a part of the much discussed spire, photographed from a NYPD helicopter, after the spire broke up.
When you look at other photo's from this same helicopter, you first see a whole wall still standing in the smoke cloud, then only the spire keeps standing, then this photo.
That's why I thought the spire was a long stretched out still standing corner portion.

Originally posted by turbofan

Originally posted by pteridineDid Jones claim to have found thermate? Was there elements of thermate or thermite present?

YOu can't be serious. You have obviously not read the paper if you're asking these questions.

Yes, there were elements of Thermate present; Sulphur namely.

Jones is incompetent vis-a-vis determining whether or not there is thermxte, or nanuthermxte in his samples.

XRD is a conclusive test for what the aluminum and iron are from. It would cost $150,Instead, he, Farritt, et al, are unaware of this simple fact.

You are honest enough to question Rob's interpretation of the FDR thing, to the point that he banned you from his forum. Now, will you do the same again and investigate what I'm saying?

Call a chemical analytics lab in your area that is familiar with the process. Call several. Ask them if the tests that Jones, etc used are conclusive tests. Ask them if there IS a conclusive test for thermxte.

Then report back here.

reply to post by Varemia


You are the first one, ever, to come up with that.
Gas lines were closed very early in the morning already, by order of mayor Giuliani's office.

I think you mix up water lines with gas. There was a huge water pipe broken leading in the "bath tub", at the point it came out of the thick concrete wall of the tub. A photo exists, where a man is standing in it upright, during the clean-up. That water flooded all lower basements in the tub and the tower basements, before they collapsed.
As I said before, explosives under water are greatly muffled by that body of water. And a very low frequency sound is heard before the towers came down. Just the same effect as that of large cutting charges exploding under water.

Btw, gas in a high-rise is a very bad idea, why do you think diesel generators were situated in all three towers as back-up power generators for tactical floors?
Cooking etc was all done electrically, as laid out in NY City high-rise building regulations.

Originally posted by Varemia
reply to post by turbofan

 

Hey, did you know that gas burns at around 3000 degrees? Did you know that the gas lines broke when the towers collapsed? Did you know that the gas was igniting constantly underground?

Just curious.

I would like to see a link to this source of information. I've NEVER seen any reference to the WTC's having natural gas lines. I don't think there is no way in hell that would have got approval. Now, there possibley could have been gas lines in the basement levels.

Seriously, i would like to see anything that pertains to natural gas in or around the WTC's.

Originally posted by LaBTop

1. It were 47 core columns.

Why thank you, LabTop, for that correction. I withdraw my original estimate. The total number of these pacakges needed to bring down the buildings is actually ONE HUNDRED AND THREE THOUSAND, FOUR HUNDRED. Either thousands and thousands of secret agents would need to descend on the towers to plant these charges all at once, or, one or two secret agents would be able to plant all these charges in about four years.

If THIS doesn't show you truthers just how preposterous these "controlled demolitions" stories are, then nothing will.

2. No need for that ridiculous amount of explosive packets at all.
Just go to the third, highest mechanical floors, fill 47 boxed in columns and a few also hollow floor beams with a thermobaric explosive charge, and detonate them at will. It will shatter those columns like glass, and the onset for a global collapse is created.

...in which case you just threw 95% of your own conspiracy theories into the trash. Every single floor in the towers were suspended in air by horizontal support braces running from the core columns to the outer perimeter, so each floor has the exact same design and load bering weight as every other floor. If even *one* floor would legitimately collapse from being unable to withstand the force of the wreckage falling down upon it, then you're necessarily saying they *all* would have legitimately collapsed.

You're openly admitting all this "fell at free fall speed" and "it looks like controlled demoliitons" bit is just conspiracy mongoring rubbish. Do you even realize that?

Those columns had wide inspection windows, covered by plates. Just stand on top of an elevator, screw those inspection windows open, lower the thermobaric packet with the ignition cable, shut the window, and glue the ignition sender in place on the wall.

...and I've posted photos ad nauseum showing the condition of the steel they were retrieving at ground zero not one column shows anything even remotely what you're hypothesizing. You're making this up and we both know it.

Easy answer?
On 9-11-2001.

Easy response? You're on a runaway train of making up crap off the top of your heads and you don't know how to get off.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave


Either thousands and thousands of secret agents would need to descend on the towers to plant these charges all at once, or, one or two secret agents would be able to plant all these charges in about four years.

If THIS doesn't show you truthers just how preposterous these "controlled demolitions" stories are, then nothing will.

So Dave, in your own words please explain how preposterous it would be for one or two agents to plant all these charges over the course of 3-4 years, could add some pure old fashioned *Those damned conspiracy websites* fuel here by stating that, this would have covered the time stamp of Bush`s brother being on the board of the company that were responsible for security at the WTC, but I won`t, instead i`ll leave it entirely up to you Dave.

Please explain how preposterous it would be for a few guys, whom by all accounts would have the relative access all areas passes, needed for the task in hand...The floor is yours.