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.

 

Professional engineer Jon Cole cuts steel columns with thermate, debunks Nat Geo & unexpectedly repr

page: 26
420
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 03:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11

I think he knows how stupid what he's posting is, and is just trying to get a rise out of us, like your classic internet forum troll.

Then he gets on his other accounts, that we all must by now realize he has, and stars his own posts.

"Durrrrrrrr"


I'm sure he knows as well. I've long ago figured that he and his buddies star their own posts. Not that stars have any value...save for those who make a game out of posting here. Maybe the mods should consider deleting that whole concept; maybe it would clean this place up a little. In the meantime, that "ignore" button comes in handy


Durrrrrrrr!




posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 08:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Joey Canoli
 


Well i can see you have no respect for looking into things...and i could give you a whole bunch of info to go through and research...but I think that you would probably not even bother and then just come back with some snarky rebuttle that would be completely irrelevant...but i was always taught not to do to others that they may necessarily do to you....because it is better to rise above the ignorance of others and move forward...so i will just point out a few things....

Progressive collapse ....DID not Happen why...time time time....the buildings...ALL the buildings came down to fast to suffer progressive collapse.


“But the craziest, most truly unhinged conspiracy theory for the towers falling on 9/11?” Torin asks rhetorically. “Fire.” The official story cannot be recreated by any experiment. NIST is the government agency involved in attempting to model what happened to the world trade center on 9/11, and they fail horribly. NIST never models what happens after the collapse initiation, and even what they do model before that is easily debunked. NIST created 16 separate physics programs to simulate the WTC 1 & 2 collapses and only got 1 to collapse partially. Torin adds, “When they did, [in the computer model] they removed 40% of the structural support.” The cross trusses that the towers received a significant amount of their strength from had to be removed to have a collapse in the computer simulation. Torin then mocks the official story, “There’s no such thing as a ‘pancake’ collapse, but there is a progressive collapse”A few slides are shown of progressive collapses throughout the world. None of them are anything like what happened to the world trade center with its pulverized concrete 100 microns or smaller just seconds after the start of collapse, and then its complete destruction. Torin uses his expertise to explain to the audience how and why a real progressive collapse occurs and subsequently why the WTC was not a progressive collapse. “The biggest problem with the argument,” Torin explains. “Time.”


good article

see i am already being kind to you...but hey civility should not be hard to do should it.

here is some of the Nist Factsheets just to show i look at all side of the argument for you perusal

Now lets look at some assumptions by Bazant and Zou shall we....or this may be to much for you to Joey.


In stage 1 (Fig. 1), the conflagration caused by the aircraft fuel spilled into the structure causes the steel of the columns to be exposed to sustained temperatures apparently exceeding 800°C. This assumption is crucial to the entire analysis, and there is no basis for it. Actual tests of uninsulated steel structures exposed to gas and diesel fuel for sustained periods never exceeded 360°C. And flames were no longer visible in the South Tower moments before its collapse, and it was emitting only dark smoke. The heating is probably accelerated by a loss of the protective thermal insulation of steel during the initial blast. Blast? By implying that the impact fireballs were blasts, the authors confuse explosions, which produce very high pressures, with fireballs, which don't. A detonation wave can be generated by the sudden ignition of an unburned hydrocarbon-air mixture, but is not produced when ignition is continuous, as appeared to be the case with the dispersing fuel in the jet impacts. The fireballs took about two seconds to expand. Had they detonated, they would have appeared in milliseconds. At such temperatures, structural steel suffers a decrease of yield strength and exhibits significant viscoplastic deformation (i.e., creep—an increase of deformation under sustained load). This leads to creep buckling of columns (e.g., Bazant and Cedolin 1991, Sec. 9), which consequently lose their load carrying capacity (stage 2). Once more than about a half of the columns in the critical floor that is heated most suffer buckling (stage 3), the weight of the upper part of the structure above this floor can no longer be supported, and so the upper part starts falling down onto the lower part below the critical floor, gathering speed until it impacts the lower part. This flies in the face of engineering practice, which is to build structures at least four times as strong as they would have to be to sustain maximum anticipated loads. Actual load conditions were a fraction of those anticipated loads, since it was not a windy day, and the floors above the impacts were holding only a fraction of their rated capacities. So 90% would be a more realistic estimate of the needed column failure rate. At that moment, the upper part has acquired an enormous kinetic energy and a significant downward velocity. The vertical impact of the mass of the upper part onto the lower part (stage 4) applies enormous vertical dynamic load on the underlying structure, far exceeding its load capacity, even if it is not heated. This causes failure of an underlying multi-floor segment of the tower (stage 4), in which the failure of the connections of the floor-carrying trusses to the columns is either accompanied or quickly followed by buckling of the core columns and overall buckling of the framed tube, was it too fast to see on the videos, or was it behind the dust? with the buckles probably spanning the height of many floors (stage 5, at right), and the upper part possibly getting wedged inside an emptied lower part of the framed tube (stage 5, at left). The buckling is initially plastic but quickly leads to fracture in the plastic hinges. The part of building lying beneath is then impacted again by an even larger mass falling with a greater velocity, and the series of impacts and failures then proceeds all the way down (stage 5).


So please go look at more info on this subject...cause i certainly do

Now the bazant document makes a large number of assumptions...not only does it assume the mass....which is powder and dust before it even impacts the lower floors which means it is not even a solid mass hitting the floors below with one single impact.



Now looking at this watch what is happening to the spire....hmmmm...strange that is should be falling into the CENTRAL CORE area of the building since if this were a progressive collapse the weakest area should be failing first...and also as i stated earlier the top is pulverised into dust....how can that be since the report says it is....SHHHH listen to the word....PANCAKING....I see no pancaking occuring there.

But is there still any point in showing you any of this info Joey...i would say obviuosly not as your comprehension may not be quite upto the challenge to question those in Authority....

now I could go on and on and on with anomalies in the OS but I have been looking at your posts and they are very argumentive and not very informative...they attack and they are personal....which is the reaction of people whom are guilty of things.....the old blame game senario.

I would hope that someone such as yourself might take the time to read some of the documents and learn from it rather than look at something with anger and rage cause it does not help in coming to understandings between people to further knowledge.

The Site here says Deny Ignorance...so lets do that because ignorance by definaition is just a person whom lacks knowledge....so by gaining knowledge that Itself leads to denying ignorance does it not.



posted on Dec, 29 2010 @ 11:43 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 30 2010 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 


Has anyone tried to debunk the ENTIRE NatGo show rather then cherry pick sections of it? I've seen the whole show twice and as a professional engineer myself, I would like to see some debunk the whole show. I would ask quite a number of questions around this video. And since I'm also a professional engineer, it takes one to know one. If I recall, the conspiracy theorists bombards the entire NatGo show with "could have, could not have, should, should have...could of, would of, should of" remarks but never really providing clear and scientific answers. Anyone really notice that? The show ends with an author, who himself, writes stories around conspiracy theories and does it for a living, stating that something of 9/11's magnitude could not have been accomplished, in theory, due to the sheer magnitude of people and resources that would be required let along, be kept a secret. Did documents leaked by Wikileaks show ANY kind of connection between the US government AND 9/11? Do you think Julian Assange would have leaked out such a connection as the first order of business? Did he even HINT or threaten to reveal such info like he did for a "known" bank? Or is such info kept at Area 51 to prevent leaks? Or is there a conspiracy theory that Assange is in cohoots with the US government and the US is bribiing him NOT to reveal it? (I anticipate another thread around that). Do you think China would have such info using their spy network?

Here's some interesting reading...

abcnews.go.com...



posted on Dec, 30 2010 @ 06:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by brohiki
Has anyone tried to debunk the ENTIRE NatGo show rather then cherry pick sections of it?


This experiment constitutes the "meat and potatoes" as they say, of the show. Other than that, what do they back up any of their claims with anyway? It's a freaking television program, not a scientific study. Since when does any television program have the kind of credibility you're trying to give it in the first place? The part debunked by the OP was the only place they even bother trying to demonstrate something physically, and they failed horribly at it.

They took 175 pounds of thermite and couldn't accomplish what one guy in his backyard could accomplish with less than 5 pounds of thermate. That alone shows you the credibility of these people.



If I recall, the conspiracy theorists bombards the entire NatGo show with "could have, could not have, should, should have...could of, would of, should of" remarks but never really providing clear and scientific answers. Anyone really notice that?


Have you ever noticed that the overwhelming majority of "conspiracy theorists" aren't even pretending to know exactly what happened, only that it wasn't what the official reports have stated? And that a much more thorough investigation is needed? Have you ever noticed that sentiment anywhere?

The fact that we don't have any scientific proof of what happened is the entire problem, because we are involved with 2 wars so far that were directly related to that attack, again not because of any proof but because of a maelstrom of endless political rhetoric and drum-beating and flag-waving.



posted on Dec, 31 2010 @ 05:57 PM
link   
Can we now send a rendition flight to collect those Dancing Israelis for questioning? Also are there any Israeli firms in the US that specialise in thermite/thermate technology? If there are then they need to be questioned too.



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 01:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by brohiki
reply to post by bsbray11
 


Has anyone tried to debunk the ENTIRE NatGo show rather then cherry pick sections of it? I've seen the whole show twice and as a professional engineer myself, I would like to see some debunk the whole show. I would ask quite a number of questions around this video. And since I'm also a professional engineer, it takes one to know one. If I recall, the conspiracy theorists bombards the entire NatGo show with "could have, could not have, should, should have...could of, would of, should of" remarks but never really providing clear and scientific answers. Anyone really notice that? The show ends with an author, who himself, writes stories around conspiracy theories and does it for a living, stating that something of 9/11's magnitude could not have been accomplished, in theory, due to the sheer magnitude of people and resources that would be required let along, be kept a secret. Did documents leaked by Wikileaks show ANY kind of connection between the US government AND 9/11? Do you think Julian Assange would have leaked out such a connection as the first order of business? Did he even HINT or threaten to reveal such info like he did for a "known" bank? Or is such info kept at Area 51 to prevent leaks? Or is there a conspiracy theory that Assange is in cohoots with the US government and the US is bribiing him NOT to reveal it? (I anticipate another thread around that). Do you think China would have such info using their spy network?

Here's some interesting reading...

abcnews.go.com...


Professional Engineer? I am a welder/machinist/engineer for a prototyping company. I work with all kinds of metals all day long. Use Machinery's Handbook a lot. Do structural analysis on all kinds of frames and the like. I have never seen the Natgeo documentary but can say with all certainty, the atomic bomb project involved more than 125,000 people, for many years, and the public had no clue. Until the first bomb was tested and the media was ALLOWED to expose it. For a reason. Otherwise, who would have known. Sept. 11th was a very complex operation and obviously had been in the making at least since 93' when the first truck bomb was planted.

Do you really think a bunch of desert dwellers in rags, planned this whole thing and then had the resources to carry out such a sophisticated plan, and did it with military precision with planes that could niether achieve the limits needed for the manuevers that were used to crash them into their respective targets?

If ANYONE "believes" that crap, please see a doctor and soon, society does not need people of this lower mentality holding down jobs that involve the general public. It is very dangerous for you to operate machinery or work near others who would would be put at risk by your unstable state. Just sayin'.



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 04:12 PM
link   
reply to post by brohiki
 


Why should you be expected to believe a NG documentary, or any documentay outright anyway? and what about the Writer in the NG story, he is English, and he is TELLING us that "Americans would believe in a 9/11 inside job, rather than believe that they are hated in a large part of the rest of the world" as is his theory, because that's all it is...a theory, and it's condescending rubbish. I'm English myself, and there are many people this side of the pond concerned over ALL the events of 9/11, and none of those concerns are to do with American Psyche.



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 08:17 PM
link   
Phenomenal post bsbray11. Have another well deserved star + flag!

The evidence is really starting to speak for itself now, I wonder if someone will actually come forward & admit what is patently obvious after watching these thermate experiments; that WTC 1, 2 & 7 were not blown or burnt down, they were CUT down! I highly doubt it.

The thermate boxcutter is like a stealthy version of the shape charge, with very similar outcome & shows perfect or near-perfect correlation to witness testimony & video footage.

The only tricky part of the puzzle remaining is HOW were these thermal charges secreted into the fabric of the building? Putting them in after the fact seems implausible or even impossible to do without attracting attention, but it's not too great a stretch of the imagination to theorize them being built in the the steelwork as the buildings went up. If that is in fact the case, then SOMEONE on site during the original construction is aware of this fact. I wonder... was there an unusual work routine? For example... construction crews limited to a max of one floor per day, & very strict access control of the site after hours?

Notice also that all the steel debris was quickly shipped off to be recycled. What better way to hide the evidence?

The whole thing stinks in my opinion, especially when all the other anomalous evidence is factored in.

Fantastic post!



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 09:33 PM
link   
reply to post by HelionPrime
 


There was renovation occurring at that time that would need the assistance of "Urban Moving Systems" along with construction workers that could easily access those areas.



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 10:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by HelionPrime
The only tricky part of the puzzle remaining is HOW were these thermal charges secreted into the fabric of the building?


How would they be timed for sequential collapse? Their mode of action is too slow.



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 11:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
How would they be timed for sequential collapse? Their mode of action is too slow.


And fire heating a bunch of trusses to pull the perimeter columns inward is any faster?



posted on Jan, 1 2011 @ 11:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by pteridine
How would they be timed for sequential collapse? Their mode of action is too slow.


And fire heating a bunch of trusses to pull the perimeter columns inward is any faster?


There are those who say that the WTC towers fell too fast and that CD was the cause. Thermite/ate is too slow in action to effect such. Is your version of reality that thermite just started the gravitational collapse?



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 12:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
There are those who say that the WTC towers fell too fast and that CD was the cause. Thermite/ate is too slow in action to effect such. Is your version of reality that thermite just started the gravitational collapse?


No amount of rattling can reconcile the contradiction you just posted.

You say thermate is "too slow" to result in what we saw, and yet you think even slower fire did the same thing. We are looking at the same reality here "pteridine." If you think fire did it then you have some serious cognitive dissonance going on if you think thermate is "too slow" to cause the exact same thing.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 09:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by pteridine
There are those who say that the WTC towers fell too fast and that CD was the cause. Thermite/ate is too slow in action to effect such. Is your version of reality that thermite just started the gravitational collapse?


No amount of rattling can reconcile the contradiction you just posted.

You say thermate is "too slow" to result in what we saw, and yet you think even slower fire did the same thing. We are looking at the same reality here "pteridine." If you think fire did it then you have some serious cognitive dissonance going on if you think thermate is "too slow" to cause the exact same thing.


There is no contradiction. The claim was made that the collapse seemed too fast for some purveyors of CT and must have been due to sequential demolition of each floor of the WTC. Therm*te can't do it because it acts too slowly, as Cole showed you in his video. This leaves the possibility that therm*te started the collapse and gravity did the rest. As we have seen, there is much handwaving as to how any therm*te demolition could be achieved with actual charges. A demonstration of thermate, made to cut steel, chopped a steel beam but this only shows that thermate does what it is designed to do.

In your reality, how was therm*te used to sequentially collapse the building from the top down?



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 02:43 PM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 


When cole did the bolt heads....that was a Very quick reaction....Also the point would be to weaken the structural points on the building to make sure the collapse continued once started.
as to it taking a load of people It would not...When Cd's are carried out they are done so to minimize damage to surrounding areas...in this case it would not have been absolutely necessary now would it.
Now jon did mention the areas where brightness was seen and not seen....which would make sense...you would only need to initiate the collapse by taking out stratgic spots of the structure....and most of this would be done in the central core...now that would be relatively easy....as the Elevator shafts would give you access to those areas as that is what is housed in the central core of most skyscrapers the world over.
another thing is windows are in place which would not give the same impressions as a normal CD so the sounds would be muffled so as for people saying there were not the normal sounds of a CD ...well this was not a normal CD was it.
now lets do some quick calculations shall we....

If you needed to take out supports allternatively....say 47 core columns..at 5lbs/col and say 117 floors cause we will go into the basement too....is 27,495 lbs or approx 13tons.....so say 10 men carry 50 lb sacks and each floor requires 235lbs of explosive material they could drop enough material on every two floors with one trip.
(but remember there were freight lifts..and using handtrucks and pallets you could reduce it...i am trying to show the simplicity)

Now i know it is simple numbers but when they get crunched down it makes the job seem quite small...and very limited number of people ....now i am talking about taking out the central core....once that is done the building WILL collapse in on itself.....so as for the box columns it would take minimal weakening and not all of them to compplete the task....you see it would be no different than saying a group of plasters were bringing in material to work on the building.

As jon Cole also showed the material is safe to handle and quite inert until you have the magnesium igniter(in his example). We should assume the perps had much higher grade material and access to better equipment....And if one does not assume this then that is a shame.

Now go to this thread...www.abovetopsecret.com... you are curious to learn whom actually had the abilities to pull this off and cordinate such a task...

So really the workforce to rig the building would only need to be small....just as in a CD...it is not thousands on the site...it is usually a relatively small team of professionals with a small labour force.....

now the weakening of the structure is what would have been required for it to collapse as it did....the time to fall...as people say was not freefall....but it was far far far to fast to even be considered a progressive collapse,,
these are STEEL structures...Think building 7 too....as i have stated in other threads about the construction of that building.

Now if the buildings did suffer progressive collapse just by the planes or fires...i have stated that being exceptionally generous with time of say.1sec per floor and 10 floors 1 sec and 110 floors 11sec...which is more time than they fell in...but in a reasonable time frame...i would calculate at least .5 sec for each floor to fail without assistance...so 10 floors due to pancaking....5sec...so a 110floors 55secs....would be a much more logical time due to kinetic energy being absorbed by the crush up effect.

but hey.....people seem to forget that if it was just a natural collapse from the impact and fires...the top of the building falling is being resisted by the structure below.

therefore the floors below would have had to be taken out as the top collapsed in order to achieve the overall time the collapse took....Just my Opinion.





edit on 023131p://f50Sunday by plube because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine

Originally posted by bsbray11
You say thermate is "too slow" to result in what we saw, and yet you think even slower fire did the same thing. We are looking at the same reality here "pteridine." If you think fire did it then you have some serious cognitive dissonance going on if you think thermate is "too slow" to cause the exact same thing.


There is no contradiction.


Of course not, pteridine. Only when you blatantly contradict yourself is it not a contradiction.


The claim was made that the collapse seemed too fast for some purveyors of CT and must have been due to sequential demolition of each floor of the WTC. Therm*te can't do it because it acts too slowly, as Cole showed you in his video.


But again, you think fire did the same thing. This whole response of yours is nothing but hilarious arm-waving.

We are looking at the same building "collapse."

If you think fire did it, how is thermate supposed to act more slowly than fire?

Answer that question. Every time you dodge it you are showing yourself.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 06:36 PM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 


They didn't use regular thermite/mate for this but a highly engineered (and explosive) nano thermetic material that was produced in a highly sophisticated environment i.e. LLL or some other military lab of which we now have conclusive evidence that it was in the buildings due to the amazing and courageous work of Professor Harriet et al.



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 08:36 PM
link   
Great thread and video.

If only we could get this on national tv or the night news...then people would believe



posted on Jan, 2 2011 @ 08:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by pteridine

Originally posted by bsbray11
You say thermate is "too slow" to result in what we saw, and yet you think even slower fire did the same thing. We are looking at the same reality here "pteridine." If you think fire did it then you have some serious cognitive dissonance going on if you think thermate is "too slow" to cause the exact same thing.


There is no contradiction.


Of course not, pteridine. Only when you blatantly contradict yourself is it not a contradiction.


The claim was made that the collapse seemed too fast for some purveyors of CT and must have been due to sequential demolition of each floor of the WTC. Therm*te can't do it because it acts too slowly, as Cole showed you in his video.


But again, you think fire did the same thing. This whole response of yours is nothing but hilarious arm-waving.

We are looking at the same building "collapse."

If you think fire did it, how is thermate supposed to act more slowly than fire?

Answer that question. Every time you dodge it you are showing yourself.


I'll explain once more. Do try to focus.

The claim has been made that CD must have occurred because impact damage, fires, and gravity just couldn't be responsible for the collapse. The reasons are varied but are generally are based on gut feelings and are backed by unsubstantiated claims and invocations of the "laws of physics." This brought forth several theories. One is that thermite was needed to start the collapse and that gravity did do the job from that point on. The other is that each floor must have had help by some sort of demolition. There are hybrid versions that claims every 5th or 10th floor was demolished.
My question to you was which theory you support, given that a thermite CD material takes too long to act in a timed demolition sequence.




top topics



 
420
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join