Face to Face with Dr. Niels Harrit: "There is no doubt that this building was taken down in a contr, page 2


Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 20 times


reply posted on 8-3-2011 @ 04:56 PM by zimishey
Originally posted by pteridine
reply to
post by zimishey



Niels may have no doubts about controlled demolition of WTC 1 and 2. Many others that understand demolitions have doubts and Niels finding red paint in the dust is not proof of anything other than that Niels wants a little attention.
The Bentham paper is full of errors and poor analytical protocols and its conclusions are not justified.


OK, here's a confession I wish to share with you. I am not a chemist, and do not even have an O level (UK) in chemistry. But I am not the one severely criticizing him. This doesn't mean to say I 'believe' him---I am the authentic sceptic--I do not know, and am investigating.
I can say that I bothereed to watch that video from beginning to end, and --hmmm well i SENSE many of you here haven't by what you say, though I could be wrong, so forgive me.

But I have confessed about my lack of chemist credentials, and thus would feel somewhat intimidated when face to face with someone who had over 40 years experience as a Chemist to naively contradict.

But you and those here, will you let me know YOUR experience in chemistry please. What is your expertise? This is a fair question considering your antagonism against his evidence. It is so I can get a handle of the proceedings. Thankyou
edit on 8-3-2011 by zimishey because: spelling and added text



reply posted on 8-3-2011 @ 06:11 PM by budaruskie
Here we go again, a new day, a new thread, same exact results.

Zimishey posts some information and the ideas of someone who has recognized expertise and specific experience with the evidence and science surrounding 9/11, seemingly in hopes to inform and possibly spark some conversation. Then comes the cavalry. Hooper gets in first with a one sentence statement (which directly opposes the rules of the forum) which leads to the same old super duper complete lack of critical or logical thought he always brings. Dave or G.O.D. as he likes to fancy himself, quickly starts the name-calling. The General gets to the show late and offers his opinion on what is science and what is not, so that the others know which direction to take. The words shovel, drivel, and damn fool conspiracy site quickly get tossed in the mix along with plenty of other assumptions and character attacks until the whole damn thing just falls apart into an unwinnable quagmire of argument. Peter guy typically comes in and claims some expertise and poses a question or makes some statements that few on this board have the ability to answer or completely understand. Although, if you pay close attention online credintials quickly become questionable when certain members pop in. If Jesus himself appeared to the world and said it was a CD these same guys would quickly point out how he can't be credible since he doesn't even have a real dad and ran off and died when his followers needed him most. Beyond that, Jesus has no expertise in demolition or physics or whatever, you get my point. Hooper, explain how the gov't and thier scientists could eliminate the possibility of the use of explosives without EVER CHECKING FOR ANY EXPLOSIVES! Talk about the scientific method.

Why don't you guys ever attack the credibility of scientists, BEFORE they chime in on 9/11? Seemingly Jones, Chandler, Harrit and the thousands of other pilots, engineeers, architects, doctors, military personel, and normal laymen and women were all upstanding citizens respected in their fields until they made that fatal mistake. If just once you were able to truly discredit someone AND THEN they said something related to 9/11, I'd be there to give you some credit.


reply posted on 8-3-2011 @ 11:48 PM by DIDtm
reply to post by budaruskie



BRAVO.
and STANDING OVATION.

-although Im sure this is considered an off-topic post and will get deleted.

APPLAUSE


reply posted on 9-3-2011 @ 09:42 AM by pteridine
reply to post by zimishey



Many things can cut steel. There is just no evidence for any of them being used during the collapse of the towers.
In many threads and posts I have explained the errors in the Jones paper. I have explained the errors in interpretation of the results. The energetics alone show that there is too much energy present for thermite and any combination of thermite and high explosive. The photos show that the super-nano-thermite self extinguished and didn't completely burn even when held in an oven above its ignition point.
Jones may have convinced himself that red paint is thermite but he hasn't proposed how it was used, what its effects were, how it was placed, where it was placed, or why 10-100 tons of it were unburned.

Jones' claims are unsupported by evidence and he is unable to offer any theory on the use and effect of the paint-on demolition material.


reply posted on 9-3-2011 @ 09:53 AM by GoodOlDave
Originally posted by budaruskie
Zimishey posts some information and the ideas of someone who has recognized expertise and specific experience with the evidence and science surrounding 9/11, seemingly in hopes to inform and possibly spark some conversation. Then comes the cavalry. Hooper gets in first with a one sentence statement (which directly opposes the rules of the forum) which leads to the same old super duper complete lack of critical or logical thought he always brings. Dave or G.O.D. as he likes to fancy himself, quickly starts the name-calling.


Pointing out that someone is spreading lies isn't name calling. It's pointing out that someone is spreading lies. Propagating the claim that Harrit said the materials he found had something to do with the reason for why the towers collapsed is spreading lies, whether you with to acknowledge the fact or not.

If you don't appreciate that others are pointing out that you're spreading lies, then don't spread lies. It ain't a trick question.

Why don't you guys ever attack the credibility of scientists, BEFORE they chime in on 9/11? Seemingly Jones, Chandler, Harrit and the thousands of other pilots, engineeers, architects, doctors, military personel, and normal laymen and women were all upstanding citizens respected in their fields until they made that fatal mistake. If just once you were able to truly discredit someone AND THEN they said something related to 9/11, I'd be there to give you some credit.


Now that's rather an absurd question. Why didn't they arrest John Wayne Gacy BEFORE he went out and murdered all those little boys? Think of all the lives they could have saved.



reply posted on 9-3-2011 @ 03:15 PM by wmd_2008
reply to post by budaruskie



Lets have a LOOK architects for the truth has taken how long about 9+ years to get 1200+ members how many structral engineers in say the USA or worldwide 1200 doesn't scratch the surface so are the other tens of thousands of structural engineers/architects ALL WRONG.

I talk to people like this on a regular basis still to meet one that thinks this was a dem job!


reply posted on 9-3-2011 @ 04:54 PM by zimishey
Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Originally posted by DIDtm
Per usual you either didnt read the OP or ignored it.
Let me quote what you are ignoring.
From the third line of the OP.

"Dr Niels Harrit claims nano-thermite has been found in the dust collected by the three twosers that came done on 9/11. "


You really are expert at evading having to admit you're wrong. Dr. Harrit says nothing about where the aluminum and iron oxide granules came from nor does the report he wrote actually claim they found thermite. All he does is report that he found aluminum and iron oxide granules (which is by definition thermitic) and the OP is misrepresenting the report to suit his conspiracy peddling. You conspiracy mongors are entirely making it up all on your own that he's even saying the materials he found were responsible for the collapse. If you are attempting to claim otherwise on any of these facts then you are lying through your teeth.

I am quoting the OP correctly. It's just that you don't want to acknowledge this because you know it means this whole, "thermitic material" security blanket you're clinging to is worthless.

Right..this coming from someone who cant read what he tries to refute.
Endless babble. You should write a book on that....your KING


More childish character assassination. Just be an adult and admit you're wrong, already. Sheesh.


I did share with you about my Chemistry knowledge experience, but you haven't answered my question regarding your experience? Any reason?


reply posted on 9-3-2011 @ 04:56 PM by zimishey
Originally posted by pteridine
reply to
post by zimishey



Many things can cut steel. There is just no evidence for any of them being used during the collapse of the towers.
In many threads and posts I have explained the errors in the Jones paper. I have explained the errors in interpretation of the results. The energetics alone show that there is too much energy present for thermite and any combination of thermite and high explosive. The photos show that the super-nano-thermite self extinguished and didn't completely burn even when held in an oven above its ignition point.
Jones may have convinced himself that red paint is thermite but he hasn't proposed how it was used, what its effects were, how it was placed, where it was placed, or why 10-100 tons of it were unburned.

Jones' claims are unsupported by evidence and he is unable to offer any theory on the use and effect of the paint-on demolition material.


Of all the members in this thread you seem to suggest you have studied the people I mention. What is your qualified level of experience in Chemistry, please?


reply posted on 9-3-2011 @ 07:05 PM by budaruskie
Originally posted by wmd_2008
reply to
post by budaruskie



Lets have a LOOK architects for the truth has taken how long about 9+ years to get 1200+ members how many structral engineers in say the USA or worldwide 1200 doesn't scratch the surface so are the other tens of thousands of structural engineers/architects ALL WRONG.

I talk to people like this on a regular basis still to meet one that thinks this was a dem job!


Well, how could I argue with that? Clearly, there is no logical fallacy in ASSUMING that all other architects and engineers in the world agree with the official story because they have not joined A/E for 9/11 truth. The proof you provided, your statement about people you talk to seems pretty ironclad and all but...

I talk to people all the time too, and none of them believe the OS, go figure. Also, 1200+ is far more than those who have signed a petition that agree with the OS, now isn't it?
edit on 3/9/2011 by budaruskie because: (no reason given)

Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>    ^^TOP^^



Why the Pentagon?
  Posted 3 days ago with 12 member flags
NEVER FORGET 9-11….Maybe we SHOULD forget.
  Posted 11 days ago with 11 member flags
Personal Theory on The Twin Towers Plane Pilots
  Posted 0 days ago with 8 member flags
The 9/11 Hijackers: Fraud in Official Video Exhibits Uncovered
  Posted 1 days ago with 7 member flags
Note from trapped workers surfaces 10 years after 9/11
  Posted 1 days ago with 6 member flags
Where were you when the world stopped turning...
  Posted 2 days ago with 4 member flags