posted on Jun, 20 2011 @ 10:35 AM
The article makes two points:
1. The fuel fires from the airplanes would have ignited any explosives that were present.
2. The collapse of the buildings were not free-fall or the type of thing that one would expect from a controlled demolition.
Point 1 is incorrect because the ignition temperature for thermite is higher than the temperatures that can be reached by a fuel-air fire. From the
wikipedia article on thermite, "Ignition of a thermite reaction normally requires only a simple child's sparkler or easily obtainable magnesium
ribbon, but may require persistent efforts, as ignition can be unreliable and unpredictable. These temperatures cannot be reached with conventional
black powder fuses, nitrocellulose rods, detonators, pyrotechnic initiators, or other common igniting substances. Even when the thermite is hot enough
to glow bright red, it will not ignite as it must be at or near white-hot to initiate the reaction. It is possible to start the reaction using a
propane torch if done correctly."
Point 2 is incorrect as well, as documented by the thousands of qualified architects and engineers who have examined the matter and put their
reputations on the line. Videos of the collapse of WTC1 released by NIST show an undeniable series of explosions occurring below the level reached by
the collapsing floors. Eyewitness testimony from first responders also indicates that there were multiple explosions. Seismic measurements show an
explosion occurred before the plane hit the tower. Unexploded thermitic residue was found in the dust, and independently confirmed in several
disparate dust samples by independent researchers. This thermitic residue was not created by processes occurring during the collapse. Fire does not
The author of the article frequently insists that people who do not agree with him on the subject are stupid and irrational. This is not a sign of a
calm and reasonable researcher.