Jonathan Cole - 9/11 Theories: Expert vs. Expert

page: 1
12
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 04:21 AM
link   
I found this interesting video that was published yesterday according to YouTube. I performed a search and wasn't able to find this video posted on here previously. A lot of the information has been discussed before but this 20 minute compilation raises a lot of interesting points that deserve to be scrutinized no matter what your stance on the 911 attacks were.

Personally I believe it was an obvious inside job, the molted steel beams from the Twin Towers and the collapse of building number 7 are two obvious give aways in my opinion. Please forgive me if this has been posted before. I know that many of the details in the video have been discussed on here before but this video does a great job of putting various facts and theories together. I advise that you please watch the video and explain what you believe or disbelieve and why.

Some of the information shared in this video raises various questions that still have gone unanswered unless you want to consider the usual debunker explanations that engineers have clearly disproven.

I hope you enjoy the video and I'm looking forward to some intelligent discussion on the content. All opinions are welcome but let's try and keep it civil. Personally, I can't even consider the possibility of jet fuel to cause those beams to melt and to cause molten steel that lasted for weeks. And no way in hell would the planes that hit the two towers cause building 7 to collapse.

Here is the video:



I would love for someone to convince me that the impact mixed with jet fuel caused all 3 buildings to collapse.

If this been posted before please provide me a link to the thread and close this one down, thanks.




posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 06:43 AM
link   
This Jonathon Cole fella is awesome. The 9/11 forum should be called "Jonathon Cole" . This guy has spent some time experimenting. Bump.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 06:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Myendica
 


I've seen some of his work but never have I seen it all put together in a fluent video such as this. It's dificult to dispute a lot of the evidence he puts forth so I'm anticipating debate from both sides since it's such an interesting subject for ATS.

I'm glad you enjoyed the video.

Thanks for the bump
edit on 22-6-2012 by Corruption Exposed because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 06:57 AM
link   
This subject has been so done to death that it amazes me every time somebody denies the explosive deconstruction of these buidings.
To blindly follow the goverment claptrap, and double speak, after all the very real counter evidence that has come to light.....Thats has to be the hieght of denial..........



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 07:18 AM
link   
reply to post by stirling
 




To blindly follow the goverment claptrap, and double speak, after all the very real counter evidence that has come to light.....Thats has to be the hieght of denial..........


Don't worry, they will be here as soon as they catch wind of this thread


"It wasn't free fall, it was a perfectly normal collapse. I'm an engineer."



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 07:27 AM
link   

911 was an inside job!



A shadow group within the US government brought down the towers, and killed 3,000 of their own countrymen in the process. If these people can't realize this, they deserve their enslavement.

We invaded Afghanistan and Iraq because of 911 even though they had NOTHING to do with it. Wake the # up people!



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 09:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by stirling
This subject has been so done to death that it amazes me every time somebody denies the explosive deconstruction of these buidings.
To blindly follow the goverment claptrap, and double speak, after all the very real counter evidence that has come to light.....Thats has to be the hieght of denial..........
It's not denial, it's obstruction of justice, which is a crime. Am starting to wonder if these so called 'debunkers' realise their culpability, as they know they're on the wrong side of this thing. Every day brings us closer to the truth.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 09:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by dillweed
It's not denial, it's obstruction of justice, which is a crime. Am starting to wonder if these so called 'debunkers' realise their culpability, as they know they're on the wrong side of this thing. Every day brings us closer to the truth.



I shudder when I read crap like this. This poster's mind has to be so #ed up to write this that he/she shouldn't be allowed out unsupervised.

In a warped mind like this, killing those that oppose your view of things seems reasonable.

The dude that shot that Congesswoman Gifford in the head used to post here. He was clearly delusional when one read his posts. This guy reminds me of him.

ATS should enact some sort of standard to remove a poster when that person adds little but veiled threats to hang debunkers, the perps, etc.

Allowing this sick mind to post is doing nothing but enabling...



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 09:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
I hope you enjoy the video and I'm looking forward to some intelligent discussion on the content. All opinions are welcome but let's try and keep it civil. Personally, I can't even consider the possibility of jet fuel to cause those beams to melt and to cause molten steel that lasted for weeks. And no way in hell would the planes that hit the two towers cause building 7 to collapse.



All right, let's have an intelligent discussion...but we both know that in a day or two the truthers are going to destroy this thread into a quagmire of pedantic arguments over the mass of the concrete in the floors and Bush's connections to the Nazis.

FIRST, this guy is being horribly fast and loose with the facts he's presenting. You saw right in the video that thermite doesn't explode- it burns really hot and really fast. If something goes KABOOM, unless it's a nuclear bomb that releases 100,000 degrees it isn't going to have any energy to melt steel- it's going to shatter it, and if it has the energy to melt steel like thermite does then it isn't going to use up all it's energy creating the KABOOM. So, all this guy managed to do it point out how the NIST report doesn't explain what we saw/heard, and then come up with ANOTHER explanation that doesn't explain what we saw/heard. With a building of that size, if there were genuinely demolitions in the building, you wouldn't need to be microanalyzing the dust or magnifying video looking for signs of explosions- there's be flashes all over the building and it's be as blatant as a stick of dynamite going off.

SECOND, This whole "thermite" discussion is entirely based on the report from Steven Jones, who supposedly found traces of thermite in the dust. That report has now been irrefutably been debunked by peer review reports, and it's been determined the thermite he found was actually paint, whcih isn't surprising, since Jones isn't an explosives expert and almost certainly never encountered thermite in his career. Thus, any positions based upon an incorrect report is by definition incorrect as well.

THIRD, and this is a big third, the towers were OCCUPIED buildings, as in they were chock full of tenants, inspectors, engineers, custodians, electricians, security guards, and the like, and they were full time employees who worked there for years, so they knew the building and they knew each other. They WILL have noticed any attempt to rig the building with demolitions and since almost all of the survived they WILL have reported seeing strange things going on. If some stranger suddenly showed up sitting on your couch who announced he was really your son, are you really telling me that wouldn't stand out?

FOURTH, which is what disappoints me about the truther movement on an intellectual level, is that literally every single accusation they come up with needs to religiously rely on armies of sinister secret agents to make it plausible. Everything, from why NIST created this supposedly fake report to how the explosives got into the building to why people are reporting seeing a plane hitting the Pentagon instead of a cruise missile, is always because of "sinister secret agents". How many people need to be in this supposedly "secret" conspiracy for it to work AND to successfully cover it up? 5,000? 10,000? Or, are you suggesting that a handful of sinister secret agents snuck into the WTC and planted these explosives, and then slapped on a fake mustache and slipped into the ground zero site and disposed of all the evidence, and then put on a fake beard and pretended to be FEMA engineers, and then put on dark sunglasses and pretended to be NIST engineers? It's completely mental. All you're doing is saying "the boogeyman" did it.

It's obvious to me that rather than looking at the evidence and then coming up with a scenario that best explains the evidence, you're coming up with the scenario first and then specifically seeking out the evidence that conforms to it. This is patently phony becuase you're consciously ignoring all the evidence that proves why it WASN'T controlled demolitions. For one thing, why does this video intentionally leave out the collapse of the penthouse from the WTC 7 video? That's one of the key pieces of evidence that backs up the NIST report.

Now let the childish "I'm really a sinister secret agent" and "Bush has connections to the Nazis" pillow fight begin.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 10:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by real_one

911 was an inside job!



A shadow group within the US government brought down the towers, and killed 3,000 of their own countrymen in the process. If these people can't realize this, they deserve their enslavement.

We invaded Afghanistan and Iraq because of 911 even though they had NOTHING to do with it. Wake the # up people!


Ah yes, the "sinister Secret agents" excuse again. I didn't even finish writing my post before the truthers starting having to rely on this crutch to allow their conspiracy theories to hobble around.

You know, you can come up with any and every conspiracy theory you'd like, but sooner or later you're going to need to come up with something more tangible to back up your claims than simply saying the boogeyman did it.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 10:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
 


Jonathan Cole is hardly an expert. He has started with conclusions and worked backwards, diddling the minds of the technically gullible with demonstrations and innuendo but no actual evidence. He used thermate in his previous demo/video, not the thermite claimed by the village idiot, Paintman Jones, but still failed to cut the steel in under a few seconds. This is far too slow for a demolition. He could have used an impact wrench and unbolted it in about the time it took for the thermite to cut it.
Assume some number of floors collapsing, say 90. Assume a collapse time of about 15 seconds. That means each floor has to collapse in about 170 milliseconds. No one has explained how thermite can clear each floor in 170 milliseconds.
This is because it can't.
The effects of thermite are not measured in milliseconds but in seconds. Look at Cole's video demonstrating that thermate can cut steel and consider the time it takes to cut one joint. The effects of thermate are not timable or fast enough or thermite would be used in building demolitions. Ask Cole to explain the speed of collapse based on thermite alone.
To do this with explosives would require enough such that there would be no question that explosives were used. The only way to explain this as a demolition is to have a demolition start the collapse because gravity did the rest. If demolitions started the collapses, where is the evidence? Was there a big explosion or bright flash immediately before the collapses. How can one distinguish a thermite induced gravitational collapse from an airplane induced gravitational collapse?



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 11:03 AM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 


His thermate video was a rebuttal of the National Geographic show which claimed that thermite cannot cut steel.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 11:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Fluffaluffagous
 
You're way over the top on this one. You know full well what I'm saying, and it has nothing to do with vigilante justice. Given the amount of contradictory evidence now available to everyone, anyone who continues to back the obviously flawed OS, without reservation, is either incredibly stupid or, culpable. Your indignation is mis-placed and unwarranted. If you don't want to be part of the solution, then you ARE the problem.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Flatcoat
 


He used thermate vice thermite, so he really didn't rebut the NG claims. Thermate is designed to cut steel as it has, in various forms, elemental sulfur and an oxidizer such as BaNO3, in addition to aluminum and a metal oxide. Thermite has to melt the steel to cause failure and is used to weld. Thermate will not weld but will lower the melting point of the target steel and cut it.
Cole only showed that thermate can cut steel, as that is what it is designed to do.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 11:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by dillweed
reply to post by Fluffaluffagous
 
You're way over the top on this one. You know full well what I'm saying, and it has nothing to do with vigilante justice. Given the amount of contradictory evidence now available to everyone, anyone who continues to back the obviously flawed OS, without reservation, is either incredibly stupid or, culpable. Your indignation is mis-placed and unwarranted. If you don't want to be part of the solution, then you ARE the problem.



You are saying that those who disagree with you regarding the cause of the WTC collapses are "incredibly stupid or culpable." Culpable of what? Do you have enough evidence for a court case? As you seem to think you have found the truth, please explain how thermite can clear each floor in less than 200 milliseconds. When you can't do it, rethink your statement.
The real problem is the technically ignorant being led around by Cole and his ilk.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 11:32 AM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 


Yes, but the purpose of the NG piece was not to educate the public. It was quite obviously a hit piece. I seem to recall them posing the question "Can thermite of any form cut steel?" I'm also quite sure that the general public wouldn't know...or care about the difference between thermite and thermate. It certainly wasn't targeting educated people.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 11:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by Flatcoat
 


He used thermate vice thermite, so he really didn't rebut the NG claims. Thermate is designed to cut steel as it has, in various forms, elemental sulfur and an oxidizer such as BaNO3, in addition to aluminum and a metal oxide. Thermite has to melt the steel to cause failure and is used to weld. Thermate will not weld but will lower the melting point of the target steel and cut it.
Cole only showed that thermate can cut steel, as that is what it is designed to do.


Excellent point, Pteridine. This argument of whether thermite/thermate/vegemite/whatever can cut steel is a strawman argument to begin with. Yes, thermite/thermate/vegemite/whatever can cut steel, but then an infinite number of monkeys with an infinite number of hammers and chisels can likewise cut steel. The revelation that it has the ability to do so does NOT spontaneously prove that an infinite number of monkeys with an infinite number of hammers and chisels brought down the towers any more than thermate/thermite/vegemite/whatever did, simply on the grounds of "because it can". There needs to be a LOT more proof for the claim than simply "because it can" for the claim to hold water...and the proof simply isn't there.

The entire connection between thermite/thermate/vegemite/whatever and the towers coming down was based 100% on the report Steven Jones put out, and that report has been shown to be false- it was paint, not thermate/thermite/vegemite/whatever that he found. Insusting that "well, okay, it really wasn't thermate/thermite/vegemite/whatever that he found, but nonetheless that's what was used to destroy the towers" is nothing but a mechanism of faith based logic. They believe in this claim so devoutly that they WANT it to be true and they'll continue to try to get us to believe it too regardless of what the evidence actually shows.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 12:10 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 
You remind me of Bill Clinton's famous "Well, that depends on what the definition of is, is." Let me simplify it for you Dave. The original 'investigation' was flawed, on many levels, can we agree on that? If we can, then let's quit this circle jerk, get our heads together, and demand they re-open the case and let the chips fall where they may. Because my hunch is you don't want that, we're left no other option but to accuse your side of obstructing us, which you do from sunup, to sundown.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 12:10 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


It may be a "strawman" argument, but I believe it originated in the OS camp with the claim that thermite/thermate/vegemite/whatever cannot cut steel.



posted on Jun, 22 2012 @ 01:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by dillweed
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 
You remind me of Bill Clinton's famous "Well, that depends on what the definition of is, is." Let me simplify it for you Dave. The original 'investigation' was flawed, on many levels, can we agree on that? If we can, then let's quit this circle jerk, get our heads together, and demand they re-open the case and let the chips fall where they may. Because my hunch is you don't want that, we're left no other option but to accuse your side of obstructing us, which you do from sunup, to sundown.


Dillweed, you haven't gotten a single thing right in any of your posts so it's no surprise you didn't get this one right, either. I've already said many times I support further investigations, since the 9/11 attack is one of the most historically important events on our nation's history and we simply cannot leave it to the findings of a single commission to try and document what happened. Lee Hamilton himself said the 9/11 commission report was a first draft, and the NIST report said on the front page their findings were an educated guess that shouldn't be considered gospel. Why shouldn't we have more investigations, especially if they're going to find out things the previous investigations missed?

Frankly, I'm tired of constantly saying the same thing over and over to you zealots, only to have you mindless repeat the same false accusation all over again like it was a religious chant, so let's have a little wager- I will bet that sooner or later you're going to completely ignore what I just said now just like you ignore everything else I say and eventually go back to believing what you yourself want to believe. If you ever say "I support the official story" or "I'm trying to prevent more investigations" again, you owe me money. Deal?





new topics

top topics



 
12
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join