@waitew So you believe that the workers on their computers weren't suspicious about mysterious men knocking down walls to get to support columns and applying explosives for a month? The ninja demolition team just remained unseen by a building full of workers while they loaded up bombs out on the open? How did the building get stripped with workers in it? Come on bro, you know deep down the conspiracy theories are just fun, you don't ACTUALLY believe this for real...do you?
you deflunkies are so pathetic and troll like ppl.You show no proof of anything just your own pea brain opinnions and say there you go.
no videos no links to defend hrs and hrs of proven Facts.you failed epic with ur pancake theary now you say there is no proof of thermite in the dust,wow wtf are you talking about there are multiple scientists with the dust of the towers dip shits.All you have is name calling lmao.Go to sleep for gods sake good day
and of course, the fact that none of the traces of thermite - aluminium oxide and barium nitrate - were found in the wtc dust samples is a clear indication that no thermite reaction ever took place. of course, steven jones like to neglect this all important piece of information..
PS. You have an acre sized wildfire burning unfought for an hour reaching temperatures of over 1,000C (which nat geo showed caused a steel beam to deform and lose strength after 4 minutes).
@inhuman0id You mean RIGHT. Here's what some fire fighters said about building 7.
We saw the fire and smoke on the south side of Building 7, alot of damage, a LOT of damage, and the smoke, there was a tremendous amount of smoke, I couldn't even tell which floor to end it at. We looked at it and said "There is so much fire in this building...Noones gonna put this fire out" - Lietenutenant Frank Papalia (FDNY, 1998 - 2006)
@inhuman0id "You could see that part of the building (7) was damaged, heavily. There was a big hole in the building, on the whole corner of the side of the building on the south side, and you can see that part of the building was bowed out a little bit, to me that's major structural damage" - Stev Spak (Photographer, and was Honerary Deputy Chief in the FDNY)
@theBartone9119 Google is not a website it's a search engine. Be that as it may,I hope people do indeed use it to try & find a picture of that huge hole you claim exists. What they will find is pictures of damage to a corner of the building & other pictures of the same corner intact. One is photoshopped & one isn't,but I don't know which. What I do know is that according NIST damage to WTC 7 from the collapse of WTC1 didn't play a part in it's collapse.So,you don't believe NIST?
@waitew Did you really just say Google is not a website? Type in .com after Google and see if it takes you somewhere, it does, it's a website. Also the collapse of WTC 1 played a big role in WTC7's collapse, NIST confirms this. You obviously don't know how to read very well, either that or you never read the NIST report, or you are lying. Now the NIST report says the debris from WTC1 didn't INITIATE the collapse, but it certainly was a factor leading up to it.
@waitew If I flip the lid off a jar, that's what initiated the lid coming off....But it still had to be twisted and loosened before the event takes palce. Even though me twisting the lid before I flipped it off didn't initiate it the lid coming off, it still played a huge roll in the lid coming off. Get it?
@theBartone9119 Basically you're saying because the collapse of WTC1 started the fires (loosened the lid) and the fires (according the NIST) lead to the collapse of WTC7 therefore the collapse of WTC1 had a lot to do with the collapse of WTC7? Is that right?
Then what ,pray tell,do non-existant photos of a huge hole in WTC7 have to do with it's collapse since it was the fires started by the collapse of WTC1?
@waitew The fires were caused by burning columns from Tower 1, the columns aren't made of pillows, they are around 6 tons each. Go to debunking911(dot)com/wtc7. You do realize you believe in conspiracy theories that were debunked in 2007 right? You don't care you, you conspiracy kooks just ignore all evidence that makes your beliefs look silly. Debating truthers is as fun (but just as pointless) as debating theists, just deluded people looking for a way to escape reality.
@waitew The reason I told you to do to that site is because it shows the picture of the huge Gash (or "hole") on the southside of WTC7. Also type in Bridging the Gap: Building 7 on google....I wrote a huge piece on building 7 that may answer all your "questions". Just remember, it's ok to ask questions, but there is no point if you won't accept the answers...
@waitew If Bush wanted the towers knocked down he would have just hired Osama to do it exactly the way it happened anyway....Hiring a demolition team and all that would too much risk, it would be impossible too. You have to strip a building bare, get to the support columns, and apply thousands of explosives, building 7 would have taken a month to prep due to it's massive size....You're trying to tell me you believe that a demo team did all this is a building full of employees? HAHAHAA Nice one
@theBartone9119 I've never been a great fan of CD theories.But as to the bigger question of 911 there's a no doubt what so ever it was an inside job.You're having to ignore an awful lot to believe the official story of 911.From military action to remove the Talebane being planned before 911 to the fact the Pentagon was specially prepared for the attack.The series of coincides defies believe.
@waitew The real truth is Bush got warnings of the attack and did nothing because he didn't take Al Qaeda seriously and was just eager to go after Saddam and had plans for years to get into office and take out Saddam when he inevitably became president (He was a dumb, narrow sighted man). 911 Shocked US officials, not because they had no clue it was being planned, but because they had no clue it was actually going to happen.They got caught with their pants down and lied to the people about shit.
@waitew They said the US was attacked because of their freedoms, but Osama was very explicit in why he attacked the US. The American government supports Israel, which is Islam's enemy, and Osama specifically stated that the US governments involvement in the middle east prior to 911 and their support for Israel is why it happened.
@waitew The government also denied that they knew something like that would happen, but in reality Bush had several warnings but just kept practicing his golf swings after quickly flipping through intelligence briefings. He was a dumbass, he fucked up, so the US gov did whatever they could to make it seem like it couldn't have been prevented. It could have..
@waitew If the US wants to attack a county, they will do it in the name of "helping our allies", they will do it in the name of "nuclear threats". I mean look at Vietnam, nobody supported that war and they did it in the name of "helping their allies". They dont' give a shit if the people don't want a war, nobody wanted the war in Iraq (it's finally over), but they did it anyway.
@waitew I'm supposed to believe that the US government devised this evil plot to take two planes, destroy two economic beacons, their own Pentagon ect. just to get people to rally behind a war? You know the gov survives off tax dollars right? 911 was a huge blow to the economy, recovery was costly...If the US wants to go to war, history proves they will. The "motive" for this conspiracy is more than laughable. And the similar "drills" you spoke of were already debunked in 2007. *sigh*
@theBartone9119 It wasn't done just to start the wars.Here's 2 fundamental truths that help to explain it:1.The people wont pay for a huge military/CIA unless they believe there's a huge threat/enemy that makes it necessary.
2.The people wont support a war unless they believe it to be for a noble cause.
With the fall of Communism there was no huge threat to justify a huge military/CIA.And though we were the Sole superpower we couldn't us it without 911.
@waitew Bollocks what about iraq they will go to war because they are bullys and try to police the world so that no one else can become richer then themselves. no one supported vietnam but they still stuck there nose in, America is the biggest terroist nation superpower freaks. Not to mention they are paranoid and trigger happy rednecks. They lost the war in Vietnam, Afganistan, and Iraq just creating more enemys in doing so. What a waste of civilian and military lives. Get the fuck away
@TheMrwildboar Are you reading my comments correctly?I'm against the wars and believe 911 was an inside job.However,I'll stand by my comment it was done just to start the wars in Afghanistan & Iraq though that's part of it.It was done to start the 'war on terror' a war against a non-existent enemy that they could claim was active ANYWHERE they wanted a war for whatever reason (even at home to justify the loss of civil liberties) it was for the 2 wars so far.
@theBartone9119 The war on terror is designed to replace the Cold War by giving us a new enemy.One not tied to any one country that can be claimed to be active anywhere we want a war for whatever reason (resources-oil) even at home to justify the loss of civil liberties.If terrorism hadn't replace Communism who would the enemy be today? what would the defense budget look like?Would we be militarily entrenched in the Middle East where the world's energy is Concentrated with no911
@waitew Yes they would because they don't care about what people think they only listen to the generals and all the hype they say. Greedy bastards no wonder it's the most hated country in the world.
@inhuman0id "You'd see columns gone, floors collapsed, heavy smoke coming out and fire, the upper floors were an inferno. You could hear the building creek above us, you could hear things fall, fire burning, you could see columns just hanging from their floors." - Richard Rotanz (Deputy director, Office of Emergency management 2000-2) was inside Building 7.
@theBartone9119 wow ..do you spend your whole life on this page and subject? and why are you even here if your quite happy with the official version of events?
@TZMareThieves4 . NO official story? what the Commission Report for then? The one that our tax dollars paid for? The official story is easily seen when you attempt to challenge it. One is "corrected" or dismissed as a conspiracy theorist. But how can this be if there is nothing official? Why aren't there other views discussed in the media. Why the blackout? why gag the whistleblowers from practically every government agency internationally?
@TZMareThieves4 okay, so let's get this straight. You believe that paper passports can survive not just plane crashes but the pulverization of building material, people and melted steel? You believe fires cause buildings to collapse on themselves symmetrically and exhibit ALL the signatures of controlled demolition? I don't think "science" is on your side :)
I'll say one more thing, Thermite's over-quick burning means that it has released its energy well before the steel had a chance to heat up. Wheras the paper products may have wasted some energy heating other things (such as the air, etc) but their steady energy release allowed the beams time to heat up and weaken the steel without a shadow of a doubt. Peace suckas!
Please tell me exactly how and how much thermite was used to bring down the WTC. Please tell me how they made the thermite not leave the piles of iron found after thermite reacts? Don't talk about Iron-rich spheres either, goddamn these Twoofers are too dumb to even try to slap some sense into...
@inhuman0id Prof. Steven Jones' paper: "We have shown that the red material contains both elemental aluminum and iron oxide"
Oh. I see. There's iron oxide (rust) and aluminum in this mixture. There's no way that rust or aluminum could possibly have gotten into the Twin Towers, right? Except of course that the Twin Towers had tons upon tons of aluminum and every building in history that had iron it also had oxidized iron (rust) in it.
@inhuman0id From Prof. Steven Jones' paper on 'nano-thermite': "We make no attempt to specify the particular form of nano-thermite present until more is learned about the red material and especially about the nature of the organic material it contains."
Yes of course, why bother making an attempt to actually identify this peticular substance, right?
We already know what other substances those chemical compounds can be found in....
@inhuman0id "An aluminum wheel on a rusty hub has the same chemical signature of nano-thermite too... Dr. Jones has not demonstrated, indeed has not even attempted to show, that the chips contain any available oxygen at all. In his burn tests, oxygen was provided from the atmosphere, not from his chips." Ryan Mackey (NASA Rocket Scientist)
@inhuman0id The "nanothermite" samples vary by about a factor of 10 in energy content. This nonuniformity proves it is not a "precision engineered" substance of any kind.
The top end of energy content exceeds the theoretical maximum for thermite by a factor of two, and the observed content of nanothermite by a factor of five. The substance cannot be thermite of any type. Its "contaminants" are, in fact, the dominant species.
@inhuman0id Why is Jones not credible? Steven Jones is a nut ball. Prior to 911, Jones was best known for his paper "Behold My Hands", which he claims that ancient Mayan artwork showing dieties with circles on their palms is evidence of his religion's belief that Jesus Christ once visited America. The critics of his 911 paper even came from his own Physics Department. The University he worked for put him on "paid leave" right before he "retired". You have no arguments against me, you failed.
@inhuman0id You are the only moron. All that video does is show that Thermite can cut steal.....It doesn't prove that Thermite was found in the rubble, or that it was used for a demolition of the twin towers. There is no evidence of this once so over, only idiot conspiracy theorists who fall for the "proof by intimidation" scam by Richard Gage and Steven Jones buy that.
Thermite reaction is over in seconds, and the WTC fell after many minutes. Thus we have office fires on multiple floors doing the damage. And those fires had much more energy..
Debunking the "Debunkers" who pretend to debunk real Debunkers:
Regarding nanothermite, wouldn't it have been cool if Jones, Harrit et al. had chosen to combust the chips in the absence of oxygen? They didn't do that, so their results are inconclusive. Real thermite would have combusted without external O2.
They ignore the fact that it was done in an oxygen atmosphere which allows atmospheric oxygen to interact with the matrix. Thermites contain their own oxidizer, doing it in an inert atmosphere would prove a thermitic compound. It's a major flaw in methodology.
No proof of conspiracy - sorry truthers, time to quit before you look even more stupid. The samples the so called thermite was found in only came to light in 2007/8 and was 'revealed' by people who were committed truthers. Truthers is an ironic name for liars.
No, it's just primer paint. Richard Gage and Steven Jones for all their blabbering about iron spheres and aluminothermic reactions, and spectrographic charts have shown absolutely NOTHING. Mark Roberts made Gage look like the complete idiot he is.
The obvious error of the 9/11 deniers is in failing to falsify the claim that 9/11 was planned and executed by 19 Islamic soldiers at war with the United States and directed by Osama bin Laden. --Bob Carroll
@TrutherD1 You obviously never seen the Hardfire episode where the Hollywood expert proved that the images were not faked at all, and it was just simple miscalculations on the truthers behalf.....Like like everything LOL
this was caused to bring NEW WORLD ORDER a sacrifice of the small for the ELITE to rule supreme . THE LAW ON TERROR IS A LAW TO TAKE AWAY OUR LIBERTIES ..... OUR FREEDOM .....IT'S TIME TO OPEN OUR EYES
"It is possible for iron and aluminum to chemically bind"... No, no it's not. But if it were, it wouldn't be thermite, because thermite is not a chemical compound, it's a fine-powdered mix. Of rust and aluminum. Hello?
Mushroom cloud on 9/11 - released in 2010! watch?v=FkMj_qnVYRU - Also do a search "no plane theory"... CGI planes? moving bridges? No eye-witness sees a plane? wtf
@TrutherD1 "No eye-witness sees a plane? wtf" Are you kidding me, there are litteraly HUNDREDS of documented testimonty from eyewitnesses that saw planes. You really think the hundreds of thousands of people in New York didn't see a plane and just haven't come forward yet?
@terrymanning1 LMAO - the Harrits paper has not been debunked - this should tell you something you fuckin idiot lmao - you idiots are so erm idiotic plus synonyms
@mooners40 Of course it's been debunked. Debunked by default because they have refused to allow independent testing of their samples. Red chips are thermite??.......... lololololol Its paint you retards!
@terrymanning1 where's your source for your accusation dickhead? Cite it or shut the fuck up- the whole review process is all about being reviewed - NIST did not let them use THEIR samples - NIST are the cover-up fuckers - and you are just a dick
@mooners40 How many more times NIST didnt test dust samples! They didn't need to as demo had already been ruled out because of NO EVIDENCE for it you fucking moron.
@mooners40 NIST weren't tasked with testing dust you ignorant fucking retard.
The controlled demo theory had already been dismissed because there is fuck all evidence for it. How many more times do you have be told the same fucking thing you complete low life fucking prick?
@terrymanning1 they were tasked with following the NFPA 921 - 18.3.2 high order damage is characterized by shattering of the structure producing small pulverized debris - with such damage explosives should have been looked for - and free-fall is evidence of demolition - sec 19.2.4 exotic accelerants - all these should have been followed - and what is your source for your 'controlled demo theory had already been dismissed ' due to lack of evidence ? Cite your source cock breath - lol
@moontarsehole40 How many more times? NIST were tasked with finding out why the building collapsed. They were not looking for a demolition because demolition had already been RULED OUT!!!
It was ruled out because there is ZERO evidence (visual, audible or physical) for a demo.
It doesn't matter how much you want 7 to have been a demo it never will be.
@terrymanning1 Harrit's paper has been torn to shit. The method, the keVs don't match, energy content is to high, he hasn't let anyone else replicate his findings, there's no chain of custody, all dust came from truthers, the publisher publishes anything as peer reviewed as long as you pay them etc, etc, etc.... Just run an XRD on the chips like everyone, even truthers (Dr. Green), have been yelling for the past 1-2 years, and let someone replicate your findings, it's not hard.
@heafers84 I agree with you that it would be good to do the XRD and FTIR analysis. But to say that Harrit's paper "has been torn to shit" - this is ignorant and immature. Let me ask you then - who refuted their findings.."Sunstealer", F.Greening, Mark Roberts:DD??Who? Who wrote the refutation paper of their findings in this "vanity journal - Bentham"? According to the duh'bunkers - it's easy to do that. why don't you do as J.Gourley has done with Bazant work and write a peer-reviewed refutation?
@Lietuvispartizan, why don't they right a refuted paper. For one, no one has been give the samples to test, and nobody feels like spending a $1000 to publish in a crap journal. Anyone who's done research knows that vanity journals are crap. 0 It's where people go to get "official" peer review done to peddle their recent medical pill for fat people to lose weight. Please tell me why no keVs match thermite, energy content is above theoretical max, etc, you've answered none of points i brought up
@heafers84 "For one, no one has been give the samples to test," - NO! nobody has to give the samples, you can write a refutation paper based on their analysis, without testing the dust. It would be more of peer reviewed discussion paper.
"and nobody feels like spending a $1000" - so now on it's 1000?? and I thought it was $ 800… well, never mind.
@heafers84 "Please tell me why no keVs match thermite, energy content is above theoretical max" - keVs??? Did you mean (W/g)? and this is your best question?If you are refering to the (Fig. (29)) the DSC test, b/c: "Reaction rates between nanosize aluminum and metal oxides can be significantly greater than those observed with traditional micron-size thermite powders". It’s man-made stuff in nanotech laboratories, so you can create what you want…more explosive or more like incendiary type.
@heafers84 But by all means, why are you referring to this graph, it’s not helping you. The graph shows that the red layer is more violent and more explosive than those from Tillotson. ( that means more violent = more damage).
“you've answered none of points i brought up” – here is your bucket, now go outside and play.
@Lietuvispartizan if we're talking about the same graph, you're mistaking violent reaction with energy content. Paper, for instance has a higher energy content than thermite, almost 3x to be exact, so does gasoline, but neither are nearly as violent. When talking about thermite, the less energy content the more violent the reaction. That's why it's made nano, it's more violent b/c teh reaction is faster therefore the energy content is lower. Energy content is time and energy
@Lietuvispartizan also, Jones has been saying he'll do an XRD since the Harrit paper came out. Why hasn't he? Either he has, and he doesn't like what he found, or he's scared to b/c he doesn't want to know the truth. They have a lab that should be perfectly capable of doing so. Plus you could take it to any number of places in the united states and pay at max $200 to test the samples. That's 1/5 of what it costs to publish at Bentham.
@heafers84 Now it's up to you. If you believe that he is hiding something, go find some dust and test for yourself and EXPOSE the truth about the "Primer paint".
"nobody feels like spending a $1000" – you fail saying "nobody". The circus clowns - from Screw Loose Change blog, were/are thinking about to raise the money and publish a refutation paper with their expertise. LOL :DD
"vanity journals are crap" - it's called Open Access and 50% of journals are open access. The purpose of publishing in open access is that even duh'bunkers could read the paper without paying.
@Lietuvispartizan ask any professor, vanity journals are crap. You would be laughed out of a program for citing a vanity journal. "Please tell me why no keVs match thermite, energy content is above theoretical max" was actually two different points. The energy content is almost double the theoretical max, meaning the highest anyone has ever thought about making any type of thermite including nano-thermite, which has less energy content, b/c it's a more violent / quicker reaction
here's also a conversation with Dr. Greening, a truther, about the elemental aluminum claim the911forum . freeforums . org / active-thermitic-material-in-wtc-dust-t150-45 . htm l # p2688
Also, if you truly believe Jones and Harrit, then you believe that the thermite would have been used as fuses!!! Wow, that's a leap. In what world would someone use thermite as a fuse.
@heafers84 The chain of custody issue is cooked up by the "duhbunk'ers". The handling of the samples was done no differently then typical scientific studies, and much research out there on the dust uses the same methods and no police were involved. The USGS did not have police escorts, the UC Davis researchers did not get dust from the police.That is just not done in scientific studies. In fact, most studies never say anything about how the dust was obtained, only where it was found.
@heafers84 Here's the methods description by the USGS:
"Ground sampling consisted of collecting debris from 35 locations in the WTC area, including 33 dust, 2 concrete, and 2 steel beam insulation samples."
@mooners40 They published in a vanity journal known for accepting FAKE papers. It's a pay and play publisher, you pay them, you publish whatever you want. Their method was flawed anyway. They used an XED method which tells us the individual element such as Iron and Aluminum, but in no way tells us what compounds, such as iron oxide or aluminum oxide. Plus there should be exponentially more product than reactant. Where is all of the product from the thermite. And dozens of other problems
@terrymanning1 You've revealed yourself: you have no valid argument, so now you are degrading the discussion with an ad hom attack, as is typical for a duh'bunker when confronted with simple facts.
I remember ages ago when I was investigating the thermite issue. I visited a site that supported the thermite claims with extensive detailed scientific analysis. I then visited one of those debunking sites. They declared the thermite didn't exist after comparing two photographs of a paint chip and a thermite chip. That's it - no further examination of Steven Jones's claims.
Anyone who believes that FIRE and JET FUEL brought down the WTC, yet rejects the idea that nano-thermite could have achieved this effect at a much faster rate.
Explosive nanothermite was found in the WTC Dust by independent scientists using uncontaminated samples. To date no such chemical testing of evidence has ever been conducted by any Governmental Investigation. WHY NOT?
Anyone claiming there was no thermite, who doesn't have any chemical tests of their own, is a complete moron.
you can shove your bag of cement clay and anything else up your arse,you ran out of ink so you couldnt post,fuck off and you want ME to go back 5 months to find your stupid comment.Lets just set the record straight,you are fucking mental and leave it that ,tit
@rollingklouds actually if you're going to believe what jones and Harrit say then you believe that the nano-thermite was used just as a ignitor for modern explosives, which is just retarded. I think they're testing their followers. Seeing what level of trust they have, almost like they're god, and they want to see what their followers will believe on blind faith
@mlkbeat " That sounds like a conspiracy theory. BTW, nice touch with the "retarded" reference" Exactly, thermite is nothing but a CT, and isn't at all real. Just overactive imaginations. Thanks for realizing that Jones is Retarded if he thinks using thermite as a fuse is a usable means to bring down a building with conventional explosives. Especially since he invented the idea of it's use for the fact that conventional demolition explosions are not heard or seismically recorded.
You posted this twice wrongly,the floor was a concrete floor NO CLAY on a permanent formwork on lattice beams fixed to the external walls and internal columns .If you find a spec with clay I will send 100 dollars to your pay pal account
amnfoliver - That's correct. I recently read a document that explained how WTC#7 collapsed. It was interesting because the Govt. scientists already said that the impact could not have brought the towers down, it was the fuel, but the fuel doesn't burn long enough. In the article, it explains that the natural fire in WTC#7 plus the structural damage was enough to bring it down like a demolition... This is after to admitting the same thing would be impossible without jet fuel.Yet they believe it.
Truthers, conspiracy theorists, whackos, delusional, paranoid, crazy and now potential terrorists!
Jeez these people must be onto something to receive such attention.
But wait a moment, who are the oaranoid?! Those who build fences & walls to imprison?
Who set up check points?
Who seem to exploit terror to innitiate wars on terror by inflicting fear & terror. Who openly speak as to their chosen status and whome we are remoselessly expected to bare alliegance to!! MOS t SAD 2muchNOIZ
I say go to where they painted the steel and get some paint chips. Then conduct the same tests. Record the results and then compare the results to the experiments done on the red/gray chips. Put this puppy to rest once and for all. Leave no out for those that believe that their government is not capable of such a crime. Force it down their throat. Make it the 2x4 that wakes them the fuck up.
I'll tell you what "heafers84": Take a year's worth of flying lessons, then try sitting in the simulated cockpit of a modern airliner. Pretend that you now have to fly the plane to a particular destination hundreds of miles away and then hit your target with some accuracy. OK. What do you do now?! What instruments do you look at and what do they mean? Speed up? Slow down? Turn left or turn right? Did you remember to turn off the transponder?
After a year of fing flying lessons i would hope to know what speed up slow down and the instruments mean. The instructor said that they used land marks very well, the instructor also said that once they got the direction it would be very easy to fly into their targets. So, do i take your word for it, or the instructor that taught them who is also a trained pilot. It's a tough one but i think i'll go with the pro on this one, and that means not you, b/c i'm sure you think i meant you
Here's an experiment, show me a real unedited video that was confiscated of what hit the Pentagon and prove to us all what hit it was in fact what they claim and I'll kiss your backside......sorry but that video won't ever surface or show up until about 50 years fom now if at all, .......show the real evidence video and prove what hit it and shut everyone up........true gutless cowards cover the truth and are just as guilty of the massacre......
who says that there's any other videos than the ones that have been shown. i mean low fps video surveliance isn't going to get a very good image of a plane traveling at several hundred mph. I know there was 80+ video cameras, but they all pointed to the ground in front of them, the two videos at the pentagon released show the entire field. None of the other cameras had a better shot than those.
Plus there were 100+ eyewitnesses who saw a plane hit, more who saw a plane
"heafers.." It's not just about the Pentagon's attack being very questionable. I mean, how many people know about the plane making a complex turn, then skimming on the ground but also, conveniently, hitting the one recently re-inforced part that also contained the auditors looking for a missing 2.3 TRILLION dollars!! What a script! It would be rejected as a TV plot because it was TOO UNBELIEVABLE AND OBVIOUS!!
But you're to also believe that a hole in the ground is where Flight 93 crashed!!
wow 2.3 trillion dollars was never missing, plus why bring it to everyone's attention the day before if this had any truth whatsoever. I have no idea where you get the auditors part from.
DNA evidence says the plane crashed there, wreckage says the plane crashed there, the first responders said they saw body parts, plane debris and smelled jet fuel. Plus dozens of residents heard and saw the jetliner crash.
What more do you want, if this were a trial it would be an open and shut case.
read it again, and stop taking a sentence from a speech and think that you understand the whole speech
Our financial systems are decades old. According to some estimates, we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions. We cannot share information from floor to floor in this building because it's stored on dozens of technological systems that are inaccessible or incompatible.
It's not lost or stolen you dimwit. You just keep moving the goal post, i'll just keep knocking it down.
Sure, "heafers84," you go right on believing whatever your minders tell you to believe. "It's just a CLERICAL ERROR!!" Yeah, right! You go right on believing that it's just a BIG simple mistake or just a bunch of small mistakes! TWO POINT THREE TRILLLLLLLLLLION DOLLARS!!!
Did you listen or read the whole speech, i guess not, wow you're lazy, nobody in their right mind after reading or listening to the speech and conversations would actually come to the conclusion that 2.3 trillion dollars just up and vanished. Even the little paragraph i posted didn't persuade you that the money isn't missing. But if you like, you can just believe that the money went to pay shills like me.
since it's on tape i advise you to watch it before commenting on the tape.
You make this to easy adam. I mean as a truther you want the truth, but you fell to look for it. Just like all truthers. You don't even watch or read the entire speech that you post trying to prove a point. And then you look like a fool when that speech is used against you. Why put yourself through the humiliation
Whether Jones thought a TEM may have been useful for some aspects of the paper, are irrelevant to the issue of proof of thermite. You need to watch Steven Jones' presentation that was held earlier this year in May at UC Davis where he elaborates on various points. Nano-thermite HAS been found, and it has been tested. Its highly energetic material, and no matter what bullshit you produce - this is fact.
You mean the UC Davis speach in 2007 where he claims Nano-thermite HAS been found, and it has been tested. Yet the paper says the tests were done in 2008, ooooooops
What is nano-thermite doing in the world trade centre? Its presence there is enough reason for a new, criminal investigation into 9/11. Neither NIST or FEMA looked for explosives in the rubble or the dust.
Nano-thermite is more energetic than conventional thermite, you need to look at the results they found. Nano-thermite can also be explosive; they have referenced their findings in that regard.
It existed BEFORE 2001, in fact it was being produced before the year 2000.
Real scientists would have taken their claims to a real journal. Upon publishing they would have let real scientists test these claims. They have done nothing. Plus the chain of custody is a HUGE issue. The ones that provided the dust are TRUTHERS. Every person who took part in the paper are truthers.
And i did make a mistake lower down. Jones said he would do a TEM in APRIL not may.
There are so many holes in this paper, but you sheep truthers are just blind to them
Let's not forget, any credible scientist would have had his results confirmed by at least one independent lab before publishing them; or the fact 5 of the 7 "authors" of this paper lack any relevant education.
steve jones please stop chuckling.. at test, at keynote speeches.. good nature we appreciate - mirth isn't a necessary part
newsmanbluesman 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@waitew So you believe that the workers on their computers weren't suspicious about mysterious men knocking down walls to get to support columns and applying explosives for a month? The ninja demolition team just remained unseen by a building full of workers while they loaded up bombs out on the open? How did the building get stripped with workers in it? Come on bro, you know deep down the conspiracy theories are just fun, you don't ACTUALLY believe this for real...do you?
theBartone9119 2 months ago
Mark Roberts can't hide behind that mole on his face, Disgraced tour guide.
Seigu007 4 months ago
you deflunkies are so pathetic and troll like ppl.You show no proof of anything just your own pea brain opinnions and say there you go.
no videos no links to defend hrs and hrs of proven Facts.you failed epic with ur pancake theary now you say there is no proof of thermite in the dust,wow wtf are you talking about there are multiple scientists with the dust of the towers dip shits.All you have is name calling lmao.Go to sleep for gods sake good day
metalbagger2012 5 months ago
and of course, the fact that none of the traces of thermite - aluminium oxide and barium nitrate - were found in the wtc dust samples is a clear indication that no thermite reaction ever took place. of course, steven jones like to neglect this all important piece of information..
cjnewson88 6 months ago
steven jones is a liar. simple
cjnewson88 6 months ago
@cjnewson88 Why is he a liar?
inhuman0id 5 months ago
PS. You have an acre sized wildfire burning unfought for an hour reaching temperatures of over 1,000C (which nat geo showed caused a steel beam to deform and lose strength after 4 minutes).
Come on SON!
theBartone9119 7 months ago
@theBartone9119 where are you getting the 'facts' from?
inhuman0id 5 months ago
@theBartone9119 WRONG. No wildfire. Listen to what the firefighters say about the weaken fires. Were are you getting 1,000 C? What is your source?
inhuman0id 4 months ago
@inhuman0id You mean RIGHT. Here's what some fire fighters said about building 7.
We saw the fire and smoke on the south side of Building 7, alot of damage, a LOT of damage, and the smoke, there was a tremendous amount of smoke, I couldn't even tell which floor to end it at. We looked at it and said "There is so much fire in this building...Noones gonna put this fire out" - Lietenutenant Frank Papalia (FDNY, 1998 - 2006)
theBartone9119 4 months ago
@inhuman0id "You could see that part of the building (7) was damaged, heavily. There was a big hole in the building, on the whole corner of the side of the building on the south side, and you can see that part of the building was bowed out a little bit, to me that's major structural damage" - Stev Spak (Photographer, and was Honerary Deputy Chief in the FDNY)
theBartone9119 4 months ago
@theBartone9119 Too bad no one had a camera at the WTC on 911. I'd like to have seen photos of that huge hole in building 7.
waitew 2 months ago
@waitew They did have a camera, the hole is easily seen, try Google. It's a very good website ;)
theBartone9119 2 months ago
@theBartone9119 Google is not a website it's a search engine. Be that as it may,I hope people do indeed use it to try & find a picture of that huge hole you claim exists. What they will find is pictures of damage to a corner of the building & other pictures of the same corner intact. One is photoshopped & one isn't,but I don't know which. What I do know is that according NIST damage to WTC 7 from the collapse of WTC1 didn't play a part in it's collapse.So,you don't believe NIST?
waitew 2 months ago
@waitew Did you really just say Google is not a website? Type in .com after Google and see if it takes you somewhere, it does, it's a website. Also the collapse of WTC 1 played a big role in WTC7's collapse, NIST confirms this. You obviously don't know how to read very well, either that or you never read the NIST report, or you are lying. Now the NIST report says the debris from WTC1 didn't INITIATE the collapse, but it certainly was a factor leading up to it.
theBartone9119 2 months ago
@waitew If I flip the lid off a jar, that's what initiated the lid coming off....But it still had to be twisted and loosened before the event takes palce. Even though me twisting the lid before I flipped it off didn't initiate it the lid coming off, it still played a huge roll in the lid coming off. Get it?
theBartone9119 2 months ago
@waitew NIST said that the debris from WTC1 didn't initiate the collapse, but it sure loosened the lid to the jar.
theBartone9119 2 months ago
@theBartone9119 Basically you're saying because the collapse of WTC1 started the fires (loosened the lid) and the fires (according the NIST) lead to the collapse of WTC7 therefore the collapse of WTC1 had a lot to do with the collapse of WTC7? Is that right?
Then what ,pray tell,do non-existant photos of a huge hole in WTC7 have to do with it's collapse since it was the fires started by the collapse of WTC1?
waitew 2 months ago
@waitew The fires were caused by burning columns from Tower 1, the columns aren't made of pillows, they are around 6 tons each. Go to debunking911(dot)com/wtc7. You do realize you believe in conspiracy theories that were debunked in 2007 right? You don't care you, you conspiracy kooks just ignore all evidence that makes your beliefs look silly. Debating truthers is as fun (but just as pointless) as debating theists, just deluded people looking for a way to escape reality.
theBartone9119 2 months ago
@waitew The reason I told you to do to that site is because it shows the picture of the huge Gash (or "hole") on the southside of WTC7. Also type in Bridging the Gap: Building 7 on google....I wrote a huge piece on building 7 that may answer all your "questions". Just remember, it's ok to ask questions, but there is no point if you won't accept the answers...
theBartone9119 2 months ago
@waitew If Bush wanted the towers knocked down he would have just hired Osama to do it exactly the way it happened anyway....Hiring a demolition team and all that would too much risk, it would be impossible too. You have to strip a building bare, get to the support columns, and apply thousands of explosives, building 7 would have taken a month to prep due to it's massive size....You're trying to tell me you believe that a demo team did all this is a building full of employees? HAHAHAA Nice one
theBartone9119 2 months ago
Comment removed
theBartone9119 2 months ago
@theBartone9119 I've never been a great fan of CD theories.But as to the bigger question of 911 there's a no doubt what so ever it was an inside job.You're having to ignore an awful lot to believe the official story of 911.From military action to remove the Talebane being planned before 911 to the fact the Pentagon was specially prepared for the attack.The series of coincides defies believe.
waitew 2 months ago
@waitew The real truth is Bush got warnings of the attack and did nothing because he didn't take Al Qaeda seriously and was just eager to go after Saddam and had plans for years to get into office and take out Saddam when he inevitably became president (He was a dumb, narrow sighted man). 911 Shocked US officials, not because they had no clue it was being planned, but because they had no clue it was actually going to happen.They got caught with their pants down and lied to the people about shit.
theBartone9119 2 months ago
@waitew They said the US was attacked because of their freedoms, but Osama was very explicit in why he attacked the US. The American government supports Israel, which is Islam's enemy, and Osama specifically stated that the US governments involvement in the middle east prior to 911 and their support for Israel is why it happened.
theBartone9119 2 months ago
@waitew The government also denied that they knew something like that would happen, but in reality Bush had several warnings but just kept practicing his golf swings after quickly flipping through intelligence briefings. He was a dumbass, he fucked up, so the US gov did whatever they could to make it seem like it couldn't have been prevented. It could have..
theBartone9119 2 months ago
@waitew If the US wants to attack a county, they will do it in the name of "helping our allies", they will do it in the name of "nuclear threats". I mean look at Vietnam, nobody supported that war and they did it in the name of "helping their allies". They dont' give a shit if the people don't want a war, nobody wanted the war in Iraq (it's finally over), but they did it anyway.
theBartone9119 2 months ago
@waitew I'm supposed to believe that the US government devised this evil plot to take two planes, destroy two economic beacons, their own Pentagon ect. just to get people to rally behind a war? You know the gov survives off tax dollars right? 911 was a huge blow to the economy, recovery was costly...If the US wants to go to war, history proves they will. The "motive" for this conspiracy is more than laughable. And the similar "drills" you spoke of were already debunked in 2007. *sigh*
theBartone9119 2 months ago
@theBartone9119 It wasn't done just to start the wars.Here's 2 fundamental truths that help to explain it:1.The people wont pay for a huge military/CIA unless they believe there's a huge threat/enemy that makes it necessary.
2.The people wont support a war unless they believe it to be for a noble cause.
With the fall of Communism there was no huge threat to justify a huge military/CIA.And though we were the Sole superpower we couldn't us it without 911.
waitew 2 months ago
@waitew Bollocks what about iraq they will go to war because they are bullys and try to police the world so that no one else can become richer then themselves. no one supported vietnam but they still stuck there nose in, America is the biggest terroist nation superpower freaks. Not to mention they are paranoid and trigger happy rednecks. They lost the war in Vietnam, Afganistan, and Iraq just creating more enemys in doing so. What a waste of civilian and military lives. Get the fuck away
TheMrwildboar 1 month ago
@TheMrwildboar Are you reading my comments correctly?I'm against the wars and believe 911 was an inside job.However,I'll stand by my comment it was done just to start the wars in Afghanistan & Iraq though that's part of it.It was done to start the 'war on terror' a war against a non-existent enemy that they could claim was active ANYWHERE they wanted a war for whatever reason (even at home to justify the loss of civil liberties) it was for the 2 wars so far.
waitew 1 month ago
@theBartone9119 The war on terror is designed to replace the Cold War by giving us a new enemy.One not tied to any one country that can be claimed to be active anywhere we want a war for whatever reason (resources-oil) even at home to justify the loss of civil liberties.If terrorism hadn't replace Communism who would the enemy be today? what would the defense budget look like?Would we be militarily entrenched in the Middle East where the world's energy is Concentrated with no911
waitew 2 months ago
@waitew Yes they would because they don't care about what people think they only listen to the generals and all the hype they say. Greedy bastards no wonder it's the most hated country in the world.
TheMrwildboar 1 month ago
@inhuman0id "You'd see columns gone, floors collapsed, heavy smoke coming out and fire, the upper floors were an inferno. You could hear the building creek above us, you could hear things fall, fire burning, you could see columns just hanging from their floors." - Richard Rotanz (Deputy director, Office of Emergency management 2000-2) was inside Building 7.
theBartone9119 4 months ago
@theBartone9119 wow ..do you spend your whole life on this page and subject? and why are you even here if your quite happy with the official version of events?
MindCrazedBanjo 3 months ago
@MindCrazedBanjo "There is no official story, there's a confluence of conclusions reached by thousands of reasearchers" -Ronald Wieck
Anyone who thinks 911 was an inside job is delusional/ In denial to facts and science.
TZMareThieves4 3 months ago
@TZMareThieves4 No sorry your wrong.
MindCrazedBanjo 3 months ago
@TZMareThieves4 . NO official story? what the Commission Report for then? The one that our tax dollars paid for? The official story is easily seen when you attempt to challenge it. One is "corrected" or dismissed as a conspiracy theorist. But how can this be if there is nothing official? Why aren't there other views discussed in the media. Why the blackout? why gag the whistleblowers from practically every government agency internationally?
dwheel39 2 months ago
@TZMareThieves4 okay, so let's get this straight. You believe that paper passports can survive not just plane crashes but the pulverization of building material, people and melted steel? You believe fires cause buildings to collapse on themselves symmetrically and exhibit ALL the signatures of controlled demolition? I don't think "science" is on your side :)
dwheel39 2 months ago
I'll say one more thing, Thermite's over-quick burning means that it has released its energy well before the steel had a chance to heat up. Wheras the paper products may have wasted some energy heating other things (such as the air, etc) but their steady energy release allowed the beams time to heat up and weaken the steel without a shadow of a doubt. Peace suckas!
theBartone9119 7 months ago
Please tell me exactly how and how much thermite was used to bring down the WTC. Please tell me how they made the thermite not leave the piles of iron found after thermite reacts? Don't talk about Iron-rich spheres either, goddamn these Twoofers are too dumb to even try to slap some sense into...
theBartone9119 7 months ago
@theBartone9119 watch?v=Mfly5wBBy8A this is just a simpleton version for you
inhuman0id 5 months ago
@inhuman0id Prof. Steven Jones' paper: "We have shown that the red material contains both elemental aluminum and iron oxide"
Oh. I see. There's iron oxide (rust) and aluminum in this mixture. There's no way that rust or aluminum could possibly have gotten into the Twin Towers, right? Except of course that the Twin Towers had tons upon tons of aluminum and every building in history that had iron it also had oxidized iron (rust) in it.
theBartone9119 5 months ago
@inhuman0id From Prof. Steven Jones' paper on 'nano-thermite': "We make no attempt to specify the particular form of nano-thermite present until more is learned about the red material and especially about the nature of the organic material it contains."
Yes of course, why bother making an attempt to actually identify this peticular substance, right?
We already know what other substances those chemical compounds can be found in....
theBartone9119 5 months ago
@inhuman0id "An aluminum wheel on a rusty hub has the same chemical signature of nano-thermite too... Dr. Jones has not demonstrated, indeed has not even attempted to show, that the chips contain any available oxygen at all. In his burn tests, oxygen was provided from the atmosphere, not from his chips." Ryan Mackey (NASA Rocket Scientist)
theBartone9119 5 months ago
@theBartone9119 Any DSC has nitrogen run through it during the testing.
anewlow23 4 months ago
@inhuman0id The "nanothermite" samples vary by about a factor of 10 in energy content. This nonuniformity proves it is not a "precision engineered" substance of any kind.
The top end of energy content exceeds the theoretical maximum for thermite by a factor of two, and the observed content of nanothermite by a factor of five. The substance cannot be thermite of any type. Its "contaminants" are, in fact, the dominant species.
- Ryan Mackey (NASA Rocket Scientist)
theBartone9119 5 months ago
@inhuman0id Why is Jones not credible? Steven Jones is a nut ball. Prior to 911, Jones was best known for his paper "Behold My Hands", which he claims that ancient Mayan artwork showing dieties with circles on their palms is evidence of his religion's belief that Jesus Christ once visited America. The critics of his 911 paper even came from his own Physics Department. The University he worked for put him on "paid leave" right before he "retired". You have no arguments against me, you failed.
theBartone9119 5 months ago
It thermite was so great we would use it to power our cars but there is nothing like the density of energy in jet fuel and gasoline.
theBartone9119 7 months ago
@theBartone9119 you are a moron
inhuman0id 5 months ago
@inhuman0id You are the only moron. All that video does is show that Thermite can cut steal.....It doesn't prove that Thermite was found in the rubble, or that it was used for a demolition of the twin towers. There is no evidence of this once so over, only idiot conspiracy theorists who fall for the "proof by intimidation" scam by Richard Gage and Steven Jones buy that.
theBartone9119 5 months ago
Thermite reaction is over in seconds, and the WTC fell after many minutes. Thus we have office fires on multiple floors doing the damage. And those fires had much more energy..
theBartone9119 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Debunking the "Debunkers" who pretend to debunk real Debunkers:
Regarding nanothermite, wouldn't it have been cool if Jones, Harrit et al. had chosen to combust the chips in the absence of oxygen? They didn't do that, so their results are inconclusive. Real thermite would have combusted without external O2.
theBartone9119 7 months ago
They ignore the fact that it was done in an oxygen atmosphere which allows atmospheric oxygen to interact with the matrix. Thermites contain their own oxidizer, doing it in an inert atmosphere would prove a thermitic compound. It's a major flaw in methodology.
theBartone9119 7 months ago
Comment removed
theBartone9119 7 months ago
No proof of conspiracy - sorry truthers, time to quit before you look even more stupid. The samples the so called thermite was found in only came to light in 2007/8 and was 'revealed' by people who were committed truthers. Truthers is an ironic name for liars.
NonLocalYokel 7 months ago
No, it's just primer paint. Richard Gage and Steven Jones for all their blabbering about iron spheres and aluminothermic reactions, and spectrographic charts have shown absolutely NOTHING. Mark Roberts made Gage look like the complete idiot he is.
bman342 9 months ago
The obvious error of the 9/11 deniers is in failing to falsify the claim that 9/11 was planned and executed by 19 Islamic soldiers at war with the United States and directed by Osama bin Laden. --Bob Carroll
Jose7777777 11 months ago
Mark Roberts fucking owned.
junglemike72 1 year ago
"No plane theory" is a great series.
TrutherD1 1 year ago
@TrutherD1 You obviously never seen the Hardfire episode where the Hollywood expert proved that the images were not faked at all, and it was just simple miscalculations on the truthers behalf.....Like like everything LOL
kushsmokkeralt 8 months ago
Dr Shyam the muslim Al Qaeda scum is a lying piece of shit.
Galv140577 1 year ago
Why was Shyam Sunder talking about the samples anyway?? Last I heard, NIST never tested for thermite
CokeSupply 1 year ago
..Would the flash from the jet fuel ignite the thermite..why would it have to be over an hour..
blueshadow1996 1 year ago
this was caused to bring NEW WORLD ORDER a sacrifice of the small for the ELITE to rule supreme . THE LAW ON TERROR IS A LAW TO TAKE AWAY OUR LIBERTIES ..... OUR FREEDOM .....IT'S TIME TO OPEN OUR EYES
amonkeyfoo 1 year ago
Shyam, you idiot...
"It is possible for iron and aluminum to chemically bind"... No, no it's not. But if it were, it wouldn't be thermite, because thermite is not a chemical compound, it's a fine-powdered mix. Of rust and aluminum. Hello?
SexyMelon 1 year ago
Mushroom cloud on 9/11 - released in 2010! watch?v=FkMj_qnVYRU - Also do a search "no plane theory"... CGI planes? moving bridges? No eye-witness sees a plane? wtf
TrutherD1 1 year ago
@TrutherD1 "No eye-witness sees a plane? wtf" Are you kidding me, there are litteraly HUNDREDS of documented testimonty from eyewitnesses that saw planes. You really think the hundreds of thousands of people in New York didn't see a plane and just haven't come forward yet?
heafers84 1 year ago
Or maybe the ingredients of the paint is flammable.
You truthers are so dumb.
terrymanning1 1 year ago
@terrymanning1 LMAO - the Harrits paper has not been debunked - this should tell you something you fuckin idiot lmao - you idiots are so erm idiotic plus synonyms
mooners40 1 year ago
@mooners40 Of course it's been debunked. Debunked by default because they have refused to allow independent testing of their samples. Red chips are thermite??.......... lololololol Its paint you retards!
terrymanning1 1 year ago
@terrymanning1 where's your source for your accusation dickhead? Cite it or shut the fuck up- the whole review process is all about being reviewed - NIST did not let them use THEIR samples - NIST are the cover-up fuckers - and you are just a dick
mooners40 1 year ago
@mooners40 How many more times NIST didnt test dust samples! They didn't need to as demo had already been ruled out because of NO EVIDENCE for it you fucking moron.
terrymanning1 1 year ago
@terrymanning1 they didn't look for evidence and din't test = cover up - and didn't test for accelerants - which is fraudulent - you idiot
mooners40 1 year ago
@mooners40 NIST weren't tasked with testing dust you ignorant fucking retard.
The controlled demo theory had already been dismissed because there is fuck all evidence for it. How many more times do you have be told the same fucking thing you complete low life fucking prick?
terrymanning1 1 year ago
@terrymanning1 they were tasked with following the NFPA 921 - 18.3.2 high order damage is characterized by shattering of the structure producing small pulverized debris - with such damage explosives should have been looked for - and free-fall is evidence of demolition - sec 19.2.4 exotic accelerants - all these should have been followed - and what is your source for your 'controlled demo theory had already been dismissed ' due to lack of evidence ? Cite your source cock breath - lol
mooners40 1 year ago
@moontarsehole40 How many more times? NIST were tasked with finding out why the building collapsed. They were not looking for a demolition because demolition had already been RULED OUT!!!
It was ruled out because there is ZERO evidence (visual, audible or physical) for a demo.
It doesn't matter how much you want 7 to have been a demo it never will be.
Now fuck off retard.
terrymanning1 1 year ago
@terrymanning1 Harrit's paper has been torn to shit. The method, the keVs don't match, energy content is to high, he hasn't let anyone else replicate his findings, there's no chain of custody, all dust came from truthers, the publisher publishes anything as peer reviewed as long as you pay them etc, etc, etc.... Just run an XRD on the chips like everyone, even truthers (Dr. Green), have been yelling for the past 1-2 years, and let someone replicate your findings, it's not hard.
heafers84 1 year ago
@heafers84 I agree with you that it would be good to do the XRD and FTIR analysis. But to say that Harrit's paper "has been torn to shit" - this is ignorant and immature. Let me ask you then - who refuted their findings.."Sunstealer", F.Greening, Mark Roberts:DD??Who? Who wrote the refutation paper of their findings in this "vanity journal - Bentham"? According to the duh'bunkers - it's easy to do that. why don't you do as J.Gourley has done with Bazant work and write a peer-reviewed refutation?
Lietuvispartizan 1 year ago
@Lietuvispartizan, why don't they right a refuted paper. For one, no one has been give the samples to test, and nobody feels like spending a $1000 to publish in a crap journal. Anyone who's done research knows that vanity journals are crap. 0 It's where people go to get "official" peer review done to peddle their recent medical pill for fat people to lose weight. Please tell me why no keVs match thermite, energy content is above theoretical max, etc, you've answered none of points i brought up
heafers84 1 year ago
@heafers84 "why don't they right a refuted paper." - I think you meant "WRITE a refuted paper."
Lietuvispartizan 1 year ago
@heafers84 "For one, no one has been give the samples to test," - NO! nobody has to give the samples, you can write a refutation paper based on their analysis, without testing the dust. It would be more of peer reviewed discussion paper.
"and nobody feels like spending a $1000" - so now on it's 1000?? and I thought it was $ 800… well, never mind.
Lietuvispartizan 1 year ago
@heafers84 "Please tell me why no keVs match thermite, energy content is above theoretical max" - keVs??? Did you mean (W/g)? and this is your best question?If you are refering to the (Fig. (29)) the DSC test, b/c: "Reaction rates between nanosize aluminum and metal oxides can be significantly greater than those observed with traditional micron-size thermite powders". It’s man-made stuff in nanotech laboratories, so you can create what you want…more explosive or more like incendiary type.
Lietuvispartizan 1 year ago
@heafers84 But by all means, why are you referring to this graph, it’s not helping you. The graph shows that the red layer is more violent and more explosive than those from Tillotson. ( that means more violent = more damage).
“you've answered none of points i brought up” – here is your bucket, now go outside and play.
Lietuvispartizan 1 year ago
@Lietuvispartizan if we're talking about the same graph, you're mistaking violent reaction with energy content. Paper, for instance has a higher energy content than thermite, almost 3x to be exact, so does gasoline, but neither are nearly as violent. When talking about thermite, the less energy content the more violent the reaction. That's why it's made nano, it's more violent b/c teh reaction is faster therefore the energy content is lower. Energy content is time and energy
heafers84 1 year ago
@Lietuvispartizan also, Jones has been saying he'll do an XRD since the Harrit paper came out. Why hasn't he? Either he has, and he doesn't like what he found, or he's scared to b/c he doesn't want to know the truth. They have a lab that should be perfectly capable of doing so. Plus you could take it to any number of places in the united states and pay at max $200 to test the samples. That's 1/5 of what it costs to publish at Bentham.
heafers84 1 year ago
@heafers84 also for Jones and Harrit to claim that elemental aluminum is present is through an XRD.
forums . randi . org / showpost . php?p=4607894&postcount=1694
heafers84 1 year ago
@heafers84 Again, typical duh'bunker... you refer to "Sunstealer". Since when JREF comments are taken as facts?
Lietuvispartizan 1 year ago
@Lietuvispartizan Please, tell us why sunstealers arguments are wrong.
heafers84 1 year ago
@heafers84 Now it's up to you. If you believe that he is hiding something, go find some dust and test for yourself and EXPOSE the truth about the "Primer paint".
Lietuvispartizan 1 year ago
@heafers84
"nobody feels like spending a $1000" – you fail saying "nobody". The circus clowns - from Screw Loose Change blog, were/are thinking about to raise the money and publish a refutation paper with their expertise. LOL :DD
"vanity journals are crap" - it's called Open Access and 50% of journals are open access. The purpose of publishing in open access is that even duh'bunkers could read the paper without paying.
Lietuvispartizan 1 year ago
Comment removed
heafers84 1 year ago
@Lietuvispartizan ask any professor, vanity journals are crap. You would be laughed out of a program for citing a vanity journal. "Please tell me why no keVs match thermite, energy content is above theoretical max" was actually two different points. The energy content is almost double the theoretical max, meaning the highest anyone has ever thought about making any type of thermite including nano-thermite, which has less energy content, b/c it's a more violent / quicker reaction
heafers84 1 year ago
here's also a conversation with Dr. Greening, a truther, about the elemental aluminum claim the911forum . freeforums . org / active-thermitic-material-in-wtc-dust-t150-45 . htm l # p2688
Also, if you truly believe Jones and Harrit, then you believe that the thermite would have been used as fuses!!! Wow, that's a leap. In what world would someone use thermite as a fuse.
heafers84 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@heafers84 The chain of custody issue is cooked up by the "duhbunk'ers". The handling of the samples was done no differently then typical scientific studies, and much research out there on the dust uses the same methods and no police were involved. The USGS did not have police escorts, the UC Davis researchers did not get dust from the police.That is just not done in scientific studies. In fact, most studies never say anything about how the dust was obtained, only where it was found.
Lietuvispartizan 1 year ago
Comment removed
Lietuvispartizan 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@heafers84 Here's the methods description by the USGS:
"Ground sampling consisted of collecting debris from 35 locations in the WTC area, including 33 dust, 2 concrete, and 2 steel beam insulation samples."
pubs . usgs . gov/ of/2001/ ofr-01-0429/ #Introduction
Lietuvispartizan 1 year ago
@mooners40 They published in a vanity journal known for accepting FAKE papers. It's a pay and play publisher, you pay them, you publish whatever you want. Their method was flawed anyway. They used an XED method which tells us the individual element such as Iron and Aluminum, but in no way tells us what compounds, such as iron oxide or aluminum oxide. Plus there should be exponentially more product than reactant. Where is all of the product from the thermite. And dozens of other problems
heafers84 1 year ago
@terrymanning1 where did the Zinc go?
Lietuvispartizan 1 year ago
@Lietuvispartizan Does anyone have a gibberish to English thesaurus?
terrymanning1 1 year ago
@terrymanning1 Yes, exactly, elemental aluminum in nano size particles are very flammable.
/watch?v=FWvhthVsVDs (watch at 3:47)
But nanosized elemental aluminum is nowhere found in nature, neither in your paint.
Lietuvispartizan 1 year ago
@Lietuvispartizan Go talk shit at someone stupid enough to fall for the trooftard lies.
terrymanning1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@terrymanning1 You've revealed yourself: you have no valid argument, so now you are degrading the discussion with an ad hom attack, as is typical for a duh'bunker when confronted with simple facts.
Lietuvispartizan 1 year ago
I remember ages ago when I was investigating the thermite issue. I visited a site that supported the thermite claims with extensive detailed scientific analysis. I then visited one of those debunking sites. They declared the thermite didn't exist after comparing two photographs of a paint chip and a thermite chip. That's it - no further examination of Steven Jones's claims.
Laughable, but expected ;)
CokeSupply 1 year ago
Anyone who believes that FIRE and JET FUEL brought down the WTC, yet rejects the idea that nano-thermite could have achieved this effect at a much faster rate.
Explosive nanothermite was found in the WTC Dust by independent scientists using uncontaminated samples. To date no such chemical testing of evidence has ever been conducted by any Governmental Investigation. WHY NOT?
Anyone claiming there was no thermite, who doesn't have any chemical tests of their own, is a complete moron.
NanoThermite911 1 year ago
comment removed ,hmm damage limitation showing that you are a mental
CHANNELOMD 1 year ago
@CHANNELOMD by the way just post your address here and I will send your $100 so you can get medical help
CHANNELOMD 1 year ago
@CHANNELOMD still waiting
CHANNELOMD 1 year ago
you can shove your bag of cement clay and anything else up your arse,you ran out of ink so you couldnt post,fuck off and you want ME to go back 5 months to find your stupid comment.Lets just set the record straight,you are fucking mental and leave it that ,tit
CHANNELOMD 1 year ago
Comment removed
ldbkbarnea 1 year ago
Debris traps heat & can burn for a long time?
How does it trap heat & allow oxygen in at the same time?
This guy has forgotten that the education system is not yet degraded so far that we're not taught what the fire triangle is...
marcoddy 1 year ago
9/11 was a false flag attack
Lietuvispartizan 2 years ago 15
OUTSIDE JOB!
ctcole77 2 years ago
@Lietuvispartizan women aren't really oppressed in Islam, it's a great religion, all a conspiracy, they treat their women with car
SeeProfileForDetails 10 months ago
That high-tech explosive paint was used to fireproof the beams.
rollingklouds 2 years ago 8
Hahaha.
ViperXXXXXXX 2 years ago
@rollingklouds Hilarious but probably true.
accersitusmaximus 2 years ago
@rollingklouds actually if you're going to believe what jones and Harrit say then you believe that the nano-thermite was used just as a ignitor for modern explosives, which is just retarded. I think they're testing their followers. Seeing what level of trust they have, almost like they're god, and they want to see what their followers will believe on blind faith
heafers84 1 year ago
@heafers84 That sounds like a conspiracy theory. BTW, nice touch with the "retarded" reference.
mlkbeat 1 year ago
@mlkbeat " That sounds like a conspiracy theory. BTW, nice touch with the "retarded" reference" Exactly, thermite is nothing but a CT, and isn't at all real. Just overactive imaginations. Thanks for realizing that Jones is Retarded if he thinks using thermite as a fuse is a usable means to bring down a building with conventional explosives. Especially since he invented the idea of it's use for the fact that conventional demolition explosions are not heard or seismically recorded.
heafers84 1 year ago
@rollingklouds i'm sorry i lol'd
tmasterization 10 months ago
Comment removed
ldbkbarnea 2 years ago
You posted this twice wrongly,the floor was a concrete floor NO CLAY on a permanent formwork on lattice beams fixed to the external walls and internal columns .If you find a spec with clay I will send 100 dollars to your pay pal account
CHANNELOMD 2 years ago
Comment removed
ldbkbarnea 1 year ago
@ldbkbarnea 5 months for that ffs ha ha
CHANNELOMD 1 year ago
Comment removed
ldbkbarnea 1 year ago
yeah I will scroll though 5 months of post to prove what I already know,you are a tit
CHANNELOMD 1 year ago
@ldbkbarnea
"Doubt is essential to selling DVD's" Me
Who the fuck quotes themselves??
DrGonzo879 1 year ago
Comment removed
ldbkbarnea 1 year ago
ha ha he is a retard
CHANNELOMD 1 year ago
Debunkers are all the same, you say It's possible but can't explain how.
amnfoliver 2 years ago
amnfoliver - That's correct. I recently read a document that explained how WTC#7 collapsed. It was interesting because the Govt. scientists already said that the impact could not have brought the towers down, it was the fuel, but the fuel doesn't burn long enough. In the article, it explains that the natural fire in WTC#7 plus the structural damage was enough to bring it down like a demolition... This is after to admitting the same thing would be impossible without jet fuel.Yet they believe it.
ViperXXXXXXX 2 years ago
@ViperXXXXXXX
lol you just taught me something, i missed that one!! Thats a nice point to make when I'm next arguing with a truth-hater :) thumbs up ^^
CokeSupply 1 year ago
Truthers, conspiracy theorists, whackos, delusional, paranoid, crazy and now potential terrorists!
Jeez these people must be onto something to receive such attention.
But wait a moment, who are the oaranoid?! Those who build fences & walls to imprison?
Who set up check points?
Who seem to exploit terror to innitiate wars on terror by inflicting fear & terror. Who openly speak as to their chosen status and whome we are remoselessly expected to bare alliegance to!! MOS t SAD 2muchNOIZ
pondman27 2 years ago
Comment removed
ldbkbarnea 2 years ago
I have been in construction for 30 years and I have never know clay to be tollerated in concrete
CHANNELOMD 2 years ago
Comment removed
ldbkbarnea 2 years ago
I say go to where they painted the steel and get some paint chips. Then conduct the same tests. Record the results and then compare the results to the experiments done on the red/gray chips. Put this puppy to rest once and for all. Leave no out for those that believe that their government is not capable of such a crime. Force it down their throat. Make it the 2x4 that wakes them the fuck up.
lizardfirefighter110 2 years ago 2
I'll tell you what "heafers84": Take a year's worth of flying lessons, then try sitting in the simulated cockpit of a modern airliner. Pretend that you now have to fly the plane to a particular destination hundreds of miles away and then hit your target with some accuracy. OK. What do you do now?! What instruments do you look at and what do they mean? Speed up? Slow down? Turn left or turn right? Did you remember to turn off the transponder?
If you believe this scenario, you're delusional!
adamrosemead 2 years ago 2
After a year of fing flying lessons i would hope to know what speed up slow down and the instruments mean. The instructor said that they used land marks very well, the instructor also said that once they got the direction it would be very easy to fly into their targets. So, do i take your word for it, or the instructor that taught them who is also a trained pilot. It's a tough one but i think i'll go with the pro on this one, and that means not you, b/c i'm sure you think i meant you
heafers84 2 years ago
Here's an experiment, show me a real unedited video that was confiscated of what hit the Pentagon and prove to us all what hit it was in fact what they claim and I'll kiss your backside......sorry but that video won't ever surface or show up until about 50 years fom now if at all, .......show the real evidence video and prove what hit it and shut everyone up........true gutless cowards cover the truth and are just as guilty of the massacre......
rushfan9thcmd 2 years ago
who says that there's any other videos than the ones that have been shown. i mean low fps video surveliance isn't going to get a very good image of a plane traveling at several hundred mph. I know there was 80+ video cameras, but they all pointed to the ground in front of them, the two videos at the pentagon released show the entire field. None of the other cameras had a better shot than those.
Plus there were 100+ eyewitnesses who saw a plane hit, more who saw a plane
heafers84 2 years ago
"heafers.." It's not just about the Pentagon's attack being very questionable. I mean, how many people know about the plane making a complex turn, then skimming on the ground but also, conveniently, hitting the one recently re-inforced part that also contained the auditors looking for a missing 2.3 TRILLION dollars!! What a script! It would be rejected as a TV plot because it was TOO UNBELIEVABLE AND OBVIOUS!!
But you're to also believe that a hole in the ground is where Flight 93 crashed!!
adamrosemead 2 years ago
wow 2.3 trillion dollars was never missing, plus why bring it to everyone's attention the day before if this had any truth whatsoever. I have no idea where you get the auditors part from.
DNA evidence says the plane crashed there, wreckage says the plane crashed there, the first responders said they saw body parts, plane debris and smelled jet fuel. Plus dozens of residents heard and saw the jetliner crash.
What more do you want, if this were a trial it would be an open and shut case.
heafers84 2 years ago
"heafers84" you make it TOO EASY!
On September 10, 2001 DONALD RUMSFELD, himself, admitted that the Dept of Defense couldn't explain why 2.3 TRILLION was missing! It's on tape!!
adamrosemead 2 years ago
read it again, and stop taking a sentence from a speech and think that you understand the whole speech
Our financial systems are decades old. According to some estimates, we cannot track $2.3 trillion in transactions. We cannot share information from floor to floor in this building because it's stored on dozens of technological systems that are inaccessible or incompatible.
It's not lost or stolen you dimwit. You just keep moving the goal post, i'll just keep knocking it down.
heafers84 2 years ago
Sure, "heafers84," you go right on believing whatever your minders tell you to believe. "It's just a CLERICAL ERROR!!" Yeah, right! You go right on believing that it's just a BIG simple mistake or just a bunch of small mistakes! TWO POINT THREE TRILLLLLLLLLLION DOLLARS!!!
What universe do you trolls come from?
adamrosemead 2 years ago
Did you listen or read the whole speech, i guess not, wow you're lazy, nobody in their right mind after reading or listening to the speech and conversations would actually come to the conclusion that 2.3 trillion dollars just up and vanished. Even the little paragraph i posted didn't persuade you that the money isn't missing. But if you like, you can just believe that the money went to pay shills like me.
heafers84 2 years ago
since it's on tape i advise you to watch it before commenting on the tape.
You make this to easy adam. I mean as a truther you want the truth, but you fell to look for it. Just like all truthers. You don't even watch or read the entire speech that you post trying to prove a point. And then you look like a fool when that speech is used against you. Why put yourself through the humiliation
heafers84 2 years ago
TEST 1
PhuqueU 2 years ago
Whether Jones thought a TEM may have been useful for some aspects of the paper, are irrelevant to the issue of proof of thermite. You need to watch Steven Jones' presentation that was held earlier this year in May at UC Davis where he elaborates on various points. Nano-thermite HAS been found, and it has been tested. Its highly energetic material, and no matter what bullshit you produce - this is fact.
Now go and crawl back into your troll cave.
PersianPaladin 2 years ago
I have lost count of the number of times Jones was caught lying
Snakeeater436 2 years ago
For instance Jones claims he had all four samples in 2007 yet the piece of shit paper says two of the samples weren't recovered until 2008. Oooooops
Snakeeater436 2 years ago
You mean the UC Davis speach in 2007 where he claims Nano-thermite HAS been found, and it has been tested. Yet the paper says the tests were done in 2008, ooooooops
Snakeeater436 2 years ago
no it's not fact, in the paper they don't even state that what they found is nano-thermite, they say it looks very close to nano-thermite
heafers84 2 years ago
You don't need TEM analysis to prove the existence of thermite. X-EDS has been used to 100% confirm thermitic material at crime scenes.
PersianPaladin 2 years ago
OH please state one crime scene that thermitic material was found at that an X-EDS was used
heafers84 2 years ago
And please state the manufacturer of nano-thermite before the year 2001. I'd love to get their number and order some myself
heafers84 2 years ago
What is nano-thermite doing in the world trade centre? Its presence there is enough reason for a new, criminal investigation into 9/11. Neither NIST or FEMA looked for explosives in the rubble or the dust.
Nano-thermite is more energetic than conventional thermite, you need to look at the results they found. Nano-thermite can also be explosive; they have referenced their findings in that regard.
It existed BEFORE 2001, in fact it was being produced before the year 2000.
PersianPaladin 2 years ago
"What is nano-thermite doing in the world trade centre?"
IT WAS NEVER THERE IDIOT
Snakeeater436 2 years ago
if nano-thermite was found wouldn't the product of nano-thermite be found. such as i don't know....aluminum-oxide, that shit should be everywhere
heafers84 2 years ago
Real scientists would have taken their claims to a real journal. Upon publishing they would have let real scientists test these claims. They have done nothing. Plus the chain of custody is a HUGE issue. The ones that provided the dust are TRUTHERS. Every person who took part in the paper are truthers.
And i did make a mistake lower down. Jones said he would do a TEM in APRIL not may.
There are so many holes in this paper, but you sheep truthers are just blind to them
heafers84 2 years ago
Let's not forget, any credible scientist would have had his results confirmed by at least one independent lab before publishing them; or the fact 5 of the 7 "authors" of this paper lack any relevant education.
Snakeeater436 2 years ago
Not to mention in a speech in 2007 Jones stated he had the FOUR samples, but the paper states TWO of the FOUR samples weren't recovered until 2008.
Snakeeater436 2 years ago