to bring down massive towers a lot of thermite would have been used and that much would have been detected by any person working in there. People think WTC 7 was blown up because of thermite but same reason people would have seen the thermite. WTC 7 might have been let to collapse because it was unsafe after the towers collapsed. there were fires that were only visible on the outside but you never see inside or the gashes the buildings suffered after being hit by the facade of WTC 1 and 2
Re Molten metal at corner: if you look at the vid taken from the Marriott at the 19:53 mark, the corner molten metal looks silvery and could be aluminum. ww w.youtube.co m/watch?v=kZi4o2OBLEI&feature=related I don't think we can eliminate the idea of the cameras, or the sunlight, or reflection from the fires, as possible contributors to what we perceive as an orangery color.
There is nothing wrong with asking questions. What makes people so sure that someone in their own country wouln't be a criminal. If it happens it other countries, it sure can happen here also.
Wow, I really cannot determine if sam49789's comments are troll or not. If so, troll harder sir. If not, I ask, how can one be so grammatically inept and still manage to operate a computer?
and deisle fuel all though not as high burning the trak did sufer strucher failer and bent when weight was added witch proves that that was the cause of the collapse of the north tower heat weight and time that was all it took. may all who died rest in peace and may any who reads my posts think that it is an opinion and theses are the facts iv gatherd... have a good day R.I.P
and this will be my last post the north tower .. there is not much to say but in my opinon if god would have let that tower stay for one more hour they could have saved thoughs people in the upper floors. the plane hit dead center of the upper floors .. not upstructing the outer beams to an extream stent and yess the middle beams were damedged horribly and eposed to the fire... witch after time could no longer hold the weight .. that is what i beleive and iv tested it useing a rail road trak
and if you watch the collapse of the south tower you can see the building from 76 and up fall to the right completly and fall in on its self and the puffs of dust from the floors was just a reaction of air rushing through the building ... when the tower collapsed the was a massive down draft in the building .. breaking windows and expelling papers and office supplyes through the windows and the bangs people were hearing were the floors falling recordeon style like it was built to do
and to prove that this was an attake was the most un looked and most basic info .. look at were that plans hit , on the north tower the plane hit from 95 to 102 and on the south from 76 and 78 this is just simple to think about , the south tower was hit second and fell first why well abviose more weight and mass on weak beams and when it hit the south tower the plane took out the right side of the building and from eye witness reports the building began to tilt untill it collapsed
and if u watch the collaps of the north tower you can see at the end of the collaps a lage part of the building still up in the air after ferther reveiw of this video, what you see are some of the support collems of the building.. witch in my opinon completly desolves the thory of thermite in the buildings
and to correct TIMOTHYRAYMOND1 iv studied the twin towers since the attakes and infact the towers were disined to implowed in on themselfs when structure failer would happen.. what people thought was controlled det was acculy what the buildings were made to do, and the twin towers were not made to take a hit from an airline maybe an extremly small plane, BUT not at all the size or speed that the planes were traviling at.
i understand that every one has the right to free speach .. well this is america but i watched the south towers outer edge beam fall in an its self many times and i just dont see this beeing an inside job.. iv watched the vid on 911 truth hundreds of times and im sorry but i just think that people are looking to deep into some thing that isent there... its in ower human nature to point the finger when somethings goes wrong wether it be at the goverment or a surten religon ...
Ok, like... first off the music is a little bit inapropriate considering this is footage of nearly 3000 people loosing their lives. The point I'd like to make is that thermite alone wouldn't have been capible of melting through the vertical steel collums supporting the towers. I do, however think different grade of thermite that burns exceptionally hotter was used near the top just below the collision on all sides to premote a perfect implosion of each tower.
Ok, like... first off the music is a little bit inapropriate considering this is footage of nearly 3000 people loosing their lives. The point I'd like to make is that thermite alone wouldn't have been capible of melting through the vertical steel collums supporting the towers. I do, however think different grade of thermite that burns exceptionally hotter was used near the top just below the collision on all sides to premote a perfect implosion of each tower.
Looks like shorting electrical cables to me... Electrical cables either use insulated copper or aluminium as the conductors inside a steel outer braid as a protective armour then a final layer of insulation. Google 'Aluminum Steel Cable' and you will see planty of stuff on steel amd aluminum combined in high power electrical cables.
Type in "9/11: Total Proof That Bombs Were Planted In The Buildings!" and search it here....watch the WHOLE video...if you STILL believe planes brought down these 3 towers, I have some swamp land in Florida for you to purchase...
WTC 1,2 and 3 were controlled demolitions but they were not Thermite. Watch the Dimitri Khalezov documentary interview on my channel for the truth about what happened on 9/11.
@TylerTheT perposterous. I'm all for believing that a special type of thermite was used but your proposal that thermite was carried on the underbelly of the aircraft is rediculous, sorry.. but if the plane hit the building with thermite it would be dispersed and thus would render it completetly ineffective to the steel collums during the explosion of the aircraft. Even if it was to ignite it would be a random guess as to where it ignited and if it was still all in one piece.
because of wath i hear a copy of nist speaking and all experts are bumbs based on what if you have found evidence than it always proof and if the have tested and have commision that they say beyond reasoneble doubt this is what it is...if you are having a judge that says your evedence is not inportend because i think , not know that it wasnt needed hahha whtf haahha
No explosives or thermite would have been needed at all. The twin towers were severely damaged by the planes and the steel was weakened, not melted, by the fires. Those two factors were more than enough to collapse the buildings. No other steel building has ever collapsed from fire, but none of those buildings had been severely damaged buy huge airplanes, and none of them had to support as as much weight above the damaged areas as the twin tower had to.
Wrong, the world trade centre was designed to take multiple impacts from aircraft.
/watch?v=q74MiBSqm78
And wrong again, the steel in the WTC did melt, change shape, completeley bend and become liquid form; it didn't just weaken. At the base of the towers were pools of molten steel that stayed in liquid form for months after the collapse, it's very strange.
@TimothyRaymond1 Those buildings were designed to withstand aircraft hits and I'm sorry but jet fuel alone burns no where near at a sufficient enough temperature to heat those collosal steel collums to a point where they soffen so much they coincidently buckle in on their selves and collapse down perfectly on themselves. I understand some people will believe what they want to to make things seem more interesting but the facts in this instance just defy psyics and I just can't abandon science.
@TimothyRaymond1 Those buildings were designed to withstand aircraft hits and I'm sorry but jet fuel alone burns no where near at a sufficient enough temperature to heat those collosal steel collums to a point where they soffen so much they coincidently buckle in on their selves and collapse down perfectly on themselves. I understand some people will believe what they want to to make things seem more interesting but the facts in this instance just defy psyics and I just can't abandon science.
@XPetiePieX No way Bush had anything to do with the planning. I agree it was an inside job, but Bush had nothing to do with it. I would say a small group of people in the American government were set up to plan it, probably given huge sums of money each to retire on as an incentive. It makes sense for it to have been planned by as few people as possible, and it doesn't make sense for Bush to have been in on it, because he's the one who had to be asked the most questions about it.
Inside Job.....Thermate prefabricated to fit beams and installed....large crew never needed, just access......Drone Planes with laser targeting.....Building 7 falls without losing it's shape.....Demolition.....WTC 1 and 2 turn to dust before even hitting the ground.....Demolition......Inside Job.
Who was the Saudi Prince that offered Guiliani millions after 9/11? Remember Guiliani refused to take the money? <------- I think it was all done for the masses and television.
3 QUESTIONS 911 TRUTHERS DON'T WANT YOU TO ASK THEM:
Why did Dr. Steven Jones circumvent the peer review process by not showing his nanothermite paper to the chief editor and printing it without her approval?
Why won’t Dr. Steven Jones release the “rigorous non-critical” peer review comments offered by David L. Griscom regarding his nanothermite paper?
How much nanothermite did Niels Harrit estimate was used in the supposed controlled demolition of WTC 1, 2, & 7?
Its just so obvious that the WTC buildings were destroyed due to controlled demolitions. I showed a 4-year-old a video of the towers coming down. At the end of the video he said, "how did those buildings blow up?" I said exactly...
3 QUESTIONS 911 TRUTHERS DON'T WANT YOU TO ASK THEM:
Why did Dr. Steven Jones circumvent the peer review process by not showing his nanothermite paper to the chief editor and printing it without her approval?
How can Marvin Bush be in charge of WTC security when he stopped working for Securecom in June of 2000?
If the WTC was destroyed via demolition, how did the charges survive the plane impacts and how did the perpetrators know exactly where the planes would hit the buildings?
Pyrosulphate Antimony trisulphide with Iron Oxide is fun to play with. Or did somone call that stuff nano thermate? What you call primacord CORDEX is fun to play with as well. Wrap your Heavy wall steel tubeing with it and you heal a bang with that flash. Whats neet is when the smoke clears it looks like some robot arm from a plasma cutter did the work. Anyways cheers folks and dont take any more wooden goverments.
@SexyMelon. The Patents Office has your answer. And i think as you browse up the holders of such patents yur jaw will drop. Thermite,mate,Or NTME was a guarded secret untill this goofy kid named Charely Sheen said dont belive me and check it out for yourself. Thermate as for demolition was not a popular choice due to gravity and blow outs. To activate the burn though requires ignition sources other then RDX,ect. Duponts hydrocarbon Viton is where you should set your querry. Then it makes sense.
I've never seen a patented application of nano-thermite, but then I don't have the technical proficiency required to search for or examine it at all, and the idea itself is hardly far-fetched. The one thing it would help with though is clarifying how easily it can cut through steel, being suitable for demolition.
Do you mean some of these patents are held by defense industry? I know they're the original developers, employing even NIST as their contractors in that area.
@SexyMelon The defence or industrial military has many faces, From Pharmicuticals Iron Mongering, Oil,most of all media control by 5 corporations who for all intents and purposes are in the win win as to goverment tax payer dollars contract bids. Like Boing ect. All that means Monsanto Dupont just to name 2 are involved with the perversion with the GM Foods. If you Pri message i can correspond with more effective information for you.Perhaps we can trade recipies as to partical weights before911
@cycimian You seem to know more about political situation than me here. ;)
I know Monsanto is outright egregious in their monopoly over food, that's really no secret, just as it is no secret that capitalism in any country is usually represented by very few very wealthy near- or simply bold-faced monopolies.
In 1954 the old dome of the Reichstag in Berlin was also destroyes by Thermite, after it was damaged in WW II.
On 25 girders were placed Thermite. After 15 seconds, the construction fall. It looked like a rain of sparks, like on the south tower, 82th floor north east corner on this video!
WTC 7 is the idiot test. If one can't see that the only thing that could have collapsed it was a demolition (well, same goes with the Twin Towers, but at least people can whine and bitch about the planes), as has been documented in however many 1000s of controlled demolitions in the past century, they are retarded beyond the human capacity for stupidity. We have a new breed of idiots. This is probably the greatest proof that will ever be conceived for macroevolution.
It looks so clear that thermite was used as you can see the way it behaves. What about the plane at the Pentagon..was there a plane and why so little wreckage...??? questions questions!
Jeffrey Shapiro, Washington DC prosecutor, FOX News, April 22, 2010: "I was working for Gannett News at Ground Zero that day. I arrived at Ground Zero shortly after the Twin Towers fell, in the danger zone created by Building 7. Shortly before the building collapsed, NYPD officers and Con-Edison workers told me that Larry Silverstein was on the phone with his insurance carrier to see if they would authorize the controlled demolition of the building."
@CrazyRay7979 That's because the truthers are failing miserably to 'prove' their explosives theories! They WANT it to be a controlled demo so bad, that they will make up all kinds of crackpot theories to 'prove' their little fantasy story! Just imagine their utter disappointment if they were to ever open their eyes to reality and discover their government didn't (couldn't even) pull this off!!
LOL Sulfur, aluminum, and iron are your tell tell signs of thermite huh.. LMAO.. all of them were there BEFORE the attacks.. Sulfur in the walls.. Iron in the steel frame.. and aluminum in the outer walls and planes that impacted.. What was that?? Oh wow. blew everyone's theory all to Hades huh..
I spoke to a demo expert on this. If cutter charges were used you would know it BLOCKS AWAY!! there would be NO MISTAKING IT and if the charge was not wrapped it would have spewed debris out the side walls. (and no the debris in the videos is not detonations that is compression debris from the upper floors compacting and ejecting the air in the building)
Riiiiight! So a bunch of dudes go in to the building. Manage to get in to all of the support columns, cutting through dry wall, electrical equipment etc (and no one notices). spread thermite all over the beams. Then leave. Wait for the planes to hit. Then wait another hour. Then set it all off and EVERY bit of thermite burns COMPLETELY and CLEANLY through all the beams at once. And it all comes down.
If you believe that (and you would have to) YOU MY TRUTHER FRIEND ARE AN IMBECILE!!
Nano thermite AKA "Super thermite" is really cool stuff, you can mix it into a liquid like a paint, paint a room with it. but if that room catches fire, the temp. will rise to 3000+ in a matter of seconds...
Al [Aluminum] + Fe3O4 [Iron oxide] = Thermite + S [Sulfur] = Thermate + Ba(No3)3 [Barium nitrate] = Super Thermite
anybody could have painted a room with this super thermite and not even know it...
@venturafor2012 The "evidence" you refer to, you mean the ONE (sulfur) element of like three that are left over?? And I guess your logic tree looks like a telephone pole huh.. In other words, the FACT that the drywall material they used for MOST of the walls ALREADY contained your so called "evidence" that thermite was used right?? No way it could have been from the already existing 100,000 pounds or so of drywall in the building. May wanna do some real research from now on honey.
@joeysmom6074 first of all, don't call me honey, this Sulfur was in HUGE amounts on the steel "I" beams (in the building's core) along with HUGE amounts of Iron, and Aluminum....
I'm shure your asking how did it get there? -- in the weeks before 9/11 there were lots "security drills" and WTCs 1, 2, 7 were evacuated for "security reasons" and right after those "security drills" bomb sniffing dogs were removed from those 3 buildings...
@venturafor2012 Sulfur is found in drywall, Iron in paint, electronics, aluminum in cars, airplanes, air ducts. How much of that do you think you would need to take care of two 110 story buildings? HUGE amounts right?
Since you did your "research" you would know that the by-products of thermite are aluminum oxide and barium nitrate. You would also find that these were NOT found in ANY amount.
@audallas841 No, barium nitrate is not a product of thermite, as can be verified by just about anyone with half a brain. Barium nitrate is, however, a component of TH-4 patented brand of thermite, used in incendiary grenades... And pretty much nowhere else.
This basically shows that your "research" on the subject does not extend further than copy/pasting blindly from "debunker" sites, without checking whether it is in any way true, or even makes basic sense.
@SexyMelon The metal coming out of the tower is magnesium from the airplane. Magnesium is flammable, the exact same thing happens in car fire watch this.v=KY9ri-UOoLo look at the right of the car see the molten metal. Airplanes use more magnesium than cars. Iron rich spheres have been an ingredient in concrete for like 80 years.They take scrap iron turn it into a fine powder , mix it in the cement , cook it at 1500c, then it get used for concrete. The only thing jones found was a red gray chip.
@ryn88220 Or paint and primer from a fire extinguisher or something."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."- SJ As this test was done in air it is possible that some of the enhancement of energy output may have come from air oxidation of the organic component."- steve jones The organic thing is key, without it you dont have explosives.
@ryn88220 "Or paint and primer from a fire extinguisher or something."
It's not paint. No paint is made from alluminothermic incendiaries. Please see the study itself for details, there's even a dedicated test to see whether it is all or part paint.
"organic thing is key, without it you dont have explosives."
Yes, as you quoted, the sample did contain a notable amount of carbon.
@SexyMelon The iron sphere they found were not on a nano scale.cement and the iron powder they put in it is about as fine as powder can get. Jones never said he proved themite he just said HE couldnt think of anything else.
@SexyMelon So what your saying is that thermite will create a consistent level of iron shperes in every bit of dust you sample from the entire building.my problem is with the consitency ,thermite could never do that but a preexisting ingredient could. The spheres were 10 to 40 micros right micro is millionth scale ,nano is billionth scale or 1,000 times smaller. Nope not on the nano scale or even close to it at all. nano is just a mesurement term like micro.
@ryn88220 "So what your saying is that thermite will create a consistent level of iron shperes in every bit of dust you sample from the entire building"
Large quantities of it, yes. Or, rather, it DID.
"thermite could never do that"
Why? Iron microspheres are a very well-known product of thermite reaction.
@SexyMelon I showed you watch v=KY9ri-UOoLo you can see it on the right of the car also" nano particles have been used in paint for decades" quote from this site . wwwpnlgov/nanotoxicology/media/C60_Engg_Publicationpdf yep paint has incorperated nano tech for a while. The article goes on to talk about how you can find nano particles in just about everthing you look at.
Thanks. I was wondering if magnesium will still burn if it's part of a large hull piece, and how it will burn, if you happen to know.
"nano particles have been used in paint for decades"
Sure, small particles aren't exactly new. It's not paint, however, for reasons aforementioned. Nano-incendiaries are a very recent and very complex development.
2, electronics, electronic packaging materials, ferrite materials, batteries;" and the list goes on wwwlookchemcom/iron-oxide-nanoparticles/ youll find manufactured iron oxide in well alot of shit . What type of IO was it since theres 16 diff iron oxides?
@ryn88220 "IRON OXIDE nanoparticles is used very widly"
Of course they are. The study does not make the judgment based just on presence of iron or iron oxide (however it should be noted the materials you mentioned would not produce iron or iron oxide in anything but trace amounts). The samples are subjected to a battery of tests to establish their composition, culminating in a combustion test yielding results almost precisely matching high-incendiary nano-thermite.
@ryn88220@ryn88220 "Well, im wondering why it wouldnt since its somewhat common in cars"
Presumably not in planes. Do you know if large pieces of magnesium alloy will ignite, and how if so?
"What type of IO was it since theres 16 diff iron oxides?"
Diferumtrioxide, inferred from oxygen content relative to other elements. The same thing used in most common kind of thermite, as well as thermate, nano-thermite (which the study later proves it is), and even TH-4 incendiary grenades.
@SexyMelon So your saying rust is the main ingredient in thermite? rust was on the steel beam and they had grey paint to protect them , still looks like paint to me
@ryn88220 "rust was on the steel beam and they had grey paint to protect them"
Neither make thermite in the end. No more than household spoon makes a CPU.
"still looks like paint to me"
Did you actually read the study? No one's concluding it's thermite on the basis that it's some kind of chips that are red (and is certainly not scientific to conclude it's paint on the same basis..)
There is a battery of tests performed to arrive at the conclusions, including at least two against actual paint.
@SexyMelon So how are they concluding it and why arent people rushing to replicate it and why arent they getting lawyers to force an investigation since its proven beyond a shadow of a doubt?Like you say? All thernmite make a dangerous amount of uv light sometimes it really fucks with video cameras. Like so v=wVPQs9wf-RY did they confirm the presence of uv light during their flame test? And why dont you see it when the towers collapse 1000s of pounds you know?
You should really read the paper. It's a tough read through complex methods, but it's not as bad as some of the stuff you get in theoretical physics. Besides, it's common sense to read something before you critique something...
"why arent people rushing to replicate it"
It's a taboo subject. Most people would rather set themselves on fire than come anywhere near anything to do with 9/11. You can count scientists skeptical of truth movement on one hand.
@ryn88220 "why arent they getting lawyers to force an investigation"
Well, that would be under naive assumptions that American courts and lawyers are concerned with justice... However it's also that science is not settled in court (last time I remember that happening, US schools ended up teaching creationism...)
"did they confirm the presence of uv light during their flame test?"
@ryn88220 "And why dont you see it when the towers collapse"
Presumably the charges would be placed at the inner core, and there is giant column-less floorspan between it and outside of the building (this is also the reason the planes went through the building as opposed to getting stuck in them half-way).
Still, there is still molten metal (or magnesium, let's say that for now) pre-collapse, molten iron post-collapse, numerous explosions, explosive ejections, and even flashes on occasion...
@SexyMelon Presumably? ya and presumably you would just have to get past 8in block walls and all the other walls that seal that shit off. and radio transmitters arent going to work in there. So you need debt cord I think they would have found something during all of this v=Rct-B4K3VXU perhaps you would like to be the first brave truther to call it all bullshit. Theres still debri there why doesnt someone go test it . They were still sifting for body parts in 2008. 1600 peps ided. but no bombs.
@SexyMelon So apparently you assume they didnt so thats your proof. Do you think you can just access the inner core of the building everywhere you want without tearing holes in walls you obviously dont work in construction. I guess you must also assume you can plant explosive near the plane impact zone and just set them off later at your convienence.ya im sure EVERYONE was in on it did you even watch it and see how much shit they found? I assume they would have found something on accident.
@ryn88220 "So apparently you assume they didnt so thats your proof."
I don't assume. There is no search on record that has ever searched for remains of explosives, explosive residue, wire cords, detonators, or indeed anything at all, not even before the debris was hauled off for recycling (destruction of evidence before investigation).
@ryn88220 "Do you think you can just access the inner core of the building everywhere you want without tearing holes in walls"
Yes, you can. In fact, in case of WTC, drilling holes in the walls won't even achieve anything: the core is not there. The service core housed the elevator shafts and stairs, so that is where one would get access to it, through a layer of thin drywall you can easily punch through. The process - the core - would be completely invisible to inhabitants.
@ryn88220 "guess you must also assume you can plant explosive near the plane impact zone"
Why would anyone do that?
"im sure EVERYONE was in on it"
Please don't exaggerate.
"I assume they would have found something on accident."
You assume that the issue was handled legally and scientifically. It was not. The access to debris was restricted, evidence destroyed, investigations blocked, and dissent penalized.
@SexyMelon So you were there then? you worked on the fresh kills site ? of course it was restricted it contained 2900 peoples body parts it was a crime scene you dont just let everyone who wants to go walking all over the shit taking pics The collapse ovbiously started where the plane hit where the molten metal that I think might be magnesium is seen coming out , It was either metal from the plane or a planted device right?
@SexyMelon --statter911com/2010/08/30/world-trade-center-steel-arrives-in-arlington-county-virginia/ --The way I remember things a whole shit load of people got to look at the steel-.v=-Bs5Jh0dm4U- ummm theres so many pictures of twisted , bolts torn out , ripped connectors__://wtcnistgov/media/galleryhtm#recover__//americanhistorysiedu/september11/collection/recordasp?ID=34_- There are so many pics even i can tell it was a collapse
@ryn88220 "The way I remember things a whole shit load of people got to look at the steel"
I don't think you've been properly informed. MOST of the steel was destroyed - shipped off, smelted - long before Bush even raised his veto over any and all investigations of it.
By the time NIST got to it, they had to dig the remains from the bottom of a trash dump. And even then they did exactly only what you said: they looked at it.
@SexyMelon wtcnistgov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR%201-3B%20Steel%20Inventorypdf more than just nist have steel and they have quite a bit. So how did all the steel get twisted up? the bolts ripped out, the connectors destroyed? does that happen in a CD? ever? Do you really need to test for explosives when its that obvious? What about all the EDD dogs? did you watch the news everyday like I did after it happened?
NIST analyzed just over 250 pieces (not columns) from the debris they got, about 30 out of these coming from previous FEMA investigation. This is a pathetic amount in comparison to the whole building mass, and even then they never actually analyzed it for explosive residue (and, more confusingly, not even for signs of thermal exposure, as that could be evidence for fire severity).
Of course, even then they only had a small amount to work with.
No bomb-sniffing dogs among them to the best of my knowledge. Even then, they'd have to be lead to thermite first.
"did you watch the news everyday like I did after it happened?"
Heck no. I don't watch the news in general, they're tripe in most every country.
Looking at the footage US was subjected to, frankly... It's like watching those propaganda films from Nazi Germany of Soviet Union. More frightening than the attack itself.
@SexyMelon So basically Clinton cant get a blowjob without the whole world finding out, Rumsfield cant cover up missing money without flying a missle or a plane into the pentagon, cant get rid of evidence in wtc 7 so the only choice is to demo it , fuck a paper shredder,bush cant fake an election without everyone pointing it out, or find wmds, or really do anything right, or give a speech,couldnt cover up watergate, no senator can have pussy on the side without it getting pointed out,
@ryn88220 The owner of the wtc goes on camera and says " ya i said pull it " " it was me" even though it was a massive conspiracy no one who was cruel enough to participate in mass murder had the bright idea to move to a country that doesnt extradite to the us and write a book , people like that dont really keep promises, or fear death.Twoofer logic isnt based on common sense or praticality, you need confusing exotic bomb claims that you cant prove to keep going like ufo nuts.
@ryn88220 "no one who was cruel enough to participate in mass murder had the bright idea to move to a country that doesnt extradite to the us and write a book"
Because, as we all know, secret projects just do not exist. For example, there are no secret services or terrorist groups.
Not that 9/11 was covered up in any meaningful way, there's evidence all over the place if you just care to look. The only cover-up to it was, in the end, nation's gullibility... And that seemed to work, didn't it?
@SexyMelon All assumption no evidence , Im disrepectfull so that proves you right ?,why should I repsect the truth movment? All I see is BULLSHIT. "What truth exactly?Not that 9/11 was covered up in any meaningful way, there's evidence all over the place if you just care to look. The only cover-up to it was, in the end, nation's gullibility... And that seemed to work, didn't it?" 9 years all the truth movement has done is sell books and dvds? You guys shootin for justice?
@ryn88220 Perhaps everyone is just poolin there money together to get a lawyer.Or maybe Dr jones is savin money to check for UV light in his sample, like I would expect a real scientist to do, or would have done myself because no one could argue with that. The only reason for that is hes dumb and he didnt think about it, or there is no UV light and in that case he may as well set his paper on fire.You demand a high standard of evidence yet you feel im gullible for questioning his work?
@ryn88220 On the other hand, after same nine years and - what - a grand total of three investigations... Is there even a single piece of physical evidence to support the official conspiracy?..
"Or maybe Dr jones is savin money to check for UV light in his sample, like I would expect a real scientist to do"
You haven not even read his paper. You are not allowed to comment on it or make arbitrary requests you don't even understand.
@ryn88220 "You demand a high standard of evidence yet you feel im gullible for questioning his work?"
You're questioning nothing as far as I'm concerned.
Precisely every argument you listed I've heard a thousand times before from the debunker rumour mill, and 90% of them are refuted - note - by the very paper they're supposed to be arguing against (don't say - assert without any basis, rather - it's paint when the paper itself has already checked whether it is).
@ryn88220 Jones' paper documents physical evidence, which is more than I can say for the official conspiracy theory.
I will reserve many doubts against it until any further testing, but documenting physical evidence through scientific methodology trumps every speculation that official conspiracy has to offer, and it would be both delusional and hypocritical to deny evidence presented by the same method responsible for every technological advancement created.
That's denial. Not an argument. I can provide many lines of evidence and back up each and every one of them. Even the video we're commenting on provides very hard evidence for molten metal, whether there's another possibility for it or not.
"Im disrepectfull so that proves you right?"
Pretty much. When all you can offer is name-calling rather than evidence to the contrary, that's pretty much a total loss.
@ryn88220 "why should I repsect the truth movment?"
Respect =/= Bias
You have no argument other than insult at the moment, and that is very poor. Our discussion began as a polite exchange of arguments, you brought up magnesium in response to a point, I acknowledged it... But now it's just a slew of insults from your side.
That is not an argument. If that's all you can do despite not having an argument, then you simply don't care about what's real, whether you're right.
@ryn88220 "9 years all the truth movement has done is sell books and dvds?"
I already rebuked that argument, didn't I? By that logic all official story did in nine years is just sell books and DVDs because 9/11 Commission Report sells for 40$ on e-bay.
In nine years, the movement reached an unprecedented amount of organization and support for any grassroots movement and, more importantly, produced a huge wealth of evidence supporters of the official theory have to dance around to begin with.
@Timmay123456789 Well, that's only delusional and non-argument on your part.
We have scientifically verified thermite residue, NIST-certified free-fall times, hundreds of witness testimonies of chain heavy-duty flashes and explosions pre-collapse, testimony and recordings of molten iron and many other things...
What do you have? Even one piece of evidence after all these years?
Do you really think it's okay to believe any bullshit conspiracies just because they're endorsed by the government?
first off, the thermATE residue is complete bullshit, see dprjone's videos on that. The tower collapse times were timed by rowen on one of his video's that shows the exact collapse time (spoiler, they're not free fall). There were no flashes pre-collapse, not to mention anecdotal evidence is the weakest kind of evidence. Also, iron has a melting point lower than the fires that took place in the world trade center (both elemental and cast iron).
not all of us are experts on physical chemistry, and criticism is needed on both sided, so for me to refer to someone's explanation is not exactly letting them do the thinking for me. I do agree with the close to-but not free fall speeds though. The NIST has a good explanation for those.
There may have been flashes for unexpected reasons, but the flashes were NOT consistent with controlled demolitions.
@Timmay123456789 "not all of us are experts on physical chemistry, and criticism is needed on both sided, so for me to refer to someone's explanation is not exactly letting them do the thinking for me"
Except, of course, DPR is not a chemist, physicist, nor did he ever address the paper, nor does he ever address scientific issues.
As it stands both you and him reject the only scientific paper ever published on issue of 9/11 that is an actual study as opposed to speculation for no good reason.
@Timmay123456789 "There may have been flashes for unexpected reasons, but the flashes were NOT consistent with controlled demolitions."
Chain heavy-duty flashes in spans of seconds as well as pre-collapse flashes, flashes accompanied by bangs going "up and down the building" is very much consistent with demolition.
Mind, WTC wouldn't be an ordinary demolition, but rather a covert one, if it were to be done.
@Timmay123456789 "The tower collapse times were timed by rowen on one of his video's that shows the exact collapse time (spoiler, they're not free fall)."
RKOwens is an idiot. His collapse times are timed from DUST and actually disagree with every "official" investigation to date: both 9/11 Commission and NIST estimate the collapse times as 9 and 12 seconds respectively.
But, yes, it's not free-fall. Except for parts of WTC 7, which NIST admits IS free-fall.
The only study i can seem to find is that terrible study in the open journal on physical chemistry that even mentions thermate. DPR jones did a good job refuting the claims of the paper, and finding the biases of the writers of said article. If you can refute his video, please, show me how it is wrong.
I dont see what your point about the molten iron in the rubble, considering how low the melting point of iron is in terms of the fires that did burn.
@Timmay123456789 "that terrible study ... DPR jones did a good job refuting the claims of the paper"
DPR never addressed the paper at all. He only slandered the publication for not being top-tier, which is about as fair as criticizing Kinsey studies or Einstein's work on the same basis. This is why I told you to "think for yourself": read the paper, don't just trust what others try to come up with about its publishers.
@Timmay123456789 "If you can refute his video, please, show me how it is wrong."
If I'm missing something and DPR has ever addressed anything in the paper, I'm reasonably sure I've heard a dozen different wrong-hoods about it by now, so if you direct me to the video or specific claims, it should be easy enough.
If you can though, please don't throw baseless accusations out there, groundless claims are just poor sport, and very annoying to try and refute on any subject.
@Timmay123456789 "considering how low the melting point of iron is in terms of the fires that did burn."
An average office fire burns at 1,100C, fires in WTC are estimated by NIST to burn at maximum of 600C (250C by physical data), iron/steel melts at 1,300-1,500C.
This is why there is no other case in history of this occurring.
Frankly it's obvious no building should look "like a foundry, with flowing lava" weeks after any kind fire.
It's one thing to average the temperature of the fires, but at specific points, temperatures of 1800 degrees were measured.
The free-fall issue seems more like a non-issue since both parties seem to agree that it was close, but not exactly free fall.
What i'm more interested in getting across is the irrationality of the claim that it was a controlled demolition. I see no empirical evidence to support the claim of a controlled demolition.
@Timmay123456789 "The free-fall issue seems more like a non-issue since both parties seem to agree that it was close, but not exactly free fall."
"Freefall" is a red herring, generally coming from misinformed opinion from one or both sides.
The actual issue is the implications of resistance offered by building components in light of near-constant near-free-fall acceleration (next to none, doesn't mesh well with giant steel structure), as well as *actual* free-fall of parts of WTC7 (same).
@Timmay123456789 "I see no empirical evidence to support the claim of a controlled demolition."
That's an admirable position, to base your beliefs on evidence, so kudos for that.
Likewise, I see no evidence to support the claim of fire-based collapses.
As far as evidence for demolition goes, however, I can cite off the top of my head... Aforementioned near-free-fall (measuring acceleration is more reliable than time), horizontal level and symmetry of the collapses... Cont.
...The aforementioned occurrence of chain heavy-duty explosions, flashes and visible explosive ejections ("squibs") abundant both on record and in witness testimony, thermitic residue of course, recorded molten iron flows pre-collapse, noted flows of molten iron and red-hot iron as long as weeks after the collapse, lack of deceleration of the collapse (either decrease in speed or acceleration), the race of explosions along surfaces of WTC1/2... Cont.
...Lack of expected "jolts" (momentary deceleration) signaling lack of any actual impact with the lower floors, the horizontally level nature of the collapses, lack of collapse tilt progression for the WTC1/2 tops (self-contradiction: if the top tilts, then building's own resistance is enough to cause yet, yet the tilt does not progress, signaling no further resistance), and many others.
I can substantiate ("prove") all of the above if you want, but I suggest just looking it up yourself.
Oh and, yeah, I could outline plenty of falsehoods within the "official" story itself - if anyone wants Pancake Theory or Core Meltdown Theory refuted, I suggest asking NIST instead - but I don't know if it would count as evidence to the contrary or not.
@Timmay123456789 Oh yeah. Many of the things listed can actually be directly observed in another case of controlled demolition - Verinage - which doesn't use explosives.
It occurs three times slower than free-fall, experiences notable jolts, it always has to be initiated in the middle (basic implications of Newton's third law), and so on.
You can also look up some recorded fire-based collapses, but it'll be much harder. Obviously enough not one building in history has ever collapsed in the manner of WTC1/2 (manner of top-down controlled demolition, basically), whereas steel-frame buildings have notably never collapsed at all ("debunker" sites generally give crud examples of this occurring, but if you look at those, the nature of their collapse refutes WTC1/2's collapse more than supports it, so it's not a good idea either way)
Interesting closure to otherwise polite and well-thought posts...
May I remind you that any act of terror is a co-operation between multiple people in secret with a plan to carry out a crime is a "conspiracy" by definition, and that anything that is not proven true beyond reasonable doubt is a "theory" by definition?
We're both "conspiracy nuts" here. Being endorsed by the government doesn't make your conspiracy any better. In fact, I'd say it's worse.
@Timmay123456789 Errata: NIST does also agree with *exact* free-fall acceleration of WTC 7's descent for a span of about 2,5 seconds.
Otherwise, yes, they claim collapse times of about 9, 12 and 7 seconds respectively, which are pretty close to free-fall.
Of course, it's fallacious to judge free-fall based on full collapse times as opposed to acceleration, especially seeing how free-fall rarely if ever occurs during controlled demolitions, partially for the same reason.
"Mean, it could have been as a result of the building collapsing, things exploding, but I saw a flash flash flash and then it looked like the building came down..."
There are at least six dozen such reports. Hundreds more of pre-collapse chain heavy-duty explosions, "like when they blow up a building".
"anecdotal evidence is the weakest kind of evidence"
Thermate residue was indeed scientifically identified whether you like it or not, NIST admit free-fall times for segments of WTC 7 as well as near-free-fall for all three collapses, there are indeed hundreds of witnesses of demolition-like precursor events - and cross-referenced witness testimony is very valid evidence -and... Well, I don't know why would presence of molten IRON not be a dead give-away. Whenever did you hear of that happening anywhere else?
...And even though there's this small mountain of hard evidence and a much larger yet unmentioned pile of evidence behind it for the "conspiracy theory"...
What exactly is the evidence for so-called "official story" at all? (Spoiler: There isn't any.)
I mean, as far as conspiracies go, there's only one "theory" here, and it's the one we've all swallowed since 2001. Just because something is paraded by politicians doesn't mean it's true any more than those WMDs, does it?..
@ryn88220 "So basically Clinton cant get a blowjob without the whole world finding out, Rumsfield cant cover up missing money "
And yet US, UK and Canada can work together with over 300,000 people in total secrecy for almost decade of development of a gigantic super-weapon.
(Project Manhattan.)
The fallacy is assuming that secret things are somehow NEVER kept in actual secret. Of course they are. The things you listed are exceptions, no the rule.
@ryn88220 And, of course, another fallacy here is assuming: a)The Bush administration were somehow the masterminds behind this; b)That politicians are inept because they can't properly do stuff they don't care about doing in the first place (I.e. caring about their citizens).
"The owner of the wtc goes on camera and says " ya i said pull it " " it was me"
Now I didn't even mention it, nor indeed any of the other things you said.
@ryn88220 "There are so many pics even i can tell it was a collapse"
Well, of course it was a collapse?..
What I'm trying to point out is that the investigation simply was not proper. It's perfectly reasonable for you to assume it was proper investigation if not more rigorous than usual. In reality it was blocked, obstructed, stiffed, evidence destroyed, and ultimately only cause of collapse investigated (no checking for explosives) and even that could not get a single piece of evidence for it.
@ryn88220 ...So there isn't really any explanation as to why explosives weren't found if they were there: they were never searched for in the first place, we wouldn't know if there were. Pretty much nothing were searched for. Nor could be after most of the debris was removed from the scene or simply destroyed.
This is why the chief request of "truth movement" is a new investigation: one that actually investigates something, as opposed to dabbling in baseless speculations.
@ryn88220 "Theres still debri there why doesnt someone go test it "
This is pretty much the main demand of all the truth movements out there: let people test the debris, however little of it is still left. So far most of this stuff is under strict lockdown and out of reach of public.
"Ya and no actuall conclusive proof that its nano thermite he just found the ingredients on an elemental level."
No he didn't, that's what I'm trying to explain... There was a whole battery of different tests.
@SexyMelon please show me evidence of post collapse molten structual iron please. and explain to me how thermite could sustain these temps after a collapse does it burn for days.?explosive ejection ya ive seen that , theres no blast front no pressure wave there not explosions ,there way too slow . Show me how nano thermite could even cut through a steel beam? have you ever seen any thermite cut through a steel beam?
@ryn88220 "please show me evidence of post collapse molten structual iron please"
If you have access to FEMA photographs, there's a few of pictures of red-hot and melted steel. The presence of molten steel is most abundant in witness accounts, however.
“In the first few weeks, sometimes when a worker would pull a steel beam from the wreckage, the end of the beam would be dripping molten steel.”
PM me if you want more details, there's a lot of data there.
@ryn88220 "and explain to me how thermite could sustain these temps after a collapse does it burn for days.?"
Thermite would generate them to begin with, after which insulation provided by the debris would trap the heat. An ordinary fire can't do that - even though it is often enough to melt weaker metals - and indeed it didn't even on 9/11, at WTC4,5,6 sites. Molten steel was only reported at WTC1,2,7.
Another factor is that thermite does not need oxygen to burn.
@ryn88220 "theres no blast front no pressure wave there not explosions ,there way too slow"
Elaborate, please?..
"Show me how nano thermite could even cut through a steel beam?"
That is it's very purpose. Ordinary thermite and even thermate ( /watch?v=Wn-MCCZ3O1M ) are well-known for their ability to cut through steel, and so are virtually any explosives in right amount, in a shaped charge.
"have you ever seen any thermite cut through a steel beam?"
@ryn88220 tl;dr: Read the paper. If not all of it, at least the "Conclusions" or "Discussion" part. It's just common sense.
There's really a lot of stuff in it, including multiple comparisons to actual paint, actual nano-thermite, tests again different compounds (including various iron oxides), multiple spectrography and calorimetry, whether such chips are found in known collapses (which they'd have to be if they were from ordinary materials), and many other things.
@SexyMelon Ya and no actuall conclusive proof that its nano thermite he just found the ingredients on an elemental level. Why didnt he submitt this to nist with his other stuff? Was it published in a reputable scientific journal? i have read it its deceiving he should have just tested for UV light. Everything he found can be found in construction materials.v=KWQaYv8-mJs this is your hero
@ryn88220 "Why didnt he submitt this to nist with his other stuff?"
He did. The reason NIST mention molten aluminum/iron/magnesium flows is because Jones corrected them on that. Everything else they pretty much ignored, including follow-up tests of aluminum glow.
I find it peculiar NIST did not say it was magnesium also.
"Was it published in a reputable scientific journal?"
Sadly not. Betham is a proper scientific journal, but of no academic standing.
@ryn88220 "i have read it its deceiving he should have just tested for UV light."
There are many ways to determine whether something is what you think it is or otherwise. UV emission would help, but it's also rather ambiguous: many substances radiate it.
@ryn88220 "Everything he found can be found in construction materials."
"If a paint were devised that incorporated these very energetic materials, it would be highly dangerous when dry and most unlikely to receive regulatory approval for building use."
It's not paint for myriad of reasons. Just because something contains iron doesn't mean it's paint. It's a common element. No one's making the judgement based on something like this alone.
to bring down massive towers a lot of thermite would have been used and that much would have been detected by any person working in there. People think WTC 7 was blown up because of thermite but same reason people would have seen the thermite. WTC 7 might have been let to collapse because it was unsafe after the towers collapsed. there were fires that were only visible on the outside but you never see inside or the gashes the buildings suffered after being hit by the facade of WTC 1 and 2
chillaxer1993 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Re Molten metal at corner: if you look at the vid taken from the Marriott at the 19:53 mark, the corner molten metal looks silvery and could be aluminum. ww w.youtube.co m/watch?v=kZi4o2OBLEI&feature=related I don't think we can eliminate the idea of the cameras, or the sunlight, or reflection from the fires, as possible contributors to what we perceive as an orangery color.
FirstUsedBooks 3 months ago
Look here watch?v=5d5iIoCiI8g
fluffatronix 4 months ago
Thermate-TH3 is more likely it burns hotter & you need a lot less 2 get the job done!
It's been around since 1940.
fluffatronix 4 months ago
There is nothing wrong with asking questions. What makes people so sure that someone in their own country wouln't be a criminal. If it happens it other countries, it sure can happen here also.
ejradiotalk 4 months ago
Wow, I really cannot determine if sam49789's comments are troll or not. If so, troll harder sir. If not, I ask, how can one be so grammatically inept and still manage to operate a computer?
OmniDarkness 4 months ago
and deisle fuel all though not as high burning the trak did sufer strucher failer and bent when weight was added witch proves that that was the cause of the collapse of the north tower heat weight and time that was all it took. may all who died rest in peace and may any who reads my posts think that it is an opinion and theses are the facts iv gatherd... have a good day R.I.P
sam49789 4 months ago
and this will be my last post the north tower .. there is not much to say but in my opinon if god would have let that tower stay for one more hour they could have saved thoughs people in the upper floors. the plane hit dead center of the upper floors .. not upstructing the outer beams to an extream stent and yess the middle beams were damedged horribly and eposed to the fire... witch after time could no longer hold the weight .. that is what i beleive and iv tested it useing a rail road trak
sam49789 4 months ago
and if you watch the collapse of the south tower you can see the building from 76 and up fall to the right completly and fall in on its self and the puffs of dust from the floors was just a reaction of air rushing through the building ... when the tower collapsed the was a massive down draft in the building .. breaking windows and expelling papers and office supplyes through the windows and the bangs people were hearing were the floors falling recordeon style like it was built to do
sam49789 4 months ago
and to prove that this was an attake was the most un looked and most basic info .. look at were that plans hit , on the north tower the plane hit from 95 to 102 and on the south from 76 and 78 this is just simple to think about , the south tower was hit second and fell first why well abviose more weight and mass on weak beams and when it hit the south tower the plane took out the right side of the building and from eye witness reports the building began to tilt untill it collapsed
sam49789 4 months ago
and if u watch the collaps of the north tower you can see at the end of the collaps a lage part of the building still up in the air after ferther reveiw of this video, what you see are some of the support collems of the building.. witch in my opinon completly desolves the thory of thermite in the buildings
sam49789 4 months ago
and to correct TIMOTHYRAYMOND1 iv studied the twin towers since the attakes and infact the towers were disined to implowed in on themselfs when structure failer would happen.. what people thought was controlled det was acculy what the buildings were made to do, and the twin towers were not made to take a hit from an airline maybe an extremly small plane, BUT not at all the size or speed that the planes were traviling at.
sam49789 4 months ago
i understand that every one has the right to free speach .. well this is america but i watched the south towers outer edge beam fall in an its self many times and i just dont see this beeing an inside job.. iv watched the vid on 911 truth hundreds of times and im sorry but i just think that people are looking to deep into some thing that isent there... its in ower human nature to point the finger when somethings goes wrong wether it be at the goverment or a surten religon ...
sam49789 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Ok, like... first off the music is a little bit inapropriate considering this is footage of nearly 3000 people loosing their lives. The point I'd like to make is that thermite alone wouldn't have been capible of melting through the vertical steel collums supporting the towers. I do, however think different grade of thermite that burns exceptionally hotter was used near the top just below the collision on all sides to premote a perfect implosion of each tower.
MrRedeyedJedi 4 months ago
Ok, like... first off the music is a little bit inapropriate considering this is footage of nearly 3000 people loosing their lives. The point I'd like to make is that thermite alone wouldn't have been capible of melting through the vertical steel collums supporting the towers. I do, however think different grade of thermite that burns exceptionally hotter was used near the top just below the collision on all sides to premote a perfect implosion of each tower.
MrRedeyedJedi 4 months ago
Looks like shorting electrical cables to me... Electrical cables either use insulated copper or aluminium as the conductors inside a steel outer braid as a protective armour then a final layer of insulation. Google 'Aluminum Steel Cable' and you will see planty of stuff on steel amd aluminum combined in high power electrical cables.
ChuffChuffWoo 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Type in "9/11: Total Proof That Bombs Were Planted In The Buildings!" and search it here....watch the WHOLE video...if you STILL believe planes brought down these 3 towers, I have some swamp land in Florida for you to purchase...
thisisfunny88 5 months ago
WTC 1,2 and 3 were controlled demolitions but they were not Thermite. Watch the Dimitri Khalezov documentary interview on my channel for the truth about what happened on 9/11.
anthonyc31 5 months ago
The big pods under the airplanes were carrying thermite probably
TylerTheT 5 months ago
@TylerTheT perposterous. I'm all for believing that a special type of thermite was used but your proposal that thermite was carried on the underbelly of the aircraft is rediculous, sorry.. but if the plane hit the building with thermite it would be dispersed and thus would render it completetly ineffective to the steel collums during the explosion of the aircraft. Even if it was to ignite it would be a random guess as to where it ignited and if it was still all in one piece.
MrRedeyedJedi 4 months ago
have you done a teste?? do you know how to make and define nanothermite hahahit isnt easy to do if your working with big hands btw
dennisjo88 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
because of wath i hear a copy of nist speaking and all experts are bumbs based on what if you have found evidence than it always proof and if the have tested and have commision that they say beyond reasoneble doubt this is what it is...if you are having a judge that says your evedence is not inportend because i think , not know that it wasnt needed hahha whtf haahha
dennisjo88 6 months ago
Comment removed
dennisjo88 6 months ago
No explosives or thermite would have been needed at all. The twin towers were severely damaged by the planes and the steel was weakened, not melted, by the fires. Those two factors were more than enough to collapse the buildings. No other steel building has ever collapsed from fire, but none of those buildings had been severely damaged buy huge airplanes, and none of them had to support as as much weight above the damaged areas as the twin tower had to.
TimothyRaymond1 7 months ago
@TimothyRaymond1
Wrong, the world trade centre was designed to take multiple impacts from aircraft.
/watch?v=q74MiBSqm78
And wrong again, the steel in the WTC did melt, change shape, completeley bend and become liquid form; it didn't just weaken. At the base of the towers were pools of molten steel that stayed in liquid form for months after the collapse, it's very strange.
/watch?v=mNknITygrqc&feature=related
lazzawazza93 5 months ago
@TimothyRaymond1 Those buildings were designed to withstand aircraft hits and I'm sorry but jet fuel alone burns no where near at a sufficient enough temperature to heat those collosal steel collums to a point where they soffen so much they coincidently buckle in on their selves and collapse down perfectly on themselves. I understand some people will believe what they want to to make things seem more interesting but the facts in this instance just defy psyics and I just can't abandon science.
MrRedeyedJedi 4 months ago
@TimothyRaymond1 Those buildings were designed to withstand aircraft hits and I'm sorry but jet fuel alone burns no where near at a sufficient enough temperature to heat those collosal steel collums to a point where they soffen so much they coincidently buckle in on their selves and collapse down perfectly on themselves. I understand some people will believe what they want to to make things seem more interesting but the facts in this instance just defy psyics and I just can't abandon science.
MrRedeyedJedi 4 months ago
The mythbusters guys set off 1000 pounds of thermite to try to burn a car in half. To see how they did, check out my video:
Incendiary Experiments
punxsutawneybarney 7 months ago
@XPetiePieX No way Bush had anything to do with the planning. I agree it was an inside job, but Bush had nothing to do with it. I would say a small group of people in the American government were set up to plan it, probably given huge sums of money each to retire on as an incentive. It makes sense for it to have been planned by as few people as possible, and it doesn't make sense for Bush to have been in on it, because he's the one who had to be asked the most questions about it.
TheLagunaSunrise 8 months ago
@TheLagunaSunrise Finally someone gets it
NDfan369 8 months ago
Inside Job.....Thermate prefabricated to fit beams and installed....large crew never needed, just access......Drone Planes with laser targeting.....Building 7 falls without losing it's shape.....Demolition.....WTC 1 and 2 turn to dust before even hitting the ground.....Demolition......Inside Job.
Who was the Saudi Prince that offered Guiliani millions after 9/11? Remember Guiliani refused to take the money? <------- I think it was all done for the masses and television.
Born2Flesh 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
3 QUESTIONS 911 TRUTHERS DON'T WANT YOU TO ASK THEM:
Why did Dr. Steven Jones circumvent the peer review process by not showing his nanothermite paper to the chief editor and printing it without her approval?
Why won’t Dr. Steven Jones release the “rigorous non-critical” peer review comments offered by David L. Griscom regarding his nanothermite paper?
How much nanothermite did Niels Harrit estimate was used in the supposed controlled demolition of WTC 1, 2, & 7?
ctcole77 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This could be burning anything! How do we know this is STEEL?
oneshotki11 11 months ago
Its just so obvious that the WTC buildings were destroyed due to controlled demolitions. I showed a 4-year-old a video of the towers coming down. At the end of the video he said, "how did those buildings blow up?" I said exactly...
PlzStopBeingStupid 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
3 QUESTIONS 911 TRUTHERS DON'T WANT YOU TO ASK THEM:
Why did Dr. Steven Jones circumvent the peer review process by not showing his nanothermite paper to the chief editor and printing it without her approval?
How can Marvin Bush be in charge of WTC security when he stopped working for Securecom in June of 2000?
If the WTC was destroyed via demolition, how did the charges survive the plane impacts and how did the perpetrators know exactly where the planes would hit the buildings?
ctcole77 11 months ago
It's an inside job, there's no doubt about that. Wake up America, wake up!
anaclet 11 months ago 2
windatekili : Are tires burns that way, at 1.22 ? So hot, with clear smoke ? Please, ask to any fireman what he think about it.
ToeDestroyer 1 year ago
I think you should be more concerned with the hundreds of white explosive flashes going on instead of dripping lava metal.
JoanBeatrington 1 year ago
I think that this could be the burning rubber from the aircraft tires.
windatekili 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Global warming deniers and holocaust deniers share a common trait with inside job theorists!!!
Please have a look at my proposal to scientifically decide what brought the WTC buildings down!!
Cut and paste the following into your youtube URL: watch?v=B90kF1c2hnM
Humantidote 1 year ago
Pyrosulphate Antimony trisulphide with Iron Oxide is fun to play with. Or did somone call that stuff nano thermate? What you call primacord CORDEX is fun to play with as well. Wrap your Heavy wall steel tubeing with it and you heal a bang with that flash. Whats neet is when the smoke clears it looks like some robot arm from a plasma cutter did the work. Anyways cheers folks and dont take any more wooden goverments.
cycimian 1 year ago
@cycimian That's pretty good info, thanks.
Do you know if detonation cords can be made from thermite-like materials?
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon. The Patents Office has your answer. And i think as you browse up the holders of such patents yur jaw will drop. Thermite,mate,Or NTME was a guarded secret untill this goofy kid named Charely Sheen said dont belive me and check it out for yourself. Thermate as for demolition was not a popular choice due to gravity and blow outs. To activate the burn though requires ignition sources other then RDX,ect. Duponts hydrocarbon Viton is where you should set your querry. Then it makes sense.
cycimian 1 year ago
@cycimian Thanks a lot!
I've never seen a patented application of nano-thermite, but then I don't have the technical proficiency required to search for or examine it at all, and the idea itself is hardly far-fetched. The one thing it would help with though is clarifying how easily it can cut through steel, being suitable for demolition.
Do you mean some of these patents are held by defense industry? I know they're the original developers, employing even NIST as their contractors in that area.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon The defence or industrial military has many faces, From Pharmicuticals Iron Mongering, Oil,most of all media control by 5 corporations who for all intents and purposes are in the win win as to goverment tax payer dollars contract bids. Like Boing ect. All that means Monsanto Dupont just to name 2 are involved with the perversion with the GM Foods. If you Pri message i can correspond with more effective information for you.Perhaps we can trade recipies as to partical weights before911
cycimian 1 year ago
@cycimian You seem to know more about political situation than me here. ;)
I know Monsanto is outright egregious in their monopoly over food, that's really no secret, just as it is no secret that capitalism in any country is usually represented by very few very wealthy near- or simply bold-faced monopolies.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
Good video!
0ddba11s 1 year ago
nice music
Pietjebellen 1 year ago
Its not aluminum anyway.
Thats stays gray no matter the heat.
Probably molten steel.
zenoist2 1 year ago
US Goverment are the bigest son of a bitch´s for all times...
killing your own people whit their partner osama bin ladem....
shame shame shame...
terrorist??????? you are the terrorist, now the entire world know who you are.
after this...hitler is like winnie phoo bear.
you will fall soon or late, and i feel sorry for your inocent people, but you will fall.
the worse is that you don´t believe...
tinchex3 1 year ago
In 1954 the old dome of the Reichstag in Berlin was also destroyes by Thermite, after it was damaged in WW II.
On 25 girders were placed Thermite. After 15 seconds, the construction fall. It looked like a rain of sparks, like on the south tower, 82th floor north east corner on this video!
chernobylworker 1 year ago
You can debate the structural "Nit Bits" and whatever of Towers 1 and 2.
But WTC Building 7 That was never hit with anything collapses.
Why don't people question Building 7? Because they stopped any media cover of building 7.
Milo8D 1 year ago
@Milo8D
WTC 7 is the idiot test. If one can't see that the only thing that could have collapsed it was a demolition (well, same goes with the Twin Towers, but at least people can whine and bitch about the planes), as has been documented in however many 1000s of controlled demolitions in the past century, they are retarded beyond the human capacity for stupidity. We have a new breed of idiots. This is probably the greatest proof that will ever be conceived for macroevolution.
GoldenZealot21 1 year ago
inside job.
falboqui 1 year ago
youtube search
1. September Clues
2. 911 entschlüsselt
3. No Plane
PeterHantsen 1 year ago 7
It looks so clear that thermite was used as you can see the way it behaves. What about the plane at the Pentagon..was there a plane and why so little wreckage...??? questions questions!
Agui007 1 year ago
This proves that terriost are more safe then some people in our country.
josh71111 1 year ago
More people would still be asleep without the help of youtube videos like this.
Locke1217 1 year ago
Nice music! From who is this amazing track?
MrHounck 1 year ago
Jeffrey Shapiro, Washington DC prosecutor, FOX News, April 22, 2010: "I was working for Gannett News at Ground Zero that day. I arrived at Ground Zero shortly after the Twin Towers fell, in the danger zone created by Building 7. Shortly before the building collapsed, NYPD officers and Con-Edison workers told me that Larry Silverstein was on the phone with his insurance carrier to see if they would authorize the controlled demolition of the building."
operationnorthwoodz 1 year ago
Truthers; if it was thermite/thermate/etc. then why was this the only area that you can see this "flowing metal"?
Non-stupid people; Don't you love these crazy thermite theories? They get "better" every month
CrazyRay7979 1 year ago
@CrazyRay7979 That's because the truthers are failing miserably to 'prove' their explosives theories! They WANT it to be a controlled demo so bad, that they will make up all kinds of crackpot theories to 'prove' their little fantasy story! Just imagine their utter disappointment if they were to ever open their eyes to reality and discover their government didn't (couldn't even) pull this off!!
Some1fromYurp 1 year ago
LOL Sulfur, aluminum, and iron are your tell tell signs of thermite huh.. LMAO.. all of them were there BEFORE the attacks.. Sulfur in the walls.. Iron in the steel frame.. and aluminum in the outer walls and planes that impacted.. What was that?? Oh wow. blew everyone's theory all to Hades huh..
joeysmom6074 1 year ago
I spoke to a demo expert on this. If cutter charges were used you would know it BLOCKS AWAY!! there would be NO MISTAKING IT and if the charge was not wrapped it would have spewed debris out the side walls. (and no the debris in the videos is not detonations that is compression debris from the upper floors compacting and ejecting the air in the building)
roquefortfiles 1 year ago
Riiiiight! So a bunch of dudes go in to the building. Manage to get in to all of the support columns, cutting through dry wall, electrical equipment etc (and no one notices). spread thermite all over the beams. Then leave. Wait for the planes to hit. Then wait another hour. Then set it all off and EVERY bit of thermite burns COMPLETELY and CLEANLY through all the beams at once. And it all comes down.
If you believe that (and you would have to) YOU MY TRUTHER FRIEND ARE AN IMBECILE!!
roquefortfiles 1 year ago
your don't know the facts son
Mohagrus 1 year ago
Nano thermite AKA "Super thermite" is really cool stuff, you can mix it into a liquid like a paint, paint a room with it. but if that room catches fire, the temp. will rise to 3000+ in a matter of seconds...
Al [Aluminum] + Fe3O4 [Iron oxide] = Thermite + S [Sulfur] = Thermate + Ba(No3)3 [Barium nitrate] = Super Thermite
anybody could have painted a room with this super thermite and not even know it...
venturafor2012 1 year ago
Right. And all 200 columns burn through at exactly the same time perfectly.
Give me a fucking break.
roquefortfiles 1 year ago
there also might have been some cutter charges.... I don't know...
all I know is that thermite WAS used because the evidence is there...
venturafor2012 1 year ago
@venturafor2012 The "evidence" you refer to, you mean the ONE (sulfur) element of like three that are left over?? And I guess your logic tree looks like a telephone pole huh.. In other words, the FACT that the drywall material they used for MOST of the walls ALREADY contained your so called "evidence" that thermite was used right?? No way it could have been from the already existing 100,000 pounds or so of drywall in the building. May wanna do some real research from now on honey.
joeysmom6074 1 year ago
@joeysmom6074 first of all, don't call me honey, this Sulfur was in HUGE amounts on the steel "I" beams (in the building's core) along with HUGE amounts of Iron, and Aluminum....
I'm shure your asking how did it get there? -- in the weeks before 9/11 there were lots "security drills" and WTCs 1, 2, 7 were evacuated for "security reasons" and right after those "security drills" bomb sniffing dogs were removed from those 3 buildings...
I've done my research, your turn!!!
venturafor2012 1 year ago
@venturafor2012 Sulfur is found in drywall, Iron in paint, electronics, aluminum in cars, airplanes, air ducts. How much of that do you think you would need to take care of two 110 story buildings? HUGE amounts right?
Since you did your "research" you would know that the by-products of thermite are aluminum oxide and barium nitrate. You would also find that these were NOT found in ANY amount.
audallas841 1 year ago
@audallas841 No, barium nitrate is not a product of thermite, as can be verified by just about anyone with half a brain. Barium nitrate is, however, a component of TH-4 patented brand of thermite, used in incendiary grenades... And pretty much nowhere else.
This basically shows that your "research" on the subject does not extend further than copy/pasting blindly from "debunker" sites, without checking whether it is in any way true, or even makes basic sense.
Well done.
Do your damn research.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon The metal coming out of the tower is magnesium from the airplane. Magnesium is flammable, the exact same thing happens in car fire watch this.v=KY9ri-UOoLo look at the right of the car see the molten metal. Airplanes use more magnesium than cars. Iron rich spheres have been an ingredient in concrete for like 80 years.They take scrap iron turn it into a fine powder , mix it in the cement , cook it at 1500c, then it get used for concrete. The only thing jones found was a red gray chip.
ryn88220 1 year ago
@ryn88220 Or paint and primer from a fire extinguisher or something."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."- SJ As this test was done in air it is possible that some of the enhancement of energy output may have come from air oxidation of the organic component."- steve jones The organic thing is key, without it you dont have explosives.
ryn88220 1 year ago
@ryn88220 "Or paint and primer from a fire extinguisher or something."
It's not paint. No paint is made from alluminothermic incendiaries. Please see the study itself for details, there's even a dedicated test to see whether it is all or part paint.
"organic thing is key, without it you dont have explosives."
Yes, as you quoted, the sample did contain a notable amount of carbon.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon The iron sphere they found were not on a nano scale.cement and the iron powder they put in it is about as fine as powder can get. Jones never said he proved themite he just said HE couldnt think of anything else.
ryn88220 1 year ago
@ryn88220 "The iron sphere they found were not on a nano scale"
They were much were. Not just in Jones' study either, in pretty much every study of the dust.
"and the iron powder they put in it is about as fine as powder can get"
Well, okay. What I'm pointing out is that the cement would have to be atomized for spheres to occur.
"Jones never said he proved themite he just said HE couldnt think of anything else."
That is scientifically correct. You can never really say anything else.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon So what your saying is that thermite will create a consistent level of iron shperes in every bit of dust you sample from the entire building.my problem is with the consitency ,thermite could never do that but a preexisting ingredient could. The spheres were 10 to 40 micros right micro is millionth scale ,nano is billionth scale or 1,000 times smaller. Nope not on the nano scale or even close to it at all. nano is just a mesurement term like micro.
ryn88220 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ryn88220 "So what your saying is that thermite will create a consistent level of iron shperes in every bit of dust you sample from the entire building"
Large quantities of it, yes. Or, rather, it DID.
"thermite could never do that"
Why? Iron microspheres are a very well-known product of thermite reaction.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@ryn88220 "The spheres were 10 to 40 micros right micro is millionth scale ,nano is billionth scale or 1,000 times smaller."
The spheres were on micron scale, yes. Unreacted iron oxide was on nano-scale.
Quote, "The red material contains grains approximately 100 nm across which are largely iron oxide."
"Yes I doo firefighters are trained for magnesium car fires."
How does magnesium burn in these situations?
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon I showed you watch v=KY9ri-UOoLo you can see it on the right of the car also" nano particles have been used in paint for decades" quote from this site . wwwpnlgov/nanotoxicology/media/C60_Engg_Publicationpdf yep paint has incorperated nano tech for a while. The article goes on to talk about how you can find nano particles in just about everthing you look at.
ryn88220 1 year ago
@ryn88220 "I showed you watch v=KY9ri-UOoLo"
Thanks. I was wondering if magnesium will still burn if it's part of a large hull piece, and how it will burn, if you happen to know.
"nano particles have been used in paint for decades"
Sure, small particles aren't exactly new. It's not paint, however, for reasons aforementioned. Nano-incendiaries are a very recent and very complex development.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon Well, im wondering why it wouldnt since its somewhat common in cars, " IRON OXIDE nanoparticles is used very widly.Application areas:
1, chemical, plastics, textiles, PAINTS, rubber, , sealing, etc.;
2, electronics, electronic packaging materials, ferrite materials, batteries;" and the list goes on wwwlookchemcom/iron-oxide-nanoparticles/ youll find manufactured iron oxide in well alot of shit . What type of IO was it since theres 16 diff iron oxides?
ryn88220 1 year ago
@ryn88220 "IRON OXIDE nanoparticles is used very widly"
Of course they are. The study does not make the judgment based just on presence of iron or iron oxide (however it should be noted the materials you mentioned would not produce iron or iron oxide in anything but trace amounts). The samples are subjected to a battery of tests to establish their composition, culminating in a combustion test yielding results almost precisely matching high-incendiary nano-thermite.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@ryn88220 @ryn88220 "Well, im wondering why it wouldnt since its somewhat common in cars"
Presumably not in planes. Do you know if large pieces of magnesium alloy will ignite, and how if so?
"What type of IO was it since theres 16 diff iron oxides?"
Diferumtrioxide, inferred from oxygen content relative to other elements. The same thing used in most common kind of thermite, as well as thermate, nano-thermite (which the study later proves it is), and even TH-4 incendiary grenades.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon Pardon, actually the way they determine it's FE203 is more complex than that. It's in the paper.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon So your saying rust is the main ingredient in thermite? rust was on the steel beam and they had grey paint to protect them , still looks like paint to me
ryn88220 1 year ago
@ryn88220 "rust was on the steel beam and they had grey paint to protect them"
Neither make thermite in the end. No more than household spoon makes a CPU.
"still looks like paint to me"
Did you actually read the study? No one's concluding it's thermite on the basis that it's some kind of chips that are red (and is certainly not scientific to conclude it's paint on the same basis..)
There is a battery of tests performed to arrive at the conclusions, including at least two against actual paint.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon So how are they concluding it and why arent people rushing to replicate it and why arent they getting lawyers to force an investigation since its proven beyond a shadow of a doubt?Like you say? All thernmite make a dangerous amount of uv light sometimes it really fucks with video cameras. Like so v=wVPQs9wf-RY did they confirm the presence of uv light during their flame test? And why dont you see it when the towers collapse 1000s of pounds you know?
ryn88220 1 year ago
@ryn88220 "So how are they concluding it"
You should really read the paper. It's a tough read through complex methods, but it's not as bad as some of the stuff you get in theoretical physics. Besides, it's common sense to read something before you critique something...
"why arent people rushing to replicate it"
It's a taboo subject. Most people would rather set themselves on fire than come anywhere near anything to do with 9/11. You can count scientists skeptical of truth movement on one hand.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@ryn88220 "why arent they getting lawyers to force an investigation"
Well, that would be under naive assumptions that American courts and lawyers are concerned with justice... However it's also that science is not settled in court (last time I remember that happening, US schools ended up teaching creationism...)
"did they confirm the presence of uv light during their flame test?"
No.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@ryn88220 "And why dont you see it when the towers collapse"
Presumably the charges would be placed at the inner core, and there is giant column-less floorspan between it and outside of the building (this is also the reason the planes went through the building as opposed to getting stuck in them half-way).
Still, there is still molten metal (or magnesium, let's say that for now) pre-collapse, molten iron post-collapse, numerous explosions, explosive ejections, and even flashes on occasion...
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon Presumably? ya and presumably you would just have to get past 8in block walls and all the other walls that seal that shit off. and radio transmitters arent going to work in there. So you need debt cord I think they would have found something during all of this v=Rct-B4K3VXU perhaps you would like to be the first brave truther to call it all bullshit. Theres still debri there why doesnt someone go test it . They were still sifting for body parts in 2008. 1600 peps ided. but no bombs.
ryn88220 1 year ago
@ryn88220 "ya and presumably you would just have to get past 8in block walls and all the other walls that seal that shit off."
What?
"and radio transmitters arent going to work in there."
The interference from the antenna is a factor, but it can't be impossible to bypass.
"I think they would have found something during all of this"
That's on assumption anyone was ever searching for either detonations cords or explosives or anything at all. Can't find what you're not looking for.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon So apparently you assume they didnt so thats your proof. Do you think you can just access the inner core of the building everywhere you want without tearing holes in walls you obviously dont work in construction. I guess you must also assume you can plant explosive near the plane impact zone and just set them off later at your convienence.ya im sure EVERYONE was in on it did you even watch it and see how much shit they found? I assume they would have found something on accident.
ryn88220 1 year ago
@ryn88220 "So apparently you assume they didnt so thats your proof."
I don't assume. There is no search on record that has ever searched for remains of explosives, explosive residue, wire cords, detonators, or indeed anything at all, not even before the debris was hauled off for recycling (destruction of evidence before investigation).
SexyMelon 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ryn88220 "Do you think you can just access the inner core of the building everywhere you want without tearing holes in walls"
Yes, you can. In fact, in case of WTC, drilling holes in the walls won't even achieve anything: the core is not there. The service core housed the elevator shafts and stairs, so that is where one would get access to it, through a layer of thin drywall you can easily punch through. The process - the core - would be completely invisible to inhabitants.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@ryn88220 "guess you must also assume you can plant explosive near the plane impact zone"
Why would anyone do that?
"im sure EVERYONE was in on it"
Please don't exaggerate.
"I assume they would have found something on accident."
You assume that the issue was handled legally and scientifically. It was not. The access to debris was restricted, evidence destroyed, investigations blocked, and dissent penalized.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon So you were there then? you worked on the fresh kills site ? of course it was restricted it contained 2900 peoples body parts it was a crime scene you dont just let everyone who wants to go walking all over the shit taking pics The collapse ovbiously started where the plane hit where the molten metal that I think might be magnesium is seen coming out , It was either metal from the plane or a planted device right?
ryn88220 1 year ago
@ryn88220 "So you were there then?"
No... But I do have ability to read up on things, you know? How do you know what happened, were you there?
"you worked on the fresh kills site ?"
Fresh Kills is a dump. The debris that WASN'T destroyed yet was dumped there.
"t was a crime scene you dont just let everyone who wants taking pics"
Now substitute "everyone" for FBI, CIA, FDNY and Police and you get a different picture. What is it called when you don't let police investigate?..
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon --statter911com/2010/08/30/world-trade-center-steel-arrives-in-arlington-county-virginia/ --The way I remember things a whole shit load of people got to look at the steel-.v=-Bs5Jh0dm4U- ummm theres so many pictures of twisted , bolts torn out , ripped connectors__://wtcnistgov/media/galleryhtm#recover__//americanhistorysiedu/september11/collection/recordasp?ID=34_- There are so many pics even i can tell it was a collapse
ryn88220 1 year ago
@ryn88220 "The way I remember things a whole shit load of people got to look at the steel"
I don't think you've been properly informed. MOST of the steel was destroyed - shipped off, smelted - long before Bush even raised his veto over any and all investigations of it.
By the time NIST got to it, they had to dig the remains from the bottom of a trash dump. And even then they did exactly only what you said: they looked at it.
That is not an examination.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon wtcnistgov/NCSTAR1/PDF/NCSTAR%201-3B%20Steel%20Inventorypdf more than just nist have steel and they have quite a bit. So how did all the steel get twisted up? the bolts ripped out, the connectors destroyed? does that happen in a CD? ever? Do you really need to test for explosives when its that obvious? What about all the EDD dogs? did you watch the news everyday like I did after it happened?
ryn88220 1 year ago
@ryn88220 "they have quite a bit."
NIST analyzed just over 250 pieces (not columns) from the debris they got, about 30 out of these coming from previous FEMA investigation. This is a pathetic amount in comparison to the whole building mass, and even then they never actually analyzed it for explosive residue (and, more confusingly, not even for signs of thermal exposure, as that could be evidence for fire severity).
Of course, even then they only had a small amount to work with.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@ryn88220 "So how did all the steel get twisted up? the bolts ripped out, the connectors destroyed?"
The building collapsed/demolished?.. Of course there would be a great deal of damage.
"does that happen in a CD?"
Of course?..
"Do you really need to test for explosives when its that obvious?"
With that line of thinking we'd still think the Earth was flat.
You always need to test for explosives, it's just common sense, nevermind with all the evidence pointing to it. In fact, it's the LAW.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@ryn88220 "What about all the EDD dogs?"
No bomb-sniffing dogs among them to the best of my knowledge. Even then, they'd have to be lead to thermite first.
"did you watch the news everyday like I did after it happened?"
Heck no. I don't watch the news in general, they're tripe in most every country.
Looking at the footage US was subjected to, frankly... It's like watching those propaganda films from Nazi Germany of Soviet Union. More frightening than the attack itself.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon So basically Clinton cant get a blowjob without the whole world finding out, Rumsfield cant cover up missing money without flying a missle or a plane into the pentagon, cant get rid of evidence in wtc 7 so the only choice is to demo it , fuck a paper shredder,bush cant fake an election without everyone pointing it out, or find wmds, or really do anything right, or give a speech,couldnt cover up watergate, no senator can have pussy on the side without it getting pointed out,
ryn88220 1 year ago
@ryn88220 The owner of the wtc goes on camera and says " ya i said pull it " " it was me" even though it was a massive conspiracy no one who was cruel enough to participate in mass murder had the bright idea to move to a country that doesnt extradite to the us and write a book , people like that dont really keep promises, or fear death.Twoofer logic isnt based on common sense or praticality, you need confusing exotic bomb claims that you cant prove to keep going like ufo nuts.
ryn88220 1 year ago
@ryn88220 "no one who was cruel enough to participate in mass murder had the bright idea to move to a country that doesnt extradite to the us and write a book"
Because, as we all know, secret projects just do not exist. For example, there are no secret services or terrorist groups.
Not that 9/11 was covered up in any meaningful way, there's evidence all over the place if you just care to look. The only cover-up to it was, in the end, nation's gullibility... And that seemed to work, didn't it?
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon All assumption no evidence , Im disrepectfull so that proves you right ?,why should I repsect the truth movment? All I see is BULLSHIT. "What truth exactly?Not that 9/11 was covered up in any meaningful way, there's evidence all over the place if you just care to look. The only cover-up to it was, in the end, nation's gullibility... And that seemed to work, didn't it?" 9 years all the truth movement has done is sell books and dvds? You guys shootin for justice?
ryn88220 1 year ago
@ryn88220 Perhaps everyone is just poolin there money together to get a lawyer.Or maybe Dr jones is savin money to check for UV light in his sample, like I would expect a real scientist to do, or would have done myself because no one could argue with that. The only reason for that is hes dumb and he didnt think about it, or there is no UV light and in that case he may as well set his paper on fire.You demand a high standard of evidence yet you feel im gullible for questioning his work?
ryn88220 1 year ago
@ryn88220 On the other hand, after same nine years and - what - a grand total of three investigations... Is there even a single piece of physical evidence to support the official conspiracy?..
"Or maybe Dr jones is savin money to check for UV light in his sample, like I would expect a real scientist to do"
You haven not even read his paper. You are not allowed to comment on it or make arbitrary requests you don't even understand.
"because no one could argue with that"
I would. It's ambiguous.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@ryn88220 "You demand a high standard of evidence yet you feel im gullible for questioning his work?"
You're questioning nothing as far as I'm concerned.
Precisely every argument you listed I've heard a thousand times before from the debunker rumour mill, and 90% of them are refuted - note - by the very paper they're supposed to be arguing against (don't say - assert without any basis, rather - it's paint when the paper itself has already checked whether it is).
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@ryn88220 Jones' paper documents physical evidence, which is more than I can say for the official conspiracy theory.
I will reserve many doubts against it until any further testing, but documenting physical evidence through scientific methodology trumps every speculation that official conspiracy has to offer, and it would be both delusional and hypocritical to deny evidence presented by the same method responsible for every technological advancement created.
I respect science, personally.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@ryn88220 "All assumption no evidence"
That's denial. Not an argument. I can provide many lines of evidence and back up each and every one of them. Even the video we're commenting on provides very hard evidence for molten metal, whether there's another possibility for it or not.
"Im disrepectfull so that proves you right?"
Pretty much. When all you can offer is name-calling rather than evidence to the contrary, that's pretty much a total loss.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@ryn88220 "why should I repsect the truth movment?"
Respect =/= Bias
You have no argument other than insult at the moment, and that is very poor. Our discussion began as a polite exchange of arguments, you brought up magnesium in response to a point, I acknowledged it... But now it's just a slew of insults from your side.
That is not an argument. If that's all you can do despite not having an argument, then you simply don't care about what's real, whether you're right.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@ryn88220 "9 years all the truth movement has done is sell books and dvds?"
I already rebuked that argument, didn't I? By that logic all official story did in nine years is just sell books and DVDs because 9/11 Commission Report sells for 40$ on e-bay.
In nine years, the movement reached an unprecedented amount of organization and support for any grassroots movement and, more importantly, produced a huge wealth of evidence supporters of the official theory have to dance around to begin with.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon
that's just plain wrong, you people are delusional and have no substantiated "evidence". Just speculation and bullshit.
Timmay123456789 1 year ago
@Timmay123456789 Well, that's only delusional and non-argument on your part.
We have scientifically verified thermite residue, NIST-certified free-fall times, hundreds of witness testimonies of chain heavy-duty flashes and explosions pre-collapse, testimony and recordings of molten iron and many other things...
What do you have? Even one piece of evidence after all these years?
Do you really think it's okay to believe any bullshit conspiracies just because they're endorsed by the government?
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon
first off, the thermATE residue is complete bullshit, see dprjone's videos on that. The tower collapse times were timed by rowen on one of his video's that shows the exact collapse time (spoiler, they're not free fall). There were no flashes pre-collapse, not to mention anecdotal evidence is the weakest kind of evidence. Also, iron has a melting point lower than the fires that took place in the world trade center (both elemental and cast iron).
U want evidence, what for?
Timmay123456789 1 year ago
@Timmay123456789 "thermATE"
Correct.
"see dprjone's videos on that"
DPR never addressed the study, he only went on a tangent ad hominem of insulting and berating an already poor publication.
Why would you allow someone else to do the thinking for you anyway?
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon
not all of us are experts on physical chemistry, and criticism is needed on both sided, so for me to refer to someone's explanation is not exactly letting them do the thinking for me. I do agree with the close to-but not free fall speeds though. The NIST has a good explanation for those.
There may have been flashes for unexpected reasons, but the flashes were NOT consistent with controlled demolitions.
On the topic of thermate again...
Timmay123456789 1 year ago
@Timmay123456789 "not all of us are experts on physical chemistry, and criticism is needed on both sided, so for me to refer to someone's explanation is not exactly letting them do the thinking for me"
Except, of course, DPR is not a chemist, physicist, nor did he ever address the paper, nor does he ever address scientific issues.
As it stands both you and him reject the only scientific paper ever published on issue of 9/11 that is an actual study as opposed to speculation for no good reason.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Timmay123456789 ...But, yes, much more debate is warranted on the issue one way or the other, I agree.
"I do agree with the close to-but not free fall speeds though."
Good. I mean, I've seen people deny this, even though all official investigations to date agree with this.
"The NIST has a good explanation for those."
Which is?..
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@Timmay123456789 "There may have been flashes for unexpected reasons, but the flashes were NOT consistent with controlled demolitions."
Chain heavy-duty flashes in spans of seconds as well as pre-collapse flashes, flashes accompanied by bangs going "up and down the building" is very much consistent with demolition.
Mind, WTC wouldn't be an ordinary demolition, but rather a covert one, if it were to be done.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@Timmay123456789 "The tower collapse times were timed by rowen on one of his video's that shows the exact collapse time (spoiler, they're not free fall)."
RKOwens is an idiot. His collapse times are timed from DUST and actually disagree with every "official" investigation to date: both 9/11 Commission and NIST estimate the collapse times as 9 and 12 seconds respectively.
But, yes, it's not free-fall. Except for parts of WTC 7, which NIST admits IS free-fall.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon
The only study i can seem to find is that terrible study in the open journal on physical chemistry that even mentions thermate. DPR jones did a good job refuting the claims of the paper, and finding the biases of the writers of said article. If you can refute his video, please, show me how it is wrong.
I dont see what your point about the molten iron in the rubble, considering how low the melting point of iron is in terms of the fires that did burn.
Conspiracy = bullshit
Timmay123456789 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Timmay123456789 "that terrible study ... DPR jones did a good job refuting the claims of the paper"
DPR never addressed the paper at all. He only slandered the publication for not being top-tier, which is about as fair as criticizing Kinsey studies or Einstein's work on the same basis. This is why I told you to "think for yourself": read the paper, don't just trust what others try to come up with about its publishers.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@Timmay123456789 "If you can refute his video, please, show me how it is wrong."
If I'm missing something and DPR has ever addressed anything in the paper, I'm reasonably sure I've heard a dozen different wrong-hoods about it by now, so if you direct me to the video or specific claims, it should be easy enough.
If you can though, please don't throw baseless accusations out there, groundless claims are just poor sport, and very annoying to try and refute on any subject.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@Timmay123456789 "considering how low the melting point of iron is in terms of the fires that did burn."
An average office fire burns at 1,100C, fires in WTC are estimated by NIST to burn at maximum of 600C (250C by physical data), iron/steel melts at 1,300-1,500C.
This is why there is no other case in history of this occurring.
Frankly it's obvious no building should look "like a foundry, with flowing lava" weeks after any kind fire.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon
It's one thing to average the temperature of the fires, but at specific points, temperatures of 1800 degrees were measured.
The free-fall issue seems more like a non-issue since both parties seem to agree that it was close, but not exactly free fall.
What i'm more interested in getting across is the irrationality of the claim that it was a controlled demolition. I see no empirical evidence to support the claim of a controlled demolition.
Timmay123456789 1 year ago
@Timmay123456789 "It's one thing to average the temperature of the fires, but at specific points, temperatures of 1800 degrees were measured."
I don't know this to be true. Source?
I'm assuming you mean Fahrenheit, in which case the average I listed is actually a bit higher.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@Timmay123456789 "The free-fall issue seems more like a non-issue since both parties seem to agree that it was close, but not exactly free fall."
"Freefall" is a red herring, generally coming from misinformed opinion from one or both sides.
The actual issue is the implications of resistance offered by building components in light of near-constant near-free-fall acceleration (next to none, doesn't mesh well with giant steel structure), as well as *actual* free-fall of parts of WTC7 (same).
SexyMelon 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Timmay123456789 "I see no empirical evidence to support the claim of a controlled demolition."
That's an admirable position, to base your beliefs on evidence, so kudos for that.
Likewise, I see no evidence to support the claim of fire-based collapses.
As far as evidence for demolition goes, however, I can cite off the top of my head... Aforementioned near-free-fall (measuring acceleration is more reliable than time), horizontal level and symmetry of the collapses... Cont.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
...The aforementioned occurrence of chain heavy-duty explosions, flashes and visible explosive ejections ("squibs") abundant both on record and in witness testimony, thermitic residue of course, recorded molten iron flows pre-collapse, noted flows of molten iron and red-hot iron as long as weeks after the collapse, lack of deceleration of the collapse (either decrease in speed or acceleration), the race of explosions along surfaces of WTC1/2... Cont.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
...Lack of expected "jolts" (momentary deceleration) signaling lack of any actual impact with the lower floors, the horizontally level nature of the collapses, lack of collapse tilt progression for the WTC1/2 tops (self-contradiction: if the top tilts, then building's own resistance is enough to cause yet, yet the tilt does not progress, signaling no further resistance), and many others.
I can substantiate ("prove") all of the above if you want, but I suggest just looking it up yourself.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
Oh and, yeah, I could outline plenty of falsehoods within the "official" story itself - if anyone wants Pancake Theory or Core Meltdown Theory refuted, I suggest asking NIST instead - but I don't know if it would count as evidence to the contrary or not.
So, yeah, see leads below.
Cheers.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@Timmay123456789 Oh yeah. Many of the things listed can actually be directly observed in another case of controlled demolition - Verinage - which doesn't use explosives.
It occurs three times slower than free-fall, experiences notable jolts, it always has to be initiated in the middle (basic implications of Newton's third law), and so on.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
You can also look up some recorded fire-based collapses, but it'll be much harder. Obviously enough not one building in history has ever collapsed in the manner of WTC1/2 (manner of top-down controlled demolition, basically), whereas steel-frame buildings have notably never collapsed at all ("debunker" sites generally give crud examples of this occurring, but if you look at those, the nature of their collapse refutes WTC1/2's collapse more than supports it, so it's not a good idea either way)
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@Timmay123456789 "Conspiracy = bullshit"
Interesting closure to otherwise polite and well-thought posts...
May I remind you that any act of terror is a co-operation between multiple people in secret with a plan to carry out a crime is a "conspiracy" by definition, and that anything that is not proven true beyond reasonable doubt is a "theory" by definition?
We're both "conspiracy nuts" here. Being endorsed by the government doesn't make your conspiracy any better. In fact, I'd say it's worse.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@Timmay123456789 Errata: NIST does also agree with *exact* free-fall acceleration of WTC 7's descent for a span of about 2,5 seconds.
Otherwise, yes, they claim collapse times of about 9, 12 and 7 seconds respectively, which are pretty close to free-fall.
Of course, it's fallacious to judge free-fall based on full collapse times as opposed to acceleration, especially seeing how free-fall rarely if ever occurs during controlled demolitions, partially for the same reason.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@Timmay123456789 "There were no flashes pre-collapse"
"Mean, it could have been as a result of the building collapsing, things exploding, but I saw a flash flash flash and then it looked like the building came down..."
There are at least six dozen such reports. Hundreds more of pre-collapse chain heavy-duty explosions, "like when they blow up a building".
"anecdotal evidence is the weakest kind of evidence"
Witness testimony =/= Anecdotal evidence
SexyMelon 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Timmay123456789 "Also, iron has a melting point lower than the fires that took place in the world trade center"
That's just stupid, sorry (that's 1,000C VS 1,300-1,500C). Besides, are you seriously going to tell us fires melted steel?..
"U want evidence, what for?"
Haha. What, you don't think you need any evidence for your conspiracy theory?..
Do some research. What exactly do you expect you'll find if you only look at one side of the debate?
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@Timmay123456789 To reiterate...
Thermate residue was indeed scientifically identified whether you like it or not, NIST admit free-fall times for segments of WTC 7 as well as near-free-fall for all three collapses, there are indeed hundreds of witnesses of demolition-like precursor events - and cross-referenced witness testimony is very valid evidence -and... Well, I don't know why would presence of molten IRON not be a dead give-away. Whenever did you hear of that happening anywhere else?
SexyMelon 1 year ago
...And even though there's this small mountain of hard evidence and a much larger yet unmentioned pile of evidence behind it for the "conspiracy theory"...
What exactly is the evidence for so-called "official story" at all? (Spoiler: There isn't any.)
I mean, as far as conspiracies go, there's only one "theory" here, and it's the one we've all swallowed since 2001. Just because something is paraded by politicians doesn't mean it's true any more than those WMDs, does it?..
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@ryn88220 "you need confusing exotic bomb claims that you cant prove"
It has already been proven with multiple lines of evidence, which even you are already aware of. So this is just bold-faced lie and denialism.
"Twoofer"
Well, that alone basically puts the nail in the coffin of this discussion.
You are disrespectful, you'd rather argue against stereotypes than the truth, and you don't care about truth itself.
This is delusional in the highest degree. Have fun with that.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@ryn88220 "So basically Clinton cant get a blowjob without the whole world finding out, Rumsfield cant cover up missing money "
And yet US, UK and Canada can work together with over 300,000 people in total secrecy for almost decade of development of a gigantic super-weapon.
(Project Manhattan.)
The fallacy is assuming that secret things are somehow NEVER kept in actual secret. Of course they are. The things you listed are exceptions, no the rule.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ryn88220 "Rumsfield cant cover up missing money without flying a missle or a plane into the pentagon"
Why not.
"cant get rid of evidence in wtc 7 so the only choice is to demo it , fuck a paper shredder"
Because how you destroy evidence you have no control of or access to is just walk in and put it in a shredder.
"bush cant fake an election without everyone pointing it out"
And yet it doesn't seem like anyone cares, he still got to be President. Peculiar, isn't it?
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@ryn88220 And, of course, another fallacy here is assuming: a)The Bush administration were somehow the masterminds behind this; b)That politicians are inept because they can't properly do stuff they don't care about doing in the first place (I.e. caring about their citizens).
"The owner of the wtc goes on camera and says " ya i said pull it " " it was me"
Now I didn't even mention it, nor indeed any of the other things you said.
If you want to argue with yourself, use a mirror.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@ryn88220 "There are so many pics even i can tell it was a collapse"
Well, of course it was a collapse?..
What I'm trying to point out is that the investigation simply was not proper. It's perfectly reasonable for you to assume it was proper investigation if not more rigorous than usual. In reality it was blocked, obstructed, stiffed, evidence destroyed, and ultimately only cause of collapse investigated (no checking for explosives) and even that could not get a single piece of evidence for it.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@ryn88220 ...So there isn't really any explanation as to why explosives weren't found if they were there: they were never searched for in the first place, we wouldn't know if there were. Pretty much nothing were searched for. Nor could be after most of the debris was removed from the scene or simply destroyed.
This is why the chief request of "truth movement" is a new investigation: one that actually investigates something, as opposed to dabbling in baseless speculations.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ryn88220 "The collapse ovbiously started where the plane hit"
And?..
"molten metal that I think might be magnesium"
Well, the key to this theory is: a)Is there enough magnesium in plane hull or interior to burn like that?; b)Do large parts burn at all?
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@ryn88220 "Theres still debri there why doesnt someone go test it "
This is pretty much the main demand of all the truth movements out there: let people test the debris, however little of it is still left. So far most of this stuff is under strict lockdown and out of reach of public.
"Ya and no actuall conclusive proof that its nano thermite he just found the ingredients on an elemental level."
No he didn't, that's what I'm trying to explain... There was a whole battery of different tests.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon please show me evidence of post collapse molten structual iron please. and explain to me how thermite could sustain these temps after a collapse does it burn for days.?explosive ejection ya ive seen that , theres no blast front no pressure wave there not explosions ,there way too slow . Show me how nano thermite could even cut through a steel beam? have you ever seen any thermite cut through a steel beam?
ryn88220 1 year ago
@ryn88220 "please show me evidence of post collapse molten structual iron please"
If you have access to FEMA photographs, there's a few of pictures of red-hot and melted steel. The presence of molten steel is most abundant in witness accounts, however.
“In the first few weeks, sometimes when a worker would pull a steel beam from the wreckage, the end of the beam would be dripping molten steel.”
PM me if you want more details, there's a lot of data there.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@ryn88220 "and explain to me how thermite could sustain these temps after a collapse does it burn for days.?"
Thermite would generate them to begin with, after which insulation provided by the debris would trap the heat. An ordinary fire can't do that - even though it is often enough to melt weaker metals - and indeed it didn't even on 9/11, at WTC4,5,6 sites. Molten steel was only reported at WTC1,2,7.
Another factor is that thermite does not need oxygen to burn.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@ryn88220 "theres no blast front no pressure wave there not explosions ,there way too slow"
Elaborate, please?..
"Show me how nano thermite could even cut through a steel beam?"
That is it's very purpose. Ordinary thermite and even thermate ( /watch?v=Wn-MCCZ3O1M ) are well-known for their ability to cut through steel, and so are virtually any explosives in right amount, in a shaped charge.
"have you ever seen any thermite cut through a steel beam?"
It's not thermite, it's nano-thermate.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@ryn88220 tl;dr: Read the paper. If not all of it, at least the "Conclusions" or "Discussion" part. It's just common sense.
There's really a lot of stuff in it, including multiple comparisons to actual paint, actual nano-thermite, tests again different compounds (including various iron oxides), multiple spectrography and calorimetry, whether such chips are found in known collapses (which they'd have to be if they were from ordinary materials), and many other things.
It's not mere speculation.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon Ya and no actuall conclusive proof that its nano thermite he just found the ingredients on an elemental level. Why didnt he submitt this to nist with his other stuff? Was it published in a reputable scientific journal? i have read it its deceiving he should have just tested for UV light. Everything he found can be found in construction materials.v=KWQaYv8-mJs this is your hero
ryn88220 1 year ago
@ryn88220 "Why didnt he submitt this to nist with his other stuff?"
He did. The reason NIST mention molten aluminum/iron/magnesium flows is because Jones corrected them on that. Everything else they pretty much ignored, including follow-up tests of aluminum glow.
I find it peculiar NIST did not say it was magnesium also.
"Was it published in a reputable scientific journal?"
Sadly not. Betham is a proper scientific journal, but of no academic standing.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ryn88220 "i have read it its deceiving he should have just tested for UV light."
There are many ways to determine whether something is what you think it is or otherwise. UV emission would help, but it's also rather ambiguous: many substances radiate it.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@ryn88220 "Everything he found can be found in construction materials."
"If a paint were devised that incorporated these very energetic materials, it would be highly dangerous when dry and most unlikely to receive regulatory approval for building use."
It's not paint for myriad of reasons. Just because something contains iron doesn't mean it's paint. It's a common element. No one's making the judgement based on something like this alone.
Please read the study.
SexyMelon 1 year ago