dprjones about Thermite, 9/11 Troofers dont want you to see this (mirror of flagged down video)

subscribe to:
http://www.youtube.com/user/dprjones

It seems like these 9/11 troofers start getting seriously annoyed by our debuking of their nonsensical mythology. Like most fringe groups that believe nonsense to be real based on ignorance would react in this situation, they try to solve the problem by silencing their critics. And it is the only tactic they have left, thats how desperate their situation in their current battle against common sense is. Seems like just like with young earth creationism, all we have to do is to defy their attempts of censorship and get our material out there and keep exposing them.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• 9/11
• truth
• movement
• wearechange
• wearechangela
• zeitgeist
• addendum
• inside
• job
• conspiracy
• building
• thermite
• nanothermite
• thermate
• controlled
• demolition
• censorship
• conspiracy theory
• analysis

[Daddyo930]

The reason this bullshit was flagged down is because it represents junk science. This nonsense was debunked long time ago. Case closed. The amount of views should be representative of it's "truth". No one bothers with this crap because that's exactly what this video is. Junk science peddled by messenger boys working for grocery clerks.

[kurtilein3]

@Daddyo930

"The reason this bullshit was flagged down is because it represents junk science." Reasonable people dont flag down stuff they disagree with. Apart from that, you are wrong. Did you do experiments with home-made thermite? Have you made thermite yourself from the ingredients? Have you lit thermite yourself and watch it burn? Have you calculated the energy the reaction gives off? For me, the answer to all of these questions is: YES. What is your answer?

[kurtilein3]

@Daddyo930

also, this video is quite good at explaining scientific principles to a broader audience. your claim that it is "junk science" is based only on your own misconceptions, i think. What reasons do you have, that can be made sense of by others, that this vide contains or promotes "junk science"? I think this video exposes junk science.

[alimort1]

Truthers don't want us to see this cos they know it's a waste of time.

// It´s really no surprise to find rust and iron in the debris of a steel frame building. And for the aluminium or aluminium-oxide - remember what material the planes had been built with. //

And how common is nano scale rust?

100nm = 0.0000001m

10nm = 0.00000001m or 0.0001 mm

Evident in substantial quantities in all dust samples tested

DUST mind you. Why no solid concrete?

Concrete turned to DUST?

[kurtilein3]

@alimort1

DUST... yeah, well, why no solid concrete in the dust samples? Maybe because you just dont include rocks when taking dust samples.

nano scale rust is incredibly common when a steel building just went down. do i need to remind you of all the people that turned sick because they inhaled the concrete dust? at least nano scale rust is not as toxic as nano scale concrete.

i dont see what point you are even trying to make. nanoscale particles of a common material in dust, yeah.

[BillSalem]

@kurtilein3 The fact that skeptics abandon ship means nothing. Bush/Cheney had many motives and as much as spelled out a confession on the PNAC website; long since discreetly removed.  PNAC said that America can and would do anything for any reason. If that involved invading small countries for profit. No problemo!

You attack Jones integrity for publishing in discredited journals without asking if his options might be few, due to Bush's political intervention, hence editorial bias.

[MrKoenig1985]

Pseudo-scientists?

Wait a minute, the paper of Steven Jones is after all peer-reviewed. Don't forget that.

[Daddyo930]

@kurtilein3 You only get one chance to get this right. If you believe in the government's official "conspiracy" theory, then you would have no problem with NIST releasing all their reports and data used for the computer simulation of the "progressive collapse" for peer review because peer review would prove you right. Do you or do you not agree that NIST should submit it's reports and data for peer review?

[lizardfirefighter110]

Ok, the authors of the paper should have picked a more credible journal and followed publishing protocol. OK, the authors were bias and doctored a photo. Furthermore, they did not do experiments that conclusively demonstrated that the red chips found in the dust were not paint chips. Poor work on their part. My question is then who should do the research to reinvestigate just WTF the chips are and how they came to be in the 9/11 dust?

[jumppack1]

@kurtilein3 your the type that was telling people gulf of tonkin is real, ur that type of sheep. you just believe your government, they care for you, they love you.

[marquedesade]

@kurtilein3 No we are talking about nano particles thats can only be manufactured a a very select few labs in the entire world. I quantifiable quantities that are absurd. You throw out sound bits and catch words like pseudo science like it gives you any credibility. while at the same time ignoring solid evidence which you can't refute.

This video proves nothing at all. It has nothing BUT conjecture and opinion. None, Not even one sound bit that is scientific in nature. So where is the evidence?