- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: 2nd plane from an angle I had not seen.
Posted on 9/14/21 at 6:51 pm to 87PurpleandGold
Posted on 9/14/21 at 6:51 pm to 87PurpleandGold
quote:
I'll check it out. Interestingly, none of the "clowns" who responded can explain why thermite was found in the debris:
Alright. Let’s take a look at this scientific paper.
1) What kind of scientific study is even considered on samples that were given to the researchers 6 years after the collapse? Not kept in a sterile environment. Kept by ordinary people showing it to everyone who asks what that jar is on the mantle.
2) I point to the part of “ Other peaks included calcium, sul-fur, zinc, chromium and potassium. The occurrence of these elements could be attributed to surface contamination due to the fact that the analysis was performed on the as-collected surface of the red layer.”
Outright admission of contamination of the sample.
3). That paper never states the stuff is thermite. No where. I looked three times. It said it reminded them of it. That’s it. Elsewhere it said they didn’t even try to identify what it was. Only that they would like to compare it with an actual sample.
4). They keep alluding to the concentration of Iron oxide (rust) and aluminum in the sample…. Well.. these were triple digit floor buildings with iron, steel, and aluminum in the structure. There may have been a little of that in the rubble.
5) the paper basically makes no conclusions. None. There are maybes. Perhaps. Reminds them of. Etc. Nothing conclusive.
Ok. Let’s look at some logic.
-if there was thermite in the building around the beams…. How did it stand as long as it did? Thermite melted beams would have resulted in collapse MUCH sooner than it actually happened.
-how did they get a boatload of it in the building unnoticed? Applied to the columns? Any records of construction work that was invasive enough to get to the columns? Any witnesses to torn down and replaced walls? Remember… the buildings had center support columns as well as the perimeter. So they would be walking through offices to place it.
-how did a thermite substance not simply explode when exposed to the burning jet fuel? And simply result in subsequent explosions after the crash?
That’s a garbage paper that the folks that published it should be embarrassed by.
This post was edited on 9/14/21 at 7:08 pm
2
Posted on 9/14/21 at 7:20 pm to CleverUserName
quote:
That’s a garbage paper that the folks that published it should be embarrassed by.
People that believe the buildings were brought down with demolitions should be embarrassed.
Posted on 9/14/21 at 10:16 pm to CleverUserName
To be clear, firstly, I am not saying they were brought down by “explosives” or “thermite”. But I am considering evidence in the debris and other models and papers by Civil Engineers stating that planes were not enough to collapse the Towers.
Not sure why the timelapse in collecting the samples. I do know it took a long time to go through it. Ideally, it would have been better of course to have the samples sooner rather than later. However, we are not talking organic material. Metals stay intact. Particularly, thermitic material is literally aluminum and iron oxide which was found in the debris.
Of course you are going to find calcium, and zinc, etc after sitting in a pile of debris from a super structure such as the Towers. The calcium and sulfur may be from the pulverized gypsum from the wallboard in the Towers. So, no surprise; especially after six years. But that doesn’t negate the fact that thermitic material was in the debris.
The term, “Thermitic material” is used ALL throughout the paper. This is referring to active, energetic aluminum and iron oxide, i.e. there is enough material in the debris to trigger intense heat once enough heat is provided. The last sentence of Point 4 on page 21 literally states, “The evidence for active, highly energetic thermitic material in the WTC dust is compelling.”
The analysis differentiated between oxidized aluminum and elemental or free aluminum and iron oxide exist in the red material by using MEK (methyl ethyl ketone) in Point 2. However, that didn’t mean it was thermitic. They tested the material with a Calorimeter, and there was thermitic material there. They only provided 430 C (806 degF) of heat to cause ignition. (Last paragraph of Point 5 on page 22.)
Page 29 of the Study literally shows 10 conclusions. The last sentence states: “…we conclude that the red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material.”
These are great questions. I’m guessing that the material could be applied by painting or spraying the beams, possibly?? I’m sure there were regular maintenance projects or inspections going on. So, if I were really diving in, that’s the first place I’d check.
I think if someone really knew what they were doing, causing an extreme exothermic reaction as opposed to a literal explosion would do the trick. It’s a good question for a demolition expert, but looking at the chemistry of it, I’m fairly confident it could be done.
Again, I’m not saying the WTC collapsed with 100% certainty by thermitic material; however, there seems to be enough evidence and analytical data to at least cause one to doubt. I find it hard to believe that jets alone caused the collapse. However, they definitely could provide the heat to trigger the thermitic material to cause intense heat needed for the catastrophic failure. It makes me sick just thinking it, but I’ve learned over the past 50 years, that I have to question both the media and, sadly, our own government and the narratives they push.
quote:
1) What kind of scientific study is even considered on samples that were given to the researchers 6 years after the collapse? Not kept in a sterile environment. Kept by ordinary people showing it to everyone who asks what that jar is on the mantle.
Not sure why the timelapse in collecting the samples. I do know it took a long time to go through it. Ideally, it would have been better of course to have the samples sooner rather than later. However, we are not talking organic material. Metals stay intact. Particularly, thermitic material is literally aluminum and iron oxide which was found in the debris.
quote:
2) I point to the part of “ Other peaks included calcium, sul-fur, zinc, chromium and potassium. The occurrence of these elements could be attributed to surface contamination due to the fact that the analysis was performed on the as-collected surface of the red layer.”
Outright admission of contamination of the sample.
Of course you are going to find calcium, and zinc, etc after sitting in a pile of debris from a super structure such as the Towers. The calcium and sulfur may be from the pulverized gypsum from the wallboard in the Towers. So, no surprise; especially after six years. But that doesn’t negate the fact that thermitic material was in the debris.
quote:
3). That paper never states the stuff is thermite. No where. I looked three times. It said it reminded them of it. That’s it. Elsewhere it said they didn’t even try to identify what it was. Only that they would like to compare it with an actual sample.
The term, “Thermitic material” is used ALL throughout the paper. This is referring to active, energetic aluminum and iron oxide, i.e. there is enough material in the debris to trigger intense heat once enough heat is provided. The last sentence of Point 4 on page 21 literally states, “The evidence for active, highly energetic thermitic material in the WTC dust is compelling.”
quote:
4). They keep alluding to the concentration of Iron oxide (rust) and aluminum in the sample…. Well.. these were triple digit floor buildings with iron, steel, and aluminum in the structure. There may have been a little of that in the rubble.
The analysis differentiated between oxidized aluminum and elemental or free aluminum and iron oxide exist in the red material by using MEK (methyl ethyl ketone) in Point 2. However, that didn’t mean it was thermitic. They tested the material with a Calorimeter, and there was thermitic material there. They only provided 430 C (806 degF) of heat to cause ignition. (Last paragraph of Point 5 on page 22.)
quote:
5) the paper basically makes no conclusions. None. There are maybes. Perhaps. Reminds them of. Etc. Nothing conclusive.
Page 29 of the Study literally shows 10 conclusions. The last sentence states: “…we conclude that the red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material.”
quote:
Ok. Let’s look at some logic.
-if there was thermite in the building around the beams…. How did it stand as long as it did? Thermite melted beams would have resulted in collapse MUCH sooner than it actually happened.
-how did they get a boatload of it in the building unnoticed? Applied to the columns? Any records of construction work that was invasive enough to get to the columns? Any witnesses to torn down and replaced walls? Remember… the buildings had center support columns as well as the perimeter. So they would be walking through offices to place it.
These are great questions. I’m guessing that the material could be applied by painting or spraying the beams, possibly?? I’m sure there were regular maintenance projects or inspections going on. So, if I were really diving in, that’s the first place I’d check.
quote:
-how did a thermite substance not simply explode when exposed to the burning jet fuel? And simply result in subsequent explosions after the crash?
I think if someone really knew what they were doing, causing an extreme exothermic reaction as opposed to a literal explosion would do the trick. It’s a good question for a demolition expert, but looking at the chemistry of it, I’m fairly confident it could be done.
Again, I’m not saying the WTC collapsed with 100% certainty by thermitic material; however, there seems to be enough evidence and analytical data to at least cause one to doubt. I find it hard to believe that jets alone caused the collapse. However, they definitely could provide the heat to trigger the thermitic material to cause intense heat needed for the catastrophic failure. It makes me sick just thinking it, but I’ve learned over the past 50 years, that I have to question both the media and, sadly, our own government and the narratives they push.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News