• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Loose Change - Part IV

Status
Not open for further replies.
Its funny, I am reading up on Thermite and Thermate, and the very first thing that strikes me is...

Ya, you can use them for demolition, but by god you are picking one of the most difficult, unsafe, unsure ways of doing it.

This stuff is unstable, hard to ignite, unreliable, requires great skill and time to set up..
 
but it sounds really cool when used in a conspiracy theory so that proves it was thermite/thermate/super-duper-nano-thermate-limited-edition
 
MarkyX said:
LOL. Final Cut contains the same debunked crap already...

Fetzer? The Jones brothers? Using old CNN footage to prove hijackers were alive?

WHen it comes to facts, they're already gone. The problem is the Denial Movement doesn't care for such things, otherwise they wouldn't exist.
Click to expand...

Just watched the "9/11 deniers speak" video.

It really is infuriating how much total disregard for anything of value these people have.

And this Fetzer fellow's a real piece of work, isn't he ? Yep. Beat 'em up with your luggage, boy. See if that works.
 
T.A.M. said:
Its funny, I am reading up on Thermite and Thermate, and the very first thing that strikes me is...

Ya, you can use them for demolition, but by god you are picking one of the most difficult, unsafe, unsure ways of doing it.

This stuff is unstable, hard to ignite, unreliable, requires great skill and time to set up..
Click to expand...

Ah, but cold thermate....
 
But he has special "disarming" luggage that is able to render conventional bombs and explosives inoperable.
 
The journal for 9/11 studies:

Editors:

Prof. Steven E. Jones
Department of Physics and Astronomy
N-269 Eyring Science Center
Brigham Young University
Provo, Utah, USA 84602
Steven_Jones@byu.edu

ADVISORY EDITORIAL BOARD

Alex Floum, Marcus Ford, Derrick Grimmer, Richard McGinn, Kimberly Moore, Robert Moore, Diana Ralph, Kevin Ryan, Robert Stevens, Lon Waters and Paul Zarembka.

Manuscripts to be considered for publication should be sent to one of the Editors. All papers will be subjected to peer-review prior to online publication.

Preferably, manuscripts should be submitted electronically. Referee reports and correspondence should also be sent by e-mail if possible.


I post this, as it is suppose to contain "peer reviewed articles". Is the advisory board the "Peers" who review, and if not then who? If so, anyone know their qualifications.

I am guess it is a farce of a legitimate peer review.
 
Belz... said:
Just watched the "9/11 deniers speak" video.

It really is infuriating how much total disregard for anything of value these people have.

And this Fetzer fellow's a real piece of work, isn't he ? Yep. Beat 'em up with your luggage, boy. See if that works.
Click to expand...

Well, it would work (assuming everybody else fought back as well). The key is that's September 12th thinking, not September 11th. Nobody on the morning of September 11th would have thought of fighting back against a group of hijackers, unless they found out their plane was doomed if they didn't.

It's really akin to historicism; judging the people of the past by the standards of today. It's hard to avoid when thinking about slaveholders or segregationists, but this reveals how mistaken one can be when judging incidents of only a few years ago.
 
T.A.M. said:
This stuff is unstable, hard to ignite, unreliable, requires great skill and time to set up..
Click to expand...

it's actually very stable until lit. It doesn't go off by accident. It's slow burning too. Not really an explosive.
 
There was a video on youtube of some US soldiers putting a thermite grenade on a safe they found and igniting it, but it doesn't seem to be there any more. Basically they were goofing off, didn't look like they were carrying out an order or anything like that. Just doing stuff any 19 year old would do given a thermite grenade coupled w/ boredom...

eta: found it on google video.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2289367460324643450
 
Last edited:
I wonder if he reported these death threats to the police...

They can't possibly expect people to take this journal seriously, at least not as a SCIENTIFIC Journal.. Maybe as a parody, but then again it is too far off the mark to even resemble a parody.

just rediculous.
 
sorry, I meant with respect to remote, timed, detonation. I am no expert, but from my reading, it seems like it is easy to activate with a blow torch, but requires some prep to detonate remotely with fuses etc.. Am I wrong.
 
So I am reading roger over at LC, and he is commenting that the air force has admitted to "Scrambling" jets 67 times, but that PM says that the only plane intercepted was payne stewarts, and that this a huge mistake made by the PM article.

So I am asking myself...(1) does scramble mean airborne and searching for something (2) are aircraft only "Scrambled" to intercept other aircraft, or are there other reasons to scramble jets, and (3) how is PM wrong. Certainly not from what roger says. 67 scrambles and one intercept of aircraft in US airspace are not statements that are incompatable with each other.
 
kevin said:
it's actually very stable until lit. It doesn't go off by accident. It's slow burning too. Not really an explosive.
Click to expand...
I'm sure this has been covered here before, but isn't it extremely difficult to use thermite/ate to cut horizontally? Every video I've ever seen of a thermite reaction, it just burns through whatever it's on (like alien blood).

How would it cut through core columns?
 
I guess if you taped them using duct tape to the columns

| |
| |
Thermate
| |
| |

:)
 
T.A.M. said:
So I am reading roger over at LC, and he is commenting that the air force has admitted to "Scrambling" jets 67 times, but that PM says that the only plane intercepted was payne stewarts, and that this a huge mistake made by the PM article.

So I am asking myself...(1) does scramble mean airborne and searching for something (2) are aircraft only "Scrambled" to intercept other aircraft, or are there other reasons to scramble jets, and (3) how is PM wrong. Certainly not from what roger says. 67 scrambles and one intercept of aircraft in US airspace are not statements that are incompatable with each other.
Click to expand...

I've always assumed that in the vast majority of the cases the order to scramble was called back before the planes even reached the air, and that even in those where the fighters went aloft, they were called back as well as the planes finally responded to radio contact. After all, how many hijackings were there in the US recently, prior to 9-11? The last one I can remember is the nut on the PSA flight who shot the pilots and that was 1987.
 
T.A.M. said:
So I am reading roger over at LC, and he is commenting that the air force has admitted to "Scrambling" jets 67 times, but that PM says that the only plane intercepted was payne stewarts, and that this a huge mistake made by the PM article.

So I am asking myself...(1) does scramble mean airborne and searching for something (2) are aircraft only "Scrambled" to intercept other aircraft, or are there other reasons to scramble jets, and (3) how is PM wrong. Certainly not from what roger says. 67 scrambles and one intercept of aircraft in US airspace are not statements that are incompatable with each other.
Click to expand...

According to FAA website..

http://www.faa.gov/ATPUBS/MIL/Ch1/mil0103.3.html

Scramble. Departure of an aircraft training for or for the purpose of participating in an air defense mission.

Scramble Order. A command and authorization for flight requiring time, of not more than 5 minutes, to become airborne.

Intercept is also a seperate order

Intercept. The encounter with or tracking of an airborne object, normally as a result of a flight path preplanned to effect such encounter in the shortest practicable time.

In conclusion, just because a plane scrambles doesn't mean they intercept. Both are completely seperate entities.
 
realitybites said:
I'm sure this has been covered here before, but isn't it extremely difficult to use thermite/ate to cut horizontally? Every video I've ever seen of a thermite reaction, it just burns through whatever it's on (like alien blood).

How would it cut through core columns?
Click to expand...

Jones says that somebody's taken a patent out on a device that is capable of cutting at a 45 degree angle to horizontal, so it would make a diagonal cut. I don't know if thermate is capable of shooting out like that, because of course it would have to come out with some force to get through those steel girders. I think Gravy pointed out that while Jones has said that the discovery of one of these at the WTC would prove the CT, doesn't the non-discovery of thousands of them disprove it?

BTW, Jones was not lying in his speech when he said you can buy thermite/thermate on ebay. They ship it via priority mail, so it must be stable.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom