This is the thread that may very well change the way you look at 9/11 FOREVER!

[28th Kingdom]

You've ignored a great many posts that attack your arguments.

I am but one man (who, btw - is a louser typer...so that doesn't help matters) trying to communicate points with MANY different people at once. All of you are only having one conversation...and that is with me. How can you expect me to jump through loops for 10-15 at once? I can't guys...sorry...I'm just not that fast.

 

[~enigma~]

post deleted

 

[~enigma~]

post deleted

 

[~enigma~]

If I present evidence of thermite devices that can be used to cut through steel, will you believe my PET? I'm not gonna continue to just pile on evidence...because every time I do...you all come up with the silliest of counterpoints...that just leads into yall asking 10 more questions and requesting 10 more bits of physical evidence to back it up. Don't you see the never ending cycle here?

Prove the entire Loizeaux family are liars. Go ahead. I am ready to foward a copy of your accusation to their lawyers.

 

[maccy]

I'm kind of getting the impression...that most of you aren't even interested in what I have to say...as you constantly attack my intelligence and logic. I have enjoyed debating this issue with pretty much everyone...but if you guys really want me to leave than I will. If ten people vote for me to go, I will leave your community...because I honestly had no intention of causing a negative disturbance like this.

Thanks.

28K I agree with the people who say that you are not engaging with challenges to your claims. You are also not providing calculations to back up your assertions.

Why do you think that people here are not convinced?

If you think it is because we have an attitude problem that makes us incapable of seeing the truth, then I suggest you take your arguments onto the world stage - surely not every scientist, engineer (especially structural engineers and fire engineers), demolition expert, science correspondent and, most importantly*, architect in the world can miss what you say is obvious? At the moment, none of them (outside of Scholars for 9/11 Truth - which contains very few scientists and no structural or fire engineers, architects or demolition experts) have raised issues with the NIST report. Surely all you need to do is keep emailing your theories out to these people until you find somebody who comprehends your viewpoint and will champion it on the world stage?

Unless you manage to do this, what you do on an internet forum or two is irrelevant. There will be no new inquiry. Things will continue as before. Your viewpoint won't matter.

The other possibility, of course, is that you are just wrong.



*this is a tongue-in-cheek emphasis.

 

[Architect]

Maccy,

I'm taking it personally that you didn't mention Architects.


Of fire engineers, for that matter, but I ain't one of them.......

 

[maccy]

Maccy,

I'm taking it personally that you didn't mention Architects.


Of fire engineers, for that matter, but I ain't one of them.......

Just for you I've edited my post.

 

[28th Kingdom]

Yeah, nothing but sunshine and puppies

At least...that made me laugh. Thanks.

 

[Miss Anthrope]

Looks like someone is playing good sock puppet/bad sock puppet ala the "Santa" thread.

Just my opinion of course.

 

[beachnut]

HOWEVER, in the last few years... with all of the data and analysis that has poured in...I mean, if one cannot plainly see what happened on 9/11 after taking in all of the overwhelming evidence...than I don't know what to say. All, I know is that it's possible to switch your belief about what happened on 9/11, because I have...and so have millions of others.

We are waiting for your facts.

You have presented zero facts. You are late, 5 years late. The facts do not change, only idiots like Dr Jones bring up thermite, not used in CD, as the culprit and you pick it up and try to use something that does not work.

A working model of your thermite charges would be neat. Or some guys confessing to your plot, better.

But all your youTube stuff shows that your conclusions are baseless.

You have done a good job making us ask you question cause you want us to, you could have posted your great study up front and earned a lot of points for being truthful in your presentation.

You never answer any questions or back up you stuff.

Present the overwhelming evidence, you have it somewhere right?

 

[Horatius]

If I present evidence of thermite devices that can be used to cut through steel, will you believe my PET? I'm not gonna continue to just pile on evidence...because every time I do...you all come up with the silliest of counterpoints...that just leads into yall asking 10 more questions and requesting 10 more bits of physical evidence to back it up. Don't you see the never ending cycle here?

No, because thermite/mate isn't an explosive.

You started out saying that the towers were brought down in a floor-by-floor detonation that blew a substantial portion of the mass of the floors outside the footprint of the towers. That would take explosives - things that detonate and produce an energetic shockwave to cause abrupt damage to a structure.

Now, you're saying thermite did it. Which is a significantly slower effect than an explosive detonation. Thermite charges could not cause a large portion of the tower's material to be forcefully ejected sideways. They also could not have cut out each floor as fast as they were seen to be destroyed.

So, no, proving that some devices may exist that allow thermite to cut horizontally or at an angle through steel won't prove your PET. In fact, it makes your PET less likely, as now you not only have to show evidence of explosives, and how they were placed in the building, you also have to show the same for thermite.

If you continue to assert that thermite did it, you must acknowledge that your earlier explosive hypothesis was incorrect. However, that would entail admitting a mistake, which you've shown no ability to actually do.

You're just digging yourself in deeper here!


And while, I'm here, this didn't post properly the first time I tried it:

ETA: Hey whats with the felines people? I get the socks. I get woowoo. I don't get the kittys.

It's simple: While my cat's eternal quest for mice hiding in improbable locations is probably just as futile as the Ctists' quests for the One True Bit of Evidence That Will Convince the Sheeple, at least he makes me smile when he does it.


These guys just give me a headache.

I mean, top of a door? What was he thinking?

ETA: I'm so glad I got that shot. He's never done it again, and it's usually really hard to catch him in the act like that!

 

[beachnut]

No, because thermite/mate isn't an explosive.

These guys just give me a headache.

I mean, top of a door? What was he thinking?

ETA: I'm so glad I got that shot. He's never done it again, and it's usually really hard to catch him in the act like that!

good post, wish he would read it!

Very good, as our 28th is up there can he dust off the top of the door.

Yes 28th when you find the mice, you have the truth; but you are looking in the wrong places.

Good post.

 

[maccy]

I mean that energy is there already, what do you need to add, not much of course then... btw I disagree with the energy picture, the collapse is mass independent as I will show in my paper soon.

Einsteen, what do you plan to do with this paper once you've finished it? If you just put it on a website, it is unlikely that anybody will take it seriously. I think my advice to 28th Kingdom is relevant here:

28K you're obviously not making much progress in convincing people here, but I don't understand why you're even trying. If what you're saying is, as you say, both obvious and scientific why aren't you making an effort to get this information out to the world? The world is has many media outlets, technical journals and engineering departments - why not send your information to people involved with these? If you don't manage to get the word out this way, I would say that you are ultimately insignificant.

Remember, this isn't about us convincing you, it's about you convincing the world. At the moment, the world says you are wrong. What are you going to do to change its mind?

There are lots and lots of people you can contact about this, here are a few suggestions of places you might want to start:

science magazines:

http://www.ejse.org/EdBoard.htm
http://www.pubs.asce.org/journals/st.html
http://www.sciam.com/
http://research.yale.edu/ysm/
http://www.sciencemag.org/
http://www.nature.com/nature/index.html
http://www.stanford.edu/~dgermain/index.htm
http://www.newscientist.com/home.ns
http://www.popsci.com/popsci/
http://www.popularmechanics.com/

Demolition Publications

http://www.implosionworld.com/

Fire Engineering Magazine:

http://fe.pennnet.com/

Architecture Magazines:

http://www.arplus.com/home.htm
http://www.architectmagazine.com/
http://architectstore.com/magazine.html

Engineering Departments

http://www.shef.ac.uk/civil/
http://www.eng.cam.ac.uk/
http://www.eng.ox.ac.uk/
http://www.engg.le.ac.uk/
http://www.eng.abdn.ac.uk/
http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/esbe/about/depeng.shtml
http://www.liv.ac.uk/engdept/
http://www.swan.ac.uk/engineering/
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/civileng/

http://www.enfp.umd.edu/
http://www.ce.ksu.edu/
http://www.matsceng.ohio-state.edu/
http://www.ce.jhu.edu/
http://ase.tufts.edu/cee/
http://www.ce.clemson.edu/
http://www.ecs.umass.edu/cee/
http://cee.mit.edu/
http://www.ce.berkeley.edu/

Science Correspondents of Media outlets:

http://www.cnn.com/
http://www.nytimes.com/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/
http://news.bbc.co.uk/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/
http://english.aljazeera.net/HomePage

There's a whole list of newspapers around the world here:

http://www.onlinenewspapers.com/

 

[beachnut]

How do you cut steel beams with Thermite? Well, one way is to use Thermate which is a form of Thermite...which has sulfur and barium nitrate added to it. There are devices that you can load the thermate into (then attaching the device to a steel beam) and when the thermate is ignited the reaction is ejected out in one direction in a quasi-blade shape...that can cut through steel.

I don't need to know how much thermate it would have taken to bring down the towers...nor do I need to know how they would have gotten it into the buildings...to know that the clear and straightforward analysis I gave as to why the pouring liquid metal from WTC 2 - is thermite...is irrefutable.

Can you show me the working model of your thermate device?

Show me! Show me the facts, show me the device. I can find it for you, but you need to show me; then we can confess. (dtd)

 

[28th Kingdom]

No, because thermite/mate isn't an explosive.
You started out saying that the towers were brought down in a floor-by-floor detonation that blew a substantial portion of the mass of the floors outside the footprint of the towers. That would take explosives - things that detonate and produce an energetic shockwave to cause abrupt damage to a structure.

Hey,

I NEVER said thermite is an explosive! Why do you say that? I haven't even opined about the full nature of the PET, because I honestly don't know exactly how it was pulled off. Try this on for size, though. Therma/ite was used to cut the core columns...so that they would remove themselves in a downwardly fashion...and then they used some type of explosives on the outer grid and floors etc. Doesn't really seem all that complex to me. (Remember, we have learned that the CORE COLUMNS...were a unique feature to the twin towers...so I guess that's why they had to do a hybrid type of demolition i.e. incendiary plus explosives. Because if they would have just used explosives, than the core columns would have remained standing. See, this is also why the WTC 7 collapse looks different than the WTC 1 & 2 collapses...because the WTC 7 did NOT have any core columns

Another point I need to stress. Even if you want to say that this molten metal (pouring from WTC 2) is aluminum mixed with ambers of other burning materials....still, NIST clearly states that the hottest temperatures on those impacted floors, were around 1000°C - so while aluminum melts at around 660°C - it will NOT appear red or orange at this point...but most importantly...it CANNOT have the type of reaction we see from the molten metal pouring from WTC 2. BY reaction, I am referring to the way the molten metal pops and dances...kind of like a sparkler or something you may see from a welder. These are clear signs of extreme heat at work...much hotter than 1000°C, the hottest temperature available on those floors.

No, in order to get a molten metal to react like that...you need massive amounts of heat (i.e. furnace) like those caused by a thermite reaction. So just going by complete and utter scientific facts...we can determine, just by visually observing the BEHAVIOR of that molten medal....that it is burning hotter than the 1000°C maximum temperature available on those floors. Which means...that something else must have been present in order to generate the heat needed to cause that type of reaction in the molten metal. Something else like a chemical reaction...from thermite.

WTC Molten Metal:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=545886459853896774

Thermite Reaction:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FEmHJORTlqk

 

[HyJinX]

No, because thermite/mate isn't an explosive.

You started out saying that the towers were brought down in a floor-by-floor detonation that blew a substantial portion of the mass of the floors outside the footprint of the towers. That would take explosives - things that detonate and produce an energetic shockwave to cause abrupt damage to a structure.

Now, you're saying thermite did it. Which is a significantly slower effect than an explosive detonation. Thermite charges could not cause a large portion of the tower's material to be forcefully ejected sideways. They also could not have cut out each floor as fast as they were seen to be destroyed.

So, no, proving that some devices may exist that allow thermite to cut horizontally or at an angle through steel won't prove your PET. In fact, it makes your PET less likely, as now you not only have to show evidence of explosives, and how they were placed in the building, you also have to show the same for thermite.

If you continue to assert that thermite did it, you must acknowledge that your earlier explosive hypothesis was incorrect. However, that would entail admitting a mistake, which you've shown no ability to actually do.

You're just digging yourself in deeper here!


And while, I'm here, this didn't post properly the first time I tried it:



It's simple: While my cat's eternal quest for mice hiding in improbable locations is probably just as futile as the Ctists' quests for the One True Bit of Evidence That Will Convince the Sheeple, at least he makes me smile when he does it.


These guys just give me a headache.


I mean, top of a door? What was he thinking?

ETA: I'm so glad I got that shot. He's never done it again, and it's usually really hard to catch him in the act like that!

That's A LOT of TUMS my man!

 

[Architect]

ah, 28th...still here and still not responded to my previous post.

I think we have to assume that you simply can't comment on technical issues, even though they are central to understanding 911.

Or can you? Go ahead, prove me wrong!

 

[uk_dave]

Remember, how I was talking about the core columns being vertical to the ground...which meant they would have had to basically telescope down on themselves...because of the way the towers collapsed straight down (although the exterior of the building was blasted outwards) Well, that's why the columns were cut at an angle....because if they would have cut them completely horizontal...the force of gravity...would try to push the split column down upon itself. (not very effective...as trying to push solid steel through solid steel - kind of defies the laws of the physical world) However, if you cut it at an angle...like this pic...than once the cut is made, gravity can pull the split column in a downward direction.

So...ermmmm mecahnical fixings between vertical structural members are just a ruse by the welding fraternity to keep their members in work?

Just like fire fireprotection is a ruse by the fire protection industry etc etc

Having returned from my 3 day suspension (hard labour breaking sledghammers with rocks, learining to play 'fingles cave' on the mouth organ (ooooer missus) and NOT dropping the soap in the shower) I am now free again to spread the word of Jeezus and respond to the drivel of 28k

Somehow, that suspension doesn't seem so bad after all

And I look good in stripes

 

[rikzilla]

We figured out that they wouldn't touch the subject with a ten foot pole.

Ahh...too bad but I understand completely why they would feel this way. Perhaps they would take up my other idea at least??? You know the one where they bring Alex Jones on the show as "Buster's" stand-in.

Hey it's national tv...and Alex is an attention whore! It may just work. I don't know about any of you but I'd pay big money to see Alex ride the "border slingshot"!!

Alex: "911 was an inside joooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo :SPLAT: buh!"

-z

 

[beachnut]

Hey,

I NEVER said thermite is an explosive! Why do you say that? I haven't even opined about the full nature of the PET, because I don't honestly know exactly how it was pulled off. Try this on for size, though. Therma/ite was used to cut the core columns...so that they would remove themselves in a downwardly fashion...and then they used some type of explosives on the outer grid and floors etc. Doesn't really seem all that complex to me. (Remember, we have learned that the CORE COLUMNS...were a unique feature to the twin towers...so I guess that's why they had to do a hybrid type of demolition i.e. incendiary plus explosives. Because if they would have just used explosives, than the core columns would have remained standing. See, this is also why the WTC 7 collapse looks different than the WTC 1 & 2 collapses...because the WTC 7 did NOT have any core columns

Thermite Reaction:

Do you make this up as you go? What a bunch of BS. You are the BS king, the youTube king!

You are the guy who says thermite did it but, just like Dr Jones, you have no idea how!

So we have waited for the facts, and the facts are you have no facts.

Good typing practice, but poor research is showing on your part.