• 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.

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

So you're all claiming this is molten slag:

http://img243.imageshack.us/img243/2271/thermiteut7.jpg

Do you know what that implies? That implies the torch melted the steel from the column...THAT'S ONE SLOPPY JOB...DON'T YOU THINK!? Besides...the column doesn't look deformed to me...looks like the black gook is on top of it...shouldn't the edges of the column, where it's supposedly melted...be distorted? They look pretty straight to me.
 
maccy said:
1, he doesn't demonstrate the provenance of his steel sample

2. he doesn't take into account the possibility of molten aluminium (ever Judy Wood managed to debunk him on this one).

3. the sulpher he says indicates thermite could easily have come from gypsum wallboard and/or diesel.

4. he hasn't found any other compounds that would definitely indicate thermite

5. he doesn't have a explanation for how the thermite could cut a vertical steel column

6. he doesn't explain how the thermite could be out into the buildings, could survive fires for an hour or an hour and a half (and for several hours in WTC7) and be detonated to cause a collapse that progressed from the impact point downwards.

7. he hasn't subjected his work to meaningful peer review or published it in an established journal
Click to expand...

Can you see the whole forrest (picture) or just some trees?
 
maccy said:
1, he doesn't demonstrate the provenance of his steel sample

2. he doesn't take into account the possibility of molten aluminium (ever Judy Wood managed to debunk him on this one).

3. the sulpher he says indicates thermite could easily have come from gypsum wallboard and/or diesel.

4. he hasn't found any other compounds that would definitely indicate thermite

5. he doesn't have a explanation for how the thermite could cut a vertical steel column

6. he doesn't explain how the thermite could be out into the buildings, could survive fires for an hour or an hour and a half (and for several hours in WTC7) and be detonated to cause a collapse that progressed from the impact point downwards.

7. he hasn't subjected his work to meaningful peer review or published it in an established journal
Click to expand...

You see, 28th Kingdom, when WE are asked to explain why we believe something, we spell it out in detail exactly what the problem is, like maccy did above. It's not "I just don't believe it so it can't be true" or "that youtube video proves he's wrong". No dodging the question, no ideological rants, no spittle spewing, just simple logical reasons.

See the difference?
 
apathoid said:
Oh, the angle cut. It takes less time and acetylene fuel by making an angle cut. The molten slag flows downward and preheats the steel before the torch does, making it easier to cut the beam.
Click to expand...

Do you even understand how enormous these core columns are?

http://img243.imageshack.us/img243/2271/thermiteut7.jpg

Look at the firefighter below...that thing is probably over ten feet high. Show me a torch or device...that would be used to cut such a large steel beam.
 
twinstead said:
You see, 28th Kingdom, when WE are asked to explain why we believe something, we spell it out in detail exactly what the problem is, like maccy did above. It's not "I just don't believe it so it can't be true" or "that youtube video proves he's wrong". No dodging the question, no ideological rants, no spittle spewing, just simple logical reasons.

See the difference?
Click to expand...

Yea, I see the difference...you're not being objective and I am...need proof? Someone on here asked me...have I even entertained the idea that I might be wrong about the PET. WELL GUESS WHAT? I HAVE ENTERTAINED such an idea...because I'm the only one here who has been on both sides of this debate. I believed the official story first...BUT THEN I ENTERTAINED the idea (which I implore you guys to do) THAT I MIGHT BE WRONG....and after close and careful analysis...I CONCLUDED THAT without a shadow of doubt - 9/11 IS AN INSIDE JOB.

If I weren't 100% sure (backed with scientific fact and evidence) than I would probably still believe the official "story."
 
Last edited:
28th Kingdom said:
Look at the firefighter below...that thing is probably over ten feet high. Show me a torch or device...that would be used to cut such a large steel beam.
Click to expand...

What's the fact that it's 10 feet high got to do with how difficult it is to cut? It's got a box cross section with sides that are inches thick.
 
28th Kingdom said:
Yea, I see the difference...you're not being objective and I am...need proof? Someone on here asked me...have I even entertained the idea that I might be wrong about the PET. WELL GUESS WHAT? I HAVE ENTERTAINED such an idea...because I'm the only one here who has been on both sides of this debate. I believed the official story first...BUT THEN I ENTERTAINED the idea (which I implore you guys to do) THAT I MIGHT BE WRONG....and after close and careful analysis...I CONCLUDED THAT without a shadow of doubt - 9/11 IS AN INSIDE JOB.

If I weren't 100% sure (backed with scientific fact and evidence) than I would probably still believe the official "story."
Click to expand...
Why don't you explain your "careful analysis" and provide the "scientific fact and evidence" that backs it?
 
28th Kingdom said:
Thanks...you just proved my case for me...burning iron (by product of a therma/ite reaction) to generate enough heat to cut through steel...there it is folks.
Click to expand...

So they secretly planted robot operated thermal lances in the Twin Towers?
 
I find it amusing that 28th has, and continues, to completely ignore the technical rebuttal I made of his argument that fire could not cause failure of the trusses (per NIST resport, etc) and instead has gone off on his Thermite/ate trip.

As promised, 28th, I will be dogging you on this. And if you have me on ignore, everyone else will still be able to see you squirm and evade.

Remember: Quadricep Tendon Rupture. 6 weeks with notning else to do.
 
28th Kingdom said:
Thanks...you just proved my case for me...burning iron (by product of a therma/ite reaction) to generate enough heat to cut through steel...there it is folks. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_lance
Click to expand...

Think about it like this...therma/ite devices...which emit extreme burning material...are basically like disposable torches. What's so hard to believe about burning material cutting through steel? You're all saying a torch can do it....well, what does a torch use to cut through steel?

Are you starting to see the forest?
 
Last edited:
Architect said:
I find it amusing that 28th has, and continues, to completely ignore the technical rebuttal I made of his argument that fire could not cause failure of the trusses (per NIST resport, etc) and instead has gone off on his Thermite/ate trip.

As promised, 28th, I will be dogging you on this. And if you have me on ignore, everyone else will still be able to see you squirm and evade.

Remember: Quadricep Tendon Rupture. 6 weeks with notning else to do.
Click to expand...

Quoted for 28th, just in case.
 
28th Kingdom said:
Think about it like this...therma/ite devices...which emit extreme burning material...are basically like disposable torches. What's so hard to believe about burning material cutting through steel? You're all saying a torch can do it....well, what does a torch use to cut through steel?
Click to expand...

Burning (oxidising) iron and burning (oxidising) aluminium, not iron oxide being converted to iron with the oxidation of aluminium as in the thermite reaction.
 
28th Kingdom said:
Thanks...you just proved my case for me...burning iron (by product of a therma/ite reaction) to generate enough heat to cut through steel...there it is folks.
Click to expand...

There what is? I dont follow.

Since high temps are required to cut steel beams, Thermite must've been used? Honestly, what is more likely : the column in your photo was cut by a Thermite oozing device that you cant even begin to describe, let alone show us that such a device exists and does what you say it does - or - the column was cut with a torch or a lance in the cleanup effort?
 
NIST...couldn't get ANY of the model floors they built to collapse do to fire in ANY of their tests....is that good enough for you? NIST couldn't even prove the floors would have collapsed due to fire.
 
28th Kingdom said:
NIST...couldn't get ANY of the model floors they built to collapse do to fire in ANY of their tests....is that good enough for you? NIST couldn't even prove the floors would have collapsed due to fire.
Click to expand...

Quick - jump away from the thermite robot torch cutter made-up theory to an unrelated point before anyone notices!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom