• 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!

defaultdotxbe said:
please state the means by which thermite can cut a vertical steel column
Click to expand...

My objective has always been to scientifically prove that therma/ite or a therma/ite like substance was in the towers, and I have done that. You are the ones who are bringing up the point about how therma/ite could have been used on the columns. That's a completely different subject and I never intended to discuss that. My only objective was to prove scientifically that something like therma/ite was in the buildings, and I have accomplished this.
 
28th Kingdom said:
My objective has always been to scientifically prove that therma/ite or a therma/ite like substance was in the towers, and I have done that. You are the ones who are bringing up the point about how therma/ite could have been used on the columns. That's a completely different subject and I never intended to discuss that. My only objective was to prove scientifically that something like therma/ite was in the buildings, and I have accomplished this.
Click to expand...
ok, lets say thermite was in the towers, that raises several more questions

what was it doing there?
who put it there?
why was it put there?

now answer those
 
28th Kingdom said:
Minus all the semantic word play - WTC fell down symmetrically...whether you want to say all the rubble is in the footprint or not... is besides the point. No one can deny that WTC 7 collapsed uniformly. There was damage to one side of WTC 7, which is random damage - random damage should mean random collapse. You know - half a building can fall off or collapse without the other side which is COMPLETELY untouched and undamaged falling down with it. You want proof?

http://img82.imageshack.us/img82/8733/ntp10ijj3.jpg

That's the governments' second attempt at trying to demolish an inhabited building. Strike Two.
Click to expand...

Johnny Winter told you that?
 
28th Kingdom said:
My only objective was to prove scientifically that something like therma/ite was in the buildings, and I have accomplished this.
Click to expand...

I thought you were trying to prove that it was thermite that cut those beams. That's what you kept talking about. Now you just wanted to prove that "something like therma/ite" was there. Nice job with the moving goalposts/
 
28th Kingdom said:
Everyone requested that I move back to the therma/ite issue, so I obliged and did so with my last couple posts. Please, let's just focus on one key point until we find some type of resolution. I presented my analysis and facts in a very straight forward way, now please refute my claims with your own analysis and facts.

If anyone is familiar with a therma/ite reaction, you will know pyrotechnic [FONT=arial,sans-serif][SIZE=-1][/SIZE][/FONT]show it puts on. Here is a typical therma/ite reaction where you can espy this phenomenon:

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

Notice the sparks and the way the molten metal jumps around almost like fireworks. This is caused by the extreme heat being emitted from the chemical reaction. Now, compare the therma/ite reaction to this video of the pouring metal coming from WTC 2:

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

NIST claims this is molten aluminum. But, molten aluminum will NOT have this type of pyrotechnic reaction at a max temp of 1000C. Here is what molten aluminum looks like when flowing downward:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gge5NyqoNIQ

I encourage everyone here to review the video evidence I have presented, and reply with your analysis with resources to back up your claims.

Thanks for reading.
Click to expand...

So what you are saying is that since the molten metal looks like Thermite, it must be?? Is that about the size of it?

  • Why would the Thermite be innocently flowing over the side of the building, rather than cutting core columns.
  • How did the Thermite in the area of the impacts not jar free from their columns and/or prematurly ignite?

Since the demolition had to have started at the impact points, much of the Thermite must've survived the fires, impact, explosion and concussion. How is it possible that it did?
 
The WHOLE point of diesigning against disproportionate collapse is to avoid a piece of random damage somewhere on the structure leading to total failure of the structure as a whole.

But the redundancy provided by this design has an upper limit i.e make the random damage severe enough and the structure will fail as a whole.

Given that a modern steel framed building is constructed in a symmetrical way, it's not so surprising that it should fail symmetrically even if the damage is random, provided that it is sufficient to overcome the redundacy of the design.

Once part of the structure is sufficiently damaged it over stresses the rest of the structure.
 
28th Kingdom said:
My objective has always been to scientifically prove that therma/ite or a therma/ite like substance was in the towers, and I have done that. You are the ones who are bringing up the point about how therma/ite could have been used on the columns. That's a completely different subject and I never intended to discuss that. My only objective was to prove scientifically that something like therma/ite was in the buildings, and I have accomplished this.
Click to expand...


No you have proved thermite was not in the towers! You posted no proof, you have no proof, you have no facts.

All the thinkg you said were not facts of thermit.

Find some facts next time. When will you have some facts?
 
28th Kingdom said:
Minus all the semantic word play - WTC fell down symmetrically...whether you want to say all the rubble is in the footprint or not... is besides the point. No one can deny that WTC 7 collapsed uniformly. There was damage to one side of WTC 7, which is random damage - random damage should mean random collapse. You know - half a building can fall off or collapse without the other side which is COMPLETELY untouched and undamaged falling down with it. You want proof?
Click to expand...

How does explosives reconcile this apparent problem? A controlled demolition's primary purpose is to cut a bunch of primary structural members and let gravity fall the building. A CD on WTC7 would've had a similar outcome, given any damage to the building, as a catastrophic structural failure. So I ask again, why is it suspicious that the building fell more or less straight down, given its damage?
 
28th Kingdom said:
Notice the sparks and the way the molten metal jumps around almost like fireworks. This is caused by the extreme heat being emitted from the chemical reaction.
Click to expand...

So, is this thermite too?



This behaviour does not distinguish thermite from any other hot reaction. Hot liquid material contacting other material that boils off at a lower temperature == "jumping around".

Liquid nitrogen bomb:



Water on a hot plate:



Oh, and for those who think air pressure couldn't produce a "squib", take a look at air pressure crushing a can:




28th Kingdom said:
Here is what molten aluminum looks like when flowing downward:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gge5NyqoNIQ
Click to expand...

That's what pure aluminum, at an undisclosed temperature looks like. Please run the experiment again with inclusions of things like carpet, paper, plastic, etc., and please disclose the temperature of the material as well.
 
28th Kingdom said:
My objective has always been to scientifically prove that therma/ite or a therma/ite like substance was in the towers, and I have done that. You are the ones who are bringing up the point about how therma/ite could have been used on the columns. That's a completely different subject and I never intended to discuss that. My only objective was to prove scientifically that something like therma/ite was in the buildings, and I have accomplished this.
Click to expand...

Wow, I've read every post in this thread, and I haven't seen anything by you that even remotely resembles science.

However, you do remind me of a macaroon, so now I'm hungry, and shall do lunch.

Toodles, Mac.
 
28th Kingdom said:
My objective has always been to scientifically prove that therma/ite or a therma/ite like substance was in the towers, and I have done that. You are the ones who are bringing up the point about how therma/ite could have been used on the columns. That's a completely different subject and I never intended to discuss that. My only objective was to prove scientifically that something like therma/ite was in the buildings, and I have accomplished this.
Click to expand...

Let me refresh your memory.

You showed us pictures of cut steel columns that you say were cut by thermite.

You were trying to prove that thermite cut a vertical column.

please state the means by which thermite can cut a vertical steel column
 
28th Kingdom said:
My objective has always been to scientifically prove that therma/ite or a therma/ite like substance was in the towers, and I have done that. You are the ones who are bringing up the point about how therma/ite could have been used on the columns. That's a completely different subject and I never intended to discuss that. My only objective was to prove scientifically that something like therma/ite was in the buildings, and I have accomplished this.
Click to expand...

All agree, even John Lennon you failed to "make the grade".

I read the news today oh, boy
About a liar man who missed the grade...

He still has no facts, anyone know of a reason 28th has made the grade.

oh, boy
 
If we can't all agree that I scientifically proved that a substance like therma/ite had to be in the buildings in order to generate the heat required to produce the molten metal seen in the towers, than there is no need to move along to how therma/ite could cut a vertical beam.
 
28th Kingdom said:
If we can't all agree that I scientifically proved that a substance like therma/ite had to be in the buildings in order to generate the heat required to produce the molten metal seen in the towers, than there is no need to move along to how therma/ite could cut a vertical beam.
Click to expand...
lets say, hypothetically, you did prove thermite was in the towers

THEN could you tell us what it was doing there and how?
 
DavidJames said:
Please stop using the word or derivative of the word science. Based on your posts you clearly don't know what it means. Why is that? Have you completed high school or attended any college? I only ask because your arguments clearly suggest you haven't.
Click to expand...

Are you analyzing the facts I presented...or are you too busy analyzing me and my education level?

Why don't you directly address my claims, instead of personally attacking my credibility.
 
Last edited:
28th Kingdom said:
If we can't all agree that I scientifically proved that a substance like therma/ite had to be in the buildings in order to generate the heat required to produce the molten metal seen in the towers, than there is no need to move along to how therma/ite could cut a vertical beam.
Click to expand...

We don't have to agree that thermite was in the buildings to discuss it.

We can say, "let's assume thermite was in the buildings".

Now,

You showed us pictures of cut steel columns that you say were cut by thermite.

You were trying to prove that thermite cut a vertical column.

please state the means by which thermite can cut a vertical steel column
 
28th Kingdom said:
If we can't all agree that I scientifically proved that a substance like therma/ite had to be in the buildings in order to generate the heat required to produce the molten metal seen in the towers, than there is no need to move along to how therma/ite could cut a vertical beam.
Click to expand...

We have near 100% agreement that you did not scientifically prove anything of the sort. And yes, there is no reason to move on to how it could cut a vertical beam.

Does this mean that you are conceding this point? If so, we can move on to the other things you were wrong about.

If you are not conceding the "presence of thermite", then your next step would be to demonstrate how it could cut a vertical column. Since you are saying that thermite was used to take out the central supports, this is a necessary step. Otherwise, there could have been a thermite factory on one of the floors and it wouldn't make a bit of difference to your theory. The presence of thermite is a necessary but not sufficient condition for your theory to have a ghost of a chance.

My advice would be to concede the point and admit you are utterly wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom