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

[The Almond]

My only objective was to prove scientifically that something like therma/ite was in the buildings, and I have accomplished this.

Again, how do you know that you've proved this? How do you know that you've accomplished something? In the scientific community, when someone proves something or discovers a new theory, they publish the data and subject it to scrutiny by their peers both before and after publication.

The proof then comes when the ideas and theories are incorporated into lectures, textbooks and literature, while the theory itself becomes the basis for further study. Using this definition, we can show that Einstein proved general relativity and that Feynman proved quantum electrodynamic theory.

How do we know that you've proved your theory?

 

[mortimer]

Grover is Hungarian? Huh, I never knew that.

Of course he's Hungarian. Hungarians have no elbows. This is self evident. Grover has no elbows. Grover is therefore Hungarian. QED.

p.s. realisticely, you can see that Grover is sitting atop the concrete core.

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Again, how do you know that you've proved this? How do you know that you've accomplished something? In the scientific community, when someone proves something or discovers a new theory, they publish the data and subject it to scrutiny by their peers both before and after publication.

The proof then comes when the ideas and theories are incorporated into lectures, textbooks and literature, while the theory itself becomes the basis for further study. Using this definition, we can show that Einstein proved general relativity and that Feynman proved quantum electrodynamic theory.

How do we know that you've proved your theory?

Good point, and it gives me an idea. 28th, if you feel you have proved thermite then please write it up in a concise proof, or formal argument, and post it.

ETA: I would suggest the following format if you wish to debate one individual on your thermite formal argument

Proposed format for moderated debate

1) a) The side arguing for the proposition (Side A) shall post first.
Side A shall post an introduction that shall state the proposition they will be defending and five points that they will argue in defense of the proposition. One post in length.

1) b) The side arguing against the proposition (Side D) shall post next.
Side B shall post an introduction that shall state how they shall be arguing against the proposition and five counter-arguments they will argue against the proposition. One post in length.

2) a) Side A will present point 1. One post in length.
2) b) Side D will present counter-point 1. One post in length.

3) a) Side A will present point 2. One post in length.
3) b) Side D will present counter-point 2. One post in length.

4) a) Side A will present point 3. One post in length.
4) b) Side D will present counter-point 3. One post in length.

5) a) Side A will present point 4. One post in length.
5) b) Side D will present counter-point 4. One post in length.

6) a) Side A will present point 5. One post in length.
6) b) Side D will present counter-point 5. One post in length.

7) a) Side A will present defense against counter-points 1-5. One post in length.
7) b) Side D will defend. One post in length.

7) c) Side A will present defense against counter-points 1-5. One post in length.
7) d) Side D will defend. One post in length.

7) e) Side A will present defense against counter-points 1-5. One post in length.
7) f) Side D will defend. One post in length.

8) a) Side A will present their summary. One post in length.
8) b) Side D will present their summary. One post in length.

A) Should Side A or Side D wish to point out logical fallacies made by their opponent, they will do so during when of their scheduled posts and the pointing out of the logical fallacy does count towards their total post length limit. Their opponent will then receive one post, in addition to their scheduled posts, to defend themselves against the accusation.

B) A separate thread shall be started for the peanut gallery to comment as they see fit.

C) Each side will have one week from the time their opponent posts the immediate previous point to respond. Failure to do so, or failing to notify the thread moderator of extenuating circumstances preventing responding, will result in forfeiting the debate.

D) Only Side A and Side D may post in the moderated thread.

E) Images will be posted as links to hosting sites (photobucket, vbhost, etc) and shall not make use of in-lining.

F) References to external sites may only be used as source citations; the relevant portion must be quoted in the post and counts towards the total post length.

 

[The Almond]

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.

Why should we agree that you're right as a basis for continuing the discussion? Why have you not considered that you are in error on your positions?

 

[Horatius]

Somebody should write LIHOP/MIHOP lyrics to one of BB Kings songs

Someone with more talent than me, you mean?

 

[JimBenArm]

Someone with more talent than me, you mean?

At least someone who will not fail to post pictures of non-existent cats in a forum about thermite-impregnated macaroons!

 

[defaultdotxbe]

If and when most of us can agree...that a therma/ite substance had to be present in the buildings...than we can move along and discuss how it might of been used in the demolitions of the towers. If you are saying therma/ite isn't in the building, than it's pointless for me to try and explain how therma/ite may of been used to cut the core columns.

Thanks.

you see, if you can provide a means and a reason for thermite to be in the towers it might go a long way toward convincing people that that actually is thermite in your pictures rather than something that we know was and should have been in the towers

what your doing now is akin to the prosecution in court telling the jury "ok, if you people can all agree the defendent killed mr smith with a plastic spoon, then i will tell you how he did it"

 

[Horatius]

Of course he's Hungarian. Hungarians have no elbows. This is self evident. Grover has no elbows. Grover is therefore Hungarian. QED.

p.s. realisticely, you can see that Grover is sitting atop the concrete core.

It's Scientific!

Bruce: Objection your honor!

Scott: Is true. I take to scientists they weigh him and everything.

Mark: Mr. Tisane would you please approach the bench?

Kevin: Uh oh. [Kevin gets up but only comes halfway.]

Mark: Mr. Tisane please come closer, I have no intention of hitting you.

[Kevin approaches the bench. Mark sniffs at him and hits him with the gavel.]

Scott: I rest my case.

Kevin: Ouch.

Mark: I'm sorry Mr. Tisane, it appears that no matter who you're with, they'll hit you. It's scientific. I see no reason to grant-

 

[Horatius]

At least someone who will not fail to post pictures of non-existent cats in a forum about thermite-impregnated macaroons!

Oh, well, then, uhm, not, is, but,,,,,,,ME?

I know!

That answers everything.


Except the question of what it is, except that it's not a cat.

 

[defaultdotxbe]

Of course he's Hungarian. Hungarians have no elbows. This is self evident. Grover has no elbows. Grover is therefore Hungarian. QED.

p.s. realisticely, you can see that Grover is sitting atop the concrete core.

do i have to go get my english to hungarian phrasebook?

my hovercraft is full of eels

 

[Timble]

do i have to go get my english to hungarian phrasebook?

my hovercraft is full of eels

Az én -m légpárnás hajó van teli -ból angolnák.

 

[rwguinn]

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?

C'mon, guys--Get it through your heads!
CD is induced catastrophic structural failure!
The laws of physics do not give a damn whether the failure is caused by dynamite, Thermi/ate, FLSC, hacksaws, oxy-acetyline torches, firetrucks,automobiles, 707's, 757's, meteorites, or anything else.
All that matters is that support structure is rendered incapable of supporting the rest of the structure against gravitationally- applied forces.
Controlled Demolition is not (rule 8) Magic!
The "skeptics" and CD-er's are both guilty of this shortness of vision, as well as argument from emotion. It looked like a controled demo because it cannot look like anything else! That's the law! Get used to it.
What it "looked like" has absolutely nothing to do with what happened--i.e., a bunch of angry fundamentalists drove huge airplanes into the building, destroying a large amount of structural integrety, and causing major fires, which, due to the loss of structural integrety, further weakende the supporting structure, and rendered it incapable of supporting the rest of the structure against gravitationally- applied forces.
End of story

 

[mortimer]

do i have to go get my english to hungarian phrasebook?

my hovercraft is full of eels

My nipples explode in delight!

 

[defaultdotxbe]

Az én -m légpárnás hajó van teli -ból angolnák.

i want to say "please fondle my bum" but that could get me into some trouble if we arent all python fans

 

[Belz...]

I proved scientifically...why nothing in the building was hot enough to produce molten metal this color.

Again: may I ask what your scientific qualifications are ?

NIST even agrees the max temp was around 1000°C on the impact floors (because nothing in the building - including the jet fuel can burn hotter than that) Alumimum can melt at around 660°C - but as NIST even claims molten aluminum at this temperature has a silvery color to it, NOT a glowing yellow-orange color.

Aren't they bad at covering-up ?

NIST agrees that this is, in fact - molten metal, so if it's not the aluminum from the planes, than most likely it would be the steel from the towers. Molten steel will have the same color as these pools i.e. yellow-orange - however steel has a melting point of 1370°C - so again, nothing in the building could have burned hot enough to melt the steel from the towers.

What part of the fact they were RED didn't you understand ?

The only other thing I can think of, would be something like therma/ite that produces it's own molten metal (because a therma/ite reaction gives off extreme heat) and this molten metal is the exact color as the molten metal seen at the site of the towers.

Except thermite cannot possibly be used to demolish a building. That alone discounts the possibility, in the absence of any evidence whatsoever.

Even if you say, I can't prove this molten metal is therma/ite - what I did just prove is that something had to cause the extreme heat needed to produce such molten metal - so if it's not therma/ite, than there had to of been another chemical agent in the towers that could have either produced it's own molten metal

Non sequitur.

 

[Belz...]

Oh, well, then, uhm, not, is, but,,,,,,,ME?

I know!

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/94904555496e8385d.jpg[/qimg]

That answers everything.


Except the question of what it is, except that it's not a cat.

If the thread is no longer interesting to you, why do you linger here, posting cats (or actually, ONE cat, over and over) ?

Post-count-upping ?

Otherwise at least say something relevant, or nothing at all.

 

[jhunter1163]

Of course he's Hungarian. Hungarians have no elbows. This is self evident. Grover has no elbows. Grover is therefore Hungarian. QED.

p.s. realisticely, you can see that Grover is sitting atop the concrete core.

This is patently false. Grover clearly has a left elbow in this photo.

Further, my wife is Hungarian, and demonstrably has elbows, as is frequently demonstrated when I approach her in an amorous mood.

Perhaps I should approach her from the right...

 

[rwguinn]

If the thread is no longer interesting to you, why do you linger here, posting cats (or actually, ONE cat, over and over) ?

Post-count-upping ?

Otherwise at least say something relevant, or nothing at all.

Because folks like you don't seem to realize that nobody's mind is going to change, and just keep picking at the idiot scabs so we can't heal...
There is nothing relevant left to be said.
quit feeding the ijit trolls!

 

[firecoins]

Because folks like you don't seem to realize that nobody's mind is going to change, and just keep picking at the idiot scabs so we can't heal...

what are you talking about? My mind has been changed. I love cats now! I think I am going to try to get some pussy right now!

 

[28th Kingdom]

"... a thermite reaction can cut through large steel columns ..."

12. Did the NIST investigation look for evidence of the WTC towers being brought down by controlled demolition? Was the steel tested for explosives or thermite residues? The combination of thermite and sulfur (called thermate) "slices through steel like a hot knife through butter."

" NIST did not test for the residue of these compounds in the steel."

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm - NIST FAQ 12


"Aluminum is not expected to ignite at normal fire temperatures and there is no visual indication that the material flowing from the tower was burning."

"Pure liquid aluminum would be expected to appear silvery. However, the molten metal was very likely mixed with large amounts of hot, partially burned, solid organic materials (e.g., furniture, carpets, partitions and computers) which can display an orange glow, much like logs burning in a fireplace." NIST FAQ 11

So NIST says there is no clear indication that this "material" is burning. But, then NIST speculates... that this "material," is composed (in part) of burned materials. Doublethink? So if nothing is burning, where is that glow coming from? Is that not a clear sign the material is burning?