Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
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.
But on Mythbusters last night, they had something that actually did that - thermite plus ice. So, the NWO clandestinely brought in tons of ice blocks and thermite, melted the some steel and then caused explosions when the thermite reached the ice. The ice melts away, and the thermite leaves residue that would normally be found in the wreckage.
This theory is better than anything the TM has produced to date.
Yeah I saw that. Very interesting. I was a little disturbed that that they did not really try to guess what caused the explosion. Seemed to me pretty clear that what we were seeing was the explosive release of super heated steam. They suggested water separating into hydrogen and oxygen? Thermite dispersed in the air?
Direct me to one single witness testimony of someone hearing an explosion while WTC7 was collapsing. Oh and just FYI, if there were explosives detonated in WTC7, they would have been heard for miles (Ever been to a controlled demo? Yeah they are LOUD). But yet, not a single piece of audio equipment recording that day picked up any sort of explosions in WTC7. Why is that?
Direct me to one single witness testimony of someone hearing an explosion while WTC7 was collapsing. Oh and just FYI, if there were explosives detonated in WTC7, they would have been heard for miles (Ever been to a controlled demo? Yeah they are LOUD). But yet, not a single piece of audio equipment recording that day picked up any sort of explosions in WTC7. Why is that?
No, no, no, you all don't understand. They don't look for smoking guns. They try to smoke the guns. This is the real reason there are so few of them anymore. They put the barrels in their mouth, inhale, and put a lighter to it.
No, no, no, you all don't understand. They don't look for smoking guns. They try to smoke the guns. This is the real reason there are so few of them anymore. They put the barrels in their mouth, inhale, and put a lighter to it.
a long time ago when i first started "debating" with truthers
i found an article on one of their research sites that was instructions on how to debate debunkers
it included instructions that read something like "dont stay on one subject too long, switch topics often"
"dont rebut things, change subjects"
etc
it was a pretty long read and shows how the "truth" operates (dirty tactics)
i've been looking for it the last few weeks but i fear its been deleted
hopefully at some point someone here has read it too and has a link or a copy
You obviously weren't at last month's NWO meeting. It was explained that the guidelines were taken down by NWO operatives and the authors were kidnapped and disposed of at the same Area 51 rendering facility used to get rid of the passengers from the fake 9/11 flights.
This is top secret information, but publishing it online as I am today is part of our psy-ops disinfo campaign. Hiding in plain sight, as it were.
Out of the many suspicious events that day, I will agree that WTC #7 is the most damning. The recent dust analysis paper, along with witness testimony of explosions and molten steel really drive the point home.
You presented hearsay and moronic Jones junk-science.
Evidence is what was asked; do you know evidence. Please do not say explosions were from explosives without evidence, there were zero sounds of explosives on 911 so you will need to bring more than lies and fantasy.
I have composed a comphrehensive & detailed list of the twoof movements accomplishments & resulting societal impact since 2001:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Post the single piece of evidence that you believe proves 9/11 was an inside job. I've seen a lot of information that is suspicious, but what is your smoking gun?
In all seriousness, AFAIK, there is no single piece of evidence which is used to 'prove' the inside job theory.
The term 'smoking gun' was used recently by Dr. Steven Jones, discussing his team's paper 'Active Thermitic Material Discovered in dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe' on Visibility 9/11 this year. As you may know, the paper focuses on the small Red/Grey chips found in WTC dust samples.
I think the paper is one of the most thoroughly and competently researched inquiries made by the 9/11 truth movement to date. As yet, the results are somewhat incomplete - they haven't identified the Grey layer, the 'organic binder', and they haven't yet isolated the Red layer to determine what the energy output of it is by itself. Nor did they get combustion of the chips in the absence of oxygen - now THAT would have been interesting!
As it stands today, you'd probably agree that the term 'smoking gun' is premature for this line of inquiry. More accurately it should be labeled 'potential smoking gun, TBC'
Here's a link to the interview. Also check out the infomercial by A&E for T's Richard Gage! (There is a blurb on the right of their home page outlining the case for CD at WTC7 http://www.ae911truth.org/)
Discussing the smoking loaded gun evidence from "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe' Discovered in dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe" is akin to discussing the evidence from a checkout rag....Headline reading: "Alien Baby found in Paris Hiltons ear"--neither one is peer reviewed, both are junk, and only fools buy into it
Also, it has not been determined that what they found was:
A)Active Thermitic Material
Nor has it been even remotley concluded to be
B)Discovered in dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe
I was wondering how the CD of WTC7 would automatically imply an "inside job"?
Why couldn't some redneck anti-gubmint types have blown it up? A few warriors working as security guards set up the magic-o-explosives and blow the thing up. Or some islamic fundamentalists for that matter?
If it was so easy to rig the building without anyone noticing where's the problem in these two scenarios?
So what specifically proves "inside job" if WTC7 was in fact blown up?
Is it from the candid behind the scenes film of Charlie Sheen after he realized what he did to his career talking about 911 being and 'inside job"?????
Is it from the candid behind the scenes film of Charlie Sheen after he realized what he did to his career talking about 911 being and 'inside job"?????
...this is complete bunk. How you can make such ridiculous generalizations without being totally called out by your fellow members is beyond me. Is there a skeptics handbook that you "all" refer to? Jref, so quick to destroy any mistatement made by a member of alternate theory, and yet so happy to let anyone posting garbage that fits their worldview get a pass.....
Why don't you hold everyone to the same standards? It would lend credibility to any member who did, imo.
Has anyone been able to explain how the fires in the two towers were only hot enough to cause structural failure(ie. not melt steel), yet molten metals were found in the rubble piles? Why was the steel hot enough to melt the worker's boots in the weeks post-collapse?
Could the fires that burned in the damaged sections of the towers spread as the building collapsed, and then grow into larger fires below the rubble that reached hotter temperatures?
Discussing the smoking loaded gun evidence from "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe' Discovered in dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe" is akin to discussing the evidence from a checkout rag....Headline reading: "Alien Baby found in Paris Hiltons ear"--neither one is peer reviewed, both are junk, and only fools buy into it
Also, it has not been determined that what they found was:
A)Active Thermitic Material
Nor has it been even remotley concluded to be
B)Discovered in dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe
Oh, thanks! Well, the Jones paper was in fact peer reviewed, although people are skeptical about the journal it was published in. I don't think it's fair to characterize the chip testing as junk science, but as I pointed out the conclusions Jones et al. are drawing are not really supported by that evidence.
See where I'm going?
Incidentally, Jones seems confused about what the possible role of any such nanothermite might have been in the collapses anyway. In a discussion with Dr. Frank Greening, he seemed to be favouring the idea that NT was used as a detonator for conventional high-explosives.
But he also speculates that the NT might have been 'painted on', possibly by unsuspecting workers, onto core steel columns.
Either way, he's not really theorizing high temperature steel melting, he's leaning towards a high-explosive effect. There are serious problems with that idea, starting with the fact that there weren't any detonations, blast shockwaves or that type of evidence observed.
Here's a really good illustration of the absence of detonations. It doesn't get any more clear than this video, taken fairly close to the collapse - the camera is zoomed in fairly tight to the burning areas, and captures the beginning of collapse. The only sound heard is a growing rumbling sound as the collapse progresses.
Doesn't look at all like CD to me. Doesn't matter whether it's nanothermite or not.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
