Moderated Thermite: Was it there or not?

Dave Rogers said:
Jones's approach, therefore, has been to sift through the evidence, modifying it occasionally to suit his purposes, for items that appear superficially consistent with the presence of thermite in the Twin Towers. These specific items are presented as irrefutable proof, while any and all items of evidence that contradict the hypothesis are simply ignored; these include the internal contradictions of the hypothesis itself.

The origin of thermite particles, therefore, is not physical but psychological; they originate from the imagination of Steven Jones, and the evidence for their existence is carefully selected, and where necessary edited, by him.

Dave
Click to expand...

I don't know what it is about seasoned professors like Jones who reach a point in their careers where they seem to think they are "above" rational thinking and can just skip to the conclusions. The most ridiculous of his claims are that pools of molten iron found in the wreckage (whose existence is by no means certain) is somehow consistent with the use of thermite a month earlier. For a physics professor, a simple back-of-the envelope equation should be enough to show that this is ludicrous...the amount of thermite required to keep iron above the melting point for a month would probably burn down to the Earth's core.
 
aggle-rithm said:
I don't know what it is about seasoned professors like Jones who reach a point in their careers where they seem to think they are "above" rational thinking and can just skip to the conclusions. The most ridiculous of his claims are that pools of molten iron found in the wreckage (whose existence is by no means certain) is somehow consistent with the use of thermite a month earlier. For a physics professor, a simple back-of-the envelope equation should be enough to show that this is ludicrous...the amount of thermite required to keep iron above the melting point for a month would probably burn down to the Earth's core.
Click to expand...

A mere ten tons of molten steel,with or without added thermite did not keep that pile hot for up to three months.
 
Last edited:
aggle-rithm said:
Exactly. Fire kept it hot.

Plus, there is zero evidence for molten steel. If you've got some, please provide it.
Click to expand...

It's posts like this that put me in mind of Steve's '1000 paid Shills'.

I know, you know and the viewing public know that no fires requiring oxygen could have burned down in the pile. And all fires require outside oxygen. Everybody knows that covering a burning pan of oil with a heavy cloth douses the flames by depriving the fire of oxygen so there is no chance at all of fires burning deep in the compacted mass of the pile.

I am not too interested in hearing about the coal seam in Nebraska or whereever it is that can burn forever with very little oxygen. Plainly there was no coal seam deep in the pile. Unless you know differently of course ? At this stage no debunker claim would surprise me.
 
Last edited:
bill smith said:
It's posts like this that put me in mind of Steve's '1000 paid Shills'.

I know, you know and the viewing public know that no fires requiring oxygen could have burned down in the pile. And all fires require outside oxygen. Everybody knows that covering a burning pan of oil with a heavy cloth douses the flames by depriving of oxygen it so there iss no chance at all of fires burning deep in the compacted mass of the pile.

I am not too interested in hearig about the coal seam in Nebraska or whereever it is that can burn forever with very little oxygen. Plainly there was no coal seam deep in the pile. Unless you know differently of course ? At this stage no debunker claim would surprise me.
Click to expand...

you obviously underestimate the power of large fires

and your post here reminds me of "how does air get in subway tunnels"
 
bill smith said:
... no fires requiring oxygen could have burned down in the pile. And all fires require outside oxygen. Everybody knoes that covering a burning pan of oil with a heavy cloth douses the flames by depriving of oxygen it so there iss no chance at all of fires burning deep in the compacted mass of the pile.
...
Click to expand...
The fires deep in the basement of the WTC had oxygen. End of Story. Why do you post nonsense. Fire can burn with little oxygen and they get very hot. I run my fire place by shutting down as much air supply as possible to deprive the fire so it burn hotter and longer. The truth is I can take a log that burns up in less than 30 minutes and in my fireplace by shutting off most the air supply burn it for 8 to 10, to 12 hours. This is why the fires burned for months in the WTC a giant supple of stuff to burn was deprived of gobs of air, and burned for months. Thermite burns in seconds. There goes Jones lies down the pit of ignorance where you dredge up all your 911 ideas
 
Originally Posted by bill smith View Post
... no fires requiring oxygen could have burned down in the pile.
Click to expand...

So coal mine fires are one more topic that Bill is ignorant of.

Abandoned coal mines sometimes catch fire and when they do, they burn for decades and are impossible to put out and can destroy the town that sits on top. Centralia Pennsylvania has been burning since 1961.

http://www.offroaders.com/album/centralia/fire-history.htm
 
bill smith said:
'...modifying it occasionally to suit his purposes '

Can you enlarge on what you think his 'purposes' might have been Dave ? And a little clarification on what exactly you think he may have'modified' might be interesting.
Click to expand...
Jones hated the war bush started so like Nixon for Jones the ends justify the means; Jones is a liar. Jones is nuts and he made up thermite with a failed letter 4 years after 911. If you had research skills (like reading) you would know about this and if you could string evidence together you could see Jones is making up a lie. Jones got fired for producing unsupported poppycock like this.
6. The observations of molten metal (I did not say molten steel!) in the basements of all three buildings, WTC 1, 2 and 7 is consistent with the use of the extremely high-temperature thermite reaction: iron oxide + aluminum powder --> Al2O3 + molten iron. Falling buildings are not observed to generate melting of large quantities of molten metal -- this requires a concentrated heat source such as explosives. Even the government reports admit that the fires were insufficient to melt steel beams (they argue for heating and warping then failure of these beams) -- but these reports do not mention the observed molten metal in the basements of WTC1, 2 and 7. Again we have a glaring omission of critical data in the FEMA, NIST and 9-11 Commission reports.
Click to expand...
Poppycock. Please get an engineer, a scientist, a chemist to read this one paragraph and explain why Jones is a liar. This one paragraph on thermite is his entire proof for thermite including the evidence.

The purpose of his paper is to declare without evidence the WTC collapsed due to controlled demolition; the big clue here is the primary source of energy, or force, for destroying building in CD is gravity. The sad irony Jones is a physicist. A failure as he pens this letter.
WTC collapses due to controlled demolition
Steven E. Jones
Professor of Physics/BYU

I believe WTC collapses to be due to controlled demolition are:

1. My own analysis of
Click to expand...
Are what? Are? I never noticed he was just ranting. He is upset about something and he makes up thermite after smashing cinder-blocks and not getting enough dust which was in the WTC mostly insulation, wallboard, ceiling tiles; not all cement. Delusional Jones.

Show me the tons of molten metal? Better yet if it is just metal not steel, what good would the thermite be if it did not melt the steel? Gee whiz the jet fuel alone is 10 time more heat energy than thermite, and paper has more heat energy than thermite. Jones has a crazy theory which fools people who lack knowledge; people like you? If Jones needs a heat source the jet fuel first at 630 TONS of TNT heat energy for the towers and then the Fire in the towers even more energy than the Jet fuel. Jones is not rational, and people that support him share some sort of willful ignorance quest.

There was no thermite; Jones made it up and now it is a test of rational thinking. A test of research. A test of who is dumb enough to fall for a lie without looking at the facts first. I can't find a single piece of evidence to support Jones overall controlled demolition delusion. No one can. You will provide nothing but uniformed statements mostly false. Repeating failed ideas, posting moronic videos. Did you fail?
 
Last edited:
bill smith said:
It's posts like this that put me in mind of Steve's '1000 paid Shills'.
Click to expand...

You mean the claim that he couldn't back up, pretended he'd backed up when somebody posted an article that didn't support it, and is now pretending he's proven by reference to a claim of one paid agent provocateur who isn't even a shill?

We know there wasn't any coal in the rubble pile. Paper, wood, plastics, interior fabrics all burn. Limiting the oxygen supply will make them burn slowly, something thermite can't possibly do. Whatever it was that kept the pile hot, as you admitted yourself we know it wasn't thermite.

Dave
 
Dave Rogers said:
You mean the claim that he couldn't back up, pretended he'd backed up when somebody posted an article that didn't support it, and is now pretending he's proven by reference to a claim of one paid agent provocateur who isn't even a shill?

We know there wasn't any coal in the rubble pile. Paper, wood, plastics, interior fabrics all burn. Limiting the oxygen supply will make them burn slowly, something thermite can't possibly do. Whatever it was that kept the pile hot, as you admitted yourself we know it wasn't thermite.

Dave
Click to expand...

With your customary exaggeration and disinformation Dave you say I said there was no thermite.
 
beachnut said:
You said it again. Jones made it up so it was not in the WTC it is in Jones' delusional mind on 911 issues.

This is the only thing you would get right if you could form a rational sentence on 911.
Click to expand...

I think you've been reading too much AW Smith Beachnut.
 
bill smith said:
I think you've been reading too much AW Smith Beachnut.
Click to expand...
Jones made up thermite and you lack the knowledge to understand that. It boils down to knowledge and you prefer posting lies from idiots who make up moronic delusions about 911. You remain in ignorance; why?

Where is Jones evidence thermite was used in the WTC?
 
bill smith said:
I know, you know and the viewing public know that no fires requiring oxygen could have burned down in the pile. And all fires require outside oxygen. Everybody knows that covering a burning pan of oil with a heavy cloth douses the flames by depriving the fire of oxygen so there iss no chance at all of fires burning deep in the compacted mass of the pile.
Click to expand...

Oh, this should be good.

Please tell me what YOU think happened.
 
BigAl said:
So coal mine fires are one more topic that Bill is ignorant of.

Abandoned coal mines sometimes catch fire and when they do, they burn for decades and are impossible to put out and can destroy the town that sits on top. Centralia Pennsylvania has been burning since 1961.

http://www.offroaders.com/album/centralia/fire-history.htm
Click to expand...

The oldest underground fire as burnt for centuries.
The oldest known continuously burning fire is an underground coal fire in New South Wales, Australia. This fire apparently started over 2,000 years ago when lightning struck a large coal seam at a point where it reached the surface of the earth. Today the fire is more than 500 feet (152 meters) underground, and is still slowly eating away at the coal............................ Underground coal fires are almost impossible to put out. They burn very slowly, using up the scant oxygen in the depths, but not going out because they stay very hot.
Click to expand...
I assume you won't bother to read the link I post Bill, it's ok, I fully understand your desire to maintain your fantasies

Linky
 
Last edited:
Mackey, if you had bothered to read through all 2 pages of previous posts in order to gain better context as you commented, you would not have prematurely levied a fallacy. I can concede that I did not bold the "E)". Moving on...

...to the main event, this little 'science' paper;oh so hotly received by the 9/11 Movement, fiercely disseminated and criticised by Skeptics.

There are a few well known Truther-bloggers, who have managed to abandon some of the common-sense debunked CT's(No Planes, Fly-over,etc). This has created a fraction in what you refer to as the 911 Truth movement, where one side is accusing the other of being disinformation agents. You've got architects and engineers all over the place!

http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/

However, these 'moderate' truthers still cling hard to the "nano-thermite proven by science-paper" bit and even claim to have an answer to your paint theory(fact by you, theory by them), which I have yet, (but am eager to) to see succinctly debunked.

In football we used to say; last guy to the chalkboard wins the game. I mean, advantage Jones when it comes to the Internet wars.....(and please don't misrepresent me on this, I'm not saying the tm is winning)

One thing I've wondered, and I really don't want the usual and typical responses, is: How do we know that the entire thing isn't simply made up? Debating the science rests on the premise that something was legitimately found in Jones' WTC dust samples.....right? Based on Mackey's info, I would be led to believe this(real find) is correct.

As for paint, here's what Jones rebukes, which is reverbarated by these bloggers in addition to the explosiveness issue...

"Another test, described above, involved subjection of red
chips to methyl ethyl ketone solvent for tens of hours, with
agitation. The red material did swell but did not dissolve, and
a hard silicon-rich matrix remained after this procedure. On
the other hand, paint samples in the same exposure to MEK
solvent became limp and showed significant dissolution, as
expected since MEK is a paint solvent."

Page 21, Harrit et al. (Revised Feb 10, 2009)

Has this ever been discussed? And if so, is there a decent thread which I could be linked to s'il te plait?
 
Last edited:
Who is gullible enough to think Jones made up thermite scam destroyed the WTC. They have to be lacking knowledge on a broad spectrum of subjects. No person has come forward to support with evidence Jones' conclusion. Reason; Jones made up his thermite scenario and if fools a few people who can't think for themselves.

Jones had to pay to publish a work which is done to support his preordained delusions of controlled demolition he dreamed up 4 years after 911. It is ironic to see his paper discussed as if it was good for something besides weeding out the gullible.

I suppose mixing in some science before you make your moronic conclusion based on your lies and fantasy, fools those people who have not researched 911.

google
The red material did swell but did not dissolve site:randi.org
Click to expand...
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=139293&page=31

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=139293

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=140017
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom