Merged National Geographic Special - "9/11 Science and Conspiracy" Debunks Thermite Myth

[triforcharity]

Your not using SUPER-DUPER-CUT THE GRASS-MAKE THE BED- FOLD THE CLOTHES-AND EVEN CUT YOUR HAIR-THERMITE!! Der.

/sarchasm

 

[dafydd]

So it was a kind of hole-in-a hole then ? lol

Bill is here,now the laughs can really start.

 

[Baylor]

I don't wish to set anything aside, I simply wanted clarification of what you were referring to, and I thank both you and Justin for providing it. As for your two questions; I never suggested traditional explosives were used, but lacking omnipresence I'm not in a position to say what was.

So you've got a limited understanding of Islam, huh? Your English and physics aren't exactly up to par either.

 

[beachnut]

...
very little of the rubble received investigation. ...

I think this is a misleading lie. What is you point? What overall conclusion can you make with this lie?

My conclusion that the office products and such you mention wouldn't have fueled hotspots starting at the temperatures reported? I'm basing that on the widely reported temps of fires containing such products. What reasoning do you have for implying otherwise?

Office contents are the only fuels along with cars, tires, gasoline, and other things in the WTC. These are the only fuels that burned in the WTC rubble pile. Your conclusion is wrong based on the facts and evidence. Why do you lean toward the lies on 911?

You have no clue what caused the fires in the WTC rubble pile but there were only WTC contents in the WTC rubble pile. I hope you are not going to spring Jones' insanity claim of thermite.

So what temperature was the rubble pile? What temperature does steel melt at?

Where is your evidence for melted steel flowing in rivers? Nile, or Mississippi?

 

[dafydd]

Your mass/drag argument completely ignores the huge difference in structural integrity between liquids and solids.


I said nothing about huge pools, but you exaggerate my statements to draw false conclusions.

As for the evdince of molten steel I have seen, I'll dig some up and post it when I hit 15 posts.

What are your engineering qualifications,kylebisme?

 

[dafydd]

But I am not claiming there is any such scandal to bring down, only suggesting there might be a secret public safety policy which is best kept secret.

You came up with the thousands of participants in a conspiracy nonsense somewhere else, and have no place blaming me for that.

I am suggesting that there may be an invisible pink unicorn living in my garden.

 

[kylebisme]

So now you think there were giant vats filled with thermite on the columns and nobody noticed?

No, I don't. However, the NG program insisted on building a big vat around a column to show what effect thermite can have on it, so I was simply pointing out what a lame job of it they did.

Sorry, I was misspeaking, they did only analyze the collapse initiation. Still, if they got the collapse initiation mechanism(s) wrong, then any recommendations they make to improve building safety will be at best worthless, and possibly less than worthless, actually making new buildings less safe. Wouldn't that be a reason to speak out by whoever installed the demolitions?

All good on the misspeak. I'm at a loss as to how you would figure "less safe", and the recommendations wouldn't necessarily be worthless, just excessive under most conditions.

On the other hand, assuming the towers were rigged for public safety and detonated for the same purpose; proving collapse initiation would be all the further one would need to go to vindicate the judgement call.

Your setup still implies that the limiting factor on the speed with which thermite melts through steel is overcoming the viscosity of the molten steel that's already been melted, and (as far as I can tell) the people here who are familiar with using thermite don't believe that to be true.

The speed it melts though is dependent on the force behind it, as is overcoming the molten steel. Yeah, I'm not suggesting using it in a normal way, so of course it would seem strange to people familiar with using it. But again, I only suggested it as a possibility, I'm not claiming it was done.

No twoof, it has a DIRECT bearing on what you said. YOu were claiming the intense temperatures in the piles for the first months after the collapse is a sign of molten steel.

I was replying the first reason it was so hot is because they DIDN'T start actual firefighting for a full 2 weeks AFTER the collapse. That gave the underground fires in the piles 2 full weeks to burn and grow.

It is FULLY applicable to the crap you are trying to spread.

try again.

Try looking up "began" if you unfamliar with the term, and then note the fires being left to burn for weeks has no bearing on the point you were responding to.

p.s. the body of the car was thin aluminum or sheetmetal, not steel. Those were the brakes. Unless of course you want to say the whole format was wrong.. because then it makes BRAKES 0 or GASTANK 0 It would help if you could try to actually READ for comprehension.

The formatting is mostly jacked, and the 0s denote information not accounted for. Trying to read it straight across you get interesting things like "Suspension - 2 twin carburators" and "Body Doors - 2420". Also sheet metal and steel are not mutually exclusive.

 

[kylebisme]

Tell me, how exactly does a thermite incendiary compound that deflagrates upon ignition, rather than detonate, compress and propel a copper liner/penetrator with enough velocity to penetrate steel? You do understand how a shaped charge works, right?

I understand the fact that there are different types of shaped charges, I was speaking of the linear type.

I think that he was saying that a conventional explosive would compress, propel and ignite the thermite, and the hurtling mass of burning thermite would penetrate the steel. As far as I can tell, the assumption is that when thermite melts through steel straight down the limiting factor on speed is that the burning thermite has to sink through the viscous molten steel it just created so that it can come into contact with solid steel and melt that too, thus if gravity was increased that it would vertically cut faster. If this assumption is true, and you horizontally hurled burning thermite at steel, its high initial momentum would cause the thermite to plough straight through the molten steel it was creating, generating a horizontal cut.

I thank you Matthew, that is exactly what I have been suggesting. It's good to have someone finally comprehend me on this point.

Or maybe there's some other reason I'm missing why explosively propelled burning thermite would be better at cutting steel than copper.

Less boom for the cut.

 

[TokenMac]

I understand the fact that there are different types of shaped charges, I was speaking of the linear type.


I thank you Matthew, that is exactly what I have been suggesting. It's good to have someone finally comprehend me on this point.


Less boom for the cut.

So the thermite replaces the copper in the shaped charge, but isn't that just a shaped charge with thermite. So I have to ask or may be you should have asked your self...
Why no det-cords?
Why no signs of a shaped charge at all?
oh and a new one, Why didn't the Jones nano-thermite paper also show traces of an explosive?

 

[BigAl]

I understand the fact that there are different types of shaped charges, I was speaking of the linear type.


I thank you Matthew, that is exactly what I have been suggesting. It's good to have someone finally comprehend me on this point.


Less boom for the cut.

But not no boom. Nobody heard any man-made demolition at WTC on 9/11.

Unless you are already published under some other name, you have a potential career in writing bad science fiction. You are completely unencumbered with any knowledge of the science and mechanics of what you propose so the Universe is wide open for your fantasies.

Unfortunately, not all of are unencumbered by facts and expertise.

 

[Scott Sommers]

No, I don't. However, the NG program insisted on building a big vat around a column to show what effect thermite can have on it, so I was simply pointing out what a lame job of it they did.

All good on the misspeak. I'm at a loss as to how you would figure "less safe", and the recommendations wouldn't necessarily be worthless, just excessive under most conditions.

On the other hand, assuming the towers were rigged for public safety and detonated for the same purpose; proving collapse initiation would be all the further one would need to go to vindicate the judgement call.

The speed it melts though is dependent on the force behind it, as is overcoming the molten steel. Yeah, I'm not suggesting using it in a normal way, so of course it would seem strange to people familiar with using it. But again, I only suggested it as a possibility, I'm not claiming it was done.


Try looking up "began" if you unfamliar with the term, and then note the fires being left to burn for weeks has no bearing on the point you were responding to.


The formatting is mostly jacked, and the 0s denote information not accounted for. Trying to read it straight across you get interesting things like "Suspension - 2 twin carburators" and "Body Doors - 2420". Also sheet metal and steel are not mutually exclusive.

You come across like you sincerely want to understand this. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, there is no example anywhere of a thermite demolition. I found this video
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=153044
of some guys trying to do a thermite demolition. It was a disaster. You can do all the thought experiments you want. None of them, not even one of them, will work. Not even demolition experts can make it work.

To make it work, you need magic. Do you believe the US government conspired to use magic to demolish the WTCs with thermite? Really, do you think they had magic? It has to be. You can't even make up a thought experiment that would work, much less run a real demolition.

Is that OK?

 

[TruthersLie]

I understand the fact that there are different types of shaped charges, I was speaking of the linear type.


I thank you Matthew, that is exactly what I have been suggesting. It's good to have someone finally comprehend me on this point.


Less boom for the cut.

so again ... a rather simple question.

wouldn't it have been much easier to just fly jets into the buildings?

I just love the rube goldberg conspiracy for dummies that bush must have used... a super secret directive to wire high rise buildings with explosives for public safety.

That in and of itself is causing me to PMSLMAO.

and now we get to shaped charges with nanothermite... Which would a. propel the thermite slower and at a lower temperature and b. not work.
This is even FUNNIER.

Personally I wonder why banned members feel the need to come back with socks... Do they enjoy getting their asses handed to them repeatedly?

Still waiting for ANY CITATION (even the simple one about the body being steel on a puegeot... which were the BRAKES ad the engine was a LUMP OF METAL.)

 

[TruthersLie]

I understand the fact that there are different types of shaped charges, I was speaking of the linear type.


I thank you Matthew, that is exactly what I have been suggesting. It's good to have someone finally comprehend me on this point.


Less boom for the cut.

again then you should be easy to provide a simple example of any linear thermite shaped charges.

Less boom for the cut. GREAT. PROVE IT.

why do you keep dodging that? Oh because it doesn't exist. Thank you for playing. MOTHRA did it.

ETA: Here comes the piss poor reading for comprehension skills... I predict a YT video of the LINEAR THERMITE CUTTER.
5....4.....3.....2.....1.....

 

[Scott Sommers]

so again ... a rather simple question.

wouldn't it have been much easier to just fly jets into the buildings?

I just love the rube goldberg conspiracy for dummies that bush must have used... a super secret directive to wire high rise buildings with explosives for public safety.

That in and of itself is causing me to PMSLMAO.

and now we get to shaped charges with nanothermite... Which would a. propel the thermite slower and at a lower temperature and b. not work.
This is even FUNNIER.

Personally I wonder why banned members feel the need to come back with socks... Do they enjoy getting their asses handed to them repeatedly?

Still waiting for ANY CITATION (even the simple one about the body being steel on a puegeot... which were the BRAKES ad the engine was a LUMP OF METAL.)

You mean I wasted some of life answering a mornoic question from a previously banned Truther? Ahhh s***. Anyway, it would still take magic to make thermite cut through steel like that. It would take magic to one of Steven Jones papers published in an honest-to-goodness real journal. There is no such thing as a thermite demolition.

Honest question Truther buddy, why do you think anyone would believe this thermite trash story? No one has ever seen one work. There are loads of demonstrations and expert testimony that thermite can't do what you you say it did. Why would anyone believe this thermite crap story?

You might as well say it was done by a giant space-based energy beam. It's just as believable.

 

[triforcharity]

Kyle,

How would YOU have done the jet fuel experiment differently. Caare to take a guess how it would be more accurate, but still maintain safety??

 

[Longfellow]

You mean I wasted some of life answering a mornoic question from a previously banned Truther? (...snip)

You haven't been here very long but I'm sure you'll come to see that the vast majority of '9/11 truthers' on this site who have been previously banned see the need to create multiple sock-puppets in order to continue posting their dirt-dumb ideas. [/beachnut mode]

It's par for the course for the 'truth movement'.

 

[alienentity]

kylebisme - you must admit, if you're going to take a reasonable, rational approach, that you're hinging your entire thesis on thermite being able to perform a task which it has not been proven to do.

Therefore you are relying on speculation, not fact. As such, you may very well be wrong.
What seems to separate a truther from a skeptic is that the truther cannot accept that their idea could be wrong. There's nothing wrong with conjecture, but one should recognize it for what it is, don't you think?

In the case of thermite, nobody (truthers included) has been able to show that thermite can indeed cut through a vertical steel column. Do you really blame skeptics for saying 'show us. Prove that it works'?

 

[kylebisme]

You come across like you sincerely want to understand this. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, there is no example anywhere of a thermite demolition. I found this video
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=153044
of some guys trying to do a thermite demolition. It was a disaster. You can do all the thought experiments you want. None of them, not even one of them, will work. Not even demolition experts can make it work.

Please understand that I never claimed thermite was used, but rather only contested others denying the possibility. Put simply, claiming that an incendiary with a boiling point of around double of what it takes to melt steel could not create a critical cut in steel is nearly as absurd as suggesting aircraft aluminum could never cut though steel.

To make it work, you need magic. Do you believe the US government conspired to use magic to demolish the WTCs with thermite? Really, do you think they had magic? It has to be. You can't even make up a thought experiment that would work, much less run a real demolition.

Please understand that I never claimed our government conspired to demolish the towers, only suggested the possibility that our government rigged the towers to be demolished in the case of a terrorist attack which would otherwise have led to to much more death and destruction than what did occur.

That said, a belief in black magic could explain why Bush was sitting in a classroom full of children reciting a story about a goat who likes destroying things while the attack was going down, and his associations with Skull and Bones and the Bohemian Club demonstrate a long standing appreciation for ritualism in his family. Not that I consider such magic to have any effect other than a psychological one on those who believe in it, nor am I suggesting any of this is necessarily anything but coincidence, I'm simply saying that I can't rightly rule out such possibilities entirely.

You mean I wasted some of life answering a mornoic question from a previously banned Truther?

No, you bought into moronic speculation deceptively stated as fact. I had never participated in this forum until just a few days ago. You can Google around and see this is the username I use all over the place, and have done so for many years now. You can ask a mod to check me out. You can search to the ends of existence and back, but you won't find any evidence of me participating on this forum under different username, simply because I never have.

 

[Scott Sommers]

Please understand that I never claimed thermite was used, but rather only contested others denying the possibility. Put simply, claiming that an incendiary with a boiling point of around double of what it takes to melt steel could not create a critical cut in steel is nearly as absurd as suggesting aircraft aluminum could never cut though steel.


Please understand that I never claimed our government conspired to demolish the towers, only suggested the possibility that our government rigged the towers to be demolished in the case of a terrorist attack which would otherwise have led to to much more death and destruction than what did occur.

That said, a belief in black magic could explain why Bush was sitting in a classroom full of children reciting a story about a goat who likes destroying things while the attack was going down, and his associations with Skull and Bones and the Bohemian Club demonstrate a long standing appreciation for ritualism in his family. Not that I consider such magic to have any effect other than a psychological one on those who believe in it, nor am I suggesting any of this is necessarily anything but coincidence, I'm simply saying that I can't rightly rule out such possibilities entirely.


No, you bought into moronic speculation deceptively stated as fact. I had never participated in this forum until just a few days ago. You can Google around and see this is the username I use all over the place, and have done so for many years now. You can ask a mod to check me out. You can search to the ends of existence and back, but you won't find any evidence of me participating on this forum under different username, simply because I never have.

Ohhhhh..you're just asking questions. I see. Ok. The real answer is there's no thermite at all. If you consult the website of Dr. Judy Wood, it's clear, it had to have been a space-based energy beam. Prove to me why it's not. Dr. Judy makes a great case, don't you think?

 

[kylebisme]

Kyle,

How would YOU have done the jet fuel experiment differently. Caare to take a guess how it would be more accurate, but still maintain safety??

From the least effort to the most:

1. distribute the weights evenly across the beam, as those in the towers were.
2. bolt the sides of the beam down,those as those in the towers were.
3. attach more steel to the ends of the beams to allow for dissipation of heat, as interconnecting beams in the the towers did.
4. use a beam the thickness of those in the WTC, as that would take longer to heat through. (of course this would require more weight too)
5. construct a controlled environment to simulate the air flow and oxygen levels as those in the towers.

Given such adjustments, of course the beam would have still deformed, as those in the towers did, but results would not been nearly as dramatic as the lame excuse for an "experiment" NG showed.