Care to Comment

[BigAl]

All I have ever maintained is that the lack of deceleration in the falls of the upper sections of the buildings shows that something was removing most of the strength of the columns before the impacts occurred between stories.

The discussion on what may have been used to do that is somewhat speculative and I have always stated that and do not pretend to know what exactly was used.

Having said that, we do know that the authors of the Active Thermitic Materials found in the WTC Dust paper say they have found unignited nano-thermite in the dust from the WTC collapses. All one can really say there is to ask what it was doing in those buildings as it certainly had no place there. If you watched my debate with Ryan Mackey that was my response to his question of how I thought it was used.

Another thing which came up in that debate was the noise level in the falls of the towers and Ron Wieck's assertion that there was no noise on the level of what usually accompanies demolition explosive use. The discussion here has involved a feature of nano-energetics called tailorability which has a place in the conversation as it can be used to limit noise..

There is no evidence that demolition explosives with this magic property and suitable for relevant steel structures exists.

You've failed to back up your claims.

 

[GlennB]

The few pieces to be saved were picked out and marked in the steel yards, after the steel was removed from the WTC site, by people like John Gross from NIST.

In the presence of countless others. And photographed, marking and cutting those samples. Not cutting it themselves, mind, but by cutting-torch dudes.

You just debunked yourself.

 

[funk de fino]

How do you know that there was no thermite residue? NIST said they didn't look for it and if you don't look for something you won't find it.

You seem to be presuming that just anyone can look at a piece of steel that was in a fire and discern that thermite had been used. I think you are wrong.

All the steel was examined by forensic investigators and demolition company officials. All of it.

You know that.

 

[funk de fino]

What you say here is not an objective argument and is actually a fallacy.

It is completely plausible that the FEMA appointees sent to Lower Manhattan on Sept. 10, 2001 by the Bush administration were in on it, along with a few members of Rudy Giuliani's staff, and were able to eliminate the evidence, as they controlled the investigation.

What about all the demolition company guys like Brent Blanchard?

FEMA were not sent on the 10th Sept. That is another truther lie.

 

[WildCat]

You certainly seem to excel in misinterpretation towards what could be considered a biased point of view. Could it be intentional? I wouldn't doubt it.

Why don't you clear up the misinterpretations Tony? All you have to do is collate all of your claims into a coherent theory... when do you think you'll be able to do that?

 

[Seymour Butz]

The tradeoff is obvious here in the impulse strength. As the particle size is increased the impulse per unit mass will be less powerful. The amount needed for the job then has to be determined and with a tailorable substance the right combination of size and power can be engineered to minimize noise for a given function.

Good, you're making progress.

Now all you have to do is quantify this tradeoff.

There's zero sense in trying to make your point with innuendo. If you can quantify these tradeoffs - as in x Db less = y amount of pressure impulse reduction, but will still fracture column steel with a z thickness with a total charge size of h kg which is equivalent to j lbs of TNT - then do it.

Otherwise, you know as well as everyone else here that it's garbage.

 

[leftysergeant]

How do you know that there was no thermite residue? NIST said they didn't look for it and if you don't look for something you won't find it.

You don't have to look for it specificly. You look for anything interesting.

You seem to be presuming that just anyone can look at a piece of steel that was in a fire and discern that thermite had been used. I think you are wrong.

Not everyone even knows what thermite is. They don't have to.

Big burnt-in areas of water-proof white crust or slag dripping down the sides of columns is, however, a major eye-grabbing WTF? Fire fighters and cops would know that this is something to take a closer look at.

 

[GlennB]

Most people aren't usually responsive to dorks who call them names while asking for a reply. But since I have already replied to you in this thread, before you got offensive, I'll make this one exception.

The tradeoff is obvious here in the impulse strength. As the particle size is increased the impulse per unit mass will be less powerful. The amount needed for the job then has to be determined and with a tailorable substance the right combination of size and power can be engineered to minimize noise for a given function.

And the "given function" is? Do tell.

 

[Telltale Tom]

I have said 1 degree of tilt would not cause the columns to miss each other at all.

It would be very interesting to see the math you used to arrive at your assertion that 1 degree of tilt would cause columns to miss by three and a half feet.

I would be happy to explain to you how I calculated the 3.5 feet, which is not without its own challenges; but would you be so kind as to explain, how in your model, the buckling columns manage to avoid missing the bar joists? What exactly happens to that buckled column.? Or is that where you need the explosives?

If you agree I am happy to go first.!

 

[Tony Szamboti]

All the steel was examined by forensic investigators and demolition company officials. All of it.

You know that.

The NIST report itself refutes what you say here as they say no metallographic analysis was done on WTC 7's steel as none of that steel was salvaged. They also say less than 0.5% of the steel from the twin towers was saved and when it didn't show evidence of high temperatures they said it was too small a sample to be representative.

Why would they say these things if all of the steel had been forensically examined?

It doesn't sound like you know enough to discuss this issue and are just saying things based on your beliefs.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

What about all the demolition company guys like Brent Blanchard?

FEMA were not sent on the 10th Sept. That is another truther lie.

There is actually video of Dan Rather interviewing a FEMA worker who states on camera that they actually arrived in Lower Manhattan on Monday night before Tuesday Sept. 11, 2001 for a bio-terror drill which was to take place on Sept. 12, 2001 and that when the buildings collapsed on the 11th they went right into action.

This isn't about truthers or non-truthers or anything else but reality and the fact that the massive crime committed in NYC on Sept. 11, 2001 has not been solved, and part of the reason for that is that the evidence which would have conclusively shown how those buildings actually came down was destroyed before it could be properly examined.

Your knowledge level here is not impressive.

 

[fess]

All the steel was examined by forensic investigators and demolition company officials. All of it.

You know that.

Thank you sir, I was going to inject that comment, but you performed nicely.
It seems that some forget that all of the steel that was removed was tracked from Ground Zero to its final destination, and none was shown missing.

 

[BigAl]

The NIST report itself refutes what you say here as they say no metallographic analysis was done on WTC 7's steel as none of that steel was salvaged. They also say less than 0.5% of the steel from the twin towers was saved and when it didn't show evidence of high temperatures they said it was too small a sample to be representative.

" no metallographic analysis " doesn't mean that essentially every piece of steel wasn't visually examined.

The gross effects of thermite and demolition cutting charges are obvious.

Lots of knowledgeable people were involved officially and unofficially. No evidence consistent with controlled demolition was found.

I'm still waiting for your citation of a specific paragraph in that DoD publication supporting your claim of the existence of nano demolition charges.

 

[BigAl]

There is actually video of Dan Rather interviewing a FEMA worker who states on camera that they actually arrived in Lower Manhattan on Monday night before Tuesday Sept. 11, 2001 for a bio-terror drill which was to take place on Sept. 12, 2001 and that when the buildings collapsed on the 11th they went right into action.

Even if true, so what?

Even before 9/11/2001 NYC and the country were ramping up counter-terrorism and disaster recovery skills. Because of the trials related to the 1993 bombing, if nothing else, terrorism was very fresh in all minds.

 

[Thunder]

There is actually video of Dan Rather interviewing a FEMA worker who states on camera that they actually arrived in Lower Manhattan on Monday night before Tuesday Sept. 11, 2001 for a bio-terror drill which was to take place on Sept. 12, 2001 and that when the buildings collapsed on the 11th they went right into action. .

yeah? so what. FEMA doesn't have the right to do drills in New York City?

 

[funk de fino]

The NIST report itself refutes what you say here as they say no metallographic analysis was done on WTC 7's steel as none of that steel was salvaged. They also say less than 0.5% of the steel from the twin towers was saved and when it didn't show evidence of high temperatures they said it was too small a sample to be representative.

Brent Blanchard refutes your claims. All the steel was forensically examined at the sorting sites. What NIST did after this is irrelevant. Those investigators would have found the residues or evidence of thermite nonsense and reported it or saved those parts. Like they did with the steel that had evaporated from WTC 7 and one of the Towers. If they saved them then why would any other steel that had to have showed evidence of explosives or thermite not saved also?

There was none. Just like there are no large pieces of molten steel.

Why would they say these things if all of the steel had been forensically examined?

It doesn't sound like you know enough to discuss this issue and are just saying things based on your beliefs.

I have read Blanchards report that refutes your claims. Remember Tony, I proved you wrong with your claims about steel temps amd the NIST report. It seemed to me you had not read that section and made up a story about forgetting it. Just like your made up story about Mr Silverstein. You have no credibility as a proven liar.

 

[funk de fino]

There is actually video of Dan Rather interviewing a FEMA worker who states on camera that they actually arrived in Lower Manhattan on Monday night before Tuesday Sept. 11, 2001 for a bio-terror drill which was to take place on Sept. 12, 2001 and that when the buildings collapsed on the 11th they went right into action.

This isn't about truthers or non-truthers or anything else but reality and the fact that the massive crime committed in NYC on Sept. 11, 2001 has not been solved, and part of the reason for that is that the evidence which would have conclusively shown how those buildings actually came down was destroyed before it could be properly examined.

Your knowledge level here is not impressive.

Show us this video Tony. It's not like your imaginary Silvetrstein one is it? I'm afraid I cannot take your word for it.

I think you will find that the FEMA guy mispoke about when he arrived also. Not very good at this are you?

The steel was examined. Get over it.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

Show us this video Tony. It's not like your imaginary Silvetrstein one is it? I'm afraid I cannot take your word for it.

I think you will find that the FEMA guy mispoke about when he arrived also. Not very good at this are you?

The steel was examined. Get over it.

Watch the movie 911 Mysteries to see the CBS clip of FEMA contract employee Tom Kenney telling Dan Rather about FEMA arriving in Lower Manhattan the night before Sept. 11, 2001, ostensibly for a bio-terror drill to be held on Sept. 12, 2001.

The CBS clip is played between 52 and 53 minutes into the film.

On a side note, it is interesting how there seemed to be a lot of contract employees and volunteers involved in the investigation. Geez, why would that be?

 

[Tony Szamboti]

Brent Blanchard refutes your claims. All the steel was forensically examined at the sorting sites. What NIST did after this is irrelevant. Those investigators would have found the residues or evidence of thermite nonsense and reported it or saved those parts. Like they did with the steel that had evaporated from WTC 7 and one of the Towers. If they saved them then why would any other steel that had to have showed evidence of explosives or thermite not saved also?

There was none. Just like there are no large pieces of molten steel.


I have read Blanchards report that refutes your claims. Remember Tony, I proved you wrong with your claims about steel temps amd the NIST report. It seemed to me you had not read that section and made up a story about forgetting it. Just like your made up story about Mr Silverstein. You have no credibility as a proven liar.

Your use of Brent Blanchard to prove the steel was examined is a joke. Brent Blanchard has no qualifications to speak about nor does he understand what a forensic analysis of the steel would entail. There was no analysis of the steel in those yards other than maybe a cursory visual, which is not nearly enough to make a determination of anything.

You aren't proving anything other than your willingness to call people liars with no basis for it.

 

[dafydd]

You aren't proving anything other than your willingness to call people liars with no basis for it.

Truthers are past masters at that.