You'd think that "36%" of the population could raise enough money for Jones to actually demonstrate how this works and answer all the questions in the OP. 
OK, so how do thermite demolitions work again?
- Thread starter CHF
- Start date
leftysergeant
Penultimate Amazing
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2007
- Messages
- 18,863
I do not think that was the deevice DC had in mind. That would be a grenade-like thing that the militart uses. You throw it down a gun tube or set it on an engine block to destroy equipment, either to neutralize captured enemy equipment that you haven';t time to guard or to render abandoned equipment useless.
The illustrated device seems rather small to demolish a skyscraper. I am still trying to figure out what sort of initiator linkage your would use.
From the techincal drawings of the structure provided, I do not see how it could be placed in direct contact with the steel.
Most thermite charges I have ever made have had chemical initiators, either liquids applied directly to an incendiary mixture which produces a hypergalic reaction or by an initiation train similar to that of a tear gas or smoke grenade. In either case, you need a mechanical device of some sort to initiate the reaction.
Do you see how complicated this is getting?
Now, in the towers, how would you use them to initiate collapse or to keep it in progress?
Since the cores stood so long, it is clear that nothing done to the cores had any role in the collapse after initiation. To have initiated collapse, the thermite would have to have been attached to the columns only on the floors where collapse began. Now we have the problem of how any initiation train would survive the fires.
To use it to keep the collapse going, it would have to have been placed on the perimeter columns. Now we have to explain how they could have been cut with thermite in such a way that, after cutting through the steel, the thermite would not have shot showers of sparks, white smoke and incandescent molten steel in all directions out of the building. We clerarly do not see this occuring anywhere.
Thus, we are left with no reasonable way that it could be used in an occupied building without detection.
In an unoccupied building, I would simply strip all the sheet rock, attach cast charges running as much as five pounds each, to the uprights on all floors and set them to go off in sequence and hope that the fl;lors do not fall faster than planned.
How I would initiate them, I have no idea.
I am SO not going to go into a building and drop reagent on the igniter hole with a medicine dropper.
The illustrated device seems rather small to demolish a skyscraper. I am still trying to figure out what sort of initiator linkage your would use.
From the techincal drawings of the structure provided, I do not see how it could be placed in direct contact with the steel.
Most thermite charges I have ever made have had chemical initiators, either liquids applied directly to an incendiary mixture which produces a hypergalic reaction or by an initiation train similar to that of a tear gas or smoke grenade. In either case, you need a mechanical device of some sort to initiate the reaction.
Do you see how complicated this is getting?
Now, in the towers, how would you use them to initiate collapse or to keep it in progress?
Since the cores stood so long, it is clear that nothing done to the cores had any role in the collapse after initiation. To have initiated collapse, the thermite would have to have been attached to the columns only on the floors where collapse began. Now we have the problem of how any initiation train would survive the fires.
To use it to keep the collapse going, it would have to have been placed on the perimeter columns. Now we have to explain how they could have been cut with thermite in such a way that, after cutting through the steel, the thermite would not have shot showers of sparks, white smoke and incandescent molten steel in all directions out of the building. We clerarly do not see this occuring anywhere.
Thus, we are left with no reasonable way that it could be used in an occupied building without detection.
In an unoccupied building, I would simply strip all the sheet rock, attach cast charges running as much as five pounds each, to the uprights on all floors and set them to go off in sequence and hope that the fl;lors do not fall faster than planned.
How I would initiate them, I have no idea.
I am SO not going to go into a building and drop reagent on the igniter hole with a medicine dropper.
Seymour Butz
Muse
- Joined
- Jun 20, 2008
- Messages
- 884
They'd have to be on all 4 sides of the columns too, due to the size of them and the distance away that the "other" side of the column would be.
Another theory I've heard is using thermate in the traditional
vertically down manner, cutting the stabilizing floor beams on several floors. This would permit buckling of the columns. But it's equally insane cuz of all the material that would need to be removed, and them sticking out all over the place.And I'm not so sure that THEY wouldn't need to be on more than just 1 side too.
Piffle.... I like that word.
ktesibios
Worthless Aging Hippie
- Joined
- Feb 23, 2002
- Messages
- 1,493
I think that there would be another real problem with using thermite for the sort of building demolitions the commercial demolition industry does- timing.
Getting a building to collapse the way you want it to depends, among other things, on breaking the structural members in the right sequence at the right times. Shaped charges do their work in milliseconds, so that cutting column "A" a specified time before you cut column "B" is a matter of delaying the detonation of charge "B" with respect to that of charge "A". This can be done easily enough that a demolition engineer can plan out how and when all the charges will detonate with a high degree of confidence.
With thermite, you ignite the incendiary material and then wait until it has melted enough steel that the column gives way. While it's probably possible to calculate how long that should take for a column of given dimensions under a given load, what are the tolerances involved?
It's also common to use a shaped charge to cut a column and a "kicker" charge detonated a short time afterward to displace the cut ends and prevent them from jamming together and continuing to support the compressive load. If the cutting were done with thermite, the heat might mess up the kicker charge.
Trying to burn through columns instead of cutting them with shaped charges just seems like a rather sloppy way of accomplishing something which is normally done with a lot of precision.
Getting a building to collapse the way you want it to depends, among other things, on breaking the structural members in the right sequence at the right times. Shaped charges do their work in milliseconds, so that cutting column "A" a specified time before you cut column "B" is a matter of delaying the detonation of charge "B" with respect to that of charge "A". This can be done easily enough that a demolition engineer can plan out how and when all the charges will detonate with a high degree of confidence.
With thermite, you ignite the incendiary material and then wait until it has melted enough steel that the column gives way. While it's probably possible to calculate how long that should take for a column of given dimensions under a given load, what are the tolerances involved?
It's also common to use a shaped charge to cut a column and a "kicker" charge detonated a short time afterward to displace the cut ends and prevent them from jamming together and continuing to support the compressive load. If the cutting were done with thermite, the heat might mess up the kicker charge.
Trying to burn through columns instead of cutting them with shaped charges just seems like a rather sloppy way of accomplishing something which is normally done with a lot of precision.
CHF
Illuminator
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2006
- Messages
- 3,871
Oh that's right! I'd forgotten all about Truthburn...
And didn't that 60lbs of thermite produce a molten slag that cooled off in like 10-20 minutes?
Something to think with regards to all that "molten steel" lasting for weeks at GZ...
Truthers try to use thermite for cutting columns; they failed to bring down a 20 foot wide sign. They had 70 pounds of thermite, but just burned it up, and sent the stuff to Jones! They say Gage came to talk. Gage, the guy who repeats Jones made up theory? How truthy. http://911truthburn.blogspot.com/ how much do they pay for bandwidth?
Is the scam to raise money for the thermite cutter charge, 10,000 bucks! Is this 9/11 truth stuff a cottage industry of frauds? Act dumb, ask for money from real dumb people.
Some truthers are doing something, albeit taking money from dolts in 9/11 truth. I have not been taken by 9/11 truth, but I have been a victim of fraud by not paying attention and not using logic and research to connect the dots before I was soaked. Truthers may learn.
Is truthburn to make money! Skim some off the donations for the 10,000 buck cutter charges and you have the likes of "The Producers". This is funny stuff
http://911truthburn.blogspot.com/ who paid for the sign, I was tied of reading junk? Is Gage nuts enough to put up thousands of dollars. The prices they quote as they ask for donations seem inflated.
Quad4_72
AI-EE-YAH!
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2006
- Messages
- 6,354
ok bye bye kids
was fun for you
Yes I would run away too if I was you. You know, the whole lack of evidence thing.
Is it possible to use Thermite, Thermate to weaken or cut steal?.......Absolutely! Yes! Defo! Without a doubt! Nobody is saying NO!
The time factor? The amount? The manpower? The shelf life? The process?
Once all of the above is sorted we would then need to hide the worlds biggest sparkler...................twice!
Thermite was and always will be the dumbest of dumbest conspiracy theories. Cool!
These CT's rock!
Irrelevent!............but in the context of 911 and a 'CD' show me that they are wrong!
What is Thermite, Thermate?
What is it used for and why?
Give me 5 reasons why it can't or wouldn't be used for 'CD'.
Give me the characteristics and sig of Thermite, Thermate.
Direct me to just one 'demolition expert' who will go public with the 'thermite' theory.
Explosive experts are laughing in their DMS boots and pissing in their kevlar pants. lol.
DC
Banned
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2008
- Messages
- 23,064
what's wrong with you?DC
Banned
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2008
- Messages
- 23,064
Unsecured Coins
Hoku-maniac
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2007
- Messages
- 5,905
I doubt you'll answer a single question
DC
Banned
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2008
- Messages
- 23,064
this is so laughable......
maybe read the stuff i wrote below the video.
there are still huge problems (not to say impossible) with that CT.
I merely posted a video with an experiment that showed, that a device similar to the patents do indeed work, they can cut steel vertically.
Something that was denied as it came without any evidence that it is indeed possible, and now someone shows that it is possible.
i thought it might be of interest, so for accuracy reason maybe?
so people that believe thermite cannot be used vertically dont claim that anymore and get debunked.
triforcharity
Banned
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2009
- Messages
- 13,961
And yet, still have yet to show how it would or even COULD be used on steel as thick as that found in the WTC.
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
Well finally someone actually tried it. I do have to commend the guy who did this.
OTOH he keeps speaking abouit 'explosive' nano-thermite.
An explosive is an explosive whether it has nano-thermitic compounds incorporated in it or not. Bigger boom for less material but still a big enough boom to sever a large box column will sound very much the same whether its RDX or an explosive containing nano-thermitic material.
So that's a non-starter.
However, he used incindiary thermite to sever, or at least severly weaken a vertical column so congrats to him on that. I see that doing so took on the order of seconds to accomplish though. So now we run into a problem that has been discussed many many times in these threads. You cannot time multiple thermite burns to occur in the manner required to bring down a large structure in any controlled manner. It certainly could not be used to sever columns or beams or connections all down the structure either since we can see quite plainly in the actual collapse, that it takes much less than a second for any particular level to fail.
The video author also shows that he could severly weaken the bolts connecting box columns. At no time however did he actually sever a vertocal column and here we run into a problem especially if one is trying for any type of control in a demolition. As stated above , explosive demo's incorporate a second, 'kicker' charge to offset the section of the column to allow that they move past each other rather than have the top settle on the lower and continue to hold a vertical load. There is no such thing in a thermite burn.
Now if thermite was used only to sever truss to column connections in order to enable column buckling due to long lengths with no bracing the problem with the way the video protrays this is that the best way to do it and not have it seen would be to only do so at the core connections and leave all perimeter connections intact. It puts inward tension on the perimeter columns (since the floor pans are still hanging onto the perimeter columns)while eliminating column bracing for both perimeter and core columns.
However if it was done the way the author of the video contends, thermite severing of both perimeter and column truss connections he must also believe in the NIST and Bazant model that once the initial collapse occured the building was doomed since we see no similar heating of perimeter columns anywhere on the structure the way we do at the actual fire floors. Nor do we see any evidence of thermite burns anywhere below the fire floors.
All of this means that the thermite theory is reduced to saying that thermite was used to weaken the structure until it gave way at the fire floors and that once this initial failure occured the building crushed down on itself.
This is EXACTLY what NIST said occured except that they contend that all the heat needed to weaken the structure sufficiently was contained in the office fires themselves AND a century of fire engineering backs this contention up.
By Occam's Razor then the simplest explanation does not include dozens of thermite cutting devices and instead concludes that the office fires coupled with the initial imapct damage caused the initial collapse and that, as the video author also must agree with, after this occured the building was doomed to complete a global collapse.
Actually many may have said that but I for one simply asked why it was that Jones and Fetzer would not try to do so and instead simply poo-pooed Nat Geo's attempt to do so.
Again I commend the author for doing more to support the contention than Jones ever has.
Of course not! They are another , lower level of dumb. Congrats on being above them.
Last edited: