South Tower 81st floor filled with thermite?

[Anders Lindman]

But yet, wasn't picked up by the many seismographs in the area.....Amazing stuff you're working with. Is it made with unobtanium?

The 911 Eyewitness documentary talks about seismic recordings showing events that look as from explosives.

 

[Anders Lindman]

Enlighten me, please expand on this no plane and thermite theory. I need a good laugh.

Ok, here is the short version, and for the uninformed it may indeed appear laughable:

The WTC towers were rigged with:

1. Charges for creating the holes in the shape of planes in the facades (plus magnesium flare as a marker for timing and positioning of computer graphics insertions).

2. Explosives together with kerosene to create the fireball explosions.

3. Explosives plus part of a jet engine of wrong type and a landing gear in one of the towers.

4. Thermite on one floor in each building to weaken the steel.

5. Approximately the equivalent of 2 tons of TNT placed under the basements of the towers to cause earthquake kind of shock waves in order to bring down the towers who were designed to collapse like they did straight down in the case of a severe earthquake for safety reasons.

 

[The Big Dog]

Y'all are posting in a troll thread.

Anders has admitted that he trolls here for entertainment, and his favorite strategy is moving the goal posts.

You'd have better luck nailing snail slime to the wall, and you'll end up covered with the stuff either way.

 

[Anders Lindman]

Y'all are posting in a troll thread.

Anders has admitted that he trolls here for entertainment, and his favorite strategy is moving the goal posts.

You'd have better luck nailing snail slime to the wall, and you'll end up covered with the stuff either way.

lol. I haven't said that! It's honest information. Ok, a bit sloppy info sometimes, and a lot of guesswork, but sincere ideas.

 

[Dave Rogers]

Ok, here is the short version, and for the uninformed it may indeed appear laughable:

The most laughable aspect of it is that you appear not to to view yourself as one of "the uninformed".

Dave

 

[Anders Lindman]

The most laughable aspect of it is that you appear not to to view yourself as one of "the uninformed".

Dave

I meant uninformed about the details of my theory.

 

[TJM]

I meant uninformed about the details of my theory.

 

[BCR]

The thermite scenario I propose includes the theory that no real planes were used in the attacks on the World Trade Center.

I gotta give ya one thing, at least you are honest. I don't buy NIST's WT7 collapse theory because it does not make sense in my little mathematical world of vectors and forces. However, that could be my own lack of expertise in the area of structural engineering. The WTC1 and WTC2 collapse does however make perfect sense in light of massive structural damage and weakening of the central core by heat. The cascading collapse simply makes perfect sense in my little mathematical world, but I keep an open mind to alternative hypothesizes.

However, with all due respect, this "no real planes" argument is simply from fairy tale land, not based on objective evidence or the real world. I never knew about the vast numbers of batteries (UPC) stored in the vicinity of impact. However, if true, that certainly explains the "molten metal" thingy.

 

[Horatius]

Even Loose Change didn't come up with something as corny as unobtainium.

Neither did The Core.

I haven't researched if more has been done with this information. The article is from 2007 so there be many other investigations related to this. The problem is that most professional conspiracy researchers seem to be controlled opposition and only lead people astray with their detours. And amateur researchers are probably too lazy to do any extensive research. I myself am not even an armchair amateur researcher. I just post things that I think are interesting.

So, you have the smoking gun for the worst crime most of us will ever see, but you're content to just sit there and do nothing?

Congratulations, NWO, you've won by default!

 

[Anders Lindman]

I gotta give ya one thing, at least you are honest. I don't buy NIST's WT7 collapse theory because it does not make sense in my little mathematical world of vectors and forces. However, that could be my own lack of expertise in the area of structural engineering. The WTC1 and WTC2 collapse does however make perfect sense in light of massive structural damage and weakening of the central core by heat. The cascading collapse simply makes perfect sense in my little mathematical world, but I keep an open mind to alternative hypothesizes.

However, with all due respect, this "no real planes" argument is simply from fairy tale land, not based on objective evidence or the real world. I never knew about the vast numbers of batteries (UPC) stored in the vicinity of impact. However, if true, that certainly explains the "molten metal" thingy.

Thanks, yeah I try to keep my posts honest. The no planes theory seemed totally kooky to me too until I learned more about it. What started to change my mind was the video of what was supposed to be flight 175 crashing into the South Tower. I looked really suspicious. Because I knew then a bit about the design of the towers with exterior steel columns and steel-reinforced concrete floors. And then this plane just melted into the building! Incredible. Check this out for example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNXmgF2yAEc

 

[ElMondoHummus]

"Fuji Bank had torn up the 81st floor, he said, and stripped it down to the bare bone to reinforce the trusses so that the floor could hold more weight. Then they had built a raised floor and filled the entire floor with server-size Uninterrupted Power Supply (UPS) batteries.

...

But were they really batteries?

"It's weird," he said. "They were never turned on."

So, what really was on the 81st floor of WTC 2? What was in these heavy "battery-looking things?" Were they batteries, or were they Thermite?"

From: http://www.erichufschmid.net/TFC/Bollyn-Fuji-WTC.html

And what, they only thermited the 81st floor of the South Tower??

----

Point #1: This, like any other thermite proposal, will be the start of a classic demonstration of Ryan Mackey's Inflationary Model of Conspiracy Theories. Too many details will have to be added and the proposal will have to be modified over and over again in order to maintain any semblence of consistency. More and more people will have to be involved, and more and more extraordinary events will have to be proposed for the idea to fly. Yet, as Ryan pointed out, a solid theory will remain rather stable in terms of complexity as it continues to develop.

That is the case here. To propose thermite UPS modules in the South Tower, you'll have to propose that they were only used on one floor. You'll have to explain the state of the recovered steel (Remember: The 81st floor of the South Tower is one of the spots steel was recovered from and documented). You'll have to explain how and why the Fuji Bank employees, not the least of which would be the systems administrators who would be the most concerned with their IT system's UPSes were in on it, as well as the contractors who would've installed those systems. You'll have to explain why only the 81st floor would have been targeted (the linked article proposes that the jets were flown into those floors on purpose, thus increasing the complexity by many times). And so on.

Yet, the more we were discovering about the hijackers, the state of the recovered steel, the fires, and so on, the narrative deriving from the preponderance of the evidence got clearer. Not more ponderous.

This leads to Point #2: The Gravy Line. Read the link for the methodology, I will not repost that here. Anyway: We have a partial theory, scoring a .50 by this measure. We have a minor positive in the statement that the UPSes were supposedly not turned on. But we have a minor negative cancelling that out in that such deception would have had to get by multiple people, thus implying either a campaign to fool those people (which adds conspirators, therefore complexity) or that those people were "in on it" (itself adding complexity and conspirators, just in a different way). But we have a major negative in the contradiction provided by the state of the recovered steel. We further have a major negative in that this only explains one floor out of 110 in two separate towers, and another in the presumption that the fake "UPS" systems were in place for when the jet hits that precise floor, thus involving an entire subtheory involving God knows how much complexity just to maintain consistency. And lastly, we have a major negative in that this added complexity is there merely to drop a single floor, one that had already been damaged by a jetliner and been on fire which due to the loss of fireproofing from the jets impacts as well as severing of columns causing shifts in loads already was in danger of collapse without additional aid.

0.50*1.25*0.8*(.5)⁴=0.03125.

If I wanted to be a jerk, I'd count at least one manager and one IT employee as separate minor negatives, as well as however many people in the airlines it would have taken for this suggestion to be true. If I wanted to be a super jerk, I would've counted the link's author as a major negative. Furthermore, I also could have found other ones. But what's here is enough to demonstrate the proposal's absurdity.

Point #3: And I can't repeat this enough - NIST has steel from that floor. It is documented in NCSTAR 1-3C. For this proposal to be true, the steel recovered from that floor would have to reflect thermite damage. None of it does. Repeat: None of it does. In the absence of any other argument, this alone negates the proposal.

What truthers have to do is actually study the available evidence, and stop thinking that isolated nits - such as the notion that the UPSes weren't turned on yet (something I'd like to see non-truther supporting evidence for, BTW) - is by itself the foundation of a stand-alone theory. Like Dave Rogers pointed out, such isolated nits have entirely consistent explanations that don't require the heavy burden of insane conspiracy machinations to be true. The towers design is one of the factors that lent itself to the start of the collapse; the obvious fire and impact damage were others. There is zero positive evidence for the notion of fake UPSes containing thermite, only one minor potential colloboration of the idea, and multiple contradictions to it. The theory is DOA, demonstrated semiformally via the Gravy Line and informally through simple common sense. Until anyone can point at steel that shows evidence of thermite use - and in this case, that pointing at would have to be at those specific pieces of steel gathered and documentd in NCSTAR 1-3C - then these proposals don't even get off the ground.

Step one: Show evidence of thermite use on the recovered steel. There is no step two until step one is complete.

 

[Anders Lindman]

Point #3: And I can't repeat this enough - NIST has steel from that floor. It is documented in NCSTAR 1-3C. For this proposal to be true, the steel recovered from that floor would have to reflect thermite damage. None of it does. Repeat: None of it does. In the absence of any other argument, this alone negates the proposal.

That's a major evidence against thermite used on floor 81, if none of the steel from that floor shows any thermite melting of the steel etc. My idea was that they had placed tons of thermite boxes (the whole floor filled with 'battery-looking things') on the 81st floor. And that it would virtually melt the whole fricken' floor.

As for only one floor rigged with thermite, see previous posts in this thread, such as post #19.

 

[twinstead]

That's a major evidence against thermite used on floor 81, if none of the steel from that floor shows any thermite melting of the steel etc. My idea was that they had placed tons of thermite boxes (the whole floor filled with 'battery-looking things') on the 81st floor. And that it would virtually melt the whole fricken' floor.

The bolded part is where a rational person would stop, and decide there isn't enough evidence to have the opinion that there was thermite on the 81st floor. You do not however.

It would have to "vaporize" the whole floor to not leave any evidence.

 

[Dave Rogers]

That's a major evidence against thermite used on floor 81, if none of the steel from that floor shows any thermite melting of the steel etc.

Of course, you've only got the unsupported word of NIST that steel samples were recovered from that floor.

Dave

 

[twinstead]

Of course, you've only got the unsupported word of NIST that steel samples were recovered from that floor.

Oh crap, don't give the boy any ideas

 

[Anders Lindman]

The bolded part is where a rational person would stop, and decide there isn't enough evidence to have the opinion that there was thermite on the 81st floor. You do not however.

It would have to "vaporize" the whole floor to not leave any evidence.

They did find pools of molten metal at Ground Zero. So it's possible that some floor did in fact get melted down by thermite. I thought floor 81 in the South Tower was a good candidate. Darn. I will have to check out that NCSTAR 1-3C document.

 

[Anders Lindman]

Point #3: And I can't repeat this enough - NIST has steel from that floor. It is documented in NCSTAR 1-3C. For this proposal to be true, the steel recovered from that floor would have to reflect thermite damage. None of it does. Repeat: None of it does. In the absence of any other argument, this alone negates the proposal.

Ha. I checked NCSTAR 1-3C and the document doesn't say that the steel from floor 81 was NOT damaged!

 

[triforcharity]

The 911 Eyewitness documentary talks about seismic recordings showing events that look as from explosives.

Too bad that the seismic data is available, and doesn't show what they want it to show.

 

[Anders Lindman]

Too bad that the seismic data is available, and doesn't show what they want it to show.

They said the seismic data had the signatures of explosives. I'm watching the entire 911 Witness documentary at the moment, and hopefully they will say something about the timing. When I looked at the timing of the recorded seismic events some time ago I found inconsistencies, but I don't remember exactly if the seismic events started some 10 seconds prior to the start of the collapse for each tower as some videos show. I remember a 5 second inconsistency and a 17 second inconsistency, or something like that.

 

[twinstead]

They did find pools of molten metal at Ground Zero. So it's possible that some floor did in fact get melted down by thermite. I thought floor 81 in the South Tower was a good candidate. Darn. I will have to check out that NCSTAR 1-3C document.

Remember, those pools of molten metal also could have been there for any one of a dozen reasons. That's the gist of this whole discussion; in my mind it isn't rational to come to such an out-of-the-box conclusion about the WTC buildings when the commonly-held narrative explains things so well.

Without extraordinary evidence to the contrary, if ANY theory comes the closest to accurately describing the preponderance of evidence it's the commonly-held narrative. It's not called commonly-held just because most people believe it, it's called commonly-held because for the most part it makes sense.

Even if I cast aside the fact that to me the no plane theory is absolutely ridiculous and for a second consider it, the theory requires too many assumptions for me, and frankly the severe lack of credible evidence to support it is a show stopper.