Blanchard Doesn't Buy Thermite Myth

[rwguinn]

I don't find anything wrong with that. But Apollo seems to call into question Blanchard's observation of the video / pictures.
I was trying to point out that Apollo's assement was pointless because you can clearly see the majority of the debris did in fact fall outside the buildings foot print from the pictures taken after the collapse.

Sorry--it is/was a semantics issue. Science is about deliberation and finding out, not relying on incomplete data and initial impressions. Hindsight, to me, is second-guessing after the fact. "I shoulda..."
I was making a point to Dr. Greening--you base your hypothesis on the data after due deliberation, not simply on initial reports and impressions. many folks often have a problem with deliberation and data gathering, especially if they have an axe to grind.

 

[Max Photon]

Less than 20% - Clearly 95%....it's all good.

I don't find anything wrong with that. But Apollo seems to call into question Blanchard's observation of the video / pictures.
I was trying to point out that Apollo's assement was pointless because you can clearly see the majority of the debris did in fact fall outside the buildings foot print from the pictures taken after the collapse.

Interesting. Interesting.


You are aware that the Bazantine models assume at least 80% of the debris falls within the footprint, or the building no fall down.

And NIST kind of - you know - builds on this failure analysis.


Meanwhile, Blanchard says 95% fell outside the footprint.


(I think it's cute Blanchard is at odds with Bazant and NIST.)


Uruk, maybe you AND Blanchard AND Ace Baker can get together.

Perhaps call yourselves The Smithereens.


Max

* * *

 

[Max Photon]

I wonder if Blanchard ever even considered that thermite was used as an incendiary?

* * *

You don't suppose Blanchard and his colleagues in the demolition industry forgot to consider that maybe thermite was used not to cut, but to heat-weaken the steel?

Nah. That'd be too stupid, and these guys are pros (hence the name, Protec).


That thermite was used as an incendiary is not far-fetched.

After all, in the Bazant/NIST world, fires heated a simple majority of perimeter columns, and - once collapse was initiated - the energy in the towers finished the job.

MAX-MIHOP says those fires were deliberately catalyzed using thermite.


Come to think of it, I understand Blanchard's paper is from an explosives perspective, and there is no reason to expect demolition experts to imagine using thermite as an incendiary.

So I'd say his company's reputation is sound as a nut.


Cheers!

Max

ETA: Time to go ride some cusp catastrophes!

* * *

 

[Arus808]

considering that THERMITE is NEVER used in demolitions, and BLanchard knows what he is talking about, you have yet to provide EVIDENCE of your claims.

Stop playing this game, Max, its really pathetic.

 

[BenBurch]

...Max, it must be remembered, is an aging hippie ...

Hey! I strenuously resemble that remark!

 

[ktesibios]

Max, it must be remembered, is an aging hippie

Hey! I strenuously resemble that remark!

And I have it in my title, as any fool can plainly see.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

I've been using thermite to heat my soup. NOOO I am nawt trying to cut my soup, just heat it up.

 

[Pookster]

considering that THERMITE is NEVER used in demolitions, and BLanchard knows what he is talking about, you have yet to provide EVIDENCE of your claims.

Stop playing this game, Max, its really pathetic.

Isn't it interesting how the "first time in history" argument isn't invoked by twoofers in situations like this?

 

[beachnut]

Binders only worsen the problem the beams move vibrate, and the Shock waves cause friction at all interfaces.
The shock waves actually break the binders apart and as they fracture they create even more fiction along the surface than the particles moving individually.
Fluids however tend to reduce the friction but lead to other problems, Binders are practically useless against the intense shock waves generated in the impacts.
It is just not a good environment for he survival of thermite or thermate. One spark of one aluminum particle with one particle of iron oxide and the whole charge goes up.
hhttp://www.hse.gov.uk/lau/lacs/65-39b.htmttp://


Placing thermite in the column would be the dumbest move, I can think of Max that is were the shock waves would be strongest.
Why not just add a small amount of nano thermite compound to the insulation same effect and once the temperature of the fires reached a certain level the small pieces of aluminum would ignite destroying the insulation.
Or just add freaking air Bubbles under the insulation by injecting air into it, the expansion of the air bubbles would remove the insulation damaging the structure, just as Nist's fire proofing model suggests.
Any thing that compromises the buildings insulation brings the buildings down even with less damage to the core than Nist predicts there is simply to much gravitational PE. Once it gains momentum downward there is no way of stopping it.

I have thought of Hundreds of ways I could have done it, and tested each for merit on how it could have been done.

The easy simplest ways are more likely to work without raising suspicions and getting caught.

PS. my services are available to the New World Order for a price to design and engineer a perfect false flag operation for next time that will not be as complicated as 9/11/2001 and will be even less likely to be detected.
All I ask for compensation is my own little independent country, 30 trillion in gold and a never ending life time supply of young sports Illustrated swim suit models to date.
I guarantee a perfect, simple, undetectable Job, just for that little bit of compensation.

How is Max taking the feeding of his pathetic crap. I could care less how much it works or even it he says the 3 inches of wall board was thermite. His ideas are pathetic for reasons other than if they could work.

 

[beachnut]

* * *

You don't suppose Blanchard and his colleagues in the demolition industry forgot to consider that maybe thermite was used not to cut, but to heat-weaken the steel?

Nah. That'd be too stupid, and these guys are pros (hence the name, Protec).


That thermite was used as an incendiary is not far-fetched.

After all, in the Bazant/NIST world, fires heated a simple majority of perimeter columns, and - once collapse was initiated - the energy in the towers finished the job.

MAX-MIHOP says those fires were deliberately catalyzed using thermite.


Come to think of it, I understand Blanchard's paper is from an explosives perspective, and there is no reason to expect demolition experts to imagine using thermite as an incendiary.

So I'd say his company's reputation is sound as a nut.


Cheers!

Max

ETA: Time to go ride some cusp catastrophes!

* * *

Your ideas are still are with the top pathetic crap on 9/11. Who did your pathetic scheme you can barely summarize? Who did it? What super secret evidence are you hiding in your lock box?

 

[Max Photon]

So that's the secret...

Your ideas are still are with the top pathetic crap on 9/11. Who did your pathetic scheme you can barely summarize? Who did it? What super secret evidence are you hiding in your lock box?

Beached Nut,

The super secret I am hiding in my lock box is that there is no secret -
they are hi din gev er ythi ngin p lainv iew.

M ax

* * *

 

[Pookster]

Beached Nut,

The super secret I am hiding in my lock box is that there is no secret -
they are hi din gev er ythi ngin p lainv iew.

M ax

* * *

That same argument can be used for Santa's Workshop at the North Pole too.

Just sayin'.

 

[uruk]

Interesting. Interesting.


You are aware that the Bazantine models assume at least 80% of the debris falls within the footprint, or the building no fall down.

{snip}

I'm sorry was Blanchard talking about WTC 7 or WTC 1&2?

I was refering to WTC 1&2. FEMA and others put the majority of the building debris well outside the footprint. And you can see it for yourself in the aerial photos.

Can you point me to the info you are refering to?

 

[uruk]

Beached Nut,

The super secret I am hiding in my lock box is that there is no secret -
they are hi din gev er ythi ngin p lainv iew.

M ax

* * *

Well we're happy for you, But What is your "evidence"? Specifically.
Just a good beddy bye story or do you have something solid?

 

[Max Photon]

There's not much chicken left...

I'm sorry was Blanchard talking about WTC 7 or WTC 1&2?

I was refering to WTC 1&2. FEMA and others put the majority of the building debris well outside the footprint. And you can see it for yourself in the aerial photos.

Can you point me to the info you are refering to?

Uruk,

Blanchard's comments on WTC7 are rather poultry.

He is talking about WTCs 1 & 2.

Here is the...paper...being discussed:


A Subcritical Analysis ...


Max

* * *

 

[lapman]

Lapman,

You are a bit confused.

Thermite was placed INSIDE perimeter box columns. There is no "apparatus" - the column itself is the thermite container.

Remember, just a dab'll do ya!

We are not cutting steel, juuuussssst heating it.

Cool.


Max

* * *

Oh how wrong can you be. The thermite would have burned through the steel at a single point and flowed out and the heating would have been limited and dissipated in minutes before it would have been able to do what you claim. Nice try. Be sure to collect your consolation prize at the door.

 

[Max Photon]

The evidence for MAX-MIHOP is NIST NCSTAR 1-5A/9/C

Well we're happy for you, But What is your "evidence"? Specifically.
Just a good beddy bye story or do you have something solid?

NIST NCSTAR 1-5A/9/C


In fact, just a couple of evenings ago I started:

BedTime Stories, with Max Photon

(Reading to children is important to their development.)


This is Brent's favorite story because not only does it tell the saga of WTC2 from impact to collapse-initiation, but also because it focuses on where the tower fails, and as Brent always has to shout out at juice time:

"When discussing similarities between the towers' collapse and an explosive demolition, many people overlook the single question most central to any objective investigation. It is not "how" or "when" the buildings failed, but "where" they failed. That answer holds the key to understanding almost everything that occurred at Ground Zero."


Where WTC2 failed is Column 301 at the 81st floor.

(Don't forget: a 10-minute metal fire - consistent with burning aluminum or thermite - was observed by NIST right at two of Column 301's bolt-access-holes.)


I think you'd really enjoy 15A9C, Uruk.

I hope you join the reading group.


Max

* * *

 

[uk_dave]

I thought thermite was used to weld steel together.

Ho hum.

 

[Brainache]

Uruk,

Blanchard's comments on WTC7 are rather poultry.

...

Max

* * *

Are you calling him a chicken?

 

[Max Photon]

Max Photon - Pure poetry

I thought thermite was used to weld steel together.

Viscous Thinking

A poem by Max Photon

Big idiots have little idiots
that feed on their lucidity.
Little idiots have tiny idiots,
and so on to stupidity.



Now that we've had our infusion of culture for the day, let's tackle the toughies:


Thermite is used to weld steel together.

Welding is just one of thermite's many uses.


You, UK Dave, are correct!

(By the way, where are you from?)


Max

* * *