• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Thermate

tj15

Critical Thinker
T
Joined
Mar 16, 2008
Messages
425
Truthers, how did thermate cut through the vertical core columns?
 
Last edited:
defaultdotxbe said:
assume it did, how did it work?
Click to expand...

How can I propose a mechanism whem i don't know that it did? Talk about trying to corner truthers in a speculation so that they are in a weaker position!

Why would I assume it did? I don't know if thermate was used. If it was, it may not have necessarily been on core columns.
 
Hey Paul. Let's have a ball.

theauthor said:
How can I propose a mechanism whem i don't know that it did?
Click to expand...


I believe that thermate is the hypothetical substance in question, going by the title of the thread.
 
theauthor said:
How can I propose a mechanism whem i don't know that it did? Talk about trying to corner truthers in a speculation so that they are in a weaker position!

Why would I assume it did? I don't know if thermate was used. If it was, it may not have necessarily been on core columns.
Click to expand...

What do you think was used to bring down the towers?
 
theauthor said:
How can I propose a mechanism whem i don't know that it did? Talk about trying to corner truthers in a speculation so that they are in a weaker position!

Why would I assume it did? I don't know if thermate was used. If it was, it may not have necessarily been on core columns.
Click to expand...
its not trying to "corner" truthers, its simply askign those who insist thermite was used to explain how, if and when they cant they should rethink their position that it was used, somehow they never do though

you claim you dont know if it was used, but appear to be open to the possibility, if you cant figure out how its possible should you still maintain its a possibility?
 
Last edited:
I think the point is this: If you cannot even conceive of a plausible way in which thermite/thermate could have been used to cut the core columns, then considering it to be a serious candidate – let alone espousing it as the answer – is somewhat irrational. If you don’t actually believe that thermite/thermate was used to cut core columns, then fine; there’s no problem; you can simply take the point.
 
I think SJ's argument at one point (he keeps changing it, so it's hard to keep track) was that thermite was probably used on the horizontal struts and some other demolition charge on the core columns. This is daft in itself, because I'm fairly sure taking out the core columns alone would cause collapse, so why take out the struts at all, let alone use an incendiary rather than an explosive?

Now he's supposedly barking on about 'super thermite paint' or some such, some kind of slap-on demolition goop which AFAIK only exists in his imagination. When I heard about that, I began to suspect that he was finally losing it.
 
I've never thoroughly understood the troofer fascination with thermite. If you're going to believe in CD, why not believe that it was entirely done with plastic explosives like a normal CD. It's quick and precise and a little bit goes a long way. I know they'll point to Jones' claim of finding sulfate at the site, but that's been so completely debunked only a fool would cling to it.

I think part of it was the child-like thrill of learning a new word. Thermite was something most people weren't familiar with prior to 9/11. Learning something new makes one think that he's privy to info that others don't have. The problem is that they've invested so much energy into it they can't let it go.

Steve S.
 
steve s said:
I've never thoroughly understood the troofer fascination with thermite. If you're going to believe in CD, why not believe that it was entirely done with plastic explosives like a normal CD. It's quick and precise and a little bit goes a long way. I know they'll point to Jones' claim of finding sulfate at the site, but that's been so completely debunked only a fool would cling to it.

I think part of it was the child-like thrill of learning a new word. Thermite was something most people weren't familiar with prior to 9/11. Learning something new makes one think that he's privy to info that others don't have. The problem is that they've invested so much energy into it they can't let it go.

Steve S.
Click to expand...


Part of it is, as you suggest, the childish delight in using a strange new word over and over. But, the loons require something that blows up buildings without making a sound. Although thermite is not used in demolition, it is quieter than the explosives that are.
 
I personally have found steel melting plasma to be far superior to thermite. Thermite is so yesterday.

TAM;)
 
steve s said:
I've never thoroughly understood the troofer fascination with thermite. If you're going to believe in CD, why not believe that it was entirely done with plastic explosives like a normal CD. It's quick and precise and a little bit goes a long way. I know they'll point to Jones' claim of finding sulfate at the site, but that's been so completely debunked only a fool would cling to it.

I think part of it was the child-like thrill of learning a new word. Thermite was something most people weren't familiar with prior to 9/11. Learning something new makes one think that he's privy to info that others don't have. The problem is that they've invested so much energy into it they can't let it go.
Click to expand...


What exactly has been debunked? Dr. Steven Jones found that a sample of structural steel from WTC7 had had certain characteristics that are consistent with a therm*te reaction (presence of sulfur, plus exposure to extremely high temperatures). He also analyzed a dust sample from GZ, and found that it also had certain characteristics that are consistent with a therm*te reaction (iron-rich microspheres).

I think you might be confused, because his research is completely valid.
 
deep44 said:
What exactly has been debunked? Dr. Steven Jones found that a sample of structural steel from WTC7 had had certain characteristics that are consistent with a therm*te reaction (presence of sulfur, plus exposure to extremely high temperatures). He also analyzed a dust sample from GZ, and found that it also had certain characteristics that are consistent with a therm*te reaction (iron-rich microspheres).

I think you might be confused, because his research is completely valid.
Click to expand...
Jones had a sample of steel? I don't recall that. Link? The iron micro spheres are more consistent with fly ash in the concrete. A little thing Jones doesn't like to talk about.
 
DGM said:
Jones had a sample of steel? I don't recall that. Link? The iron micro spheres are more consistent with fly ash in the concrete. A little thing Jones doesn't like to talk about.
Click to expand...


Where did I say that he possessed any steel? Read it again - I choose my words very carefully for a reason.

With regard to fly ash - what you've done is offer an alternative explanation. Unless you prove that the microspheres were definitely from fly ash, or somehow challenge Jones' analysis, they are both valid possibilities.

So just as I suspected, you guys haven't debunked anything. I hate to sound like a broken record, but a new investigation is probably what it will take to figure out which theory is correct.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom