Thermite Debate

[Mudcat]

How much paper do you think it would it take to weld railway tracks like they do with thermite Sam ?

I had to look it up but wiki bears you out for once. Thermite is, indeed, used to weld railway tracks together in a process called flash-butt welding. But the differences between Thermite and paper is how fast they burn.

 

[wollclark]

I said I was "kind of, sort of a former 9/11 truther. That's mean I still have my doubts. I'm not too familiar with most of the things posted here in response and I've deleted my responses because I would fail to convey what I'm trying to say. He'll take this as a win, and he's probably right.

When trying to shed truther beliefs it feels like denial, something in my head tells me I'm trying to cling to the idea that it couldn't be the government. I've seen evidence and logical improbabilities (planting explosives without being caught, not just attacking the towers instead of bringing them down) against the conspiracy idea, but there's also claims that have yet to be debunked to my liking. I hope that makes sense.

Here are two videos I have yet to see debunked:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcFOd16IHdE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5d5iIoCiI8g

 

[bill smith]

I said I was "kind of, sort of a former 9/11 truther. That's mean I still have my doubts. I'm not too familiar with most of the things posted here in response and I've deleted my responses because I would fail to convey what I'm trying to say. He'll take this as a win, and he's probably right.

When trying to shed truther beliefs it feels like denial, something in my head tells me I'm trying to cling to the idea that it couldn't be the government. I've seen evidence and logical improbabilities (planting explosives without being caught, not just attacking the towers instead of bringing them down) against the conspiracy idea, but there's also claims that have yet to be debunked to my liking. I hope that makes sense.

Here are two videos I have yet to see debunked:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcFOd16IHdE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5d5iIoCiI8g

For someone in your ambivalent position this attached clip is essential viewing..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trfCyvLAQd8 pschologists

 

[wollclark]

For someone in your ambivalent position this attached clip is essential viewing..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trfCyvLAQd8 pschologists

My paranoia, delusions and depression do not count as evidence that 9/11 was an inside job. Stop pretending that it does.

 

[bill smith]

My paranoia, delusions and depression do not count as evidence that 9/11 was an inside job. Stop pretending that it does.

I'm not pretending anything. It's up you what to believe. Good luck. It's not an easy thing to deal with.

 

[Sunstealer]

I said I was "kind of, sort of a former 9/11 truther. That's mean I still have my doubts. I'm not too familiar with most of the things posted here in response and I've deleted my responses because I would fail to convey what I'm trying to say. He'll take this as a win, and he's probably right.

When trying to shed truther beliefs it feels like denial, something in my head tells me I'm trying to cling to the idea that it couldn't be the government. I've seen evidence and logical improbabilities (planting explosives without being caught, not just attacking the towers instead of bringing them down) against the conspiracy idea, but there's also claims that have yet to be debunked to my liking. I hope that makes sense.

Here are two videos I have yet to see debunked:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcFOd16IHdE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5d5iIoCiI8g

They've been debunked a number of times. I think this is one of the threads on the topic.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=191550&highlight=great+thermite+debate

Use the search function to find more and have a read then perhaps you can ask some questions. There are plenty of people, including myself, who are more than capable of answering your thermite questions. Just ignore the twoofies like BS on this subject - BS is a troll who hasn't got any experience in chemistry or science - not even school level.

 

[Oystein]

I had to look it up but wiki bears you out for once. Thermite is, indeed, used to weld railway tracks together in a process called flash-butt welding. But the differences between Thermite and paper is how fast they burn.

The more important difference is that thermite neither uses nor produces any gas. Paper uses oxygen gas and produces CO₂, water vapor and possibly other gasses that quickly remove much of the heat of the reaction, resulting in much lower temperature of the solid products.

This is an important distinction when you try to melt something locally and instantly.
Of course, thermite still produces less heat than paper when burning, it just concentrates that heat more in space and time; the flip side of that concentration is that, once the reaction is finished (after a very short time, best measured in seconds), the temperature will rapidly decrease (a short time also measured in seconds, or minutes at most), leaving solid slacks of aluminium oxide and iron. Paper is not good at melting metals, but much better than thermite at keeping things hotter for a longer time. That's the reason why molten steel weeks after the collapse cannot possibly have anything to do with any thermite used before the collapse.

 

[Oystein]

I said I was "kind of, sort of a former 9/11 truther. That's mean I still have my doubts. I'm not too familiar with most of the things posted here in response and I've deleted my responses because I would fail to convey what I'm trying to say. He'll take this as a win, and he's probably right.

When trying to shed truther beliefs it feels like denial, something in my head tells me I'm trying to cling to the idea that it couldn't be the government. I've seen evidence and logical improbabilities (planting explosives without being caught, not just attacking the towers instead of bringing them down) against the conspiracy idea, but there's also claims that have yet to be debunked to my liking. I hope that makes sense.

Here are two videos I have yet to see debunked:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcFOd16IHdE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5d5iIoCiI8g

I can't watch the first video here in Germany, it's blocked due to a copyright issue. Can you please give me a summary of its content, or that which you would like to have debunked?


What is in the second video that you need to have debunked?
It proves that thermite can be used to destroy steel columns,
- but you can also use a platoon of midgets with saws to destroy columns,
- I am sure you can use certain acids to destroy columns,
- and also you can use burning office contents and gravity to destroy columns.
So do you think it is credible that the towers were destroyed by midgets with saws? If not, why not?
Do you think it's credible that the towers were destroyed by acids? If not, why not?
Do you think it's credible that the towers were destroyed by office fires and gravity? If not, why not?
And finally: Do you think it's credible that the towers were destroyed by thermXte? If so, why? If not, why not?

 

[Oystein]

My paranoia, delusions and depression do not count as evidence that 9/11 was an inside job. Stop pretending that it does.

Hehe spot on - great reply!

 

[Tomtomkent]

How much paper do you think it would it take to weld railway tracks like they do with thermite Sam ?

That is a very basic misunderstanding of chemical energy, heat, and temperature. Thermite is hot, but only for a brief period. The weld burns fast and bright. Paper could in theory achieve the same effect (as could wood, or other fuels, as medievil blacksmiths will attest) because the fire burns slower, releasing the heat over a longer time, allowing temperature to rise.

 

[Tomtomkent]

I had to look it up but wiki bears you out for once. Thermite is, indeed, used to weld railway tracks together in a process called flash-butt welding. But the differences between Thermite and paper is how fast they burn.

Yep, is for insitu welding using a cask trackside.

It is not the prefered method by the way. Where possible as long a length of track as can be transported is welded at the depot to reduce the number of "visible" welds in a set track section.

 

[wollclark]

They've been debunked a number of times. I think this is one of the threads on the topic.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=191550&highlight=great+thermite+debate

Use the search function to find more and have a read then perhaps you can ask some questions. There are plenty of people, including myself, who are more than capable of answering your thermite questions. Just ignore the twoofies like BS on this subject - BS is a troll who hasn't got any experience in chemistry or science - not even school level.

I'm on the 10th page of that thread. A lot of it is going over my head because I'm not educated in these matters. It seems to consist of the same points versing each other over and over and nothing's being accomplished. I don't know who to believe. Some say they're experts and they know what they're talking about, but others claim their experiments are right and thermite WAS in the buildings. It's all a confusing mess.

 

[Oystein]

I'm on the 10th page of that thread. A lot of it is going over my head because I'm not educated in these matters. It seems to consist of the same points versing each other over and over and nothing's being accomplished. I don't know who to believe. Some say they're experts and they know what they're talking about, but others claim their experiments are right and thermite WAS in the buildings. It's all a confusing mess.

Why don't you tell us specifically which posts go over your head, and why, and maybe we can point you somewhere to help you improve your education?

 

[GlennB]

I'm on the 10th page of that thread.

You are very brave to have got that far.

Therm?te is the worst agent in the world - apart from boiled cabbage residue or monkey poo - for secretly procuring the collapse of a large building. Nobody would be stupid enough to even attempt to use it. They'd use shaped (directional) cutter charges if they were going to try, which they wouldn't because it would be insanely complex and risky.

 

[Mudcat]

Yep, is for insitu welding using a cask trackside.

It is not the prefered method by the way. Where possible as long a length of track as can be transported is welded at the depot to reduce the number of "visible" welds in a set track section.

Indeed, that was mentioned on the wiki as well. I know precious little of the process (flash welding) but I can see how it could work.

 

[chrismohr]

Therm*te = thermite or thermate. Truthers can never really nail it down as to which one they are talking about (not that they have a clue about it anyway, they simply regurgitate bad information that they got from other truthers).

Richard Gage told me he believes explosive nanothermite was used to bring down the twin towers and hot hot hot thermate was used to bring down Building 7. So he would say both were used. From what I've seen on Steven Jones videos, he seems to kind of float back and forth with those terms but he may have the same belief as Gage I don't know. When in doubt about any of this it becomes a call for a new investigation.

 

[GlennB]

Indeed, that was mentioned on the wiki as well. I know precious little of the process (flash welding) but I can see how it could work.

As I understand it, it's the fact that iron is deposited as a by-product that does the job. Presumably some dude comes along afterwards with an angle-grinder and carves off the rough edges?

This is strangely important when considering the lack of iron slag on, say, the eutectically corroded steel samples from the WTC. This is evidence of an absence of thermite, something that Truthers find strangely confusing.

 

[wollclark]

I've just finished reading the entire thread.

Rationally, I've learned this:
I learned some truthers who believe thermite brought down the buildings, contradict themselves with talking about explosions. This is a contradiction the truther I was debating earlier made but I didn't catch it.

I also learned of this logistic improbability: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6611731&postcount=560

I've learned that thermite wouldn't burn long enough to find such high temperatures days or weeks afterward.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I mentioned feeling like I was in denial earlier, I still feel that way. It's hard to explain. I also feel that some of you debunkers may be in denial as well. I'm not saying that claiming I know or in a judging manner, it's just a thought that crops up. I have an overwhelming feeling of "What if the thermite guys are right?" Which is the same feeling I get with god some time, although I'm a bit more certain I don't believe in god.

Sorry if I sound like a fool.

Why don't you tell us specifically which posts go over your head, and why, and maybe we can point you somewhere to help you improve your education?

It's nothing specific, it's just physics and number and chemicals. I don't know much about any of it.

 

[GlennB]

Sorry if I sound like a fool.

No, you don't.

Basically, there's no great hurry to join one camp or the other. Take as much time as you want to look into the issues. My apologies if that sounds patronising, as it isn't intended that way.

 

[chrismohr]

I'm on the 10th page of that thread. A lot of it is going over my head because I'm not educated in these matters. It seems to consist of the same points versing each other over and over and nothing's being accomplished. I don't know who to believe. Some say they're experts and they know what they're talking about, but others claim their experiments are right and thermite WAS in the buildings. It's all a confusing mess.

The chemistry around the thermite question is tough for me too. Does anyone know of an actual chemist besides Kevin Ryan himself who is on the 9/11 Truth side? There are some really knowledgeable people on this thread on the "natural collapse" side, but no one I know of with real scientific skills on the "Controlled demolition" side who can directy address the technical issues around the thermitic experiments. When I did my research I went straight to Kevin and his explanations helped me understand that side. But most people don't have access to him.

You can look at my youtube video by typing in keyword chrismohr911 and go to parts 11a and 11b. It's a pretty simplified explanation of both sides. Rather than going 100% against it, I said I leaned against the thermites in the dust experiment but I laid out both sides and simply quoted some of the things Kevin Ryan and Niels Harrit told me. Not exactly objective but I tried to be fair. And VERY simple.

As a layperson, where I landed was: the experiments look bad, but I could be wrong. Where I am confident is with the very simple question: will you submit your dust samples to an independent lab for testing? I have just asked Kevin Ryan this question directly. He has responded but has not said yes or no yet. Their results need independent verification, which is inexpensive, and it has not happened in 2 1/2 years now. If they do test positive for thermites in an independent lab, then maybe they'll have something. Since they've failed to do this, I assume there are no thermites in the dust until the scientists can prove there are, and then others can do yet another test with dust that is certifiably reliably pure. ANYONE can understand that!