Topic: What do you think about 9/11 mystery? - page 28. (Read 54944 times)

The losses in the terrible tragedy of bldg 7 made it so that the Enron investigation could not proceed so I've heard.  Many other investigations of corporate fraud and corruption were set back as well.  Darn shame it was, but that's the way to cookie crumbles.  Best to stop asking questions, come together as a nation, and go attack Saddam and whoever else the neocons have targeted.  What can ya do? 

+1

I've tried and failed to get this very basic subject discussed.  It'd be nice to see internal consistency among the conspiracy theories, but there isn't any.

That's an indication it's more active dis information by groups who are adversaries to the US on the world stage, of course.  They don't need quality theories, just crap repeated over and over to ignorant populations, such as in Jordon, Pakistan and Egypt.

By contrast the JFK killing is a very clean, simple conspiracy theory.  There was one bullet or several; there were several assassins or only one. 

Got to hand it to you.  That sure sounds like Al Queda and ISIS, doesn't it?

Here are some brief sections of Millette.

SEM-EDS phase mapping (using multivariate statistical analysis) of the red layer after exposure to MEK for 55 hours did not show evidence of individual aluminum particles

Based on the optical and electron microscopy data, the Fe/O particles are an iron oxide pigment consisting of crystalline grains in the 100-200 nm range and the Al/Si particles are kaolin clay plates that are less than a micrometer thick.

There is no evidence of individual elemental aluminum particles detected by PLM, SEM-EDS, or TEM-SAED-EDS, during the analyses of the red layers in their original form or after sample preparation by ashing, thin sectioning or following MEK treatment.

Nano-thermite  ....is made up of approximately 2 nanometer iron oxide particles and approximately 30 nanometer aluminum metal spheres

The differences in size of the FeO being 100-200 nm and the requirement for about 2 nanometer size for the "nano-thermite" are not reconcilable.  Period.

The lack of the (more or less) 30 nm AL spheres is conclusive.  Obviously, for "regular thermite" normal size powdered metals are satisfactory.

It is if someone pays you enough to do it - https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.14860214... like the American people paying the government people in taxes for who knows what, and this is the result.

You mean cutting a horse's head off, then shooting it, then driving over it with a truck isn't necessary?

The money!



9/11 Trillions: Follow The Money



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3xgjxJwedA

I mean, false flags are a diversionary tactic used in this world. If foul play is involved, magicians' tricks of "look here while I do this there" could be expected.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversionary_foreign_policy

Consider a Machiavellian group with political power embroiled in a military-industrial complex, who needs a reason to go to war for the control of oil somewhere that is not a part of the Empire. Is it not plausible that such a group would figure some sort of means to an end to control such a resource that allows for more power?

Let's say hypothetically that there was a controlled demolition of the twin towers, plus building 7. In that case, then why the hell did planes crash into the towers in the first place, and why did they blow up building 7 too?

It makes absolutely no logical sense to me, why spend more resources on having planes fly into them? And why blow up a third tower when the huge twin towers were already going to fall, no added shock value was added by having building 7 fall too, it seems needless. Think I asked this question earlier in this thread but no-one had a good answer.

As far as I'm concerned, even without delving into the mechanics on whether this could or couldn't have occured, the logic of the controlled demoliton theory is massively flawed.

Umm....NO.  Particle sizes and burn rates are huge differences.  Look at my note about nano particle aluminum being the fuel for torpedoes.  Change the particle size, that does not work.  What I am saying is that one must get very specific on "nano-thermite" or otherwise it is a nebulous term that can have any characteristics you want.  

Regardless, we can agree to use "standard iron oxide thermite."  

Come on, that's not fair.  I only said I was trying to think of a simple way to explain it.  Here goes.

The WTC towers were by volume, about 10% steel, concrete, etc - building structure, and 90% air - working spaces.  Then one falls.  All material goes downward.  Material fragments in the process.  By the time 10 stories have pancaked, there is in that area pretty much a solid mass of building material.  It is no longer 90% air.  Once the density of material reaches a certain number - you pick it, 30%, 50%, 70%, then that area or section is effectively presents a solid mass to materials coming down from above.  Then they move sideways because that's all they can do.

Now do you seriously want to argue that 0.2% of the PE of a beam cannot translate into sideways movement?  Really?

We could agree that the debris pile from a 200 foot x 200 feet building extended 5 feet further out than the original perimeter.  That's sideways motion.  It extended 200 feet.  Again, that's sideways motion.  It extended 500 feet.  That's sideways motion.

I used the term "standard iron oxide thermite" for a reason. I never said it HAD to be nanothermite, only that there was evidence for it. Additional, there is plenty of reason to assume thermite and nanothermite have the same properties, as they are almost chemically identical. The main difference is particle size and burn rate. The igniton temperature is roughly identical. Additional compounds can be added to have other effects if desired. It is not magic or alchemy, it is chemistry, and if you know how chemistry works you can change its properties considerably, so it is not some unimaginable feat that the properties could vary. Again you seem to want to pretend nanothermite is some fantastical nonexistant substance. Its existence and its properties are well documented.





Oh no? You seemed to think it was a viable explanation until I presented this information. Funny how it suddenly is not your argument any more after confronted with the evidence. Again you are ignoring that fact that this effect happened over and over again with multiple sections, in all directions. When this energy is transferred multiple hundreds or thousands of times over the entire structure, it becomes a much greater proportion of the total percentage of kinetic energy some how magically redirected laterally against the forces of gravity. Again, this is all in a situation where there is no perfect transaction of energy, meaning that there also had to be a lot of energy wasted in this translation of kinetic energy laterally. Not being able to define the method of lateral translation of energy is pretty much the entire point of presenting this evidence, so the fact that you can't explain it is a pretty fucking big hole in your logic.


Here is more evidence for you to chew on while you manufacture your next denial.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zoAD8HlrLZg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1Fye_H1wIM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pd70TwKS3qo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8QCQudNEtY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jc1ql4TfCZw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gt8PMLTmcng

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8W-t57xnZg

"the stuff" is exactly what your house would have if it was done with a 1970s era primer, because that's what the "red/gray chips" were, primer paint.  Look at the Millet study that debunked Harriet -

    


    'In summary, red/gray chips with the same morphological characteristics, elemental spectra and magnetic attraction as those shown in Harrit et al.1 were found in WTC dust samples from four different locations than those examined by Harrit, et al.1 The gray side is consistent with carbon steel. The red side contains the elements: C, O, Al, Si, and Fe with small amounts of other elements such as Ti and Ca. Based on the infrared absorption (FTIR) data, the C/O matrix material is an epoxy resin. Based on the optical and electron microscopy data, the Fe/O particles are an iron oxide pigment consisting of crystalline grains in the 100-200 nm range and the Al/Si particles are kaolin clay plates that are less than a micrometer thick. There is no evidence of individual elemental aluminum particles detected by PLM, SEM-EDS, or TEM-SAED-EDS, during the analyses of the red layers in their original form or after sample preparation by ashing, thin sectioning or following MEK treatment.'

    '
    Conclusions
    The red/gray chips found in the WTC dust at four sites in New York City are consistent with a carbon steel coated with an epoxy resin that contains primarily iron oxide and kaolin clay pigments.
    There is no evidence of individual elemental aluminum particles of any size in the red/gray chips, therefore the red layer of the red/gray chips is not thermite or nano-thermite.'
    
Millette is actually an expert at this type of study, so he didn't make the rookie mistakes they did. He used FTIR, for one thing. He took the guesswork and speculation out of it, and found nothing remarkable.  

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=015_1330900552

No to the kJ/g "estimates."  They are in excess of yields from thermite. 
So what to the "ignites."  Paint ignites.

This material was not thermite or nano-thermite, it was primer paint.  Yes, paint contains metal and metal oxides.  No, paint does not explode.


Eliminating the fantasy stuff about fantasy nano-thermite is a step forward.  Then you are simply left with the question of whether an energy source other than jets, fire and potential energy is required to explain the events.

Neither of these assertions are exactly true of the nano-thermite (especially difficult to initiate, or a hypothetical invention in which it would necessarily be especially easy to initiate a reaction.)  The material has been studied in detail in one paper in particular.  From 3. in TOCPJ-2-7.pdf:


I would not want the stuff coating my house if a spark from a random short circuted wire could set it off.  Possibly this was associated with the short-notice power disturbances which impacted on-site datacenter deployments.  I mean, taking certain vacant and prepped floors out of service for safety reasons.

Nano-thermite would act like a high explosive in terms of it's potential to shater and pulverize things and would not overlap with the function of conventional thermite/thermate which is used to cut steel.  The heavy steel box structures mostly I would guess.

I don't doubt that conventional high explosives were employed in convential ways to acomplish certain tasks.  It probably was these which were reported by witnesses time and time again in the early days, and which were responsible for the outward and often upward trajectories of the debris as the buildings were collapsing.

There's no reason to presume that a "nano-thermite" would have the same stability characteristics as regular thermite.  None whatsoever.  In fact, nano-thermite seems to be a mythical creation of 911 conspiracy advocates which has whatever features they want to give it.  Real behavior of nano-materials is quite different.

For example, nano aluminum which can be used as a propellant reacting with sea water alone.  Not exactly something that could be used reliably or safely as a explosive.  Again, Nobel won his prize for discovering a way to save lives by making explosive materials safe for those whose job required using them.

To an extent I agree with you.  "Toppling down a debris pile" wasn't precisely what I had in mind.  Rather I wanted to illustrate the massive amounts of potential energy in each of these pieces of the building when they were up in the air.  The translation of just a small part of this energy into sideways motion easily results in the sideways displacement.

What percentage? 40,000 required for sideways movement/24,000,000 joules PE = 0.16%
(this is for that one column fragment previously discussed, eg 4 ton section A36 steel)

Less than one part in 500 translated into sideways movement.

You still want to argue that this cannot occur without explosives?  I have not so far defined the METHOD of translation into sideways motion, just sought to illustrate that the energy was there in sufficient quantities to allow it.  I do have an idea on the answer, am trying to think of ways to explain it well.

Note true. Standard Iron oxide thermite is extremely stable. It is not reactive to impact, and its ignition temperature requires a temperature of 2731.730 F, so well within the safe range of any petrol based fuel fires. You make a fair point about it not being sufficient to pulverize concrete, but there is a lot of evidence to support the additional use of high explosives.



If you bother to actually read the thread this is exactly what I have been providing evidence for based on the laws of physics.




Again, that kinetic energy is acting with a DOWNWARD force. Any lateral force would be irregular and insufficient to move 4-ton objects the distance they were found and at the speed of their travel. As far as the bones, the question is HOW they became pulverized in the first place. A collapse would crush them, but not turn them into tiny shattered fragments. You make arguments about the plane impacts, but the fragments were not simply found in one direction, they radiated outward in all directions surrounding the area which does not line up with your explanation of it being caused by the plane impact. Even in horrible massive plane crashes there are still bodies and bones left. Anyways, this is an ancillary topic that you will only use to distract from the indisputable physical evidence of explosive force based on the distance of the massive steel supports hundreds of feet from the towers, so I am not going to address this specific topic any further.

What is "far away"? Lets examine that.



For reference here is the wall segment we are talking about.





Here is a diagram of the paths and velocities required for each of these sections depending on the originating floor.





The sections were ejected in ALL directions, and from every floor. This totally disqualifies any theory of it being a result of the plane impacts, or some freak "spring" action created by the collapse.





Here are photographs showing where this wall segment landed, 600ft away on roof of the Winter Gardens. Note the section lodged in the building at the top of the photo well above the height of the debris pile, disqualifying the toppling down the debris pile theory.




Finally here is an aerial shot of the area showing really how far away 600 feet is. As you can see, this area is also well outside the main mass of the debris pile clearly demonstrating it did not simply topple down a debris pile.

9/11 was all planned by USA.

"Reactive" means simply that it will very, very shortly be "not reactive."