IPBFacebook



POSTS MADE TO THIS FORUM ARE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE AUTHOR AND DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF PILOTS FOR 911 TRUTH
FOR OFFICIAL PILOTS FOR 9/11 TRUTH STATEMENTS AND ANALYSIS, PLEASE VISIT PILOTSFOR911TRUTH.ORG


DIGITAL DOWNLOADS

WELCOME - PLEASE REGISTER OR LOG IN FOR FULL FORUM ACCESS ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Dustification Simplified, four reasons WTC turned to dust

yankee451
post Feb 3 2014, 12:17 PM
Post #41





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 91
Joined: 22-June 13
Member No.: 7,427



QUOTE (amazed! @ Feb 3 2014, 06:17 AM) *
That's all well and good, but it flies in the face of Occam, and it does not even BEGIN to explain all the other anomalies.

Delivering that much dust would have been a huge and very messy project, contradicting Occam's general principle.

Your theory does not explain the lateral ejection of massive pieces, it does not address the strangely burned vehicles, and it certainly does not address the epidemiology surrounding those who worked at GZ.

Nuclear does, easily and precisely.


So despite the evidence of removed bolts and floors, despite the evidence of directional damage, despite the evidence of corruption among the authorities who inform, educate, govern and entertain us, you think it's unrealistic for them to deliver a bunch of dry cement? Too messy you say?

Conventional explosives and every day, run of the mill corruption can answer all your "yeah buts", from ejected steel to "strangely" (not) burned vehicles.

Tell me, with over 100 first responders already busted for massive fraud, how can you be sure the reported "epidemiology" is factual and not just part of the fraud? Cancers and lung issues can be caused by any number of materials, so how do you know whether it was due to the toxins found in standard building materials (such as asbestos) and clouds of gypsum and cement dust, or so-called "nuclear" elements.

Most of the "nuke" crowd believe 9/11 was the first time this sort of fraud was perpetrated, but history shows otherwise. Have you even researched the veracity of such weapons? I'm sure you haven't.

No nukes. Period.
http://letsrollforums.com/do-nuclear-weapo...ist-t28427.html

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
tumetuestumefais...
post Feb 3 2014, 01:51 PM
Post #42





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 1,111
Joined: 7-November 07
From: Prague or France
Member No.: 2,452



QUOTE (leostokes @ Feb 2 2014, 07:10 PM) *
Partially unignited thermite, thermate, and/or nanothermite falling through the air as it continued to react would have produced molten iron droplets. A still-reacting thermitic mixture drifting down onto the cars in the dust plumes could easily account for the singing of their paint and even igniting the cars (since the highly exothermic thermite reaction can quickly reach temperatures exceeding 4000 F.)

Exactly. Moreover they would fall faster in the dustcloud for their much higher density than rest of the dust. And if ending on horizontal roofs of the cars and soon covered by less dense concrete dust so insulated from the air they could burn the paint and plastic parts as i.e. door handles, even ignite the cars because they would still carry pretty enough heat. I think this explanation of burned cars is much more plausible than that it was caused by some exotic weapons which authors of this claims not only aren't able to prove they were used, but barely that they even exist.

I think all this DEW and nuke terrories are just wild disinfo.
For nukes nobody ever proved any slightest hint of secondary neutron activation around which must have been there if a nuclear explosion would take place there. It would radiate there everything.
One of their main argument of the nukers from the beginning was the elevated strontium and barium levels in some samples, without ever caring what isotopes of this elements were indeed found (Both strontium and barium are common in buildings - strontium is natural in cement and barium important part of wallpaints - even me I have all walls in my flat painted by almost pure barium sulfate -BaSO4 for decades - do I suffer radiation sickness? Nope) and whether it were stable or radioactive isotopes. This only shows diletantism of those using such arguments and extremely poor value of such claims.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NP1Mike
post Feb 3 2014, 09:44 PM
Post #43





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 422
Joined: 25-November 13
Member No.: 7,592



QUOTE (yankee451 @ Feb 2 2014, 09:44 PM) *
Until you check his work it's all just hearsay. What, government "scientists" don't lie? Why is that? Is it because he has a "Dr." in his name?


Dr. Harrit is a government scientist? Hmmmm......


QUOTE
Dry cement (which contains gypsum) can easily account for the dust, but this would mean a massive conspiracy which most people can't wrap their brains around. My personal experience is that this realization caused a paradigm shift which changed the way I view civilization itself; it changed my life and made me an outcast from what most people consider normal society. Who would want to go through that? No, it's much easier to believe the towers were turned to dust with top-secret weaponry, or that jet planes with scary Arabs did it, or some "rogue" military coup was responsible...anything will do.



Hey I'm all with you about the life-changing paradigm shift. It has affected me the same way.
However..... this does not mean we all have to believe the same details as the next truther, right?

This dry cement is a new one on me, and quite frankly, right now I'm not buying it.

QUOTE
How would you expect a falling column to look when dust is coming from both ends and hand holes?


I would expect to see dust coming out from both ends and hand holes as it was falling!
Not from its entire surface! I thought that would be obvious, hence I made the comment.

QUOTE
And I repeat, the steel wasn't "dustified", was it? The steel was all that was left.

Did you read anything here by me, saying it was dustified?

QUOTE
Show me the images of molten metal and I'll show you how you're mistaken.


I may show you this later.


QUOTE
What I'm saying is that there are other explanations for the fuming without having to rely on imaginary weapons and if they'd use them at the Pentagon, why wouldn't they also do so at the other sites.



What are the other explanations for the white smoke at ground zero for months after 9/11?

And better still, why would it even enter the heads of the perps to create white smoke for months after 9/11?
Please give me JUST ONE GOOD REASON?



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
leostokes
post Feb 3 2014, 09:50 PM
Post #44





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 15
Joined: 6-January 14
Member No.: 7,654



QUOTE (tumetuestumefaisdubien @ Feb 3 2014, 12:51 PM) *
Exactly. Moreover they would fall faster in the dustcloud for their much higher density than rest of the dust. And if ending on horizontal roofs of the cars and soon covered by less dense concrete dust so insulated from the air they could burn the paint and plastic parts as i.e. door handles, even ignite the cars because they would still carry pretty enough heat. I think this explanation of burned cars is much more plausible than that it was caused by some exotic weapons which authors of this claims not only aren't able to prove they were used, but barely that they even exist.


You have explained the cars. What about the paper.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
yankee451
post Feb 4 2014, 12:55 AM
Post #45





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 91
Joined: 22-June 13
Member No.: 7,427



QUOTE (NP1Mike @ Feb 3 2014, 05:44 PM) *
Dr. Harrit is a government scientist? Hmmmm......


Last I checked universities need to have the blessings of the government before they are able to give someone a degree. Stop toeing the government line and a university will find itself without a license, therefore anyone with a doctorate is indoctrinated to repeat government-approved information, even if it's the Danish government.

QUOTE (NP1Mike @ Feb 3 2014, 05:44 PM) *
Hey I'm all with you about the life-changing paradigm shift. It has affected me the same way.
However..... this does not mean we all have to believe the same details as the next truther, right?


No one's telling you what to believe. I am only leading the horse to water, as it were.

QUOTE (NP1Mike @ Feb 3 2014, 05:44 PM) *
This dry cement is a new one on me, and quite frankly, right now I'm not buying it.


No problem. I once didn't buy it either just as I once did buy the DEW meme, but after considering the facts the best explanation is good, old-fashioned corruption; namely the authorities lied about the occupancy rates of the WTC from the beginning and had been prepping the buildings for demolition since the 93 bombing. That bombing allowed the existing tenants to break their leases to be replaced by the big-name firms that were there on the big day. Tenants such as Marsh McLennan allegedly lost hundreds of employees on floors that the damage evidence indicates weren't there, strongly suggesting they were a brass plate front.

QUOTE
Intelligence agencies use front organizations to provide "cover", plausible occupations and means of income, for their covert agents. These may include legitimate organizations, such as charity, religious or journalism organizations; or "brass plate firms" which exist solely to provide a plausible background story, occupation, and means of income. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_organiz...igence_agencies
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_organiz...igence_agencies


Adding piles of cement to gutted and empty towers would be a piece of cake. With the Mall and the Path terminal the empty towers would appear to be bustling metropolises, and with a private police force the Port Authority was able to ensure no one got in who didn't need to be there. All it would take would be the lighting finish the ruse; introducing Ogden Global Entertainment Services, an international corporation which beat-out Time Warner for the rights to the WTC observation deck. Ogden modernized the light shows and prepared the set for 911:

QUOTE
Ogden, a global entertainment services provider to arenas, sports stadiums (Veteran's Stadium in Philadelphia), concert halls, amphitheaters and amusement parks (Disney World), was awarded the contract in March after requests for proposals were put out by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. Ogden's proposal won over six other high-powered bidders, including Time Warner and Service America.
http://www.nytimes.com/1997/09/21/ny...yi-171069.html


Ogden is not just into entertainment though:

QUOTE
UNTIL 1985, OGDEN CORPORATION was primarily a "smokestack operation" - it built ships and freight cars, manufactured machine tools and processed scrap metal. However, in 1985, Ogden sold these operations to its employees to concentrate on services. "The new Ogden," company ads proclaimed, is "putting America's house in order."

Today, Ogden Corporation is a "service-oriented" company with 40,000 employees and net sales and service revenues in 1992 of over $1.76 billion. Based in New York City, its businesses include Ogden Building Services, which manages and maintains commercial buildings; Ogden Entertainment Services, which promotes concerts; and Ogden Aviation Services, which refuels planes and prepares on-flight meals. Ogden Environmental and Energy Services provides consultation to the nuclear industry and is involved in the cleanup of Defense and Energy Department contaminated sites.
http://multinationalmonitor.org/hype...mm0893_09.html


Why is it everywhere I look there's a defense contractor?

QUOTE (NP1Mike @ Feb 3 2014, 05:44 PM) *
I would expect to see dust coming out from both ends and hand holes as it was falling!
Not from its entire surface! I thought that would be obvious, hence I made the comment.


Did you read anything here by me, saying it was dustified?


With dust streaming from both ends, it would pass along the outsides of the column as it was falling, easily explaining the phenomenon you are concerned about.

If you didn't imply it was "dustifying", why did you bring it up?

QUOTE (NP1Mike @ Feb 3 2014, 05:44 PM) *
I may show you this (images of molten metal) later.


Please do. Rivers flow into lakes and oceans, so where there are rivers of molten metal there should also be solidified pools of metal somewhere. Thinkaboudit... cool.gif

QUOTE (NP1Mike @ Feb 3 2014, 05:44 PM) *
What are the other explanations for the white smoke at ground zero for months after 9/11?

And better still, why would it even enter the heads of the perps to create white smoke for months after 9/11?
Please give me JUST ONE GOOD REASON?


What you consider a GOOD REASON is pretty subjective considering you're arguing in favor of weapons that can't be proved to even exist.

Smoke machines were used at at least one other site (the Pentagon), and probably also at Shanksville. With all the sub levels beneath the WTC it would be no effort at all to make it appear the ground was fuming. It's a great trick, doncha think? Houdini eat your heart out.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NP1Mike
post Feb 4 2014, 08:08 PM
Post #46





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 422
Joined: 25-November 13
Member No.: 7,592



QUOTE (yankee451 @ Feb 3 2014, 11:55 PM) *
Last I checked universities need to have the blessings of the government before they are able to give someone a degree. Stop toeing the government line and a university will find itself without a license, therefore anyone with a doctorate is indoctrinated to repeat government-approved information, even if it's the Danish government.


You do realize that Dr. Harrit's 9/11 viewpoints are 180 degrees opposite to the government's who 'funded' him? Kinda strange, wouldn't you say?


QUOTE
...the best explanation is good, old-fashioned corruption; namely the authorities lied about the occupancy rates of the WTC from the beginning...

Agreed.

QUOTE
... and had been prepping the buildings for demolition since the 93 bombing.

Not sure, but certainly possible.

QUOTE
That bombing allowed the existing tenants to break their leases to be replaced by the big-name firms that were there on the big day.

Correct.

QUOTE
Tenants such as Marsh McLennan allegedly lost hundreds of employees on floors that the damage evidence indicates weren't there, strongly suggesting they were a brass plate front.

Agreed.

QUOTE
With dust streaming from both ends, it would pass along the outsides of the column as it was falling, easily explaining the phenomenon you are concerned about.


I think if a steel beam that had holes at both ends and was filled with dust were falling, the dust would be seen to primarily be coming out of the ends and not along its entire surface.

Now this would make a much more doable project (financially and logistically) than your crash test for dummies project! How about throwing one together? A dust-filled steel beam drop test, from a tower? Filmed/recorded for all to see.

QUOTE
If you didn't imply it was "dustifying", why did you bring it up?.

I wasn't implying that it was dustifying.
Find me the context of what I said, and I will explain why I brought it up.

QUOTE
What you consider a GOOD REASON is pretty subjective considering you're arguing in favor of weapons that can't be proved to even exist.


To repeat, I am not arguing in favor of DEW's.

QUOTE
Smoke machines were used at at least one other site (the Pentagon), and probably also at Shanksville. With all the sub levels beneath the WTC it would be no effort at all to make it appear the ground was fuming. It's a great trick, doncha think? Houdini eat your heart out.


Yes, as I have said, it's quite clear they were used at the Pentagon.
I haven't seen video of Shanksville, so I have no comment for that.

But you missed my point entirely about a possible white smoke machine at the WTC's.

Let me rephrase my question.
Why would the perps have needed to show smoke coming from ground zero, weeks and months after 9/11?
What would they have gained from it?

Or put another way.
The white smoke is embarrassing to the perps! It is a literal smoking gun, exposing the fraud they committed. There is no logical explanation for why ground zero would have been smoking for more than a day or two after the event.

So planting machines to produce white smoke (which otherwise would never have occurred naturally), would be a completely absurd/foolish thing to do.






Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
yankee451
post Feb 4 2014, 10:21 PM
Post #47





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 91
Joined: 22-June 13
Member No.: 7,427



QUOTE (NP1Mike @ Feb 4 2014, 04:08 PM) *
You do realize that Dr. Harrit's 9/11 viewpoints are 180 degrees opposite to the government's who 'funded' him? Kinda strange, wouldn't you say?



No, not strange. He thinks thermite is responsible and is afraid our civilization is threatened but anyone who has really digested 9/11 truth can only HOPE our civilization would be threatened. After all, it is the people who lead what passes for civilization who were the most likely suspects, so what's to be afraid of? Honestly I can't believe anyone is still talking thermite knowing how little explosive power the stuff packs.

He is making the motions of activism but in the end he is just providing a safe sandbox for sincere truth seekers to spin their wheels in.

QUOTE (NP1Mike @ Feb 4 2014, 04:08 PM) *
I think if a steel beam that had holes at both ends and was filled with dust were falling, the dust would be seen to primarily be coming out of the ends and not along its entire surface.

Now this would make a much more doable project (financially and logistically) than your crash test for dummies project! How about throwing one together? A dust-filled steel beam drop test, from a tower? Filmed/recorded for all to see.


Go for it. Please. I urge you to put your heart and soul into a project and sit back and enjoy the good will spread by charming folks like you.

QUOTE (NP1Mike @ Feb 4 2014, 04:08 PM) *
To repeat, I am not arguing in favor of DEW's.


Then you're just arguing.

QUOTE (NP1Mike @ Feb 4 2014, 04:08 PM) *
Why would the perps have needed to show smoke coming from ground zero, weeks and months after 9/11?
What would they have gained from it?


Fear, Judy Wood, mystery, intrigue, fear, awe, shock, and fear.

QUOTE (NP1Mike @ Feb 4 2014, 04:08 PM) *
Or put another way.
The white smoke is embarrassing to the perps! It is a literal smoking gun, exposing the fraud they committed. There is no logical explanation for why ground zero would have been smoking for more than a day or two after the event.

So planting machines to produce white smoke (which otherwise would never have occurred naturally), would be a completely absurd/foolish thing to do.


It would only be foolish if they didn't already control all media that could possibly inform the people of it. It would only be foolish if they didn't have generations' worth of empirical evidence that the vast majority of the public will believe anything as long as it's on the TeeVee. "They" are not foolish, but they clearly think we're stupid and we continually prove they're right.

Since they used smoke machines at the Pentagon, it stands to reason they wouldn't be averse to using them elsewhere. To what do you attribute the fuming?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NP1Mike
post Feb 4 2014, 11:31 PM
Post #48





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 422
Joined: 25-November 13
Member No.: 7,592



QUOTE (yankee451 @ Feb 4 2014, 09:21 PM) *
Go for it. Please. I urge you to put your heart and soul into a project and sit back and enjoy the good will spread by charming folks like you.


I was not trying to dissuade you from carrying out your crash test. I think it would be cool to see.
However... I know you already decided to can it, at least for now.
Plus, it really wouldn't prove that the planes couldn't have made it into the towers (if the wing failed the crash test).

My suggestion (for a steel beam dust test) was definitely tongue in cheek. smile.gif

QUOTE
Since they used smoke machines at the Pentagon, it stands to reason they wouldn't be averse to using them elsewhere. To what do you attribute the fuming?


I haven't given it a lot of consideration, but I really can't think of anything logical other than something 'unclear'.



Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
amazed!
post Feb 5 2014, 06:54 PM
Post #49





Group: Extreme Forum Pilot
Posts: 4,017
Joined: 14-December 06
From: Fort Pierce, FL
Member No.: 331



QUOTE (yankee451 @ Feb 3 2014, 12:17 PM) *
So despite the evidence of removed bolts and floors, despite the evidence of directional damage, despite the evidence of corruption among the authorities who inform, educate, govern and entertain us, you think it's unrealistic for them to deliver a bunch of dry cement? Too messy you say?

Conventional explosives and every day, run of the mill corruption can answer all your "yeah buts", from ejected steel to "strangely" (not) burned vehicles.

Tell me, with over 100 first responders already busted for massive fraud, how can you be sure the reported "epidemiology" is factual and not just part of the fraud? Cancers and lung issues can be caused by any number of materials, so how do you know whether it was due to the toxins found in standard building materials (such as asbestos) and clouds of gypsum and cement dust, or so-called "nuclear" elements.

Most of the "nuke" crowd believe 9/11 was the first time this sort of fraud was perpetrated, but history shows otherwise. Have you even researched the veracity of such weapons? I'm sure you haven't.

No nukes. Period.
http://letsrollforums.com/do-nuclear-weapo...ist-t28427.html



Oh I completely understand that humans are corrupt, and humans in government even more corrupt than the average bear. I have no problem with that point, but you seem to be trying to explain everything that happened by saying that humans are corrupt. That is not exactly rational, IMO, or relevant.

You find the burned vehicles to be normal, or unburned? It's hard to tell from this post.

What evidence do you have that the first responders were corrupt as a group?

I don't see what removed bolts have to do with anything, and I certainly have never heard of such a claim, much less any proof for it.

Nukes are the only theory that ties up all the loose ends, IMO.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
tumetuestumefais...
post Feb 5 2014, 08:33 PM
Post #50





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 1,111
Joined: 7-November 07
From: Prague or France
Member No.: 2,452



QUOTE (leostokes @ Feb 3 2014, 02:50 PM) *
You have explained the cars. What about the paper.

With pleasure.
The paper sheet has relatively very low density and has considerable surface area so it would take much more time for it to get to the ground, likely even minutes from higher parts of the buildings than for the much denser droplets of the molten iron which were found in the dust. By then when the paper gets to the ground the most dense part of the dust would be already relatively long time covered by the less denser concrete dust insulating it, so if a paper sheet would land on it the surface of the dust could not have temperature high enough to ignite the paper, but the iron droplets below still would carry enough heat to burn the paint they came in immediate contact with.

For the record I don't believe any hypothesis about "steel dustification". It looks to me as far fetched and being rather a disinfo. If a thermite, thermate and/or their nanoparticle variants would be used to do the job it would inevitably produce amounts of aluminum oxide, which basically is white powder when cooled under 2072C and could be easily mistaken for smoke or dust. For demolishing whole WTC tower basically what one would need to do is to cut the core columns and disconect the outer wall panels bolted together at some points, rest will be done by gravity. All this could be made by thermite/thermate and their nanoparticle variants which have high but still subsonic burning speed, so would not produce a distinct detonation as the high explosives. The needed charges could be positioned inside the box columns through service holes used for bolting as Jonathan Cole demonstrated.

This post has been edited by tumetuestumefaisdubien: Feb 5 2014, 09:26 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
onesliceshort
post Feb 5 2014, 10:36 PM
Post #51



Group Icon

Group: Global Mod
Posts: 2,612
Joined: 30-January 09
Member No.: 4,095



Tume says

QUOTE
For demolishing whole WTC tower basically what one would need to do is to cut the core columns and disconect the outer wall panels bolted together at some points, rest will be done by gravity. All this could be made by thermite/thermate and their nanoparticle variants which have high but still subsonic burning speed, so would not produce a distinct detonation as the high explosives. The needed charges could be positioned inside the box columns through service holes used for bolting as Jonathan Cole demonstrated.


thumbsup.gif

I believe that preweakening of the structure is the missing link.

It's the only explanation for WTC7 too (IMO).

Weaken specific areas before 9/11, ignite exotic accelerants at these and other areas on 9/11 itself, let the lower floor atriums act as a "kick out" from underneath while the heavy mechanical floors added the punch.

Remember that people had first hand knowledge of (high) explosive effects on the WTC columns at basement level in 1993 too.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
tumetuestumefais...
post Feb 6 2014, 09:08 PM
Post #52





Group: Respected Member
Posts: 1,111
Joined: 7-November 07
From: Prague or France
Member No.: 2,452



QUOTE (onesliceshort @ Feb 5 2014, 03:36 PM) *
I believe that preweakening of the structure is the missing link.

Hi OSS. cheers.gif Exactly.
Whether it was done before 9/11, on 9/11 before the plane impact (for example the explosions in the basement reported by Rodriguez and Sanchez), or after it (for example the signs of significant explosion in the WTC1 exactly when WTC2 was attacked, the red glowing outer colums or the molten metal pouring from WTC2 point of outer wall primary failure out of many such indices) it certainly played crucial role.

QUOTE
It's the only explanation for WTC7 too (IMO).

In the WTC7 there were loads of time to do plenty of things under the smokescreen of the WTC1,2 demolitions. And after that the area was basically cleared, but still we have the Jenkins account about explosions there and even a video which clearly recorded it. Not speaking that the mere existence of the significant office fires on multiple floors there is itself unexplained: how they even came into existence. Yes, there was the falling debris from the WTC1 demolition, but how it could set another building 100m away on fire? On some photographs it looks like whole southern side of the building is billowing smoke top to botom, which itself looks to me pretty weird, because there are no signs of fire on the other side on most of the floors, not speaking about the apparent lack of effort to fight the fires. Then whole building falling down at freefall speed...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
leostokes
post Apr 9 2014, 10:22 PM
Post #53





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 15
Joined: 6-January 14
Member No.: 7,654



QUOTE (tumetuestumefaisdubien @ Feb 5 2014, 07:33 PM) *
With pleasure.
The paper sheet has relatively very low density and has considerable surface area so it would take much more time for it to get to the ground, likely even minutes from higher parts of the buildings than for the much denser droplets of the molten iron which were found in the dust. By then when the paper gets to the ground the most dense part of the dust would be already relatively long time covered by the less denser concrete dust insulating it, so if a paper sheet would land on it the surface of the dust could not have temperature high enough to ignite the paper, but the iron droplets below still would carry enough heat to burn the paint they came in immediate contact with.

For the record I don't believe any hypothesis about "steel dustification". It looks to me as far fetched and being rather a disinfo. If a thermite, thermate and/or their nanoparticle variants would be used to do the job it would inevitably produce amounts of aluminum oxide, which basically is white powder when cooled under 2072C and could be easily mistaken for smoke or dust. For demolishing whole WTC tower basically what one would need to do is to cut the core columns and disconect the outer wall panels bolted together at some points, rest will be done by gravity. All this could be made by thermite/thermate and their nanoparticle variants which have high but still subsonic burning speed, so would not produce a distinct detonation as the high explosives. The needed charges could be positioned inside the box columns through service holes used for bolting as Jonathan Cole demonstrated.

Are you a disinformation agent? You have changed the issue from evidence of dustification to evidence of thermite. You have assumed the two issues are mutually exclusive. You assume proof of thermite disproves dustification. Not so. Both are in abundant evidence at WTC. I, for one, never said thermite was not used. You changed the subject out of ignorance?
Your idea about the paper not burning is flawed. Because cars only toasted (in the Embassy Suites lot) after the the second tower came down when there was already a carpet of paper around Manhattan.
I am replying to your comment not to enlighten you. But rather to expose your misguided reply to other interested readers. So go ahead and reply to this and we can do it again.

This post has been edited by leostokes: Apr 9 2014, 10:24 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
leostokes
post Apr 11 2014, 01:16 AM
Post #54





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 15
Joined: 6-January 14
Member No.: 7,654



QUOTE (leostokes @ Jan 21 2014, 12:03 AM) *

When links that use to work switch to not working you can bet that someone is disturbed about their content. My link has stopped working. Where did it go? Who removed the web page?
My guess is that it was too near the TRUTH to be allowed to remain.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NP1Mike
post Apr 11 2014, 09:33 PM
Post #55





Group: Active Forum Pilot
Posts: 422
Joined: 25-November 13
Member No.: 7,592



QUOTE (leostokes @ Apr 11 2014, 12:16 AM) *
When links that use to work switch to not working you can bet that someone is disturbed about their content. My link has stopped working. Where did it go? Who removed the web page?
My guess is that it was too near the TRUTH to be allowed to remain.



Relax Leo, the link still works.
World order restored. smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
leostokes
post Apr 12 2014, 11:15 PM
Post #56





Group: Student Forum Pilot
Posts: 15
Joined: 6-January 14
Member No.: 7,654



QUOTE (NP1Mike @ Apr 11 2014, 08:33 PM) *
Relax Leo, the link still works.
World order restored. smile.gif

I checked it on two forums and it did not work. I think I just failed to wait long enough. My mistake. Thanks.

However, Fukushima has permanently destroyed world order. Can't relax.

This post has been edited by leostokes: Apr 12 2014, 11:16 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 




RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 15th November 2019 - 04:13 PM