Re: Scientists find active 'super-thermite' in WTC dustApr 17th, 2009
On September 11, 2001, the seismic stations grouped around New York City recorded seismic events from the WTC site, two of which occurred immediately prior to the aircraft impacts upon the Twin Towers. Because these seismic events preceded the collisions, it is clear they were not associated with the impacts and must therefore be associated with some other occurrence.
If that more appropraite and not purposefully misleading image isn't enough. Please contact the two Seismologists responsible for the station at Columbia, as I did.
They are the ones who have repeatedly said, conspiracy theorist are misleading people with bastardized hypothesis of their work and the evidence they provided.
"There is no scientific basis for the conclusion that explosions brought down the towers"
email@example.com (external - login to view)
9/11 Inside Job - The Most Explosive Evidence Yet! An Experiment using Thermite shows for sure that 9-11 was indeed an Inside Job.
LOL...I had moved on...sorta, then I came back online...
When I was offline, I was laid up for a while, so I read and read and read some more. Everybody kept bringing me books and magizines, lol.
I had my own developed conclusions of what happened on 9/11. But it wasn't until I started to read some of the C/T theories that I started to question the science behind the 'official version'. That's what prompted me to do some serious digging of my own. Low and behold, if you stop listening to other peoples opinions and thinking they're fact. You find the 'official version', actually more plausible then the C/T theories.
Since 9/11, there have been numerous pseudo scientific journals sprout out of the wood work. All claiming peer review and the highest standard. Unfortunately, most are published by small companies that do not fact check, before publication. In fact most have a disclaimer in the first pages, saying..."The views and studies expressed in this publication, are the sole property of the persons involved and in no way supported or affirmed by the publisher".
Find me that disclaimer in any respected scientific journal.
Sure, there are all sorts of unanswered questions. There should be and people shouldn't stop asking them or researching them because the 'official version' was published. An event of this magnitude should not go quietly into the history books.
But the clincher is, use real science for **** sakes. The pseudo science, 'rationalised technology and hyperbole these C/T's use is pure hogwash. In most cases, out right lies. Like the pic in the OP. The time line, which can be traced right back to the photographer that took the picture weeks after the excavation began. Can easily be found. The use of it, in the context of which it is being used here, is a bold faced lie.
It discredits real objective researchers and people who question the 'official version'.
I suggest you reread the OP, then reread my posts Petros. You've made a major error in what you think I said.
I kind of like you Petros, so I'm going to give you the chance to retract this, or face me at my worst. Your choice.
Now to tear apart those video's...
First, note the amount of thermite needed to cut through the hood of the car, the engine block is never shown, so as far as I'm concerned, it wasn't cut...
But lets assume it was...
What direction was the cut made in?
Gravity did all the work. Did you notice how it is a violent reaction, not easily contained. Now try and imagine a device that could hold that energy to an upright column, for the full duration of the cut needed to weaken or shear the column.
There is not such device.
Did you notice the ignition method?
Thermite requires incindiary ignition. It CAN NOT BE ELECTRONICALLY DETONATED!!!
Thus remote blasting caps are out.
So I guess Bush had someone running through the building light wicks.
Anyways Petros. I have much to learn in life. But I'm probably the most knowledgable person on substances like thermite on this site (By going out and looking to learn about this kind of stuff, that's how I roll), save for Tonnington or Dexter.
This proof is totally irrefutable. Anyone who denies this proof is purely in denial because they can't bare to face the truth that such a henious crime could be carried out by the people we trust to rule over us.
Here's more, from earlier posts...
The phenomenon is called "rationalised technology". The act of trying to invent or conjure up some form of technology to confirm an hypothesis. In this case, first it was 'Thermite'. When the C/T's finally realised that would require tractor trailer loads of the stuff, they cam eup with 'Nano Thermite' or 'Super Thermite'. Because of its presumed 'nano' size. They hoped it would pack the same punch, using far less amounts. Unfortunately, 'Nano Thermite' is still in its experimental stages and is being developed for high heat, low volitility applications. Such as 'Heat signature flare decoys', you know what they are Lone, and Molecular welding applications, ie: Extremely small welds on extremely small things. So 'Nano Thermite' is out to. Unfortunately for the C/T crowd.
Actually, that's not true. Thermite composition is not remarkable. In an event like the collapse of any building containing copious amounts of air craft parts and office supplies, you would find the bulk of the chemical make up of 'Thermite'.
This is true, and from the top down no less. Unlike every other controlled demolition in recorded history, ground up.
Also from that article...
As someone that works with metal, let me assure you, you will find no one, and I mean no one that works with steel, wood, and even grain, that would argue with that statement.
Most dust, of various origin is combustive. Especially Aluminum and steel!
Stretch, don't you feel at all silly, being misinformed by a site called OpEdNews?
If you will recall, I've mentioned this before, Op/Ed pieces are not objective, not scientific and offer more of the authors opinion, then of the truth or facts.
In this case, it offers no facts, no truth, just more BS. Tonnington, a student of science and well rounded in the true practices of experimentation. Has already expressed the flaws with the research paper your OP presented in link.
Why can you not dig deeper? Why is it that the 'anti C/t' folk are the ones doing all the real digging?
None of the authorities charged with the responsibility for the investigation of the events of 9/11 have proposed a source for these seismic events, nor have they given a valid reason for the difference in times between the seismic events and the aircraft impacts. Only by consideration of the evidence of basement explosions before the aircraft impacts, as experienced by William Rodriquez and 36 others, can an explanation be found for the fact that the seismic stations recorded seismic events originating from the WTC sites prior to the aircraft impacts. It seems unlikely that Middle Eastern terrorists could have overcome the WTC security and managed this kind of high-level, technological coordination. Do the facts presented here, simple and few, raise the possibility of inside involvement in 9/11/01, both before and after the attack?
BTW...A simple link to your source would be much better then mile long cut and pastes..