Scientists find active 'super-thermite' in WTC dust

[lone wolf]

Bear, a seismic event can be pinpointed as to how far beneath the earth's surface it occurred. It's quite an interesting science and used a lot in the mining industry. IF those two events occurred in bedrock, there might be something worth looking into - as if anyone is really interested....

 

[CDNBear]

Bear, a seismic event can be pinpointed as to how far beneath the earth's surface it occurred. It's quite an interesting science and used a lot in the mining industry. IF those two events occurred in bedrock, there might be something worth looking into - as if anyone is really interested....

I was interested....

Funny thing about sky scrapers, they're built on bedrock. The center shaft, built on bedrock. All acting like that string you tied between two cans as a kid.

Bingo. How many tons did the top sections weigh? Imagine all that energy smashing into the center structure.

I can see how that would register a seismic event. Right before the actual collapse.

This isn't rocket science Lone. It's real simple. You only have to be willing to be open minded and actually want to find the truth. To many people come to their conclusion, then seek reinforcement.

The truth is out there. :lol:

 

[lone wolf]

I was interested....

Funny thing about sky scrapers, they're built on bedrock. The center shaft, built on bedrock. All acting like that string you tied between two cans as a kid.

Bingo. How many tons did the top sections weigh? Imagine all that energy smashing into the center structure.

I can see how that would register a seismic event. Right before the actual collapse.

This isn't rocket science Lone. It's real simple. You only have to be willing to be open minded and actually want to find the truth. To many people come to their conclusion, then seek reinforcement.

The truth is out there. :lol:

Oh, I'm open-minded - but not quite so interested any more. Funny how many people are....

 

[darkbeaver]

I was interested....

Funny thing about sky scrapers, they're built on bedrock. The center shaft, built on bedrock. All acting like that string you tied between two cans as a kid.

Bingo. How many tons did the top sections weigh? Imagine all that energy smashing into the center structure.

I can see how that would register a seismic event. Right before the actual collapse.

This isn't rocket science Lone. It's real simple. You only have to be willing to be open minded and actually want to find the truth. To many people come to their conclusion, then seek reinforcement.

The truth is out there. :lol:

When I think of "open minded" I think of taking an unimpeded overland tour through yours with a motor vehicle.:lol:

 

[Tonington]

Why couldn't those scientists who tested this material, give the amount of red/grey chips for each sample? They said one sample yielded 0.1% red/grey chips by weight in the sorted sample. Then they don't mention the percentage for the other three samples. This shouldn't be a difficult task to complete, and it frankly doesn't support the first sentence in their conclusion:

We have discovered distinctive red/gray chips in significant
numbers in dust associated with the World Trade Center
destruction.

They mention at the beginning of the article that they received several samples, but they only selected four for analysis. There is no indication why they chose those four samples, there is no mention of random selection (a very big no-no), and they didn't quantify the percent composition of the samples. This would be fairly important. Does the composition of the dust change as the distance from the tower increases, or does it remain constant? They can't answer that question.

Despite the fact they found a 2.5 mm chunk, they maintain that the material is nano-material. That doesn't follow.

They measure 4 different energy yields by mass for the chips they found, in one case one chip yielding 4 times as much energy as another. Again, this amount of variation doesn't lend itself to the explanations of a lab produced material.

I'm sure there's more to pick apart, but that's a good start.

 

[petros]

There should be a plethora of samples to had on the bottom of the Hudson. Who wants to swimming in the Hudson?

 

[petros]

Bear, a seismic event can be pinpointed as to how far beneath the earth's surface it occurred. It's quite an interesting science and used a lot in the mining industry. IF those two events occurred in bedrock, there might be something worth looking into - as if anyone is really interested....

Read my second post.

 

[CDNBear]

Read my second post.

I did...well I looked at it anyways. I've seen that before as well as the time line and the corrisponding description by one of the researchers that first brought that information forward.

I pretty much summed up their assertions. The initial shocks were caused by the floor collapses.

When I think of "open minded" I think of taking an unimpeded overland tour through yours with a motor vehicle.:lol:

Go troll a creek DB. I guess you can't back up your shyte, nor can you refute my assertions, so you resort to your typical morally bankrupt immaturity.

At least I can say you're consistant...;-)

 

[petros]

The initial shocks were caused by the floor collapses.

LOL Waaaaay too funny. The initital floor collapses put out more energy 30 miles through the bedrock than the whole pile hiitting the ground? You are serious? That is absolutely hillarious.

 

[petros]

Anyone else wanna take a crack at how a falling building puts out more energy (triple) in the process of falling than when the entire mass hits the ground?

Anyone?

 

[CDNBear]

LOL Waaaaay too funny. The initital floor collapses put out more energy 30 miles through the bedrock than the whole pile hiitting the ground? You are serious? That is absolutely hillarious.

If you go and find an interpretation of that, that isn't mangled, you may actually understand what I just said...:lol:

Laugh that off while you look for someones OP/ED piece to dissect the info for ya.

Anyone else wanna take a crack at how a falling building puts out more energy (triple) in the process of falling than when the entire mass hits the ground?

Anyone?

Are you really this obtuse, or are you putting on a show for someone?

Seriously Petros, I suggest if you wish for my respect for to continue, you curb the stupidity and try being objective.

 

[petros]

Like these?

 

[petros]

 

[petros]

@#$%^

 

[petros]

What does this seismic information say? Can you read it?

 

[petros]

I'll give you one hint. On the far right you'll see where it says 0 -10.0? Ea 0.1 is twice the energy.

 

[CDNBear]

What does this seismic information say? Can you read it?

I have no idea what it says...I have no idea what that siesmic reading is from.

It could be something made in someones MS Paint for all I know.

Go read a book, not some conspiracy book, but something a kin to truly informative.

Petros, there is nothing you can post that will sway me here dude. I've read the reports from the actual Seismologists that were in charge of the seismograph, Won-Young Kim and Arthur Lerner-Lam. They have already expressed and shown how the graphs you and all other C/T's use, are taken out of context and used to mislead the people.

But hey, if all you want is more proof to back up what you think you already know. Have at it.

I prefer to be informed, not misinformed.

Would you like me to post a copy of the full graph, the one that disproves your asinine assertions?

 

[petros]

If this collapse story they fed you were true the squiggles would increase steadily and then max out when the whole pile hits not more energy in the beginning and mid way than at then end when it hits earth.

 

[petros]

You saw these people in person and they taught you how to read this in 10 seconds on TV? Was Gil and the old chick with nice tits there too?

 

[CDNBear]

If this collapse story they fed you were true the squiggles would increase steadily and then max out when the whole pile hits not more energy in the beginning and mid way than at then end when it hits earth.

Petros, I didn't read somebody else's opinion and use that as my proof, I read the actual report from Won-Young Kim and Arthur Lerner-Lam. The actual Scientists that were in charge of said seismograph, and subsequent researchers of the event timelines.

Do you understand the diference between OP/ED and a documented research paper?