Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

9 Scientists Find Nano-thermite in WTC Dust

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Political Videos Donate to DU
 
Tx4obama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 01:40 AM
Original message
9 Scientists Find Nano-thermite in WTC Dust
Edited on Sat Apr-11-09 02:27 AM by Tx4obama
 
Run time: 10:32
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_tf25lx_3o
 
Posted on YouTube: April 10, 2009
By YouTube Member:
Views on YouTube: 0
 
Posted on DU: April 11, 2009
By DU Member: Tx4obama
Views on DU: 15528
 
A danish scientist Niels Harrit, on nano-thermite in the WTC dust (English subtitles)

And here is a link to the Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice press release:
http://stj911.org/press_releases/ActiveThermiticMateria...

.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 01:46 AM
Response to Original message
1. Nope, paint chips.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tx4obama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 01:49 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. If you had watched the video
then you would know that the scientist in the video said that you can't see the nano-thermite with your eye - you have to look under a micro-scope.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 01:57 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. I've been dealing with the "scientist's crappy paper on this since it got released


An actual materials scientist has been looking at their work and has identified each layer. It's micaceous iron oxide primer and red paint.

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4589454&postcoun...

I've also shown directly that the grey layer is MIO.

You see that grey layer had me foxed. I couldn't work out why the grey layer wasn't red because the EDS data clearly shows an iron oxide and I've got good experience with steel and rust. I initially thought that Jones et al had accidentally mislabeled the layers, which is easily done. I know cos I've done it in the past!

So I had another look at the macro-photographs and the grey layer is actually very metallic looking so I thought that maybe this was actually rust that spalled off and had some paint attached. The SEM photo of the layer just looked wrong for rust. I was stumped. So I decided to have a quick look for corrosion protection and came across this MIO, which is very widely used on structural steel. What I didn't have was a SEM photo or any size in which to compare that to the Jones chip. It could have been something completely different and not in anyway like the grey layer on the chip but nope, it's exactly the same.

A tiny individual platelet of MIO from an anti-corrosion material with some red pain adhering to it. It fits and what's more I've shown how I got to that conclusion by showing people the evidence in my posts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tx4obama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 02:02 AM
Response to Reply #3
7. The video
has nothing to do with paint.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 10:04 AM
Response to Reply #7
19. The video is talking about how these idiots convinced themselves
that paint chips were "super-nano-thermite".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr. Benway Donating Member (14 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 04:49 PM
Response to Reply #19
63. Explain Please
How do you explain the presence of elemental aluminum in your so-called paint chips? Do you even know the difference between elemental aluminum and aluminum in a compound? Have you even had a class in chemistry anytime during your education?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wildbilln864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 07:44 PM
Response to Reply #63
75. Welcome to the DU Dr.
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
baldguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-13-09 07:43 AM
Response to Reply #63
83. He can't.
Not without totally dismissing anything not included in the 9/11 Commission Report.

The biased, incomplete, unsubstantiated 9/11 Commission Report created only to cover the Bush Regime's ass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tiptoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 02:31 AM
Response to Reply #3
13. 5:01 "And we know roughly how much unreacted thermite we have found." nt
Edited on Sat Apr-11-09 02:31 AM by tiptoe
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 10:06 AM
Response to Reply #13
20. And he's a fool. He's calling paint chips "unreacted thermite."
In fact, using their own tests, you can show that their chips AREN'T thermite.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 04:51 PM
Response to Reply #20
64. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
tiptoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 02:32 AM
Response to Reply #3
14. 5:07 "This is the 'loaded gun', material that did not ignite for some reason." nt
Edited on Sat Apr-11-09 02:37 AM by tiptoe
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #14
21. How many loaded guns have to prove to have no bullets
before you abandon silly issues like this and move on to more important stuff?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tiptoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 07:17 PM
Response to Reply #21
43. "Scientists Discover **Active** Thermitic Material in WTC Dust"--presumably, "bullets" not "blanks"
Edited on Sat Apr-11-09 07:18 PM by tiptoe

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Victoria Ashley, STJ911 committee member
Phone: 510-769-5109
Site: www.STJ911.org
Email: stj911@gmail.com

Berkeley, CA, April 3, 2009

Study: Scientists Discover Active Thermitic Material in WTC Dust





 
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 07:56 PM
Response to Reply #43
45. Nope, not thermite
Paint.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr. Benway Donating Member (14 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #45
65. If you say so, bunky.
Does that paint explode spontaneously when heated? Remind me not to move next door to you if you think it's safe to put aluminum powder in paint. Oh! they're both red! They must be the same!

What a dork.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 05:10 PM
Response to Reply #21
72. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 02:33 AM
Response to Reply #3
15. Are you saying that the aluminum was in the paint?
I can understand your claim that the iron was in the paint. But where did the aluminum come from? I am not a scientist and don't have any particular view on what happened on 9/11. I'm just wondering where you think the aluminum would have come from. Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 10:09 AM
Response to Reply #15
22. Yes, in the form of kaolin, a common paint additive
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 04:32 PM
Response to Reply #22
61. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Dr. Benway Donating Member (14 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 05:12 PM
Response to Reply #22
73. If you had actually read the linked article...
you'd know that kaolinite is a compound. There is no free aluminum present. You may want to look up the term element next time you go to Wikipedia, Einstein.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kitty Herder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-13-09 04:42 AM
Response to Reply #22
81. It's clay, you say?
Edited on Mon Apr-13-09 04:43 AM by Kitty Herder
Just wanted to clarify for those to whom kaolin is not a familiar term. Kaolin is a kind of clay.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Just-plain-Kathy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 01:58 AM
Response to Original message
4. Two planes crashed, three buildings came down.
Marvin Bush was in charge of the WTC security.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 01:59 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. One building fell into the other, started fires that couldn't be fought
Marvin Bush was NOT in charge of the WTC security. Isn't that at Snopes?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tx4obama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 02:02 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. No...
There wasn't any building that fell on Building #7
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 10:03 AM
Response to Reply #6
18. Yes, there was - debris from 1 hit 7 and started fires
Please stop spreading factual inaccuracies about this event.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #18
66. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Just-plain-Kathy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 02:04 AM
Response to Reply #5
8. Did you see the footage of the third building going down?
Yes there was a fire, but it wasn't uncontrollable. That building was barely touched. It was demolished by an explosion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tiptoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 03:32 AM
Response to Reply #8
16. "...demolished by an explosion." ...after Larry Silverstein's recorded words: "Pull it."
Edited on Sat Apr-11-09 03:35 AM by tiptoe
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 10:15 AM
Response to Reply #16
24. There were no explosive devices. Larry Silverstein was talking about
pulling people away from the building in case it did fall.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DT0WjGyZW1M
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Just-plain-Kathy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #24
32. Defending against a conspiracy seems to be very important to you.
"Pull IT" does not mean get people away from the building.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 03:19 PM
Response to Reply #32
33. I value truth and evidence-based arguments. This isn't either.
Silverstein's assistant has confirmed that Silverstein was talking about a contingent of firefighters that he assumed was fighting the fires around his building.

What you're pushing here is the Merry Pason argument. Just like Perry Mason could get the bad guy to confess his guilt on the witness stand, you think that 9/11 conspirators are running around blurting out their guilt and only conspiracy advocates like yourself can understand it.

Looking at what Daniel Nigro has said, it's clear that the only "pulling" done on 9/11 was pulling people out of harm's way. The only way you "pull" buildings is by attaching cables to it and pulling it over. That's not what happened to Building 7.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Just-plain-Kathy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #33
34. I guess we should believe the "assistant" of the man who profited the most from the...
...destruction of the Twin Towers.

9-11 was an inside job. It gave reason for Bush and Cheney to bring us into Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #34
37. Why not? You think you're taking the actual man at his word, aren't you?
Listen: Fire departments don't knock down buildings. They do pull people out of harm's way. What sense does it make to tell the fire department to demolish your building? They don't do that. They didn't do that. And it was "they" that made the decision to pull, not Silverstein.

Release your bias and look at the facts.

PS: Why, if 9/11 was meant to get us into Iraq, didn't Bush and Cheney make sure some fricking Iraqis were among the hijackers???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wildbilln864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 07:41 PM
Response to Reply #37
74. bullshit!
You know "pull it" means pull the building down with cables usually but sometimes with explosives.

video link

and...
link
"PS: Why, if 9/11 was meant to get us into Iraq, didn't Bush and Cheney make sure some fricking Iraqis were among the hijackers???"
Because their guy UBL recruited who ever he could find dumb enough to follow him and he wasn't allowed in Iraq so he got Saudi Arabians and Bush/Cheney 's arrogance made them believe they'd be able to sell the OCT anyway so it didn't matter IMHO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Just-plain-Kathy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-13-09 07:38 AM
Response to Reply #37
82. That's right. It's the fire dept. that would make the call to pull people from...
a burning building. ...But the owner, Silverstein made the call to "pull it".

Re: PS: Why, if 9/11 was meant to get us into Iraq, didn't Bush and Cheney make sure some fricking Iraqis were among the hijackers???

Bush wanted to get rid of one of his business partners Osama bin Forgotten. If Osama was still in the picture, it would have been his family's construction firm that would have profited from rebuilding the Middle East and not Cheney's.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
baldguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-13-09 07:58 AM
Response to Reply #37
84. You're casting doubt on Dr Harrit's word - he has nothing to gain in this.
And dismissing the fact that Lucky Larry made $4 Billion on 9/11.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wildbilln864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #33
60. only when it comes to 9/11!
we don't see you fighting for truth on any other issues here do we. Stolen elections, global warming, illegal war, illegal spying, torture. Those don't seem to rouse your interest. Hmmm....
:think:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
psychopomp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-14-09 11:31 AM
Response to Reply #60
94. I think it is good that we have a single-issue user on DU who commits to countering lame arguments
concerning 9/11.

I know that I certainly couldn't keep up with all of the misconceptions tossed around on this topic. Most of the issues regarding explosives in buildings and WTC7 were have been addressed for years in the 9/11 forum. I also used to have my suspicions about explosions in the towers but after learning how the most 'suspicious' of the collapses occurred I came around. This topic has gone around and around, only because some people have not really spent time doing the research and have only repeated claims that were disproved years ago.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vanbean Donating Member (957 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-14-09 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #32
97. It doesn't mean "fire in the hole" either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tiptoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #24
35. Your interpretation of what's said sounds like bullshit. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 04:28 PM
Response to Reply #35
38. Nuh-uh. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wildbilln864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 07:50 PM
Response to Reply #24
76. the fire fightrs had already abandoned fighting the fire and weren't in the building. nt
:banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 10:14 AM
Response to Reply #8
23. Yes.
http://wtc.nist.gov

You really should read the NIST final report for yourself and not rely on the people who've told you about it.

The fires burned without control. The building had an unrecognized design flaw. There were no explosive devices used to bring down the building.

Let me repeat that. NO explosive devices. They would have shown up on several seismographs scattered around Manhattan on various projects for actual demolitions. They weren't there. Some people on the east side of the building heard a loud bang (one) as the building was falling, but others on the west side, very close to the building, are on tape conducting an interview as the building begins to fall. There is no explosive sound. They don't react to the building falling at all until the final phase of the collapse began. That's when the outside wall finally fell. That's what they finally notice.


This building fell down because it was on fire. That's it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catamount Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 02:12 AM
Response to Reply #5
10. One fell into the other?? That's a new one! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 10:16 AM
Response to Reply #10
25. Debris from 1 hit 7. You should find out what you can about this event
Then you won't make silly statements like that one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Prometheus Bound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-14-09 05:04 AM
Response to Reply #10
91. "One building fell into the other". I couldn't stop laughing at that one too.
Starting to stretch things just a tad.

Not much credibility left with that poster.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rollingrock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 09:33 AM
Response to Reply #5
17. Not according to the official report
"Other than initiating the fires in WTC 7, the damage from the debris from WTC 1 had little effect on initiating the collapse of WTC 7." NCSTAR 1A, p xxxii, NIST final report.

In other words, a modern steel-frame building fell solely due to fire (for the first time in history), according to NIST, which once again inexplicably alters the entire basis of their story. The government changes their story as frequently as one changes their underwear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #17
26. What did I say? "Other than initiating the fires in WTC 7" -- that's what I said.
That's what I've been saying. Yes, the debris fell into the building and started the fires which caused it to collapse.

Tell me something, rollingrock -- how many times before or since in history has supernanothermite been used to bring down a building? Never? So we're dealing with an unprecedented event here.

Science changes its hypothesis on the basis of EVIDENCE. There were many things to explore on how the building fell, but the evidence examined and developed by NIST show conclusively that the fire caused the building to collapse. Meanwhile, your sainted 9/11 scientists are mucking around with paint chips.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tx4obama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 01:57 PM
Response to Reply #26
30. Actually
your comment title up above was:

"One building fell into the other, started fires that couldn't be fought"

-----

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 02:03 PM
Response to Reply #30
31. Yes, one building fell into the other.
Debris from WTC 1 fell into Building 7, starting fires.

You seem to have a gnat in your throat. Do you need a glass of water?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr. Benway Donating Member (14 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #31
68. And fires collapsed a steel-framed skyscraper?
Right fellah. Amazing how something that never happened before or since happened three times on the same day. Do you also believe in the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy? By the way, I have this great bridge in Lower Manhattan I'll let you have for a song.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ASUliberal Donating Member (201 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-13-09 07:17 PM
Response to Reply #68
89. God do I really have to explain this to you???
Do you know what happens to steel at temperature extremes?

When steels is subjected to extremely cold temperatures it becomes brittle like glass and shatters.

When it is subjected to extremely high temperatures (say temperatures equivalent to the burning of jet fuel combined with building material, or tanks of diesel, like the ones in tower 7) it softens and the point at which it loses the ability to maintain form is lowered.

When the planes hit the two towers, they ripped the fire retardant off the frames, the frames were subjected to high temperatures and softened. Eventually they gave way.

Building 7 was directly hit by debris from the two towers. In fact chunks of the tower ribbed out most of the first few floors, exposing the main internal support structure. Many of those support beams were damaged. On top of that, fires burned in building for hours and they were fueled by tanks of diesel used for generators and massive amounts of paper and wood products. Eventually the support beams weakened, just like in the towers, and building 7 fell.

Tada....

Now can we stop this conspiracy BS? I mean honestly folks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bjobotts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 03:04 AM
Response to Reply #5
46. How naive.The only way to not know it was an inside job is to not want to know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bjobotts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 03:05 AM
Response to Reply #46
47. After all the smoke and fire and destructioin "Look, I found a terrorist's passport"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bjobotts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 03:06 AM
Response to Reply #47
48. Just laying on the ground...must have fallen out of the jet.Not even burnt"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bjobotts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 03:07 AM
Response to Reply #48
49. "oh look, all the terrorists plans and list of members just laying ina hotel room. Gee,...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bjobotts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 03:08 AM
Response to Reply #49
50. they must have just forgot to take it with them". Oh look, there's one of the dead terrorists now"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bjobotts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 03:09 AM
Response to Reply #50
51. All of the videos surrounding the pentagon's crashed jet were confiscated and never releashed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bjobotts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 03:10 AM
Response to Reply #51
52. Such a shme all those "Enron" records and CIA records got burned up in 7
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bjobotts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 03:11 AM
Response to Reply #52
53. And the special workmen that shut down the top floors of the WTC 2wks before were for what??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bjobotts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 03:12 AM
Response to Reply #53
54. All those people hearing explosions going off in the basement are just crazy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bjobotts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 03:13 AM
Response to Reply #54
55. and the firemen reporting blasts on several floors aren't very good at their jobs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bjobotts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 03:14 AM
Response to Reply #55
56. And it's only reasonable that Bush & Cheney testify together not under oath
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bjobotts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 03:15 AM
Response to Reply #56
57. Not under oath and with no transcript either.We sure got rid of all the debris to China fast enough
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bjobotts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 03:17 AM
Response to Reply #57
58. And the major investigative agencies were not allowed on the site till it was cleared
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wildbilln864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #58
59. all good points to remember! thanks. nt
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr. Benway Donating Member (14 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 05:06 PM
Response to Reply #58
71. Of course not
When you already know your fellow government employees did it, why waste the money investigating?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
StarryNite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-13-09 12:39 AM
Response to Reply #58
80. Coincidences...
just coincidences.

:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pauldg0 Donating Member (608 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 02:06 AM
Response to Original message
9. Discovery had a show......
Edited on Sat Apr-11-09 02:08 AM by pauldg0
...about the design of the towers. I believe a Detroit architect designed the towers specifically to collapse inward under most scenarios of either terror or natural events...say earthquakes, natural fires.

It would be obvious because a inward collapsing tower would spare many lives outward & away from the building.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hekate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 02:28 AM
Response to Reply #9
11. That differs from Frontline. The architect they interviewed was deeply shaken & didn't understand...
... how in hell the collapse of 3 towers could have happened the way it did. I came away with the impression that this man lies awake at night over it.

At least that's the deep impression that was left with me from watching the program several years ago.

Hekate


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Reform Donating Member (417 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 02:30 AM
Response to Reply #9
12. even if that was the case
that would not explain WTC7's perfect pancake collapse reaching free fall speeds, just from common office fires
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 10:25 AM
Response to Reply #12
27. WTC7's "perfect pancake collapse", wherever you got that phrase from
reached "free fall speeds" for only 2.25 seconds of its ~18 second collapse. Before NIST was even aware of this short period, their modeling provided an explanation for it. That was a period when the model called for about eight floors to have completely buckled, providing zero support for the floors above them. Once the remainder of the building fell through that area, it experienced a significant loss of acceleration rate.

It is how the collapse propagated through 7's unique design that caused a short period of falling with little resistance to the acceleration of gravity. That was already baked into the NIST modeling before the snake oil salesmen at AE911Truth found it. The conspiracy theorists did some actual observing and helped to verify NIST's modeling!

And now they're waving paint chips around and calling it "super-nano-thermite".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 05:03 PM
Response to Reply #27
69. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
baldguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-13-09 08:04 AM
Response to Reply #9
85. They also specifically designed them to be able to survive an airplane strike.
A fully loaded 707 airliner traveling at 650 mph, if I recall correctly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wildbilln864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 11:48 AM
Response to Original message
28. k&r! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 12:01 PM
Response to Original message
29. 9 Scientists Misidentify Paint Chips As "Nano-thermite"


Kaolinite is a common additive to paint, especially if you want your paint to be red.

On the left, you see microphotographs taken by the 9 scientists of their chips. On the right, you see a microphotograph of Kaolinite.

They are obviously the same substance.

Kaolinite has aluminium in it, as well as silicon and oxygen.

For more on this subject, proving this substance to be kaolinite (and therefore paint), go here:

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4607894&postcoun...

The plate-like structures seen in the photo-micrographs, of both "thermite chip" samples, share not only the same crystalline morphology and grouping, but also the same EDS signature.

This means that there is very little doubt remaining as to what these platelets are. In light of this evidence it is safe to say that these platelets consist of Kaolinite, which does not contain any "elemental aluminium". The SEM examination in Jones' paper does not show any other particle type (other than the rhomboidal Fe2O3) and no other data in the EDS spectra for samples a-d indicate its presence.

Therefore these samples CANNOT be thermite.


If Herrit et al. had spent $40 on a different test (XRD), one that would have told them the compounds present in their chips instead of just the elements, they would not have embarrassed themselves by announcing paint chips to be thermite.

There are many reasons to hate Bush, and I share them with you. Blowing up the WTC buildings is not one of them. If you seek the truth, you will recognize these people for what they are and shun them. They are not friends of the truth. They are snake oil salesmen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tiptoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #29
36. "...obviously...same substance." Layered-chips, both sides; spiked-granules only on left--obviously.
Edited on Sat Apr-11-09 04:30 PM by tiptoe
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 04:30 PM
Response to Reply #36
39. Two sides.


Look at the picture on the left. You see the paint peeling away and the black layer adhering to it in places.

Would you like to answer the question? Which source did that top chip come from? Is it Jones or is it NIST?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tiptoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 04:37 PM
Response to Reply #39
40. Now, you seem to obfuscate with a set of pics different from that in your post #29--obviously. nt
Edited on Sat Apr-11-09 04:46 PM by tiptoe
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 06:01 PM
Response to Reply #40
41. Because they illustrate different points. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tiptoe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 06:59 PM
Response to Reply #41
42. Again, BS. "Kaolinite is a...layered silicate mineral," #29=particulates & layered chips--obviously
Edited on Sat Apr-11-09 07:24 PM by tiptoe
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 07:55 PM
Response to Reply #42
44. Kaolinite is an additive to paint
Of course the paint is going to have more things than just the layered chips. Your objection is unreasonable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr. Benway Donating Member (14 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 04:57 PM
Response to Reply #44
67. What does Kaolin have to do with...
free aluminum? Do you not know the difference between an atom and a molecule? I didn't think so. Go sit in the corner and shut up until you learn something about basic chemistry. You are pathetic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dbmk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-14-09 06:13 AM
Response to Reply #44
93. So is yours Bolo.
You are expecting reason where none can reasonably be found. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #40
70. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Dr. Benway Donating Member (14 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 04:37 PM
Response to Reply #29
62. Randi Nonsense
This stuff from the Randi website is pure crap. Paint does not contain elemental aluminum. Kaolinite does not contain elemental aluminum. No one in their right mind would put elemental aluminum into paint. Kaolin is added to paint not to make it red--the iron oxide does that--you add it as a fire retardant. Do you seriously think aluminum powder would be added to paint as a fire retardant?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wildbilln864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 07:57 PM
Response to Reply #62
77. Thanks...
for the educational posts! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wildbilln864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 11:33 PM
Response to Original message
78. A related interview is here...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
baldguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-13-09 08:09 AM
Response to Reply #78
86. Question: Why is this stuff all over the international media?
And not even a peep about it on our own?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wildbilln864 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-13-09 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #86
87. I'd guess "Operation Mockingbird" is the reason! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dbmk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-14-09 06:11 AM
Response to Reply #86
92. Its not "all over the international media" n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lovuian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-12-09 11:55 PM
Response to Original message
79. WTC building 7 collapse was never
addressed in the 911 commission

the thermite confirms
a coordinated effort to collapse the buildings by our own government
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lovuian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-14-09 03:12 PM
Response to Reply #79
95. And wonder why WTC Building 7 had to be destroyed
It was the primary goal
it had to be taken down it contained the documents

the World knows that American government was taken over by a cabal that day
the Pentagon was attacked and taken over
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jersey Ginny Donating Member (549 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-13-09 04:15 PM
Response to Original message
88. Two thoughts 1-Bullshit 2-I really hate seeing that footage n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lonestarnot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-13-09 11:52 PM
Response to Reply #88
90. And all the criminals happily depend upon people like you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
soulcore Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-14-09 03:26 PM
Response to Original message
96. C'mon people, seriously!
Wake up! Do you really still believe the 'official' conspiracy theory of 19 Saudi hijackers? Even when some of them are still alive?

You want some proof that the beams were thermite'd, here...



Cuz you know, jet planes make metal slag and 45 degree angle cuts. :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Broken_Hero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-14-09 08:49 PM
Response to Original message
98. Locking
This is 9/11 material, and should be posted in the 9/11 Topic Forum, feel free to repost in that forum.

Thanks,
petersond
DU Moderator
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Aug 21st 2014, 12:35 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Political Videos Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC