I fully appreciate your 'PASSION' about this subject and for your ability to handle so much piled on criticism about it as well; and yet don't you think that this is what you are up against>>>


I've read everything you've placed out here/all the links and all of your comments and I'll accept quite a bit about Bldg #7 {still a mystery} and not all of what has been stated about both WTC towers: loud explosions within a echo chamber {stairwell/foyer] could have been the building slowly popping rivets and starting to heave inward...so that's a plausible OPINION - Event to me.

On the flip side of all this and the back data for what our own government knew - shrugged off - should have followed through with; well that makes a lot of Americans very queasy and highly uneasy! That we sent 4000+ humans over to be killed for something that wasn't quite what it was presented to all of us {sold us a bile of goods} and to diminish those honorable military by poking & piling the layers of 'WHAT IF' --- well it might still be to raw and emotional for the TRUTH METER to be shown the light of day.

My feelings about this are just a horrendous as those ghastly events about the 'BOMB TESTING' out on the desert - when our government shipped numerous convoy's of military out there to become guinea pigs for that RADIATION ---

My government has done some really horrid things to our citizens and the lack of follow up for the 'SIGNS - CIA Information - Terrorist testing our commercial airports'...well you know all about all that; HELL YES, it's really gut wrenching!
But you won't change peoples minds if & when they'll believe all the BS lies that just keep circling our Internet --- much like the regurgitated BS about our President --- there's no stopping STUPID...it's just keeps spreading!

you people crack me up...it wasn't an inside job,, don't believe everything you read on the internet

Thermite remains a myth:

https://youtu.be/aGGJ4xzna8o

you tellem Hotrod.

Dr. Niels Harrit, Professor of Chemistry at Copenhagen University in Denmark, expert in Nano-chemistry, lead author of the peer-reviewed paper concluding Nano-thermitic explosives in WTC dust, says that he is doing this for his "6 grandchildren". (source)

Frequently asked why he researches the September 11th attack, Dr. Harrit says, "First, I am opposed to crime, and second, when my 6 grandchildren ask me, 'Grandfather, which side were you on?', I will be able to answer them; I was on your side." Dr. Niels Harrit is lead author of a groundbreaking peer-reviewed paper by an international scientific team of nine scientists. The scientists discovered hard physical evidence of Nano-thermitic explosives in numerous samples of dust from the World Trade Center catastrophe on 9/11. Dr. Harrit says that these explosives are "extremely advanced" and that Journalists should investigate who was in charge of WTC security and why they permitted explosives to be placed in the three towers. "Our work should lead to demands for a proper criminal investigation of the 9/11 terrorist attack."

Conclusion of paper: "Based on these observations, we conclude that the red layer of the red/gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material."

Previous to this paper, scientists published "Smoking Gun" evidence of Thermitic residue found in the rubble of 9/11. Incriminating iron-rich microspheres with a chemical "fingerprint" of Thermitic reactions had been discovered in WTC debris and tested as positive by multiple scientific laboratories, of which, government studies corroborate evidence consistent with Thermitic reactions in WTC debris. This new forensic evidence represents the "Loaded Gun" itself. All test samples have a well-documented "chain-of-custody" record, which will be important in pursuing a successful Federal Prosecution. It is significant to note that sample (b) was documented as being collected ten minutes after the destruction of the second tower's (North Tower) demolition.

"There is no possible way those buildings could have collapsed the way they did from fire." --Tim Sullivan, Controlled Demolition, Inc.

James Quintiere, PhD, former Chief of NIST's Fire Science Division calls for independent review of 9/11 World Trade Center investigation.

"Man is not born evil. Why then are some of them infected with this plague of malevolence? It's because those who are at their head have the malady and communicate it to the rest of mankind." --Voltaire, considered one of the world’s greatest minds, French literary giant Francois-Marie Arouet, better known as Voltaire


hotrod, at what university are you a professor of chemistry? so we should all believe you, over someone who is a professor of chemistry that says there is hard evidence of thermite being found in the trade centers? sorry, but ill believe the professor.

You didn't watch the video then? If you did you wouldn't need to respond in said fashion, nor would you need to resort to an argument from authority.

1) So, you do know I hope that all thermitic reactions leave traces of elemental aluminium (Metalwing, I would like your professional opinion on this)? Why did Jones, Harritt & Farrer fail to find any?

2) Why could they not verify the source of the dust used in their study? Such an error is poor control methodology.

3) Why could they not get their hypothesis published in a credible journal and had to use the Benthem outlet to gain circulation of their tenuous hypothesis?

4) The editor of the Bentham paper was sacked over the subsequent 'pay for print' scandal.

5) Harritt and Jones have not had their findings peer reviewed unlike the AE911T claim. That is just a lie.

6) The International Skeptics Foundation raised funds for an independent study conducted by Dr. James Millette at MVA Scientific Consultants.

7) Their samples proved NOT be evidence for a thermitic reaction, but simply the iron micro-spheres which were the product of the fires; the elevator braking mechanisms; the traffic outside the WTC etc. Iron-Rich microspheres are common in daily life and may not be the result of some nefarious campaign to illogically destroy 10 buildings and four airliners in order to press public opinion for a campaign in Afghanistan. One must accommodate the logical hypothesis before jumping to an irrational conclusion.

The Millette study is still under debate, but it looks like MVA found paint chips and brake dust instead of the thermitic residue that Jones/Harrit/Farrer claimed they found. Furthermore, the MVA study had a wider variety of authenticated samples for their tests.

At this stage, it's not looking good for Harritt either. A Danish journalist labelled Harritt a crank based upon his beliefs regarding 9/11. Harritt sued and lost.

A court recognises that Harritt is a crank. What more would like?

Excuse me, I forgot to address the above. Millette found the same Red-Grey chips to be merely a layer of rust preventer (red) under a coat of primer (grey).

Logical really.

Think about it for a moment. Painting on a coat of thermite will do very little in order to destroy a long-span open plan building. It would be a nice flash though. Furthermore, Thermite is not an explosive (someone should tell AE911T), it is often used as a cutting agent, but it is not an explosive in the true sense.

Remember, 9/11 truth only chose Thermite because there were no obvious demolition explosions. Then a truther scientist went looking for it and claims he found it painted on? Applied however long ago? How did it survive the fires for over an hour? Hush-A-Boom, Noiseless, Fire-Resistant Explosives. It's getting silly.

The MVA study puts all this stupidity to bed, at last.

I think I down played that a little.

Actually, it would be a HUGE flash that you would see over the horizon. And it would cause everything combustible in the immediate vicinity to ignite. But no, the steel frame would probably survive as Thermite is a flash powder, and the process is all over in a fraction of a second.

This bring into question another point about thermite which is often raised: Thermite could only be responsible for the 'Rivers of Iron and Steel' that were noticed for months later according to some sites.

If Thermite is a flash powder, that means cooling would begin immediately. Thermite therefore, is NOT confirmed by the Molten Rivers reports.

But I'm getting ahead of myself.

No, it was 17.5. Chandler got it wrong. See the following video and note that the collapse sequence begins with the disappearance of the eastern Penthouse.

http://youtu.be/nqbUkThGlCo




No, it is usually one of the first replies on the subject when I relate the real figure, not the fantasy of AE911T. I'm surprised it took this long and I nearly missed your response.

AE911T know that the interior collapsed before the curtain wall exterior-they just 'haven't removed it yet'. ;)

I'd really like to debate the subject of 7WTC with someone who knows the subject. If you're up for it, I'm keen.

Sorry, I'm catching up on the thread, so please excuse my replies being 'all over the place'.

I feel we have to think like a politician here. Sure the administration was reluctant to cooperate with an inquiry. They feared the political ramifications of perhaps being caught with their pants down (which they were). But so were London, Madrid and Bali in the following years.

Can you imagine the political mileage the left would have gained out of such a finding?

I'm sure the Bush administration feared having to defend such claims and prosecute a war in Afghanistan at the same time. Bush had an opportunity to gain political mileage over Clinton for his limp wristed response to the embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanganyika, and he missed it. In 2000, the Cole gave Bush all he needed to eliminate AQ, but he too, waited. Eleven months later AQ escalate their campaign.

Simple really. Neither of these examples were struck by Boeings. In addition, 7WTC collapsed owing to the fires being unfought for seven hours because the collapse of the twins had severed the water supply and the FDNY could not get pressure. You haven't factored in the unique nature of the design of 7WTC either.

One should be careful when making generalisations regarding the nature of fires, for each behaves according to a multitude of interactions that are essentially, chaotic.

Your argument is basically one based on incredulity.

Here is a basic plan of 7WTC:



Note the large open area and the trapezoidal shape of the building itself.

The interior was gutted after seven hours of unfought fires. A single column gave way under the Eastern Penthouse and the interior progressively collapsed from east to west; the curtain wall followed. The Eastern Penthouse contained all the machinery for the lifts and air conditioning; these crashed through the floors starting the interior collapse sequence.



This graph shows the acceleration between the 11 second mark and the seventeen second mark. Note the free-fall that 9/11 truth claim to be the smoking gun occurs at the 12.5 second mark (note the blue line).

The fact that freefall is attained is for 9/11 truth the evidence that explosives were deployed to demolish the building, for as Chandler says, 'freefall can only be reached when all resistance is suddenly removed from beneath certain floors' (9 to be exact IIRC).

However, if you note on the graph, that free fall is actually exceeded at the 12.5 second mark and maintained for 2.25 seconds. This denotes other forces at play here other than the simple removal of floors.

Chandler's hypothesis only works if the collapse sequence is regarded as taking 6 seconds. It didn't, it took 17.5, and as the interior collapsed, it 'pulled' the curtain wall down with such force as to exceed free fall.

Geez guys. If you really want to know the science behind how the 9/11 buildings fell, I posted ALL the science on Mingle2 years ago. I posted all the physics and explained it from scratch because I am an expert in structural engineering and forensics. I am even aware of some of the design flaws in the tower construction which led to the use of light truss construction (which shouldn't have been used in the first place).

The "thermite" theory is nonsense. The sulfur that seem so mysterious is just a common ingredient in sheetrock/drywall which is made of calcium sulfate of which there were TONS.

The steel reaches failure mode at about 1000 degrees Fahrenheit. The fire from the jet fuel burned at about 1,800 degrees. I posted the strength/temperature curves for steel which shows exactly how much strength is lost as the steel heated up. At 1000 degrees the trusses only had half their strength which is about when you would expect them to fail.

Building seven has two vertical truss supports that took the place of the main interior columns. The falling debris set fire to the building adjacent to one of the trusses and (trust me on this one) trusses are not near as fire resistant as typical heavy steel or steel/concrete columns. The ASCE (American Society of Civil Engineers) even did a nice computer study of the way that the vertical truss pulled down the building as it failed. The computer simulation matched EXACTLY the photographic evidence of what actually happened.

In a similar note, the shear connections on the two towers are what was expected to fail in a fire but the actual failure mode was more of a rotation of the shear connections which allowed the columns to bend resulting in column buckling from P-Delta effect. (resultant loads off center from the column centerline which induces bending).

Lots of photos were introduced into conspiracy websites showing melted steel which were actually where the firemen and contractors cut the metal with torches to look for survivors or remove large pieces of the building.

I am not sure why anyone thinks it takes more than the planes to bring the buildings down. All it took was a lot of heat to an already damaged structure hit by a plane. ALL the science and physics backs up failure by this mode.

The real science is just as available on the web as the junk. Why not study how the real world works and prove it to yourself?

Hey! Long time no chat my friend!

This illustrates one of your points.
WTC5:



This simulation illustrates the damage to the columns in the North Tower:

http://youtu.be/cddIgb1nGJ8

Hi Alle! Metalwing did it admirably I thought, and he even showed me where I had made a mistake. LOLOL

Nice post! The animation doesn't go into the physics of what happens after the initial damage was done to the structure but it shows the curvature of some of the trusses which, with the addition of the heat, pulled the columns into a curve also. Once the gravity loads of the building no longer have a straight path to compress the steel in the columns, bending is introduced which the columns were never designed to take and, also due to the heat, now exceeded the maximum working stress of the steel.

The ASCE also did detailed photographic studies of the building exterior at the moment of failure which showed subsequent rotation and buckling of the exterior columns in failure mode.

A detailed failure mode analysis uses the actual constructed details of the building's members as opposed to "design" members which may not exactly match standards. Sometimes minor differences in the size and length of welds differ from one truss supplier to another which normally don't matter but can have a significant effect on failure mode.

For one the person claims they said it before. That isn't a "fact". Second it could have been in error announcing the wrong number (or possibly misinformation about Firefighters claiming it will fall and thinking it had fallen) or the more likely scenario is like many New Programs they are using a Green Screen and have a shot from before the tower fell and it was reported after the fact.

"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." --Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

"In the size of the lie there is always contained a certain factor of credibility, since the great mass of people will more easily fall victims to a great lie than to a small one." --Adolph Hitler

"Strange times are these in which we live when old and young are taught in falsehoods school. And the one man that dares to tell the truth is called at once a lunatic and fool." --Plato

"The individual is handicapped by coming face-to-face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists." --J. Edgar Hoover

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltP2t9nq9fI

Oh...come on Tomato...posting 'quotes' from other humans has zero bearing on what Metalwing or Hotroddeluxe have stated!

Reading their post and looking at they're data explains loads of my doubt...