New Thermite?

[flintlock]

Re: New Thermite?

Who are THEY Lukester? Who exactly are these people who found the thermite residue? Do they work for the government? If not, how did they gain access to the site and was their work "approved".

[tombat1913]

Re: New Thermite?

no, no, no... i won't... won't get sucked in... no... ugh!

ok, ok! i'll bite!

Wrong! I won't get sucked in. Go do your own objective independent research.

[tombat1913]

Re: New Thermite?

Carl Sagan is attributed with saying that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. In this case, just documented provable evidence would probably do.

Nice quote, Carl Sagan is one of my heroes.

[Guest]

Re: New Thermite?

Flintlock - references are all in the opening thread. Look entirely respectable (peer reviewed journal?), if one can peer out that far, without the red fog induced haze of overly partisan heated arguments. I think Don's maybe jumped out of a window by now so is unavailable for further comment. :rolleyes:

http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthr...89354#poststop

Who are THEY Lukester? Who exactly are these people who found the thermite residue? Do they work for the government? If not, how did they gain access to the site and was their work "approved".

Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe
pp.7-31 (25)

Authors: Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley, Bradley R. Larsen

The Open Chemical Physics Journal
Volume 2

ISSN: 1874-4125

doi: 10.2174/1874412500902010007
Complete Article
http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCPJ/2009/00000002/00000001/7TOCPJ.SGM

[Diarmuid]

Re: New Thermite?

When I read that, I almost immediately thought of the monumental amount of thermite that would need to be in there to leave unburned residues that well scattered in time and place. Then, my next thought was whether there was a well documented chain of custody for the samples. IANAL but if there was then such a paper trail would help defend against assertions of tampering with the samples. Otherwise, little can be said regarding the validity of the results.

One would hope with the reported concentrations that a small sample of some properly handled evidence should reveal similar results and if so there is definitely a puzzle to be investigated. Otherwise the alternate explanation of evidence contamination cannot be rejected and it will remain a matter of dispute forever. Carl Sagan is attributed with saying that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. In this case, just documented provable evidence would probably do.

Not necessarily

some legal speak: doctrine of objective improbability

"that an unusual and abnormal element might perhaps be present in one instance, but other similar instances occur with similar results the less likely is the abnormal element to be the true explanation of them"


if one can show convincing collaborating evidence for "dubious" forensic evidence it may well be admissible in a court of law

it is my belief the forensic study here would have no value standing on its own as per metalmans comments but it may well have value as collobrating evidence to other convincing circumstanial evidence if such evidence exists and if the above study is peer validated.

[flintlock]

Re: New Thermite?

I read those, but they don't mean anything to me. Thought maybe someone else knows if they are legit or not. I kind of doubt it.

[cjppjc]

Re: New Thermite?

What I've never understood regarding "planned demolitions" is the idea that the towers would have to be taken down. What, flying a jet into the Trade Towers wasn't enough to get people riled up?

[flintlock]

Re: New Thermite?

What I've never understood regarding "planned demolitions" is the idea that the towers would have to be taken down. What, flying a jet into the Trade Towers wasn't enough to get people riled up?

Exactly my thoughts also.

[maTTz]

Re: New Thermite?

To see for yourself what thermite looks like and how it burns a hole through thick steel plate, see this video:

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/234701...make_thermite/

If that building had thermite in it, either stored on the plane or stored in the building before the event, then you will realise that the thermite will burn it's way through anything - almost tunneling to the centre of the earth (exaggeration but you get the idea).

Also, I recall some news reporters and firemen talking of "secondary blasts" at the time, these were people on the ground. I believe that the official response was "gas pipes in the building, for chef's cooking kitchens etc" or something to that effect.

As an engineer and sceptic, I don't believe that jet fuel at the top of a building, can cause structural members all the way down the building to collapse. Maybe at the top at best.
Anybody that has done welding will know that you need to pre-heat the metal before you can get some melting. I doubt that jet fuel in that location could pre-heat the entire thermal mass up to such a large temperature, and yet you couldn't even see excessive fire on the videos taken from the scene.

[maTTz]

Re: New Thermite?

2 buildings had jets fly into them.
3 fell down.

The third fell in sympathy?

[flintlock]

Re: New Thermite?

Well perhaps those two 110 story building collapsing right next door had something to do with it. Where do you think all that debris went, straight into the basement all nice and tidy?

This conspiracy stuff doesn't belong on Itulip imo. Hard to expect friends I've referred to this site to take it seriously when this kind of stuff pops up. Move to rants or something please.

[don]

Re: New Thermite?

Nice to see a few posts of interest. Personally I have no fixed opinion about 9/11, only many, many questions. You would have to be brain dead not to reach an initial conclusion you had witnessed a controlled demolition, one of considerable skill and experience. Two of the world's tallest buildings and a sizable third collapse at free fall speed onto their footprints. To me, the burden of proof is on explaining how that could have happened without three controlled demolitions.

As far as the relevancy of these discussions, if 9/11 was an inside job, that most certainly affects the financial world in which we hope to both survive and prosper.

[cjppjc]

Re: New Thermite?

[quote=don;89523]You would have to be brain dead not to reach an initial conclusion you had witnessed a controlled demolition, one of considerable skill and experience. Two of the world's tallest buildings and a sizable third collapse at free fall speed onto their footprints. To me, the burden of proof is on explaining how that could have happened without three controlled demolitions.
quote]


Ok. Even though the burden of proof should not be as you stated. Here are some wacky sources. Scientific America

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=...in-towers-fell


PBS: Nova


http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/

[FRED]

Re: New Thermite?

Horrifically bad waste of iTulip brain power.