Southnow bro, the source I gave is a BYU Physics Prof who found prove of the use of thermate.
Are you a professor with a very good name in his profession who did numerous tests on the evidence?
Guess not, but professor Jones IS and did those tests.
Southnow, I don't blaim you for your desparate denial of the facts, most people fear the consequenses of this so much that they rather stick their heads in the sand. I regarded you as someone who doesn't do that but you make me doubt about that now.
The article that you showed is just another one of those stupid reactions of people who want to make jokes about it to distract from what really happened, it's not only lame but doesn't work anymore, this is TOO SERIOUS to make rediculous jokes about bro, people died.
I'm just raggin' on you about linking to that site as one source.
Dude, I don't deny facts, but I don't hunt facts to validate the conclusion that I want. That's what gets people believing whatever they hear. I'm going to research the whole thermate thing a bit. I'll be back.
__________________
He that lives upon hope will die fasting. ~ Benjamin Franklin
The residue came from a memorial being made from WTC scrap. Thermate and thermite are frequently and routinely used in welding rods. This could be welding residue. This could be residue for welding rods themselves that were left in the towers for construction or repairs. More than likely it is residue from welding and cutting done during the clean-up.
Most of the components of thermite and thermate (sulfur, iron and aluminum) would have been found in abundance in the WTC rubble pile.
It’s easy to make thermite. It could have actually formed in the high temperature fire in the building. The fire caused first by burning jet fuel and then possibly high pressure induced heat.
Red iron (III) oxide (Fe2O3), this is common rust folks, which I’m sure was present in the buildings, can be used to make thermite. Aluminium is used as a reactive material. These could be fused together in the heat found in the WTC fires. Many other metals beside aluminum can also be used to make thermite.
Again, it is pretty easy to figure out of all the crap burned in those building that there could be aluminum and rust and that the byproduct after burning is the same byproduct of thermite…because that is exactly what it would be.
Jones has yet to put his claim about thermate in writing which make one wonder if he is sure enough of this claim to publish. What Jones found was the end products of a thermate reaction.
There is no independent confirmation of anything Jones has claimed. No Engineers, no chemists, no other professors.
What he is saying comes nowhere close to a valid investigation.
__________________
Great CD/DVD Sleeves, Mailers, Inserts, Labels, and More - Buskerdoo. We also carry Shipping Labels.
Buskerdoo, as a chemist myself I have to say that I hold more credibility to Proffessor Jones explaination than yours. Thermate can NOT be made by coincidence in the circomsstances you describe.
Nice try but again, some people will do anything to find reasons to deny the facts, because the truth is too disturbing for them, and I count you as one of them, looking at your comments.
What I see all the time is that respectable scientists are being discredited by amatuers with no sufficient knowledge on the fields of those experts, Prof. Jones is not the only one who comes out with information, many scientists with good reputations in their fields did and all I see is people sticking their heads in the sand and desperately looking for reasons not to take the facts for granted.
What's so hard to exept that there is something really fishy about the whole thing?
Just have a close look at the circomstances of WTC7 and ask yourself WHY this building is "not talked about" by every single official, there are too many circomstancial evidences to make it valid to deny that there is something really wrong in the picture.
I don't think there is anything fishy about it. The conspiracy theories, on the other hand, seem extremely far fetched.
...for those who live in denial John, if they were they would not be suported by so many scientists not only in the US but in the whole world. The technical University (TNO) in my country has come to the same conclusion.
It's not just one thing that is fishy, there are too many things and they all add up.
Why is it that so many scientists with damn good reputations all say the same thing? And why is it that the only ones who deny the facts are people with no sufficient background, rather than not agreeing with the idea?
There are numerous scientists quoted in numerous posts in this tread John, did you ever take the effort to really follow some of the links? Did you see that interview with professor Jones which is one of those you say that you are not aware off?
just the other day I was viewing a video news report on a Dutch news agency's website which documented a lecture at a Dutch technical university in which was shown that the speed of the buildings coming down could have impossibly be caused by the building collapsing without 'help'.
Buildings only collapse in 'freefall' speed when there is no recistance from the layers below whatsoever and they also showed with video and photos, and comparison with numerous other buildings that has come down in the world that the only possibel explaination is that they are being detonated. They also mentioned the fact that the 9/11 report is a blatant cover up and leaves out the most important questions, and even gives false information.
This 9/11 incident has been the cause and excuse for the USA to ask help from their allies all over the world, this help includes money but also troops and some allies really want to know why their citizens are taking the risk for dying for the USA's wars and because of the numerous lies that has come out already by the USA they are investigating why they send their children to fight wars for the USA and if they are not deceived somehow.
Maybe the US government doesn't care much about the lives of their citizens and lies about reasons to send them to foreign nations to fight, but other nations sure do care and want to turn every rock to find the truth.
You can try and discredit people on this thread for their opinions all you want. I'm sure you think we should all bow down to you, your theories, and your sources. But, you have shown us nothing but crazy ideas with remote, biased, and un-backed sources.
Your sources are not that great or credible. I've read them. I've also read just as many sources that discredit your sources. The media in our country, and many others, would do anything they could to publish something on this to go along with your theories. As they haven't because, unlike bloggers et al, they have to maintain a reputation, that should tell people that these "theories" are full of crap.
As for your credentials and poo pooing what I had to say: I have an advanced degree in engineering and do have an idea of what I’m talking about. I did a fair amount of research on the subject from credible sources. I will be the first to say that my theory of thermite being created in the reaction of the fire is a little far fetched, but it is more plausible and provable that anything you’ve presented. I’m not going into all the details here that will bore people to death. The fact is that you know, or should know, there is a percentage chance it could happen. The correct raw materials and heat were present.
Later last night I did follow-up by talking to a chemist. Not a friend of mine. Bottom line here folks:
There is no way in hell you can take the residue from a thermite reaction and say that it was caused by thermite. There would be too many common similar residual materials from other reactions in the fire.
Ferre, as some sort of chemist you should have known or do know this. What disappoints me is that people like the BYU professor and you will say and do anything to promote your ideas. It's wrong and it misleads people that don't know better and don't check out the facts.
BTW. Your comment to John.
“Buildings only collapse in 'freefall' speed when there is no recistance from the layers below whatsoever and they also showed with video and photos, and comparison with numerous other buildings that has come down in the world that the only possibel explaination is that they are being detonated. They also mentioned the fact that the 9/11 report is a blatant cover up and leaves out the most important questions, and even gives false information.”
Has been shown to be crap too. People do some quick research and you’ll see many many true experts in demolition, etc say this is crap.
__________________
Great CD/DVD Sleeves, Mailers, Inserts, Labels, and More - Buskerdoo. We also carry Shipping Labels.
Has been shown to be crap too. People do some quick research and you’ll see many many true experts in demolition, etc say this is crap.
Not true. It is impossible for a building to collapse while the top layers hit the lower layers without recistance from the lower layers.
Recistance WILL slow it down. this is simple gravity law and anyone who denies this is, as you say, full of crap.
AND... Show me how building 7 came down. NEVER in history did a building constructed like this building collapse that had only minor fire damage on one end. How do you, with all your knowledge, explain the building to come down? Remember that even the US government and the mainstream press are desperately silent about that building.
What is the melting point of steel? This article explains exactly why the official story is BS. Anyone with a technical background will understand it very clearly.
