18 Jan 2011, 12:42 pm
18 Jan 2011, 4:05 pm
skafather84 wrote:
An article published by The Open Chemical Physics Journal in 2009 details that a team of scientists lead by a Danish University of Copenhagen researcher have found traces of what appears to be unreacted and partially reacted super-thermite, or nano-thermite, in four different samples of the World Trade Center dust collected by eyewitnesses. The unique compound shows immense reactivity to heat and ejects the same iron-rich spheroids observed in the ignition of commercial thermite.
An English-subtitled Danish television interview with the lead researcher, Niels Harrit, who believes that the discovery of this thermite compound implies foul play, is shown below, followed by an abstract from the research paper.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_tf25lx_3o&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]
Abstract: We have discovered distinctive red/gray chips in all the samples we have studied of the dust produced by the destruction of the World Trade Center. Examination of four of these samples, collected from separate sites, is reported in this paper. These red/gray chips show marked similarities in all four samples. One sample was collected by a Manhattan resident about ten minutes after the collapse of the second WTC Tower, two the next day, and a fourth about a week later.
The properties of these chips were analyzed using optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy (XEDS), and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC). The red material contains grains approximately 100 nm across which are largely iron oxide, while aluminum is contained in tiny plate-like structures. Separation of components using methyl ethyl ketone demonstrated that elemental aluminum is present. The iron oxide and aluminum are intimately mixed in the red material. When ignited in a DSC device the chips exhibit large but narrow exotherms occurring at approximately 430 ˚C, far below the normal ignition temperature for conventional thermite. Numerous iron-rich spheres are clearly observed in the residue following the ignition of these peculiar red/gray chips. The red portion of these chips is found to be an unreacted thermitic material and highly energetic.
An English-subtitled Danish television interview with the lead researcher, Niels Harrit, who believes that the discovery of this thermite compound implies foul play, is shown below, followed by an abstract from the research paper.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_tf25lx_3o&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]
Abstract: We have discovered distinctive red/gray chips in all the samples we have studied of the dust produced by the destruction of the World Trade Center. Examination of four of these samples, collected from separate sites, is reported in this paper. These red/gray chips show marked similarities in all four samples. One sample was collected by a Manhattan resident about ten minutes after the collapse of the second WTC Tower, two the next day, and a fourth about a week later.
The properties of these chips were analyzed using optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy (XEDS), and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC). The red material contains grains approximately 100 nm across which are largely iron oxide, while aluminum is contained in tiny plate-like structures. Separation of components using methyl ethyl ketone demonstrated that elemental aluminum is present. The iron oxide and aluminum are intimately mixed in the red material. When ignited in a DSC device the chips exhibit large but narrow exotherms occurring at approximately 430 ˚C, far below the normal ignition temperature for conventional thermite. Numerous iron-rich spheres are clearly observed in the residue following the ignition of these peculiar red/gray chips. The red portion of these chips is found to be an unreacted thermitic material and highly energetic.
Thanks, but we where allready aware of this for a year or two, besides we have an expert here on the forum who has allready debunked this forensic proof that thermite was used, apparently these forensic experts are liars according to MCalavera when I brought this up on the conspiracy thread, and with hard evidence like that from MCalavera Ive given up all these silly conspiarcy theories now.
I really dont know how I could have been so gullible, lets all thank MCalavera for giving us the facts!
18 Jan 2011, 6:21 pm
18 Jan 2011, 6:27 pm
18 Jan 2011, 6:39 pm
18 Jan 2011, 9:35 pm
Inuyasha wrote:
sarcasm: Sure whatever I'm sure the planes were piloted by George W. Bush's clones into the World Trade center too.
Seriously, I've seen more believable conspiracy theories in X-Files, and I didn't even care for the show...
Seriously, I've seen more believable conspiracy theories in X-Files, and I didn't even care for the show...
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=384CCzUKHtA[/youtube]
Apparently, one of the believable conspiracy theories from the X-Files guys includes crashing a remotely controlled jet into the world trade center. The show aired in March 2001.
19 Jan 2011, 1:21 am
Nambo wrote:
Thanks, but we where allready aware of this for a year or two, besides we have an expert here on the forum who has allready debunked this forensic proof that thermite was used, apparently these forensic experts are liars according to MCalavera when I brought this up on the conspiracy thread, and with hard evidence like that from MCalavera Ive given up all these silly conspiarcy theories now.
I really dont know how I could have been so gullible, lets all thank MCalavera for giving us the facts!
I really dont know how I could have been so gullible, lets all thank MCalavera for giving us the facts!
What makes you so certain these experts are wrong and MCalavera is right? To me, it has always seemed physically impossible that the towers fell because of the planes crashing into them. This is especially true for building 7, where there weren't even any planes. To me, this so-called debunking you mention seems a silly attempt to ignore the actual evidence and hold on to a theory that simply can't be defended rationally. Nevertheless, feel free to repost this so-called evidence in this thread
19 Jan 2011, 3:25 pm
Salonfilosoof wrote:
Nambo wrote:
Thanks, but we where allready aware of this for a year or two, besides we have an expert here on the forum who has allready debunked this forensic proof that thermite was used, apparently these forensic experts are liars according to MCalavera when I brought this up on the conspiracy thread, and with hard evidence like that from MCalavera Ive given up all these silly conspiarcy theories now.
I really dont know how I could have been so gullible, lets all thank MCalavera for giving us the facts!
I really dont know how I could have been so gullible, lets all thank MCalavera for giving us the facts!
What makes you so certain these experts are wrong and MCalavera is right? To me, it has always seemed physically impossible that the towers fell because of the planes crashing into them. This is especially true for building 7, where there weren't even any planes. To me, this so-called debunking you mention seems a silly attempt to ignore the actual evidence and hold on to a theory that simply can't be defended rationally. Nevertheless, feel free to repost this so-called evidence in this thread
Heres MCalaveras "so-called evidence" (I just copyed and pasted, so the first line is a quote from my earlier post, and the second line is Mcalaveras response.)
Quote:
Note the physisist mentions the post event forensic evidence that thermite was used.
I could care less what that liar says.
20 Jan 2011, 4:44 am
Out of context.
But then again, I don't expect you and other conspiracy theorists to be honest. 
20 Jan 2011, 5:46 am
MCalavera wrote:
Out of context.
But then again, I don't expect you and other conspiracy theorists to be honest.
But then again, I don't expect you and other conspiracy theorists to be honest.
Look who's talking
20 Jan 2011, 3:33 pm
MCalavera wrote:
Out of context.
But then again, I don't expect you and other conspiracy theorists to be honest.
But then again, I don't expect you and other conspiracy theorists to be honest.
You will have to explain how its out of context?
The first line was me mentioning a physicist who found evidence of thermite which is what the original poster brought up on this thread, and the next line was your line i which you said he was a liar.
How is that out of context?,
Your a fine one to make such an accusation by the way, you who keep re-posting the youtube video I posted to show two of your witnesses who atually saw the plane flying in a totally differant place from where the government said it was flying, either the governmnet is lying about its flight plan, or the two Police witnesses who say they saw it flying elsewhere are lying, yet you keep posting it out of the context for which I posted it!
But then again, I dont expect you and other anti-semetic (anti-Arabs) Zionist conspiracy theorists to be honest.
21 Jan 2011, 6:18 pm
Quote:
Look who's talking
I don't recall ever resorting to dishonest tactics to support my arguments. And if I did, it wasn't intentional.
But, anyhow, please elaborate on what you said.
If I was dishonest in any way, by all means point it out.
21 Jan 2011, 6:24 pm
21 Jan 2011, 10:19 pm
Nambo wrote:
Thanks, but we where allready aware of this for a year or two, besides we have an expert here on the forum who has allready debunked this forensic proof that thermite was used, apparently these forensic experts are liars according to MCalavera when I brought this up on the conspiracy thread, and with hard evidence like that from MCalavera Ive given up all these silly conspiarcy theories now.
I really dont know how I could have been so gullible, lets all thank MCalavera for giving us the facts!
I really dont know how I could have been so gullible, lets all thank MCalavera for giving us the facts!
pmsl
_________________
<Insert meaningful signature here>
21 Jan 2011, 10:54 pm
MCalavera wrote:
Weren't you arguing that it wasn't a plane that hit the Pentagon. Those two witnesses showed how wrong you were. So what do you mean by "out of context"?
Two witnesses. Wow.
Strange how NORAD never intercepted these flights and another witness, a man named Norman Mineta heard somebody saying to the Vice president at the time "the plane is X amount of miles out. Do the orders still stand" "of course they do, have you heard anything to the contrary?"
Orders of what? Orders to do nothing about a "plane" on it's way to the Pentagon?
Perhaps he is BS'ing but perhaps your two witnesses could be as well.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=em_XyTeNA1g[/youtube]
Now, what physical evidence is there of a plane hitting the building? Any wreckage from the plane itself or a hole in the building proportional to and speed of a plane crashing into it? Why so many precautions to confiscate videos and hide evidence from an honest inquiry?
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHFjf6fwnj4[/youtube]
If this damage has been done, where is the rest of the plane?
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFz7gLz7CVk&feature=related[/youtube]
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=paWiZ2Y8fRg&feature=related[/youtube]
If all of this is BS and it is all a ridiculous conspiracy, why is it that the government is unwilling to cooperate with people so that a new investigation, so that we can decide what witnesses and evidence are real and what ones are not?
_________________
<Insert meaningful signature here>
22 Jan 2011, 9:26 am
