This forum is used with the NationStates web-game designed and run by Max Barry. While not officially affiliated, this serves as the regional forum for the regions: Middle East, African Continent, American Continent, Asian Continent, and European Continent.
You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and can "read only".
We most certainlt, as citizens, have the right to move from one state to another, unless doing so will violate a specific court order preventing that movement. The mode of trvel may be restricted, but if I wish to walk from Michigan to Ohio, I am violatng no law, and the right to do it is mine (10th amendment, at least).
The WTC debate. For example, Scy cited Silverstein in post 52. I can't remember the name of that fallacy right now, but it has something to do with "so-and-so said this, so it must be true". Q had a few fallacies out there as well, though I've noticed more on Scy's part.
(1) As Menhad said, trace amounts of thermite are not evidence of thermite being used to destroy the towers. (2) The editor of Open Chemical Journal resigned from her post in response to the publishing of Jones' paper, which calls into question whether or not it was properly peer-reviewed. (3) Very few mainstream scientists would approve of a 9/11 truth paper (whether or not that is right is not the concern), which suggests that it is unlikely that Jones' paper went through a comprehensive peer review. (4) Bentham Open has in at least one other case published a hoax paper. Admittedly, Bentham runs 200 journals, but still.
It does not cause an explosion; it burns. It does not cut steel columns cleanly; it bores holes in them. It is not a material used in demolitions.
I do not deny that there were explosions in the WTC. This is due to the fact that the WTC, like most office buildings, had transformers and other electrical equipment. There was even an earlier incident of electrical fire in the WTC:
That's your only explanation? He was allegedly a son calling his MOTHER! I don't care how stressed he was, people just don't announce their last name to the person who raised them. I think they know what their kid's last name is.
And a trained CIA agent, who is on the most important mission of his life, is more likely to fuck up?
Quote:
Passengers are passengers, but terrorists still have to be proven. About half of the accused terrorists are still alive.
Let’s say Alex Jones blows up a building with himself inside. Is the fact that there is another Alex Jones somewhere in the English speaking world evidence that Alex Jones is still alive?
Half the hijackers aren’t still alive. People with the hijackers’ names are still alive.
Quote:
Also, Flight 93 was shot down, allowing a better chance to float out of the diving wreck.
Flight 93 was quite possibly shot down; that is not evidence that the government blew up the WTC.
Quote:
You drove this thread off topic in one post just to challenge my knowledge on 9/11, and that's not antagonistic?
Touche.
In regards to your claims about Turner Corporation, from the website you linked:
Quote:
In 1997 Turner Construction also constructed the new headquarters for the Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA). The Indian Head Naval Surface Warfare Center, a laboratory managed by NAVSEA was described during the 1990s as the "National Center for Energetics", the "Pentagon's jargon to broadly describe explosive materials, propellants and pyrotechnics" and as the "only reliable source of aluminum nanopowders in the United States". http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-574412.html
The article quoted cuts off abruptly, requiring a paid subscription. The parts before that make no mention of Turner.
Further, aluminum nanopowder is not the same thing as thermite.
Quote:
12 employees of Turner Construction were located in an office in the third subbasement of Tower 1, the north tower. Turner had been performing renovation work in various parts of the center and had occupied various office spaces. http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-79439506.html
Again, same deal. Assuming good faith on the part of the quote, how is this evidence that Turner Construction was involved in the attack? Why would they voluntarily kill several of its workers for no apparent reason? (and yes, I am aware that Turner currently holds the contract to rebuild the WTC; that in itself is also fucking stupid evidence, because it would require Turner workers to have knowingly been placing thermite on steel columns – which is absurd – or for CIA or NSA or whatever agents to have been doing so, which makes Turner a complete red herring).
How much mass would be required to produce molten iron from thermite equal to the same volume of molten aluminum droplets shown flowing from the south tower window: A mole of Fe weighs 54 g. For every mole of Fe produced by thermite, one mole of Al and 0.5 mole of Fe2O3 is needed. 2Al + Fe2O3 = Al2O3 + 2Fe One mole of Al weighs 27 g. 0.5 mole of Fe2O3 weighs 80 g. Therefore, (27 + 80) g = 107 g of Al and Fe2O3 is needed to produce 54 g of Fe. That means the mass of the reactants to that of Fe produced is a ratio of 107/54 = 2. The mass of thermite reactants (Al, Fe2O3) is twice that of the molten iron produced. Comparing the weight of molten aluminum droplets compared with iron: Iron is 7.9 g/cc. Aluminum is 2.64 g/cc. Fe is denser than Al by a factor of 3. For the same volume of droplets, Fe would have three times the mass as Al. To produce the iron from thermite requires a reactant mass that is a factor of 2 more than the iron produced. Also, Fe is 3 times as dense as Al. So, it would take 2*3 = 6 times as much mass to produce the same volume of molten iron droplets from thermite compared with molten aluminum droplets. Example: Assume 3000 lbs of aluminum fell from the towers. If it had been molten iron produced by thermite, then 6*3000 = 18,000 lbs of thermite reactants would have been required to produce that same volume of falling mass. Suppose 10 tons of molten aluminum fell from the south tower, about 1/8th of that available from the airplane. If it had been molten iron produced from thermite, 60 tons of thermite reactants would have to have been stored in Fuji Bank to produce the same volume spilling out of the south tower. The section of floor would have to hold all of that plus the aircraft. http://www.debunking911.com/thermite.htm
Given the massive amount of thermite that would have been required to bring down the WTC (and it still couldn’t really do that, as it’s not a demolition material), somebody should have noticed the fact that a ludicrous amount was being delivered.
Quote:
Watch some of the footage on YouTube, it's clearly fluid. All of the jet fuel had burned up by then. At that point there was suppose to be only a sissy little office fire with burning paper and desks.
Nobody claimed that: it’s called an electrical fire.
In regards to your so-called whistleblowers: http://www.apfn.net/messageboard/8-10-03/discussion.cgi.64.html Colonel Donn de Grand Pre (assuming this source is even credible to begin with) has not, by this article’s own admission, been involved with government since the Carter administration. He has no special knowledge of a plot.
Mr. Von Buelow is the former Minister of Technology for Germany. He has not been involved in the executive branch of the German government since the 80s and has not been a member of the German parliament since ’94. He has no special knowledge of a plot.
Mr. Michael Meacher is a Labour politician in the UK. When he served in Blair’s government (a state of affairs that ended in ’97), he worked exclusively on internal matters, such as the environment. He has no special knowledge of a plot.
Mr. Ray McGovern has never claimed that the Bush administration participated in a plot; he claimed that they exploited the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks. Further, the fact that Mr. McGovern, as a former high ranking intelligence agent, has not produced actual evidence to show that the Bush administration orchestrated 9/11 seems to suggest there is none.
I acknowledge that the 9/11 commission was flawed.
Richard Groove had evidence of corporate fraud; he has no special knowledge of a plot.
Sibel Edmonds was not in the employ of the FBI before the attack.
William Bergman is not associated with any federal agency. He has no special knowledge of a plot.
Coleen Rowley was a Minneapolis police officer. While her disgust with the FBI’s handling of the investigation may be justified, she has no special knowledge of a plot.
J. Michael Springmann has not been in the employ of the government since ’89 and presents a totally uncontroversial fact: that during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan Osama bin Laden was a CIA asset. He has no special knowledge of a plot.
Robert Wright has never alleged that the government destroyed the WTC; he claimed that if his team had not been starved of funds, they could have found the terrorists plotting 9/11 before 9/11 happened, which is completely at odds with your narrative of a planned demolition. He has no special knowledge of a plot.
If you listen to the full audio and think Larry Silverstein is talking about intentionally blowing up a building, then your hearing needs to be checked.
We most certainlt, as citizens, have the right to move from one state to another, unless doing so will violate a specific court order preventing that movement. The mode of trvel may be restricted, but if I wish to walk from Michigan to Ohio, I am violatng no law, and the right to do it is mine (10th amendment, at least).
While it is true that you are violating no law, you do not have the right, and such a law could be made.
The WTC debate. For example, Scy cited Silverstein in post 52. I can't remember the name of that fallacy right now, but it has something to do with "so-and-so said this, so it must be true".
How is consideration of anecdotal/eyewitness evidence a logical fallacy? Anecdotal/eyewitness evidence is an inescapable part of inductive logic.
A Prince Amoung Men-Shoot First and Ask Questions Later
Posts:
8,837
Group:
Forum Mods
Member
#209
Joined:
January 11, 2006
I don't think that's what Telo meant, TC (I can't remember the name of the fallacy either, and I'm not sure if it has a formal name). Scy is trying to make it appear as if Larry Silverstein saying "pull it" means he was referring to a bomb, which clearly he wasn't, he was referring to the firefighters.
Further, another question: why are you people not out on the streets? If you people believed that the Bush administration had willfully killed three thousand American civilians, then you people should have been in active rebellion, not skulking around on internet forums.
That is a question about the content of the evidence (and I agree with you Silverstein isn't talking about a bomb) but there is no logical fallacy in citing eyewitnesses. What fallacy are you thinking of?
(1) As Menhad said, trace amounts of thermite are not evidence of thermite being used to destroy the towers.
You mean his Hindenburg example? The Hindenburg was a zeppelin filled with hydrogen. Hydrogen burns so hot the flames can often be invisible and if you Google the incident, you'll find that Thermite wasn't completely substantiated in that incident. Hell, Wikipedia states that if it had enough paint to create thermite, it would have been too heavy to fly.
Quote:
(2) The editor of Open Chemical Journal resigned from her post in response to the publishing of Jones' paper, which calls into question whether or not it was properly peer-reviewed.
Actually it can also imply a grudge. This isn't evidence.
Quote:
(3) Very few mainstream scientists would approve of a 9/11 truth paper.
Based on what?
Quote:
(4) Bentham Open has in at least one other case published a hoax paper. Admittedly, Bentham runs 200 journals, but still.
Wow, one whole paper. Horrors upon horrors.
You seem to really be reaching desperately on this one.
It does not cause an explosion; it burns. It does not cut steel columns cleanly; it bores holes in them. It is not a material used in demolitions.
Did I say the bombs were thermite? Thermite was used on the columns and average demolition explosives on everything else.
Quote:
I do not deny that there were explosions in the WTC.
A lot of debunkers do, so pardon my assumption of your views.
Quote:
This is due to the fact that the WTC, like most office buildings, had transformers and other electrical equipment. There was even an earlier incident of electrical fire in the WTC:
Except that WTC1 had survived a previous fire that was quite formidable described as "like fighting a blowtorch", and yet it still stood and didn't collapse into its own footprint.
Look, it's very clear you don't know what a controlled demolition looks like. Here's a comparison on smoking gun Building & with another controlled demolition.
Here's WTC1's antenna falling before everything else. Protip, the antenna was supported by the core column which needed to be destroyed in order for the demolition to succeed. (And more talk about explosions and explosive devices.)
Tell me, why did that camera shake several seconds before the collapse?
Then there's the explosion in WTC1 when plane 2 hits WTC2.
Quote:
Quote:
That's your only explanation? He was allegedly a son calling his MOTHER! I don't care how stressed he was, people just don't announce their last name to the person who raised them. I think they know what their kid's last name is.
And a trained CIA agent, who is on the most important mission of his life, is more likely to fuck up?
It's far more likely.
Quote:
Quote:
Passengers are passengers, but terrorists still have to be proven. About half of the accused terrorists are still alive.
That wasn't much of a retraction, as it effectively amounts to "the FBI (unreliable narrator) said we were wrong and they were just talk about some other guy."
This completely ignores the fact that they recognized their own faces on TV!
Quote:
Let’s say Alex Jones blows up a building with himself inside. Is the fact that there is another Alex Jones somewhere in the English speaking world evidence that Alex Jones is still alive?
Do these Alex Joneses look exactly alike?
Quote:
Half the hijackers aren’t still alive. People with the hijackers’ names are still alive.
Wrong for the above reasons. Didn't you even read it? Hell, it was even admitted by one of the guys in the article that he was at the flight school the FBI said his "terrorist version" was at the same time. How can you miss that??
Also, Flight 93 was shot down, allowing a better chance to float out of the diving wreck.
Flight 93 was quite possibly shot down; that is not evidence that the government blew up the WTC.
It proves they're willing to kill innocent people.
Quote:
In regards to your claims about Turner Corporation, from the website you linked:
Quote:
In 1997 Turner Construction also constructed the new headquarters for the Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA). The Indian Head Naval Surface Warfare Center, a laboratory managed by NAVSEA was described during the 1990s as the "National Center for Energetics", the "Pentagon's jargon to broadly describe explosive materials, propellants and pyrotechnics" and as the "only reliable source of aluminum nanopowders in the United States". http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-574412.html
The article quoted cuts off abruptly, requiring a paid subscription. The parts before that make no mention of Turner.
Further, aluminum nanopowder is not the same thing as thermite.
Quote:
12 employees of Turner Construction were located in an office in the third subbasement of Tower 1, the north tower. Turner had been performing renovation work in various parts of the center and had occupied various office spaces. http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-79439506.html
Again, same deal. Assuming good faith on the part of the quote, how is this evidence that Turner Construction was involved in the attack?
You're too lazy to sign up for a free trial?
Quote:
Naval Surface Warfare Center at Indian Head Mourns Loss of Its Energetic Champion Article from:The Washington Post Article date:February 18, 1999Author:Steve Vogel
Back in the early and mid-1990s, things were looking pretty grim for the Indian Head Division of the Naval Surface Warfare Center. Base closures were the order of the day, and the century-old explosives facility on the banks of the Potomac was considered a prime candidate for the ax.
Roger M. Smith, the director of Indian Head, had some ideas about what needed to be done. He transformed Indian Head from a somewhat tired engineering-oriented installation into a full-spectrum facility involved in the research, development, testing and evaluation of explosives.
But just as important, and without anyone's permission, Smith started calling Indian Head the "National Center for Energetics." The word "energetics" was a catchy name Smith had dreamed up to describe the world of explosives he had spent his life developing. What's in a name? A lot. It would be one thing to close the Indian Head Division of the Naval Surface Warfare Center. But closing the National Center for Energetics? Forget it. That sounded too important to mess with. Needless to say, some of the sticklers at the Pentagon were ruffled by Smith's preemptive strike. "I've been asked, 'Who sanctioned this? Do you have a charter?' " Smith recalled during an interview last year, grinning like a Cheshire cat. "The answer is no, it's self-promotion." The bottom line is, it worked. Indian Head was spared and remains the largest employer in Charles County, with a diverse work force drawn from across the Washington area, including Southern Maryland, Prince George's County, the District and Northern Virginia. "We talked about getting the name sanctioned, but felt it was better to just go ahead and become it," Smith said. "If they didn't want us to be the center, they'd tell us." That was just the way Roger Smith did things. Smith left work on a Friday, Jan. 29, leaving colleagues with some of his usual droll observations to chuckle about. But he took ill at his home in Silver Spring over that weekend and, completely unexpectedly, died of heart failure at Holy Cross Hospital on Jan. 31 at the age of 59. On Feb. 4, more than 500 people showed up for a memorial service at the Town of Indian Head pavilion. There were admirals from the Pentagon and members of Congress, and there were Navy firefighters and civilian secretaries. "Roger loved it here," said Sen. Paul S. Sarbanes (D-Md.), a friend of Smith's and one of the speakers at the service. "This ceremony is a reflection of how much the people of Indian Head loved him." Smith was a Montgomery County native--a graduate of Montgomery Blair High School who went on to study physics at the University of Maryland in College Park and at American University in Washington. Energetics was an appropriate field for Roger Smith. He had a rare combination of engineering expertise and salesman wizardry, and during his 37 years in the Navy--the last 10 at Indian Head--he built up enormous stature in the field. "His influence went well beyond Indian Head," said Ira Blattstein, Smith's superior with NSWC. The energetics term he coined has since entered the Pentagon's jargon to broadly describe explosive materials, propellants and pyrotechnics. And Smith made sure people associated the word with Indian Head. "Through his initiative, we became known as the National Center for Energetics for the Navy," said A.J. Perk, a now-retired, longtime Indian Head worker who spoke at the service. "That acceptance became crucial for our survival." Among the memorabilia on display at the service were a collection of the whimsical and witty columns Smith wrote once a month for the base newspaper, Flash Point--very different from the sanitized and saccharine observations his counterparts at other military installations usually make in their newspapers. His last column, which came out several days before he died, was a classic. "I was out with friends recently and the subject of growing older came up," it began. "It seems to be happening with greater and greater frequency." Smith went on to muse about how old people are allowed to say whatever they want, something one of his friends found to be "a scary concept as applied to me," he wrote. "How could it get worse than it is now?" she asked Smith. "As far as being able to say whatever you want to, you've already reached your mid-nineties." Smith then offered this advice to his readers: "Say what you want to now, but protect yourself. Don't wait until you're old. When you're old you can be blunt to a fault. In the meantime be diplomatic, be obtuse, and wrap your words in a cloak of humor. Leave some things to the listener to decide." It's a good thing for Indian Head and the Navy that Smith followed his own advice. "Roger Smith will always be remembered as Indian Head's champion and hero," said Capt. John Walsh, Indian Head's base commander, choking back tears, before presenting a flag to Smith's wife, Maryhelen. Maybe one day, it'll be known as the Roger M. Smith National Center for Energetics. Pax River Missile Is Launched Unnoticed in the ongoing shooting war between Iraq and the U.S. war planes enforcing the "no-fly" zone has been a milestone for Patuxent River Naval Air Station, headquarters for the Naval Air Systems Command. On Jan. 25, an F/A-18 Hornet from the carrier USS Carl Vinson launched the first Joint Standoff Weapon ever used in combat. The program for the JSOW--a satellite-guided bomb with wings--has been managed at Pax River. In all, three JSOWs were launched at an antiaircraft missile site in southern Iraq. "They were all bull's-eyes," said Rear Adm. Craig Steidle, vice commander of NAVAIR. Because the JSOW can be launched from over 40 miles from its target, officers overseeing the program at Pax say, it offers much more protection to pilots bombing missile sites. "What better weapon to use than one that has standoff, instead of having to roll on top of it with regular ordnance," Capt. Bert Johnston said. Military Matters appears every other Thursday. Steve Vogel can be reached by e-mail at vogels@washpost.com
And...
Quote:
Terror devastates A/E/C firms.(World Trade Center attack)(Brief Article) Article from:Building Design & Construction Article date:October 1, 2001
The attack on the World Trade Center left the nation numb and heartbroken, but for several A/E/C firms, the damage wrought on Sept. 11 was much more personal and devastating. Of the more than 400 employees from companies involved in building construction in or near the towers on that morning, 13 are missing, all from The Washington Group, which had offices on the 91st floor in Tower 2, the south tower.
The Washington Group, formerly Raytheon Infrastructure Inc., employed 190 people in those offices when two hijacked commercial airliners struck the center's towers. More than 6,000 people are listed as missing or killed following the towers' ensuing collapse.
"We haven't given up hope," says Rod Hunt, The Washington Group's director of corporate communications, "but [New York City Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani] is saying that it would be a miracle to find anyone alive, and we tend to agree."
Hunt added that although many of the company's center employees are not yet ready to return to work, those who have returned are working in the company's other city offices.
The towers also housed the headquarters of the interior design firm of Mancinie*Duffy Architecture Design, an office of Turner Construction Co. and 15 employees of Parsons Brinckerhoff. Fifty employees of the engineering and construction firm of Edwards and Kelcey Inc. were forced from their offices in a now badly damaged building located 500 feet from Tower 2.
Of Mancini*Duffy's 142 employees, 140 were in the firm's office on the 21st floor of Tower 2. "All our people managed to evacuate the building safely," says Francis Leone, managing principal of the firm's Parsippany, N.J., office. He marveled at the character of his firm's New York City staff, saying, "Those New Yorkers are really tough. They have a hell of a spirit."
Only days after the tragic event the firm said it was finalizing arrangements on a permanent office. Leone says the new headquarters will be located in a five-story walkup, noting, "I don't think we want to go to another high-rise."
The 12 employees of Turner Construction were located in an office in the third subbasement of Tower 1, the north tower. Turner had been performing renovation work in various parts of the center and had occupied various office spaces. Employees at work on surrounding buildings also made it to safety.
Quote:
Why would they voluntarily kill several of its workers for no apparent reason?
So? As you can now read the article, you can see that documents were lost in the attacks.
Quote:
Further:
Quote:
How much mass would be required to produce molten iron from thermite equal to the same volume of molten aluminum droplets shown flowing from the south tower window: A mole of Fe weighs 54 g. For every mole of Fe produced by thermite, one mole of Al and 0.5 mole of Fe2O3 is needed. 2Al + Fe2O3 = Al2O3 + 2Fe One mole of Al weighs 27 g. 0.5 mole of Fe2O3 weighs 80 g. Therefore, (27 + 80) g = 107 g of Al and Fe2O3 is needed to produce 54 g of Fe. That means the mass of the reactants to that of Fe produced is a ratio of 107/54 = 2. The mass of thermite reactants (Al, Fe2O3) is twice that of the molten iron produced. Comparing the weight of molten aluminum droplets compared with iron: Iron is 7.9 g/cc. Aluminum is 2.64 g/cc. Fe is denser than Al by a factor of 3. For the same volume of droplets, Fe would have three times the mass as Al. To produce the iron from thermite requires a reactant mass that is a factor of 2 more than the iron produced. Also, Fe is 3 times as dense as Al. So, it would take 2*3 = 6 times as much mass to produce the same volume of molten iron droplets from thermite compared with molten aluminum droplets. Example: Assume 3000 lbs of aluminum fell from the towers. If it had been molten iron produced by thermite, then 6*3000 = 18,000 lbs of thermite reactants would have been required to produce that same volume of falling mass. Suppose 10 tons of molten aluminum fell from the south tower, about 1/8th of that available from the airplane. If it had been molten iron produced from thermite, 60 tons of thermite reactants would have to have been stored in Fuji Bank to produce the same volume spilling out of the south tower. The section of floor would have to hold all of that plus the aircraft. http://www.debunking911.com/thermite.htm
Given the massive amount of thermite that would have been required to bring down the WTC (and it still couldn’t really do that, as it’s not a demolition material), somebody should have noticed the fact that a ludicrous amount was being delivered.
And yet we have a report about thermite found int the WTC dust. Furthermore, that "fact" doesn't make this go away.
Watch some of the footage on YouTube, it's clearly fluid. All of the jet fuel had burned up by then. At that point there was suppose to be only a sissy little office fire with burning paper and desks.
Nobody claimed that: it’s called an electrical fire.
Electrical fires make fluid molten steel like above and then cause symmetrical collapses that look just like demolitions as also shown above? Are these fires magic?
Quote:
In regards to your so-called whistleblowers: http://www.apfn.net/messageboard/8-10-03/discussion.cgi.64.html Colonel Donn de Grand Pre (assuming this source is even credible to begin with) has not, by this article’s own admission, been involved with government since the Carter administration. He has no special knowledge of a plot.
Mr. Von Buelow is the former Minister of Technology for Germany. He has not been involved in the executive branch of the German government since the 80s and has not been a member of the German parliament since ’94. He has no special knowledge of a plot.
Mr. Michael Meacher is a Labour politician in the UK. When he served in Blair’s government (a state of affairs that ended in ’97), he worked exclusively on internal matters, such as the environment. He has no special knowledge of a plot.
Sibel Edmonds was not in the employ of the FBI before the attack.
William Bergman is not associated with any federal agency. He has no special knowledge of a plot.
Coleen Rowley was a Minneapolis police officer. While her disgust with the FBI’s handling of the investigation may be justified, she has no special knowledge of a plot.
J. Michael Springmann has not been in the employ of the government since ’89 and presents a totally uncontroversial fact: that during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan Osama bin Laden was a CIA asset. He has no special knowledge of a plot.
Fine....
Quote:
Robert Wright has never alleged that the government destroyed the WTC; he claimed that if his team had not been starved of funds, they could have found the terrorists plotting 9/11 before 9/11 happened, which is completely at odds with your narrative of a planned demolition. He has no special knowledge of a plot.
Not at odds completely. Enough funds and he could have stumbled across something he didn't expect.
Hell, according to FBI's claims afterwards, they already knew where these so-called terrorists were.
If you listen to the full audio and think Larry Silverstein is talking about intentionally blowing up a building, then your hearing needs to be checked.
You mean his Hindenburg example? The Hindenburg was a zeppelin filled with hydrogen. Hydrogen burns so hot the flames can often be invisible and if you Google the incident, you'll find that Thermite wasn't completely substantiated in that incident. Hell, Wikipedia states that if it had enough paint to create thermite, it would have been too heavy to fly.
Two words, Myth Busters. And anyone can edit Wikipedia, thus you can't use it for a research paper.
BTW: I still have the spelling of Scythirus memorized after this long time not rping with you :lol:
200 years from now, after the global nuclear armageddon, there will be two rival religions among the survivors in the wasteland. One religion's central dogma is that 9/11 was an inside job by the US government. The other religion's central dogma is that foreign terrorists caused 9/11. Many wars and crusades are fought by the followers of these two rival religions. Nonetheless, these two religions play a noble role in that they give their respective followers existential satisfaction and something worthwhile to cling on to while they bravely struggle to survive in the wastelands and perpetuate the human species.
Quick, someone write a science fiction short story based on this general outline.
Since it looks like no one is writing this science fiction story then I have no choice but to take one for the team and write it myself. This thread will provide the research material for the story.
You mean his Hindenburg example? The Hindenburg was a zeppelin filled with hydrogen. Hydrogen burns so hot the flames can often be invisible and if you Google the incident, you'll find that Thermite wasn't completely substantiated in that incident. Hell, Wikipedia states that if it had enough paint to create thermite, it would have been too heavy to fly.
Two words, Myth Busters. And anyone can edit Wikipedia, thus you can't use it for a research paper.
BTW: I still have the spelling of Scythirus memorized after this long time not rping with you :lol:
You mean his Hindenburg example? The Hindenburg was a zeppelin filled with hydrogen. Hydrogen burns so hot the flames can often be invisible and if you Google the incident, you'll find that Thermite wasn't completely substantiated in that incident. Hell, Wikipedia states that if it had enough paint to create thermite, it would have been too heavy to fly.
Two words, Myth Busters. And anyone can edit Wikipedia, thus you can't use it for a research paper.
BTW: I still have the spelling of Scythirus memorized after this long time not rping with you :lol:
A Prince Amoung Men-Shoot First and Ask Questions Later
Posts:
8,837
Group:
Forum Mods
Member
#209
Joined:
January 11, 2006
According to the New York Times article linked to by your source about the WTC fire notes that the greater part of the fire's intensity was limited to one floor.
Further, the WTC in 1975 had not had many of us support columns severed or otherwise damaged by the force of a plane impact. The fireproof insulation of the support columns had not been blown off by the force of a plane impact.
The WTC collapsed because the columns were reduced to about 10% of their normal strength by the fire. The perimeter columns were pulled inward by sagging floors, causing a collapse which reached free fall speeds because the floors beneath it offered relatively little resistance.
There is no way that the hundreds of trained demolitionists could have descended upon WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 without being noticed. There is no way that the hundreds of trained demolitionists could keep quiet for nine years, nor is there a way that every single person directly connected to the conspiracy could have kept quiet for nine years. That is the end of the story.
According to the New York Times article linked to by your source about the WTC fire notes that the greater part of the fire's intensity was limited to one floor.
Further, the WTC in 1975 had not had many of us support columns severed or otherwise damaged by the force of a plane impact. The fireproof insulation of the support columns had not been blown off by the force of a plane impact.
The WTC collapsed because the columns were reduced to about 10% of their normal strength by the fire. The perimeter columns were pulled inward by sagging floors, causing a collapse which reached free fall speeds because the floors beneath it offered relatively little resistance.
There is no way that the hundreds of trained demolitionists could have descended upon WTC1, WTC2, and WTC7 without being noticed. There is no way that the hundreds of trained demolitionists could keep quiet for nine years, nor is there a way that every single person directly connected to the conspiracy could have kept quiet for nine years. That is the end of the story.
That's it? That's your last rebuttal? "Nah-uh?" Pathetic.
Btw, I find it humorous that you think it was "hundreds" when only a few acting discretely could act without much notice during "renovations." They weren't exactly worried about life and property when time to blow the whole thing up came along.
Also, how is it the core columns, the very engineering that made those buildings so sturdy suddenly vanish as if by magic? The WTC1 and 2 were built to survive potential impacts from 707s thanks to those columns. 767s aren't that much bigger! You're expecting me to believe that an OPEN fire spontaneously melted the core column of each building into nonexistence.
After the planes hit the buildings, but before they collapsed, the cores of both towers consisted of three distinct sections. Above and below the impact floors, the cores consisted of what were essentially two rigid boxes; the steel in these sections was undamaged and had undergone no significant heating. The section between them, however, had sustained significant damage and, though they were not hot enough to melt it, the fires were weakening the structural steel. As a result, the core columns were slowly being crushed, sustaining plastic and creep deformation from the weight of higher floors. As the top section tried to move downward, however, the hat truss redistributed the load to the perimeter columns. Meanwhile, the perimeter columns and floors were also being weakened by the heat of the fires, and as the floors began to sag they pulled the exterior walls inwards. In the case of 2 WTC, this caused the eastern face to buckle, transferring its loads back to the failing core through the hat truss and initiating the collapse. The section above the impact area then tilted in the direction of the failed wall. In the case of 1 WTC, the south wall later buckled in the same way, and with similar consequences.
So, no, I'm not expecting you to believe anything was melted. Nothing was melted.
And I am quite aware that won't satisfy you, but I don't particularly care, as every point you bring up I can counter easily; that can be done ad nauseam. The physics of the collapse are well documented and they do not align with the Truther world view. What remains is the fact that you're underlying premise, i.e., the government planting explosives, makes no sense whatsoever.
Quote:
Btw, I find it humorous that you think it was "hundreds" when only a few acting discretely could act without much notice during "renovations."
No, that's idiotic. If we are attributing the cutting of the columns to thermite, as you so insist despite the fact that the claim is nonsensical, I refer to my previous posting of a very simple equation:
Quote:
How much mass would be required to produce molten iron from thermite equal to the same volume of molten aluminum droplets shown flowing from the south tower window:
A mole of Fe weighs 54 g. For every mole of Fe produced by thermite, one mole of Al and 0.5 mole of Fe2O3 is needed.
2Al + Fe2O3 = Al2O3 + 2Fe
One mole of Al weighs 27 g. 0.5 mole of Fe2O3 weighs 80 g.
Therefore, (27 + 80) g = 107 g of Al and Fe2O3 is needed to produce 54 g of Fe.
That means the mass of the reactants to that of Fe produced is a ratio of 107/54 = 2. The mass of thermite reactants (Al, Fe2O3) is twice that of the molten iron produced.
Comparing the weight of molten aluminum droplets compared with iron:
Iron is 7.9 g/cc. Aluminum is 2.64 g/cc. Fe is denser than Al by a factor of 3. For the same volume of droplets, Fe would have three times the mass as Al.
To produce the iron from thermite requires a reactant mass that is a factor of 2 more than the iron produced. Also, Fe is 3 times as dense as Al. So, it would take 2*3 = 6 times as much mass to produce the same volume of molten iron droplets from thermite compared with molten aluminum droplets.
Example:
Assume 3000 lbs of aluminum fell from the towers. If it had been molten iron produced by thermite, then 6*3000 = 18,000 lbs of thermite reactants would have been required to produce that same volume of falling mass.
Suppose 10 tons of molten aluminum fell from the south tower, about 1/8th of that available from the airplane. If it had been molten iron produced from thermite, 60 tons of thermite reactants would have to have been stored in Fuji Bank to produce the same volume spilling out of the south tower. The section of floor would have to hold all of that plus the aircraft.
A small group of people acting covertly could not place several tons of thermite in the WTC. It could not be done.
Further, you have presented evidence that there was renovation work going on in tower 1 and tower 2. You have presented nothing in regards to WTC7.
Quote:
They weren't exactly worried about life and property when time to blow the whole thing up came along.
Which is begging the question, as you are using your conclusion (i.e., the government blew up the WTC) to justify your evidence.
Protip: Making wild claims without being able to back them up makes you look bad.
Protip: Saying "protip" is douchy, except when ironically mocking someone else's use of protip.