Quake3World

Hannibal wrote:They are not on equal footing IF (a big IF) a story minus the demolition charges IS just as credible. Exactly the reason I've asked if there is any positive evidence for demolition on offer; if there is not, then it just becomes a counting game...how many experts line up on each side of the issue. As I said, I don't have an opinion on this issue yet....I've not read nearly enough. But unless a critical mass of expert opinion develops around the explanatory necessity of DA BOMB, we will be picking gnat shit out of pepper until the stars burn out.

It is far from clear that an explanation without explosives is possible at all, much less more credible than with an explosion - which we have seen cause building collapses thousands of times.

If you read just a part of this, you will see my point:
http://911review.com/articles/griffin/nyc1.html

It contains a lot of rhetoric, but from all I've read so far the general evidence and facts referenced are sourced and credible - most of them come from the NIST studies or from Thomas Eager himself - the MIT professor who supports the official story.

The problem is that the facts themselves don't get through the rhetorical mudslinging that Geebs was so kind to point out above.

edit: replaced 'all' with 'all I've read so far.' It was just an example for reference and I skimmed a few pages of it.

R00k wrote:http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,635179751,00.html

To cite only one example out of several, molten steel was found on site. Steel cannot be melted due to the heat produced by a jet-fuel fire.

Et cetera, et cetera.

Hey! It's all ball bearings nowadays. Now you prepare that Fetzer valve with some 3-in-1 oil and some gauze pads, and I'm gonna need 'bout ten quarts of anti-freeze, preferably Prestone. No, no make that Quaker State.

If this represents the beginning to a scholarly thread of contrarian inquiry, I'm all for it...but only time will tell. Fetzer has certainly wandered out of Plato's cave (check out his writings re: Wellstone's plane crash).

R00k wrote:http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,635179751,00.html

To cite only one example out of several, molten steel was found on site. Steel cannot be melted due to the heat produced by a jet-fuel fire.

Et cetera, et cetera.

Explosions don't melt it, either.

Some demolitions grade explosives do. Thermite does.

sometimes rook makes my head spin

R00k wrote:Some demolitions grade explosives do. Thermite does.

Thermite isn't used in demolitions. It's a purely incendiary device, and while it will melt a lot of metals, I'm not sure if structural steel is one of them.
Can you show me details of which explosives used in demolitions that will melt steel?

There's an AWFUL lot of speculation in that link busetibi. They mention that a thermite detonation will cause a lot of dense white smoke with little odor, but they neglect to mention that large, brilliant, yellow-ornage fireball that accompanies it.
The more I read, the more I see that there are a lot of interesting questions that need to be answered, and they never will be due to the lack of forensic evidence.
I do recall seeing one 9/11 report wherein a metallurgist had pieces of structural steel from the towers, and they showed a great deal of thinning, in his words as if the metal had been vaporized. I think that this was on the History Channel.
The thing that most folks seem to be overlooking is that when buildings are demo'd, the collapse starts at the bottom. This clearly did not happen with the WTC. I have yet to see a CONVINCING clip of the base of the tower that makes me there was an explosion just before the collapse. And riddle me this: If there was a detonation in the lower floors or basement, how did they manage to get the collapse to start right at the spot where the planes hit in BOTH TOWERS?

There's an AWFUL lot of speculation in this whole thread,
as youve mentioned, the more answers one gets the more questions arise.
tbh, i cant see the truth about this ever coming out.

Nightshade wrote:

R00k wrote:Some demolitions grade explosives do. Thermite does.

Thermite isn't used in demolitions. It's a purely incendiary device, and while it will melt a lot of metals, I'm not sure if structural steel is one of them.
Can you show me details of which explosives used in demolitions that will melt steel?

Most of what I've read on thermite has talked about it being used in regards to the 9/11 attack, and I got the impression that it was used in demolitions occasionally, but I could be wrong on that.

Thermite is an incindiary mix of metal powders - aluminum and steel I believe - which when detonated/ignited, leaves the byproduct of molten metal.

And there ARE eye witness accounts of large yellow fireballs and explosions.

On a lighter note, to break the monotony of scientific discussion, a critical take on loony conspiracy theories:

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/holmgren01.htm

R00k wrote:

Nightshade wrote:

R00k wrote:Some demolitions grade explosives do. Thermite does.

Thermite isn't used in demolitions. It's a purely incendiary device, and while it will melt a lot of metals, I'm not sure if structural steel is one of them.
Can you show me details of which explosives used in demolitions that will melt steel?

Most of what I've read on thermite has talked about it being used in regards to the 9/11 attack, and I got the impression that it was used in demolitions occasionally, but I could be wrong on that.

Thermite is an incindiary mix of metal powders - aluminum and steel I believe - which when detonated/ignited, leaves the byproduct of molten metal.

And there ARE eye witness accounts of large yellow fireballs and explosions.

Yes, it's an aluminum and iron oxide mix, but let's talk about what it leaves behind versus what was found at the WTC. If large amounts of slag were discovered, then it could have come from metal being melted, but not solely from thermite, unless a LARGE amount was used. Think about the compenents in the reaction here, whatever's left over would have to have come from the thermite, minus what's expended as heat in the process. So, IMO, it would take a very large amount of thermite to produce what's stated to have been found.
The materials used in demolitions are generally copper-clad explosive compounds. They're sheathed in copper to give them a shaped-charge effect so they can cut cleanly through the structural members like a laser. It's really an amazing process. There's no melting, just a clean cut.
If there are these eyewitness accounts, where are they? Why is there not more amatuer video coming out? Think about the vast number of camcorders that must have been running, there should be a LOT of video available.

You still haven't addressed my point about demo charge placement versus mode of collapse.

R00k wrote:On a lighter note, to break the monotony of scientific discussion, a critical take on loony conspiracy theories:

http://www.serendipity.li/wot/holmgren01.htm

Oh jesus christ.

Nightshade wrote:

R00k wrote: Most of what I've read on thermite has talked about it being used in regards to the 9/11 attack, and I got the impression that it was used in demolitions occasionally, but I could be wrong on that.

Thermite is an incindiary mix of metal powders - aluminum and steel I believe - which when detonated/ignited, leaves the byproduct of molten metal.

And there ARE eye witness accounts of large yellow fireballs and explosions.

Yes, it's an aluminum and iron oxide mix, but let's talk about what it leaves behind versus what was found at the WTC. If large amounts of slag were discovered, then it could have come from metal being melted, but not solely from thermite, unless a LARGE amount was used. Think about the compenents in the reaction here, whatever's left over would have to have come from the thermite, minus what's expended as heat in the process. So, IMO, it would take a very large amount of thermite to produce what's stated to have been found.
The materials used in demolitions are generally copper-clad explosive compounds. They're sheathed in copper to give them a shaped-charge effect so they can cut cleanly through the structural members like a laser. It's really an amazing process. There's no melting, just a clean cut.
If there are these eyewitness accounts, where are they? Why is there not more amatuer video coming out? Think about the vast number of camcorders that must have been running, there should be a LOT of video available.

You still haven't addressed my point about demo charge placement versus mode of collapse.

Some eyewitness accounts from FOX/other news correspondents, police, firefighters, workers and bystanders:
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/911_firefighters.html

That was the easiest one-stop collection I could grab quickly, but they are documented in lots of other places as well.

I'll follow up on your thermite/demo mode questions later when I'm not so busy.