Video of molten iron dripping out of WTC on 9/11

Ux
Posts: 37
Joined: 2008-08-28
User is offlineOffline
Video of molten iron dripping out of WTC on 9/11

This cannot be explained except with the presence of thermate, which is a military-grade explosive.

video.google.com/videoplay

 


Ux
Posts: 37
Joined: 2008-08-28
User is offlineOffline
Explanation of what thermate

Explanation of what thermate and thermite are:

video.google.com/videoplay


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
I thought you were told in

I thought you were told in the last thread that Thermate is an incendiary not an explosive.

I will say:

The government's story has problems.

I don't believe we will ever know the entire story

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


deludedgod
Rational VIP!ScientistDeluded God
deludedgod's picture
Posts: 3221
Joined: 2007-01-28
User is offlineOffline
Quote:which is a

Quote:

which is a military-grade explosive.

How do I communicate this principle to you? Thermite does not explode. Thermite is an incendiary and the thermite reaction is a displacement reaction between Al and Fe2O3. It does not involve explosive reactions. Explosive reactions are those which employ rapid electron donation to highly electronegative chemical groups or rapid displacement of electrons in highly positive groupings, employing a very strong oxidizing agent or a pure substance like nitro. The displacement reaction between Al and Fe2O3 falls into neither category. It is a metal-displacement reaction resulting in extreme heat (deflagration), not detonation.

"Physical reality” isn’t some arbitrary demarcation. It is defined in terms of what we can systematically investigate, directly or not, by means of our senses. It is preposterous to assert that the process of systematic scientific reasoning arbitrarily excludes “non-physical explanations” because the very notion of “non-physical explanation” is contradictory.

-Me

Books about atheism


Ux
Posts: 37
Joined: 2008-08-28
User is offlineOffline
In common parlance it is an

In common parlance it is an explosive used in demolitions.

I can see you're unwilling to debate like a man, but are instead must nit-pick and ignore any hard questions, pretending to know something about physics in order to smoke-screen your way around them.

 

 


D-cubed
Rational VIP!
D-cubed's picture
Posts: 715
Joined: 2007-01-04
User is offlineOffline
It can be explained by the

It can be explained by the ignition of a large amount of jet fuel.  You know, the sort of thing an airplane is filled with and a sort of explosion that happens when a jet collides with a building.


Ux
Posts: 37
Joined: 2008-08-28
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote: Thermate is

jcgadfly wrote:

 Thermate is an incendiary not an explosive.

It's a pyrotechnic compound: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermite

So now, what else would you like to nit-pick about while your country descends into fascism, eh dummy?

 


Ux
Posts: 37
Joined: 2008-08-28
User is offlineOffline
D-cubed wrote:It can be

D-cubed wrote:

It can be explained by the ignition of a large amount of jet fuel.  You know, the sort of thing an airplane is filled with and a sort of explosion that happens when a jet collides with a building.

Jet fuel does not burn anywhere near hot enough to melt metal.

 


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
It doesn't need to melt it

It doesn't need to melt it it only needs to soften it. Do you read? Deludedgod has a degree in physics so he knows way more about it than you. This sort of idiocy is another example of the poor understanding of science and critical thinking the average American has.

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


deludedgod
Rational VIP!ScientistDeluded God
deludedgod's picture
Posts: 3221
Joined: 2007-01-28
User is offlineOffline
Quote:In common parlance it

Quote:

In common parlance it is an explosive used in demolitions.

Thermite does not explode! How can I get this through your head. Thermite does not explode. It is therefore not an explosive. It is an incendiary device. It is completely false to state that it is a "military-grade explosive".

Quote:

pretending to know something about physics

I assure you I know a very, very great deal about physics. You are not in a position to decide whether I am pretending to know physics. The question is: Do you? Can you, for example, employ a contour integral over a vector function? Can you employ a Jacobian to change a plane or use a Lagrange multiplier to find an unknown vector? Can you recognize the rate differential for thermal expansion, or use triple integrals to compute variable density where mass is a function of position in R3? Can you employ del operations in n-dimensional gradient fields to find rates of change of flow or use Stoke's theorem to find the curl in a magnetic field?

"Physical reality” isn’t some arbitrary demarcation. It is defined in terms of what we can systematically investigate, directly or not, by means of our senses. It is preposterous to assert that the process of systematic scientific reasoning arbitrarily excludes “non-physical explanations” because the very notion of “non-physical explanation” is contradictory.

-Me

Books about atheism


deludedgod
Rational VIP!ScientistDeluded God
deludedgod's picture
Posts: 3221
Joined: 2007-01-28
User is offlineOffline
Quote:Jet fuel does not burn

Quote:

Jet fuel does not burn anywhere near hot enough to melt metal.

We've been through this already. The physics between airplane-induced collapse have already been outlined.

"Physical reality” isn’t some arbitrary demarcation. It is defined in terms of what we can systematically investigate, directly or not, by means of our senses. It is preposterous to assert that the process of systematic scientific reasoning arbitrarily excludes “non-physical explanations” because the very notion of “non-physical explanation” is contradictory.

-Me

Books about atheism


deludedgod
Rational VIP!ScientistDeluded God
deludedgod's picture
Posts: 3221
Joined: 2007-01-28
User is offlineOffline
Perhaps you should read the

Perhaps you should read the link you cited:

Quote:

It's a pyrotechnic compound: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermite

Thermite is a pyrotechnic composition of aluminium powder and a metal oxide which produces an aluminothermic reaction known as a thermite reaction. It is not explosive, but can create short bursts of extremely high temperatures focused on a very small target for a short period of time.

This is exactly what I've been trying to tell you for the better part of an hour!

"Physical reality” isn’t some arbitrary demarcation. It is defined in terms of what we can systematically investigate, directly or not, by means of our senses. It is preposterous to assert that the process of systematic scientific reasoning arbitrarily excludes “non-physical explanations” because the very notion of “non-physical explanation” is contradictory.

-Me

Books about atheism


Thomathy
SuperfanBronze Member
Thomathy's picture
Posts: 1861
Joined: 2007-08-20
User is offlineOffline
Ux wrote:jcgadfly

Ux wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

 Thermate is an incendiary not an explosive.

It's a pyrotechnic compound: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermite

So now, what else would you like to nit-pick about while your country descends into fascism, eh dummy?

 

Wikipedia wrote:


Thermite is a pyrotechnic composition of aluminium powder and a metal oxide which produces an aluminothermic reaction known as a thermite reaction. It is not explosive, but can create short bursts of extremely high temperatures focused on a very small target for a short period of time.

The aluminium reduces the oxide of another metal, most commonly iron oxide, because aluminium is highly combustible. The products are aluminium oxide, free elemental iron, and a large amount of heat. The reactants are commonly powdered and mixed with a binder to keep the material solid and prevent separation.

The reaction is used for thermite welding, often used to join rail tracks. Other metal oxides can be used, such as chromium oxide, to generate elementary metal. Copper thermite, using copper oxide, is used for creating electric joints in a process called cadwelding. Some thermite-like mixtures are used as pyrotechnic initiators such as fireworks.

Thermite is not an explosive.  That's not nitpicking, that's fact.

BigUniverse wrote,

"Well the things that happen less often are more likely to be the result of the supper natural. A thing like loosing my keys in the morning is not likely supper natural, but finding a thousand dollars or meeting a celebrity might be."


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Ux wrote:jcgadfly

Ux wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

 Thermate is an incendiary not an explosive.

It's a pyrotechnic compound: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermite

So now, what else would you like to nit-pick about while your country descends into fascism, eh dummy?

 

If nit-picking means getting people to get what few facts they bring to the table straight, then I will happily nit-pick my ass off.

How about you? Are you trying to get to the truth of the matter or is your concern more about not blaming the Muslims who flew into the buildings for flying the planes into the buildings?

No one here has ever blamed all Muslims for 9/11 - the  onlything we agree on concerning Islam is that it is a foolish as any other religion.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


D-cubed
Rational VIP!
D-cubed's picture
Posts: 715
Joined: 2007-01-04
User is offlineOffline
Ux wrote:Jet fuel does not

Ux wrote:

Jet fuel does not burn anywhere near hot enough to melt metal.

 

Fascinating.  So a tanker truck in Oakland that ignited and melted a bridge so it collapsed is another huge government conspiracy.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/04/29/BAGVOPHQU46.DTL

Facts are a bitch aren't they?


Jeffrick
High Level DonorRational VIP!SuperfanGold Member
Jeffrick's picture
Posts: 2354
Joined: 2008-03-25
User is offlineOffline
relax

deludedgod wrote:

Perhaps you should read the link you cited:

Quote:

It's a pyrotechnic compound: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermite

Thermite is a pyrotechnic composition of aluminium powder and a metal oxide which produces an aluminothermic reaction known as a thermite reaction. It is not explosive, but can create short bursts of extremely high temperatures focused on a very small target for a short period of time.

This is exactly what I've been trying to tell you for the better part of an hour!

   Deluded..... I put this on the other post; relax! That turkey isn't going to hear anything that abases his new toy.  Ux is no more then a child with a new toy and it wants all of us to see it, and be just as excited about it as it is.  I gave up on the SOB an hour and a half ago.

"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."

VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"

If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?


Sleestack
Sleestack's picture
Posts: 172
Joined: 2008-07-07
User is offlineOffline
You mean it wasn't the

You mean it wasn't the Illuminati???? Did you hear that it wasn't really the Japanese that bombed Pearl Harbor? It was a long lost cousin of George Bush that did it.


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Jeffrick wrote:deludedgod

Jeffrick wrote:

deludedgod wrote:

Perhaps you should read the link you cited:

Quote:

It's a pyrotechnic compound: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermite

Thermite is a pyrotechnic composition of aluminium powder and a metal oxide which produces an aluminothermic reaction known as a thermite reaction. It is not explosive, but can create short bursts of extremely high temperatures focused on a very small target for a short period of time.

This is exactly what I've been trying to tell you for the better part of an hour!

   Deluded..... I put this on the other post; relax! That turkey isn't going to hear anything that abases his new toy.  Ux is no more then a child with a new toy and it wants all of us to see it, and be just as excited about it as it is.  I gave up on the SOB an hour and a half ago.

He's working so hard to protect the guys who flew the planes that he's forgotten that no one has scapegoated Muslims (except maybe for himself).

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


peterweal
peterweal's picture
Posts: 93
Joined: 2008-06-08
User is offlineOffline
What makes you think it's

What makes you think it's molten iron?


nigelTheBold
atheist
nigelTheBold's picture
Posts: 1868
Joined: 2008-01-25
User is offlineOffline
Sleestack wrote:You mean it

Sleestack wrote:

You mean it wasn't the Illuminati????

Dude! Who do you think G.W. Bush works for? It sure as hell ain't the Templars.

"Yes, I seriously believe that consciousness is a product of a natural process. I find that the neuroscientists, psychologists, and philosophers who proceed from that premise are the ones who are actually making useful contributions to our understanding of the mind." - PZ Myers


Sleestack
Sleestack's picture
Posts: 172
Joined: 2008-07-07
User is offlineOffline
nigelTheBold wrote:Sleestack

nigelTheBold wrote:

Sleestack wrote:

You mean it wasn't the Illuminati????

Dude! Who do you think G.W. Bush works for? It sure as hell ain't the Templars.

Well it's all very confusing how those Skull and Bones boys play their games. Which I'm sure could be the root of the problem with conspiracy nuts. Eye-wink


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Do you really think Bush

Do you really think Bush would be smart enough to pull something like that off? Not only that but it would require years of planning - and Bush was only president for 7 1/2 months before it happened. Also, the preparation that is required to demolish a building would certainly have been noticed - not only that, but there is no way a building prepared would be able to function as a working office building. Finally, how do you explain the planes themselves - the families of the people who were on them, not to mention Bin Laden fucking admitted to doing it! This is again something the conspiracy theorists have in common with fundies - they ignore evidence that goes against their bullshit and dispense with logic, common sense and even the definitions of words.

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


nigelTheBold
atheist
nigelTheBold's picture
Posts: 1868
Joined: 2008-01-25
User is offlineOffline
MattShizzle wrote:Do you

MattShizzle wrote:

Do you really think Bush would be smart enough to pull something like that off? Not only that but it would require years of planning - and Bush was only president for 7 1/2 months before it happened. Also, the preparation that is required to demolish a building would certainly have been noticed - not only that, but there is no way a building prepared would be able to function as a working office building. Finally, how do you explain the planes themselves - the families of the people who were on them, not to mention Bin Laden fucking admitted to doing it! This is again something the conspiracy theorists have in common with fundies - they ignore evidence that goes against their bullshit and dispense with logic, common sense and even the definitions of words.

Bush didn't plan it. The Freemasons (working through their master branch, the Illuminati) did. They've had it planned for years. The planting of the bombs was performed by trained rats, so nobody noticed. Since they weren't worried about knocking down other buildings (WTC 7 was an accident, in spite of what the conspiracy nuts say), they didn't have to saw through the support beams. They just used more explosives (Anfo, which is cheap [they subcontracted this part of the deal to al Queda, of all people, who tried to cut costs], not thermate, which burns hot, but produces no explosion).

As for the planes: the real planes were diverted to Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio (the same place where the Roswell UFO wreckage and alien bodies were taken). There, they were killed, and their bodies turned into Doritos(tm) Cool Ranch chips. (The movie Soylent Green was based on real research being done at the time.) The planes that hit were really just shells around guided missiles. You can see the actual missiles hitting the WTC buildings an instant before the planes themselves strike the buildings.

Bin Laden has been a CIA patsy since they trained him and made him a CIA agent during the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. The CIA has been run by Freemasons since its inception (as have MI5 and MI6).

So, no, Bush didn't plan it. It was planned by the head of the Freemasons. I trust I don't have to mention his name?

"Yes, I seriously believe that consciousness is a product of a natural process. I find that the neuroscientists, psychologists, and philosophers who proceed from that premise are the ones who are actually making useful contributions to our understanding of the mind." - PZ Myers


aiia
Superfan
aiia's picture
Posts: 1923
Joined: 2006-09-12
User is offlineOffline
You're all wrong of

You're all wrong of course.

The Dark Force controls all


The Doomed Soul
atheist
The Doomed Soul's picture
Posts: 2148
Joined: 2007-08-31
User is offlineOffline
Ux wrote:Jet fuel does not

Ux wrote:

Jet fuel does not burn anywhere near hot enough to melt metal.

 

HAHAHAHA... ahahaa....

 

oh wait, he was being serious O_o

Pity... would have been great sarcasm

What Would Kharn Do?


Ux
Posts: 37
Joined: 2008-08-28
User is offlineOffline
deludedgod wrote:We've been

deludedgod wrote:

We've been through this already. The physics between airplane-induced collapse have already been outlined.

Actual working physicists disagree with your theory, which ignores many factors.


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Ux wrote:deludedgod

Ux wrote:

deludedgod wrote:

We've been through this already. The physics between airplane-induced collapse have already been outlined.

Actual working physicists disagree with your theory, which ignores many factors.

Intersting assertion - can you name one of those factors?

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


Ux
Posts: 37
Joined: 2008-08-28
User is offlineOffline
nigelTheBold wrote:Bush

nigelTheBold wrote:

Bush didn't plan it. The Freemasons (working through their master branch, the Illuminati) did.

On 9/11 several Israelis were arrested for

  • Celebrating and videotaping the collapses of the towers.
  • Driving a truck bomb toward the city.

But don't worry, religious people from Israel would never want to harm the USA.

Thanks to the Bush admin, they were freed ... after failing numerous polygraphs.

 

 


Ux
Posts: 37
Joined: 2008-08-28
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:Intersting

jcgadfly wrote:

Intersting assertion - can you name one of those factors?

Molten steel dripping out of the building.

Explosions in the basement before the 1st plane hit that injured workers.

Huge amounts of drilling sounds from the walls the weekend before 9/11.

Numerous secondary explosions before and during the collapses.

Firemen reporting the fires were small and under control, not raging infernos.

Free-fall collapse of WTC 1, 2, and 7.

270 smoking guns:

killtown.911review.org/911smokingguns.html

Be brave and face the truth. If you fail to, it's not rationality but irrationality that is the cause of your failure.

 


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Ux wrote:jcgadfly

Ux wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

Intersting assertion - can you name one of those factors?

Molten steel dripping out of the building.

Explosions in the basement before the 1st plane hit that injured workers.

Huge amounts of drilling sounds from the walls the weekend before 9/11.

Numerous secondary explosions before and during the collapses.

Firemen reporting the fires were small and under control, not raging infernos.

Free-fall collapse of WTC 1, 2, and 7.

270 smoking guns:

killtown.911review.org/911smokingguns.html

Be brave and face the truth. If you fail to, it's not rationality but irrationality that is the cause of your failure.

 

I'd love to face the truth. I just don't believe anyone knows what it is. The government's story is riddled with holes (as you have shown) and your story is also riddled with holes (as others have shown you).

Give me something airtight.

For the record, I'm a LIHOP person. I don't think the government made it happen but I can believe they made it easier for those that did it.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


Ux
Posts: 37
Joined: 2008-08-28
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:Ux wrote:270

jcgadfly wrote:

I'd love to face the truth. I just don't believe anyone knows what it is. The government's story is riddled with holes (as you have shown) and your story is also riddled with holes (as others have shown you).

Give me something airtight

The chemical analyses of WTC dust particles are that. Microscopic particles of unexploded thermate are found throughout the dust and they are NOT a normal part of any building or office supplies. But they are what's needed to cut supporting columns.

Chemical analyses of chunks of the formerly the molten steel also show it is from a thermate reaction, with traces of other compounds suggesting the thermate was suspended in solgel.

This and the fact that work crews were sent into the towers before 9/11 during a "power down", during which bomb sniffing dogs were removed and all security systems turned off.

And the fact that you can see clear diagonal cuts in photos of some of the columns, just like is done for controlled demolitions.

 

 


deludedgod
Rational VIP!ScientistDeluded God
deludedgod's picture
Posts: 3221
Joined: 2007-01-28
User is offlineOffline
Quote:Actual working

Quote:

Actual working physicists disagree with your theory, which ignores many factors.

Yes, and vastly more agree with me. Remember, we are discussing whether an aircraft is capable of bringing down the WTC by itself. I am telling you that this is perfectly possible and have outlined the manner in which this occurs. You have asserted the typically conspiratological adage "fire can't melt steel" as if this were actually an argument against the ability of a plane to induce the collapse of WTC1/2, demonstrating how simplistic your understanding of basic thermal physics and third-order calculus is.

"Physical reality” isn’t some arbitrary demarcation. It is defined in terms of what we can systematically investigate, directly or not, by means of our senses. It is preposterous to assert that the process of systematic scientific reasoning arbitrarily excludes “non-physical explanations” because the very notion of “non-physical explanation” is contradictory.

-Me

Books about atheism


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
I have to agree that there's

I have to agree that there's no evidence that what was coming out is steel - it could easily be burning fuel or something else melted. Again, it doesn't have to melt steel only soften it. Ever go to a Renaissance fair or Colonial Williamsburg and see a blacksmith? He heats the iron to soften it - but when he hits it with the hammer it still goes "clang" not "splat. " This whole thread and the other one have been a serious case of epic fail.

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


JillSwift
Superfan
JillSwift's picture
Posts: 1758
Joined: 2008-01-13
User is offlineOffline
...


zarathustra
atheist
zarathustra's picture
Posts: 1149
Joined: 2006-11-16
User is offlineOffline
Obviously, it was the Mossad

Ux wrote:

On 9/11 several Israelis were arrested for

  • Celebrating and videotaping the collapses of the towers.
  • Driving a truck bomb toward the city.

But don't worry, religious people from Israel would never want to harm the USA.

Thanks to the Bush admin, they were freed ... after failing numerous polygraphs. 

Would you also suggest that Bush & Israel forced 19 Arab muslims to enter the United States (before Bush had even been elected), enroll in flight school and martial arts, then commandeer commercial airliners and take their own lives by flying them into buildings -- all as a cover-up for a planned demolition?

And, deludedgod asked you (more than once) in another thread at what level the 3 courses were that you took in physics.  Would you care to answer him, since you scoff so freely at his analysis?

 

There are no theists on operating tables.

πππ†
π†††


nigelTheBold
atheist
nigelTheBold's picture
Posts: 1868
Joined: 2008-01-25
User is offlineOffline
Ux wrote:Chemical analyses

Ux wrote:

Chemical analyses of chunks of the formerly the molten steel also show it is from a thermate reaction, with traces of other compounds suggesting the thermate was suspended in solgel.

Again, you can't effectively use thermate (or thermite) combined with an explosive. You just can't.

Why? Because thermate (and thermite) are incendiaries. They take time to burn. They don't produce a concussive explosion. Solgel would concuss, but at the expense of the thermate.

And it doesn't make sense to cut support beams if you are going to melt them with thermate. It only makes sense if you are going to use an explosive (which would negate the effect of the thermate). And, cuts to the beams would weaken the entire structure, making it unsuitable for occupation. It could collapse as people are using it, causing vibrations, increasing its lateral stress, and so on.

Buildings have collapsed in the past due to fire. The collapses have been only partial collapses, true. But entire sections of building have collapsed due simply to fire.

Couple that with an impact near the top of the building, and you've got a recipe for disaster, literally. (Finally! A sentence in which the word "impact" is used properly!) And, as the second tower collapsed assymetrically due to the offset impact of the second aircraft, it blows your "controlled demolition" hypothesis all to hell. (Pun/simile intended.)

I know we haven't been told the whole story. The explosives in the basement (if they really were there) could very well have been placed there beforehand by those involved, very much like the attempt in 1993. There are holes in the official narrative. But the conspiracy you suggest neither makes sense in the execution, nor in the motive, nor in the evidence as it's played out. Nor could it be covered up as you suggest. It would require far too many people.

The Israelis were arrested, but there's no evidence they were celebrating. It seems they may have been working for Mossad (the Israeli secret service), but they were merely taping the event, after it initiated. It makes no sense for Isreal to have instigated it; not because they have nothing to gain from it, but because they have everything to lose.

So, what it comes to is this: the towers could very well have fallen due to the impacts of the planes, and subsequent fires. We have motives for al Queda, as well as a narrative that supports that hypothesis. We have motives for G.W. Bush (though of a highly unlikely nature), but the narrative doesn't support it. Most of the evidence you've presented is either fallacious, or at least suspect, while the rest merely indicates areas of uncertainty for everyone.

Your physics is poor, which is the foundation of your argument.

Rationality indicates there is not enough contrary evidence to discredit the official explanation. There are holes in the narrative, but nothing contradictory.

I guess that leaves us where we started: with you believing one thing based on meager evidence and vast speculation, and on us believing something else, based on better evidence and less speculation.

"Yes, I seriously believe that consciousness is a product of a natural process. I find that the neuroscientists, psychologists, and philosophers who proceed from that premise are the ones who are actually making useful contributions to our understanding of the mind." - PZ Myers


deludedgod
Rational VIP!ScientistDeluded God
deludedgod's picture
Posts: 3221
Joined: 2007-01-28
User is offlineOffline
Quote:Why? Because thermate

Quote:

Why? Because thermate (and thermite) are incendiaries. They take time to burn. They don't produce a concussive explosion. Solgel would concuss, but at the expense of the thermate.

Additionally, the force of detonation is sufficient to ionize the Aluminium particles, rendering them inert.

"Physical reality” isn’t some arbitrary demarcation. It is defined in terms of what we can systematically investigate, directly or not, by means of our senses. It is preposterous to assert that the process of systematic scientific reasoning arbitrarily excludes “non-physical explanations” because the very notion of “non-physical explanation” is contradictory.

-Me

Books about atheism


Ux
Posts: 37
Joined: 2008-08-28
User is offlineOffline
nigelTheBold wrote:Why?

nigelTheBold wrote:

Why? Because thermate (and thermite) are incendiaries. They take time to burn. They don't produce a concussive explosion. Solgel would concuss, but at the expense of the thermate.

Really? There are videos showing thermite going through car engines in less than a second. You must not be speaking from experience.

Quote:

Buildings have collapsed in the past due to fire. The collapses have been only partial collapses, true. But entire sections of building have collapsed due simply to fire.

That's a key point you're glossing over: Partial collapses are nothing like what happened to WTC 7 or the twin towers. Why are you being manipulative here? Don't you want to get at the truth?

Quote:

But the conspiracy you suggest neither makes sense in the execution, nor in the motive, nor in the evidence as it's played out. Nor could it be covered up as you suggest.

So the billions that Halliburton has made and the oil companies isn't a motive? So the plans for world empire aren't a motive. So the boon for Israel, which controls the media and Congress, isn't a motive? Holy crap, HOW NAIVE ARE YOU?

Quote:

The Israelis were arrested, but there's no evidence they were celebrating.

Once again you're being dishonest. Why? Eyewitnesses said they were high-fiveing. They admitted as much to the cops, and on Israelis TV.

 


Ux
Posts: 37
Joined: 2008-08-28
User is offlineOffline
zarathustra wrote:Would you

zarathustra wrote:

Would you also suggest that Bush & Israel forced 19 Arab muslims to enter the United States

 

The earliest passenger lists for the planes, before the terrorists' names were announced, don't even list any Arabs. That's a fact.

As for Mohammed Atta, he came to the USA, got a stripper for a girlfriend, harrassed girls at Hooters, all while he hanged out with a German who later claimed to some cops to be a CIA agent.

 


Cali_Athiest2
Cali_Athiest2's picture
Posts: 440
Joined: 2008-02-07
User is offlineOffline
MattShizzle wrote:I have to

MattShizzle wrote:

I have to agree that there's no evidence that what was coming out is steel - it could easily be burning fuel or something else melted. Again, it doesn't have to melt steel only soften it. Ever go to a Renaissance fair or Colonial Williamsburg and see a blacksmith? He heats the iron to soften it - but when he hits it with the hammer it still goes "clang" not "splat. " This whole thread and the other one have been a serious case of epic fail.

The explanation I heard for the "molten" steel was that the fires caused a chemical reaction in large battery boxes located on that floor for an uninteruptable Power Supply (UPS) feeding a rather large computer network. The batteries caught on fire and the electrolytic components burned resembling slag from a blowtorch. Maybe somebody with a chemistry background could verify this.

 

"Always seek out the truth, but avoid at all costs those that claim to have found it" ANONYMOUS


Ux
Posts: 37
Joined: 2008-08-28
User is offlineOffline
Cali_Athiest2 wrote:The

Cali_Athiest2 wrote:

The explanation I heard for the "molten" steel was that the fires caused a chemical reaction in large battery boxes located on that floor for an uninteruptable Power Supply (UPS) feeding a rather large computer network. The batteries caught on fire and the electrolytic components burned resembling slag from a blowtorch. Maybe somebody with a chemistry background could verify this.

No. Chemical analyses have been done on that molten steel after it cooled. It is the result of a thermate reaction, plain and simple.

 


Cali_Athiest2
Cali_Athiest2's picture
Posts: 440
Joined: 2008-02-07
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:Ux

jcgadfly wrote:

Ux wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

Intersting assertion - can you name one of those factors?

Molten steel dripping out of the building.

Explosions in the basement before the 1st plane hit that injured workers.

Huge amounts of drilling sounds from the walls the weekend before 9/11.

Numerous secondary explosions before and during the collapses.

Firemen reporting the fires were small and under control, not raging infernos.

Free-fall collapse of WTC 1, 2, and 7.

270 smoking guns:

killtown.911review.org/911smokingguns.html

Be brave and face the truth. If you fail to, it's not rationality but irrationality that is the cause of your failure.

 

I'd love to face the truth. I just don't believe anyone knows what it is. The government's story is riddled with holes (as you have shown) and your story is also riddled with holes (as others have shown you).

Give me something airtight.

For the record, I'm a LIHOP person. I don't think the government made it happen but I can believe they made it easier for those that did it.

You're right the government lied about WMDs so why not lie a little about 911. However the LIHOP makes the most sense. Someone in some aspect had an idea something was going to happen. The following article is about Willie Brown flying on the morning of 911. Since this was written he has refused to talk much about it and it's interesting that he and Condi Rice were very close having worked at Chevron together.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/09/12/MN229389.DTL

 

"Always seek out the truth, but avoid at all costs those that claim to have found it" ANONYMOUS


Ux
Posts: 37
Joined: 2008-08-28
User is offlineOffline
nigelTheBold wrote:So, what

nigelTheBold wrote:

So, what it comes to is this: the towers could very well have fallen due to the impacts of the planes, and subsequent fires.

And the collapse of WTC 7?

If you're just bullshitting because you don't really care if your country goes fascist, I am sure will ignore this question.


Ux
Posts: 37
Joined: 2008-08-28
User is offlineOffline
deludedgod

deludedgod wrote:

Additionally, the force of detonation is sufficient to ionize the Aluminium particles, rendering them inert.

I sincerely doubt you've ever taken a science course. You're no more credible than a creationist and you use the same tactics.

 

 


aiia
Superfan
aiia's picture
Posts: 1923
Joined: 2006-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Ux

Ux I asked you before and now again.

Why do you want people to believe this?


nigelTheBold
atheist
nigelTheBold's picture
Posts: 1868
Joined: 2008-01-25
User is offlineOffline
Ux wrote:Really? There are

Ux wrote:

Really? There are videos showing thermite going through car engines in less than a second. You must not be speaking from experience.

And solgel explodes in far less than a second.

[edit addendum]

That's the difference between an incendiary and an explosive. Perhaps now you see why the distinction is important?

[end edit]

What's your personal experience, since that seems important to you?

Quote:

That's a key point you're glossing over: Partial collapses are nothing like what happened to WTC 7 or the twin towers. Why are you being manipulative here? Don't you want to get at the truth?

Of course I want the truth. WTC 7 was not strictly a fire collapse. There was structural trauma due to debris (which you ignore) preceding the fire. WTC 1 and 2 were compromised due to the energy released during the impact of the planes (which was not insignificant) and suffered progressive collapse. This is evidenced by the top-down collapse of the towers, rather than the bottom-up collapse as would've happened if it were a controlled demolition.

Quote:

So the billions that Halliburton has made and the oil companies isn't a motive? So the plans for world empire aren't a motive. So the boon for Israel, which controls the media and Congress, isn't a motive? Holy crap, HOW NAIVE ARE YOU?

Well, pretty naive, admittedly.

The problem as I see it is, there is no evidence that Israel controls congress or the media. Last I looked, big business controlled the media (hey, Mr. Murdoch, how ya' doin'?). Although congress falls in line with support for Israel, that probably has more to do with the US as being a key figure in setting up the country of Israel after WWII, and the fact that a lot of religious folks see Israel as a seat of Judeo-Christian power in an otherwise Muslim Middle East.

As far as the corporations go. I definitely see some war profiteering going on, at a minimum.

But as any murder mystery writer knows, it's not just enough to have a motive. You also have to establish an alibi; and so far, everyone has a great alibi. al Queda took credit for the attack, making them prime suspect #1.

Quote:

Quote:

The Israelis were arrested, but there's no evidence they were celebrating.

Once again you're being dishonest. Why? Eyewitnesses said they were high-fiveing. They admitted as much to the cops, and on Israelis TV. 

No, I'm not.

First, you have to realize that, in the hours, days, and years subsequent to the attacks, tempers and suspicions ran high. The Israeli agents (we'll assume they were, since it seems that way) were caught videotaping the event. They weren't as distraught as those around them. Their job was to capture the event on film (which started after the attacks began, indicating they didn't know it was coming, but suspected something might happen). Any "high-five" could be simply because they caught the second plane striking the second building. A smile at a single good fortune would be interpreted as "celebration." So eye-witness accounts of middle-eastern-looking folk "celebrating" is far from damning.

The only thing they admitted to on Israeli TV was taping the event, which they were doing for Mossad. They did not admit to celebrating, that I've seen.

Here's the problem with the Israeli conspiracy theory: if they were caught out, they would lose everything. The backlash in the US would require the US government to pull all support of Israel. Right now, the only thing standing between Israel and the biggest block of Muslim anger is twelve nukes and a large chunk of US money and hardware. That's it. Should the US population find out that Israel engineered 9/11, it wouldn't be more than twelve weeks before there was nothing left of The Holy Land except The Holey Land.

Meanwhile, what would they gain? Iraq had nothing. It was the most progressive country in the Middle East, bordering on downright liberal (in relation to the other countries in the area). If any country posed a threat to Israel, the US would step up to defend it. So they had very little to gain whatsoever. In fact, with anti-American sentiment running high in the middle east right now, Israel is at its most vulnerable.

So, no. I'm not being dishonest. I'm looking at the evidence, the possible motivations, the misinformation and subterfuge, and coming to the conclusion that Halliburton and Cheney didn't have the resources to both pull it off and cover it up; that Israel had more to lose than to gain; and the official story doesn't quite add up, but makes more sense than anything presented as an alternative.

"Yes, I seriously believe that consciousness is a product of a natural process. I find that the neuroscientists, psychologists, and philosophers who proceed from that premise are the ones who are actually making useful contributions to our understanding of the mind." - PZ Myers


nigelTheBold
atheist
nigelTheBold's picture
Posts: 1868
Joined: 2008-01-25
User is offlineOffline
Ux wrote:And the collapse of

Ux wrote:

And the collapse of WTC 7?

If you're just bullshitting because you don't really care if your country goes fascist, I am sure will ignore this question.

Again, about for the fifth time, WTC was damaged on the north side, the side facing WTC 1 & 2.

Trust me, I see my country going fascist. But it doesn't take conspiracy theories for my country to go fascist. It just takes years of gradual degradation of rights, of the elevation of irrationality (such as represented by religion and conspiracy theories) above rationality, of the celebration of the trite over the contemplation of the important.

Believe me, I worry for my country. I even wondered after 9/11 about the possibility that my government somehow had a hand in it. But, like Pearl Harbor, the most likely scenario involves possible government knowledge, not government engineering.

I don't doubt that Halliburton took advantage of the situation. I don't doubt that the neocons didn't push for invasion of Iraq in spite of the lack of evidence that Iraq was a threat. I don't doubt that there is misinformation and misdirection going on.

But you know what? I also believe that all these conspiracy theories are part of the misdirection. What you are spreading is merely more misinformation, perhaps engineered by the US government itself, designed to halt credible inquiry into reasonable issues.

How do you like being a tool?

"Yes, I seriously believe that consciousness is a product of a natural process. I find that the neuroscientists, psychologists, and philosophers who proceed from that premise are the ones who are actually making useful contributions to our understanding of the mind." - PZ Myers


peterweal
peterweal's picture
Posts: 93
Joined: 2008-06-08
User is offlineOffline
Ux wrote:[Really? There are

Ux wrote:

[Really? There are videos showing thermite going through car engines in less than a second. You must not be speaking from experience.

It's not nearly that fast:

"350 g of thermate-TH3 charge is capable of burning through a sheet of 1-inch thick steel plate in about 8 second reaction time."

Read more here: http://www.dodtechmatch.com/DOD/Patent/PatentDetail.aspx?type=description&id=6766744

 


zarathustra
atheist
zarathustra's picture
Posts: 1149
Joined: 2006-11-16
User is offlineOffline
Ux wrote:The earliest

Ux wrote:

The earliest passenger lists for the planes, before the terrorists' names were announced, don't even list any Arabs. That's a fact.

As soon as you provide your source for these "earliest passenger lists", perhaps you'd like to explain how these commercial flights found their way into the Twin Towers, the Pentagon and the ground in Shanksville. 

And would you then suggest that Bush & Israel forced 19 Arab muslims to enter the United States (before Bush had even been elected), enroll in flight school and martial arts, then commandeer commercial airliners and take their own lives by flying them into buildings suddenly go into hiding on 9/11/2001 -- all as a cover-up for a planned demolition?

Ux wrote:

As for Mohammed Atta, he came to the USA, got a stripper for a girlfriend, harrassed girls at Hooters...

So...he couldn't have been one of the 9/11 terrorists because he got a stripper for a girlfriend?

Ux wrote:
..., all while he hanged out with a German who later claimed to some cops to be a CIA agent.

So...he was part of the inside job since he "hanged out with a German who later claimed to some cops to be a CIA agent", even though he wasn't on the "earliest passenger list"?

 And since you now doubt deludedgod has ever taken a science course, ...would you please finally let us know what these 3 glorious physics courses were that you took to entitle you to such scientific snobbery?

There are no theists on operating tables.

πππ†
π†††


nigelTheBold
atheist
nigelTheBold's picture
Posts: 1868
Joined: 2008-01-25
User is offlineOffline
zarathustra wrote:Ux

zarathustra wrote:

Ux wrote:

As for Mohammed Atta, he came to the USA, got a stripper for a girlfriend, harrassed girls at Hooters...

So...he couldn't have been one of the 9/11 terrorists because he got a stripper for a girlfriend?

Well, she did tell him she was a virgin, and that she and 39 of her best virgin friends would meet him after work.

Guess he's in for a surprise.

"Yes, I seriously believe that consciousness is a product of a natural process. I find that the neuroscientists, psychologists, and philosophers who proceed from that premise are the ones who are actually making useful contributions to our understanding of the mind." - PZ Myers


zarathustra
atheist
zarathustra's picture
Posts: 1149
Joined: 2006-11-16
User is offlineOffline
Correction

Blurb in above post should look like this (strikeout feature didn't work):

And would you then suggest that Bush & Israel forced 19 Arab muslims to enter the United States (before Bush had even been elected), enroll in flight school and martial arts, then commandeer commercial airliners and take their own lives by flying them into buildings suddenly go into hiding on 9/11/2001 -- all as a cover-up for a planned demolition?

 

 

 

There are no theists on operating tables.

πππ†
π†††