Thermite or Explosives ?

originally posted by: waypastvne

originally posted by: sg1642
can you give me a theory on what caused this?

That's easy. This event happened on the 76 floor, east side of WTC 2. The 76 floor is a mechanical floor which contained the HVAC units. A large heat exchanger for the AC units is sitting inside the building at that position it contains a large volume of compressed freon.

The black cloth you see flying out of the window frame is a bird screen used to keep birds from nesting in the AC units. Heat from the fires caused a soldered copper tube connection to fail and the AC unit dumped it's freon out the window blowing out the bird screen.

I was just going to say actually. It looks more like a jacket or piece of fabric when you pause it.

a reply to: sg1642

Here is a section of the MER walls in free fall you can clearly see the bird screens in this photo.

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: engineercutout

I don't think that you understand what it takes to bring down a steel frame building. If it is not done right, the building will remained standing and you will have something like this where steel columns of WTC 1 sit within the bomb crater.

Explosives Failed to Bring Down Steel Frame Building 1

And, this:

Bombed Building in Iraq

Remember, we are not talking about a building built of wood.



Such as?



Impossible. Even a large clean-up crew cannot cover up evidence of explosives and if a steel frame building is not properly pre-weakened, it cannot be expected to collapse as planned as was the case in 1993 when terrorist tried to topple WTC 1 onto WTC 2.

You seem to be suggesting here, that it would be impossible to rig a large clandestine demolition such as this in such a manner as to leave little or no visible evidence (blasting caps or extra wires or some such) after the fact. I don't believe it. I think the capabilities of modern explosives technology (circa 2001) would have been capable of such a feat. I'm no expert on the subject, and I've still made no specific claims as to what brought down the towers; but, I do not accept your reasons for why it would have been impossible as valid.

What about the molten metal at the site? What about the explosive evidence claimed in the dust samples? What about all those architects and engineers that think it was a demo? Your thoughts?

a reply to: engineercutout

You seem to be suggesting here, that it would be impossible to rig a large clandestine demolition such as this in such a manner as to leave little or no visible evidence (blasting caps or extra wires or some such) after the fact.

Absolutely!!

I don't believe it. I think the capabilities of modern explosives technology (circa 2001) would have been capable of such a feat. I'm no expert on the subject, and I've still made no specific claims as to what brought down the towers; but, I do not accept your reasons for why it would have been impossible as valid.

First of all, there was no way to plant explosives in the WTC buildings and not attract a lot of attention. The name of the game is to pre-weaken the steel structure before explosives are placed. The pre-weakening process would have taken many months of preparation before explosives are placed. It took months just to prepare a bridge in Corpus Christ, Texas for explosive demolition and that was nothing compared to what it would have taken to demolish the WTC buildings with explosives.

People get the wrong idea that you can plant explosives in a steel frame building in order to bring it down, but that is Hollywood thinking. Here is an example of what I am talking about. and notice that the steel structure of WTC 1 are standing within the bomb crater that was created when huge bomb was detonated beneath WTC 1 in 1993.

WTC 1 Steet Structure Standing in Bomb Crater

We can take a look at these buildings and notice that their structures remained standing despite the bombings.

Photo 1

Photo 2

Photo 3

I might add that demolition implosions always leave behind evidence, none of which was evident neither on video nor within the rubble at ground zero.

Add to the fact that the collapse of WTC 1 and WTC 2 commenced at the locations where they were struck and yet, there are no secondary explosions and any explosives planted at the points of impact would have been rendered useless. In order for explosives to be effective against a steel structure, the explosive must be firmly attached to the structure itself or the blast waves will simply flow about the steel columns like wind around a flag pole. Investigators determined that the impacts were so violent that they dislodged fire protection from the steel columns. In other words, there was no chance that explosives would have remained attached to steel columns in order for them to be effective.

What about the molten metal at the site?

We know there were no pools of molten steel because the recorded temperatures were far too low to melt steel but far above the melting point of aluminum and lead. In fact, molten aluminum would have been expected at ground zero considering that tons of aluminum was used in the facade of WTC 1 and WTC 2 and of course, the airframe of the aircraft consisted of aluminum as well.

Aluminum at the World Trade Center

Aluminum was present in two significant forms at the World Trade Center on 9-11:

(i) By far the largest source of aluminum at the WTC was the exterior cladding
on WTC 1 & 2. In quantitative terms it may be estimated that 2,000,000 kg of
anodized 0.09 aluminum sheet was used, in the form of 43,600 panels, to
cover the faÄade of each Twin Tower.

(i) The other major source of aluminum at the WTC was the aluminum alloy
airframes of the Boeing 767 aircraft that crashed into the Twin Towers on the
morning of 9-11. It may be estimated that, on impact, these aircraft weighed
about 124,000 kg including fuel; of this weight, 46,000 kg comprised the
fuselage and 21,000 kg made up the mass of the wings – all of which were
fabricated from aluminum alloys.

www.911myths.com...

The molten aluminum was seen flowing from the northeast corner of WTC 2, which is the location where much of the aluminum airframe of United 175 came to rest. Notice the exit hole created at the corner of WTC 2 in the following imagery, which is where the molten aluminum was seen flowing.

Impact Imagery of WTC 1 and WTC 2

Photo: WTC 2 Molten Aluminum

Molten metal would have been expected especially aluminum and other metals that melt at temperatures recorded during the fires.

Report chronicles the final moments of WTC tragedy

The apparent source of this waterfall: molten aluminum from the airliner's wings and fuselage, which had also piled up in that corner. Within minutes, portions of the 80th floor began to give way, as evidenced by horizontal lines of dust blowing out of the side of the building.

Seconds later, near the heavily damaged southeasterly portion of this same floor, close to where the aircraft had entered, exterior columns began to buckle.

www.taipeitim....../03/30/129774/1

What about the explosive evidence claimed in the dust samples?

There was no explosive evidence in the dust. If there were, a lot of people would have been locked up in prison by now. At no time did dust samples indicate the presence of explosive residue. The Truth Movement clouded the issue, but they were unaware that the spheres can be generated during the welding process when the buildings were constructed and during the clean-up process where crews used high temp wands and torches. In fact, you can create your own spheres simply using a lighter and steel wool.

What about all those architects and engineers that think it was a demo? Your thoughts?

The overwhelming majority of demolition experts, structural and civil engineers, architects and firefighters have come to the reality that fire, in conjunction with impact damage, was responsible for the collapse of WTC 1, WTC 2, and WTC 7.

Towers Weakened by Planes; Brought Down by Fire

Analysis by a team of 25 of the nation's leading structural and fire protection engineers suggests that the World Trade Center Towers could have remained standing indefinitely if fire had not overwhelmed the weakened structures, according to a report presented today at a hearing of the House Science Committee. That finding is significant, said W. Gene Corley, Ph.D., team lead for the ASCE/FEMA Building Performance Study Team, because extreme events of this type, resulting in such substantial damage, are generally not considered in building design, and the fact that these structures were able to successfully withstand such damage is noteworthy.

911-engineers.blogspot.com...


Why the World Trade Center Buildings Collapsed: A Fire Chief ’s Assessment

vincentdunn.com...

a reply to: engineercutout

Your thoughts?

It was not possible for anyone to use thermite or explosives to bring down the WTC buildings without detection. It took 1500 pounds of thermite just to burn through two legs of a tower in order to bring it down on its side and that was nothing compare to what it would have taken to bring down the WTC buildings.

Photo of Tower

I was aware that fire, in conjunction with impact damage, was responsible for the collapse of WTC 1, WTC 2, and WTC 7, based on my over 40 years experience in the world of aviation as a pilot and an airframe technician where I worked with aerospace metals. I have also seen results from burning aircraft as well.

I was also aware that a typical office fire can turn steel into a soft, plastic-like state. Here are two examples.

Photo 1: Fire Weakens Steel

Photo 2: Fire Weakens Steel

In addition, rusty iron in storage has been known to generate temperatures high enough to start fires and fires have been known the smolder for days and since thermite burns out in a matter of seconds, there was no way that thermite could have been responsible for the high temperatures recorded in the rubble months later, which goes to show just how absurd that claim is.

Only at the points of impact, is where the WTC Towers began their collapse and nowhere else, which is further proof that explosives was not responsible because any explosives placed in that location would have either been detonated or render ineffective.

The WTC Towers did not collapse at free fall speed as evidence in the following photos and notice that debris and dust plumes are outpacing the collapse of the buildings. Since I posted these references in other threads over the years, I want to make you aware of my references.

Photo 1: No Free Fall Collapse

Photo 2: No Free Fall Collapse



The government could not have carried out such an attack and not get caught. After all, how look did it take for the Watergate Scandal to unravel?

There was no way the government could have acquired B-757's and B-767's that cannot be traced. Even APU's, engines, and time-sensitive line replacement equipment aboard those aircraft have their own unique histories related only to those aircraft that can be traced, not to mention fuel and servicing records for each of those aircraft that can be easily traced as well.

There is no way those aircraft could have been modified to fly under remote control or switched in controlled airspace or even at the airports without notice. In fact, I can reveal a switched aircraft in less than 30 minutes because I know what to look for and who to call because I have had such experience as a supervisor and inspector in the Air Force as well as for defense contractors.

Incidentally, the Air Force and a major defense contractor sent me to Pensacola, Florida years ago to develop a new inlet repair manual for the TF-39C engine used by the Air Force's C-5 transport.

I also have a long history for modifying large and small aircraft so I knew there was no way they could have modified the 9/11 airliners and not leave behind traceable evidence. As a pilot since 1969, I knew that the "Pilot for 9/11 Truth" website was lying, misleading readers and spreading disinformation about the 9/11 airliners, which is why I went head-to-head with the founder of that website in another message board a few years ago.

To sum that up, no one in government in their right mind would even thought of using the B-767 or the B-767 in a false flag operation unless their wish was to face the death penalty shortly after such an attack.

Think of it as an unmasked robber who is captured by the bank's cameras as he robs that bank and leaves behind his wallet containing his drivers license, credit and business cards and other personal information and his gas and maintenance receipts.

Thermite most certainly can be used as an
explosive. It's all in the device used to house thermite.
Here's an hours worth of what thermite can and can't do.
Also pay attention to the rushing sound thermite makes when
used as a cutter. Sound familiar ?
youtu.be...

a reply to: UnderKingsPeak

Thermite most certainly can be used as an explosive. It's all in the device used to house thermite.

Thermite in not an explosive, it is an incendiary.

Here's an hours worth of what thermite can and can't do. Also pay attention to the rushing sound thermite makes when used as a cutter. Sound familiar ?
youtu.be...

Even with cutter charges, explosives must still be used.

It took 1500 pounds of thermite to just to burn two steel legs of a tower at ground level and that was a piece of cake compared to the WTC Towers because there was no way anyone could have transported and plant over 10 truckloads of thermite above the 70th floors and not get caught.

a reply to: Rocker2013

When you can't explain something simply, that means you don't understand it very well(;

Nice paragraphs there little guy hahaha

a reply to: redchad

And the cars in the car parks a block away half incinerated half untouched, please explain?

Wouldn't it be prudent to tow the cars to another temp location in order to clear the area near ground zero?

a reply to: UnderKingsPeak

Just to let you know I have listened to that guy in your video and it is evident that he has no clue as to what it takes to prepare a steel frame building for explosive demolition. He speaks of explosions and yet, he cannot provide a single shred of evidence of explosions in any of the WTC videos.

originally posted by: redchad
Stay away from the rumours and stick to the facts you will be surprised

wheredidthetowersgo.com...

REDCHAD IS RIGHT ON THE MONEY!