Trying to resolve 9/11

a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

You even post pictures that contradict everything you just said. I don't even think you watch the videos you post?
Oxy-Acetylene Welding torch pictures display a straight aligned measured cut! ( look again the image i posted)
Observe the WTC sample video- Again the cuts are straight not erratic and jerky.
Car experiment- what you posting this to prove? Part of the steel roof caved in? We know thermatic material can cut shapes like I posted. Most of the slag would be wiped away in the rubble pile and when steel got moved.

Again. The whole argument.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

You keep posting my image. Yet you can't substantiate it was cut by a torch? Show me online copy of 9/11 welder cutting steel like this? I worked for a large engineering company and no welder would cut steel in this irregular way. You avoided showing the other piece that cut below it, that indeed more establishes a torch did not cut this.

A blatant false argument by. This has been repeatedly posted for you.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

Show me a welder cutting the steel like that on 9/11

Still don’t know what your referring to?

I have repeatedly posted a backyard do it yourselfer that made a clearer cut than the column you posted.

neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

You showing pieces cut by cutting torch. You are ridiculous.

You

I have doubts human hands cut this. The piece below is also cut, its look like it melted away. We never know the truth.

It’s actually kind of a sloppy cut

Again...

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

I give up. Just post rubbish all day if you want

Your the one posting falsehoods.
You

originally posted by: Hulseyreport
For me this evidence of cut steel by nanothermite.
Same steel piece- and exposed to high heat.

This is steel cut by a cutting torch

m.youtube.com...
Oxy/acetylene torch cutting tips

This is NIST taking samples with a cutting torch as far as I can tell. It is the Internet.

Steel Samples from WTC Towers after 9/11 (Clip 1, part
m.youtube.com...

This is thin steel worked on by thermite

1/2 ton of thermite VS SUV mythbusters
www.dailymotion.com...

The picture below posted by you is not steel cut by thermite. It is steel cut by torch during cleanup or sampling.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

You the one playing the looks like game. Looks like has nothing to with having the ability to support a thermite reaction.

Back to the MEK test huh.


You

They did three investigations to confirm Aluminum was present. A DSC test, a XED test and MEK test all three confirmed elemental AI and Iron oxide.

You

MEK test

Please post the procedure that is used to show free elemental aluminum in a”MEK test”

In fact, please post the procedure for the “ DSC test“ to find elemental aluminum?

I don’t know about elemental aluminum, but

By Oystein

The results ranged from 1.5 to 7.5 kiloJoules per gram, a wide spread that makes "high-tech nano-stuff" an unlikely explanation. More importantly, 2 of the sample released more than 4kJ/g of energy, which is the maximum energy thermite could possibly release due to the basic laws of this universe.

www.internationalskeptics.com...

Was two more of your blatant falsehoods document and added to you list.

When you going to ever answer these simple true or false questions?

You use XED by comparing the peaks from known samples. Is that false? The Harrit peaks are close or dead on for industrial coatings, not aluminum iron oxide thermite. Is that false?

a reply to: Hulseyreport

This was what was quoted from FEMA

Fires at WTC 7

www.fema.gov...

Currently, there is limited information about the ignition and development of fires at WTC 7, as well as about the specific fuels that may have been involved during the course of the fire. It is likely that fires started as a result of debris from the collapse of WTC 1.
According to fire service personnel, fires were initially seen to be present on non-contiguous floors on the south side of WTC 7 at approximately floors 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, and 19. The presence of fire and smoke on lower floors is also confirmed by the early television news coverage of WTC 7, which indicated light-colored
smoke rising from the lower floors of WTC 7.
Video footage indicated that the majority of the smoke appeared to be coming from the south side of the building at that time as opposed to the other sides of the building. This is corroborated by Figure 5-17, a photograph taken at 3:36 p.m. that shows the south face of WTC 7 covered with a thick cloud of smoke, and only small amounts of smoke emanating from the 27th and 28th floors of the west face of WTC 7.
News coverage after 1:30 p.m. showed light-colored smoke flowing out of openings on the upper floors of the south side of the building. Another photograph (Figure 5-18) of the skyline at 3:25 p.m., taken from the southwest, shows a large volume of dark smoke coming from all but the lowest levels of WTC 7, where white smoke is emanating. The mode of fire and smoke spread was unclear; however, it may have been propagated through interior shafts, between floors along the south façade that may have been damaged, or other internal openings, as well as the floor slab/exterior façade connections.
It appeared that water on site was limited due to a 20-inch broken water main in Vesey Street. Although WTC 7 was sprinklered, it did not appear that there would have been a sufficient quantity of water to control the growth and spread of the fires on multiple floors. In addition, the firefighters made the decision fairly early on not to attempt to fight the fires, due in part to the damage to WTC 7 from the collapsing towers. Hence, the fire progressed throughout the day fairly unimpeded by automatic or manual suppression activities.
A review of photos and videos indicates that there were limited fires on the north, east, and west faces of the building. One eyewitness who saw the building from a 30th floor apartment approximately 4 blocks away to the northwest noted that fires in the building were not visible from that perspective. On some of the lower floors, where the firefighters saw fires for extended periods of time from the south side, there appeared to be walls running in an east to west direction, at least on floors 5 and 6, that would have compartmentalized the north side from the south side. There were also air plenums along the east and west walls and partially along the north walls of these floors instead of windows that may have further limited fires from extending out of these floors and, therefore, were not visible from sides other than the south.
As the day progressed, fires were observed on the east face of the 11th, 12th, and 28th floors (see Figure 5-19). The Securities and Exchange Commission occupied floors 11 through 13. Prior to collapse, fire was seen to have broken out windows on at least the north and east faces of WTC 7 on some of the lower levels.
On the north face, photographs and videos show that the fires were located on approximately the 7th, 8th, 11th, 12th, and 13th floors. American Express Bank International occupied the 7th and 8th floors. The 7th floor also held the OEM generators and day tank. Photographs of the west face show fire and smoke on the 29th and 30th floors.
It is important to note that floors 5 through 7 contained structural elements that were important to supporting the structure of the overall building. The 5th and 7th floors were diaphragm floors that contained transfer girders and trusses. These floors transferred loads from the upper floors to the structural members and foundation system that was built prior to the WTC 7 office tower. Fire damage in the 5th to 7th floors of the building could, therefore, have damaged essential structural elements.

Can you cite actual evidence that it’s wrong or you just feel you don’t want it to be more correct than you.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

This was what was quoted from FEMA

Fires at WTC 7

www.fema.gov...

Currently, there is limited information about the ignition and development of fires at WTC 7, as well as about the specific fuels that may have been involved during the course of the fire. It is likely that fires started as a result of debris from the collapse of WTC 1.
According to fire service personnel, fires were initially seen to be present on non-contiguous floors on the south side of WTC 7 at approximately floors 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, and 19. The presence of fire and smoke on lower floors is also confirmed by the early television news coverage of WTC 7, which indicated light-colored
smoke rising from the lower floors of WTC 7.
Video footage indicated that the majority of the smoke appeared to be coming from the south side of the building at that time as opposed to the other sides of the building. This is corroborated by Figure 5-17, a photograph taken at 3:36 p.m. that shows the south face of WTC 7 covered with a thick cloud of smoke, and only small amounts of smoke emanating from the 27th and 28th floors of the west face of WTC 7.
News coverage after 1:30 p.m. showed light-colored smoke flowing out of openings on the upper floors of the south side of the building. Another photograph (Figure 5-18) of the skyline at 3:25 p.m., taken from the southwest, shows a large volume of dark smoke coming from all but the lowest levels of WTC 7, where white smoke is emanating. The mode of fire and smoke spread was unclear; however, it may have been propagated through interior shafts, between floors along the south façade that may have been damaged, or other internal openings, as well as the floor slab/exterior façade connections.
It appeared that water on site was limited due to a 20-inch broken water main in Vesey Street. Although WTC 7 was sprinklered, it did not appear that there would have been a sufficient quantity of water to control the growth and spread of the fires on multiple floors. In addition, the firefighters made the decision fairly early on not to attempt to fight the fires, due in part to the damage to WTC 7 from the collapsing towers. Hence, the fire progressed throughout the day fairly unimpeded by automatic or manual suppression activities.
A review of photos and videos indicates that there were limited fires on the north, east, and west faces of the building. One eyewitness who saw the building from a 30th floor apartment approximately 4 blocks away to the northwest noted that fires in the building were not visible from that perspective. On some of the lower floors, where the firefighters saw fires for extended periods of time from the south side, there appeared to be walls running in an east to west direction, at least on floors 5 and 6, that would have compartmentalized the north side from the south side. There were also air plenums along the east and west walls and partially along the north walls of these floors instead of windows that may have further limited fires from extending out of these floors and, therefore, were not visible from sides other than the south.
As the day progressed, fires were observed on the east face of the 11th, 12th, and 28th floors (see Figure 5-19). The Securities and Exchange Commission occupied floors 11 through 13. Prior to collapse, fire was seen to have broken out windows on at least the north and east faces of WTC 7 on some of the lower levels.
On the north face, photographs and videos show that the fires were located on approximately the 7th, 8th, 11th, 12th, and 13th floors. American Express Bank International occupied the 7th and 8th floors. The 7th floor also held the OEM generators and day tank. Photographs of the west face show fire and smoke on the 29th and 30th floors.
It is important to note that floors 5 through 7 contained structural elements that were important to supporting the structure of the overall building. The 5th and 7th floors were diaphragm floors that contained transfer girders and trusses. These floors transferred loads from the upper floors to the structural members and foundation system that was built prior to the WTC 7 office tower. Fire damage in the 5th to 7th floors of the building could, therefore, have damaged essential structural elements.

Can you cite actual evidence that it’s wrong or you just feel you don’t want it to be more correct than you.

I know you don't do facts.
This is direct from the NIST study.
The fires were observed only at 1.30pm on northeast side. Almost three hours after towers collapse.
Which raises some questions about how the fire started? 



There reports of random fires on the southside that died out at 12.30 pm.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

originally posted by: Hulseyreport
For me this evidence of cut steel by nanothermite.
Same steel piece- and exposed to high heat.

The piece was not cut by thermite. It was cut by torch. And looks like it was cut by the same type of torch in the video below

Steel Samples from WTC Towers after 9/11 (Clip 1, part 1)
m.youtube.com...

This picture looks like a sample was taken. Something of interest was cut around by torch. And it’s kinda sloppy. With a turn. A change in direction mid cut by hand. A change in direction or angle that cannot be made by thermite because it cannot be focused like a cutting torch flame, and the way thermite slags/blows material out of its cut.


The cut looks nothing like the cuts you posted by thermite. They all have a wide area washout effect from not being able to focus a flame like a cutting torch flame. None of the below pictures show a cut changing direction during mid cut. Just large washed out areas from not being able to focus a flame like a cutting torch.






The only thing you keep doing is proving your willingness to post blatant falsehoods.

 I actually read the official account unlike most debunkers.

This another nugget of info.


For some odd reason the entire fire protection inside the building system went offline when WTC2 collapsed? I don't understand how that can happen? NIST doesn't seem to know why either!

NIST gives us the fire resistance for columns, trusses and girders.



NIST claim fires were only heating columns up to 15 minutes. There entire theory is a joke based on the information they provide.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

The jet impacts cut fire water mains and electrical services. If possible, electrical services were probably isolated to the site for the safety of the first responders.

Can you be more specific concerning your new BS argument.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

What are you rambling about?

Uneven heating and thermal stress are the real dangerous

Again. WTC 5 had floor connection failures.








Was the fire loading of WTC 5 different than WTC 7?

WTC 7 having similar damage and fire loading as WTC 5, why wouldn’t WTC 7 have floor connection failures like WTC 5?

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

The jet impacts cut fire water mains and electrical services. If possible, electrical services were probably isolated to the site for the safety of the first responders.

Can you be more specific concerning your new BS argument.

Not correct, because alarms were going off inside WTC7 (their video). So the power was not knocked off. NIST could even come up with an explanation to why the entire fire system in the building went offline after WTC2 collapsed. It very mysterious why the fire alarms would not go off when smoke is present. Then fires only appearing three hours after collapse another mystery. 

WTC5 contradicts everything you claim. You can still see the support structure is maintaining the building together. 
Figure 4.18. See the columns and girders and trusses haven't come down, even though there was a limited collapse. Buildings have a redundancy to keep the construction up. 
NIST what you to believe one girder here on a floor caused the entire building from each corner to fall apart!

By knocking out the fire alarms, you affect the water sprinkler system mostly likely. The conspirators would not want this fire going out before they brought it down.

Another nugget. Sprinklers had adequate water to put out the fires.


If you needed anymore evidence, this building was brought down. That fire system was likely knocked out on 9/11 (manually) and fires were allowed to burn away.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

It’s mysterious that a block of buildings hit by jets. Hit by falling material from the jet wreckage. Jet impacts that dumped and ignited jet full in elevator shafts and ignited. Building floors that lost power from jet impacts. Buildings that were damaged from two 1000 foot buildings collapsing and caught fire. It’s a mystery that a site devastated by jet impacts, fires, buildings collapsing were degraded and electricity deranged to the point fire alarm systems didn’t work as expected. You don’t say.

The truth movement. Take something expected and make it mystical for a fabricated mythology.

Why would anything you post be considered credible at this point?

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

Let’s start with this blatant falsehood you posted and tried to blame was it Jones for?

Stop repeating things I have previously answered.
Harrit chips were analyzed in inert atmosphere.

Let’s add this one in..,

Or like you posted the below picture as proof of thermite when it was obviously cut and sooted up by a cutting torch?

You

originally posted by: Hulseyreport
For me this evidence of cut steel by nanothermite.
Same steel piece- and exposed to high heat.

Why would I trust anything you post at this point?

So? There is no evidence of cut columns? So you fabricated your own mythology? Sad.

And this blatant falsehood by you

Basille were independent scentists who contacted Steve Jones for samples to test. They confirmed the chips had thermitic properties.

Really. Shame. Another blatant falsehood.

Any Updates on Mark Basile's Study?
We skipped August.

66 months now.

www.internationalskeptics.com...

Basile never published results of testing that confirmed Harrit’s results.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

You the one playing the looks like game. Looks like has nothing to with having the ability to support a thermite reaction.

Back to the MEK test huh.


You

They did three investigations to confirm Aluminum was present. A DSC test, a XED test and MEK test all three confirmed elemental AI and Iron oxide.

You

MEK test

Please post the procedure that is used to show free elemental aluminum in a”MEK test”

In fact, please post the procedure for the “ DSC test“ to find elemental aluminum?

I don’t know about elemental aluminum, but

By Oystein

The results ranged from 1.5 to 7.5 kiloJoules per gram, a wide spread that makes "high-tech nano-stuff" an unlikely explanation. More importantly, 2 of the sample released more than 4kJ/g of energy, which is the maximum energy thermite could possibly release due to the basic laws of this universe.

www.internationalskeptics.com...

Was two more of your blatant falsehoods document and added to you list.

When you going to ever answer these simple true or false questions?

You use XED by comparing the peaks from known samples. Is that false? The Harrit peaks are close or dead on for industrial coatings, not aluminum iron oxide thermite. Is that false?

a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

By knocking out the fire alarms, you affect the water sprinkler system mostly likely. The conspirators would not want this fire going out before they brought it down.

How? Your totally clueless on how a building fire sprinkler system works.

Fire Sprinklers are Simple, Reliable and Proven
Fire sprinklers are very simple.
The sprinkler is just a plug that holds back water in a pipe similar to your other plumbing pipes.
Heat from a fire will break a glass tube or melt a solder plug which releases the water.
The water comes out as a spray that covers the area immediately around the sprinkler, putting out the fire.
Only the one sprinkler closest to the fire opens. All the other sprinklers remain sealed so the water is confined to just the area of the fire.

homefiresprinkler.org...

a reply to: Hulseyreport

I imagine if the there was fire water pumps, they were independent of the fire alarm system too. A sprinkler cuts loose, the pressure in the fire header drops, the pump kicks on to maintain pressure to set point.

You should actually research before putting your foot on your mouth.

a reply to: neutronflux

You created your own “evidence”.
Now again... "I counted them on the video did i not?"
Is that after your claim you tweaked the audio? So you are manipulating the sound? Where, if the “explosions” actually had the force to cut steel columns, the detonations would be clear, obvious, and would have echoed about manhattan. Let’s say you claim eight loud bangs that are expected from any large building fire, or from a structure failing by overloading. Eight bangs who’s audio you manipulated, is that false?

Tweaked and manipulated the sound...oh sweet baby Jeesus.


Tell you what

1.Download the original Huibregtse clip:
archive.org...

2.Get a decent Audio Editor (i use WavePad)

3.Since explosive detonations create low frequencies this is where you want to concentrate on. So a Band-Pass filter must be used.
See where i whipped mine: 96-169Hz
Essentially this operation disregards the helicopter and random street noise, leaving the juicy bits.

4. Report back if your results vary.

originally posted by: democracydemo
a reply to: neutronflux

You created your own “evidence”.
Now again... "I counted them on the video did i not?"
Is that after your claim you tweaked the audio? So you are manipulating the sound? Where, if the “explosions” actually had the force to cut steel columns, the detonations would be clear, obvious, and would have echoed about manhattan. Let’s say you claim eight loud bangs that are expected from any large building fire, or from a structure failing by overloading. Eight bangs who’s audio you manipulated, is that false?

Tweaked and manipulated the sound...oh sweet baby Jeesus.

Tell you what

1.Download the original Huibregtse clip:
archive.org...

2.Get a decent Audio Editor (i use WavePad)

3.Since explosive detonations create low frequencies this is where you want to concentrate on. So a Band-Pass filter must be used.
See where i whipped mine: 96-169Hz
Essentially this operation disregards the helicopter and random street noise, leaving the juicy bits.

4. Report back if your results vary.

Don’t have too. Your created evidence and frequencies are not reflected in the seismic data for detentions with the force to cut steel columns. By frequency, how can you tell if a fire cracker sets off vs a pressurized air conditioning unit exploding in a fire. Other then the ac unit exploding would be more forceful. Again, nobody is say there were no explosions. But, keep on making your own reality.

And the whole argument.

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: democracydemo
a reply to: neutronflux

With ease:

The same old out of context with no attempt at quantification argument.

Nobody disagrees there was explosions from closed pressurized systems like refrigeration units and air conditioning units cutting loose in the fires. And nobody disagrees there wasn’t a pop when floor connections failed as in WTC 5 being an example.


A detonation that makes a transient pressure wave in the atmosphere where the pressure wave has the force to cut steel columns is entirely different.

And your easily debunked again.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: democracydemo

You didn’t hit a nerve with me. You created your own “evidence”.

Now again...

I counted them on the video did i not?

Is that after your claim you tweaked the audio? So you are manipulating the sound? Where, if the “explosions” actually had the force to cut steel columns, the detonations would be clear, obvious, and would have echoed about manhattan.

Let’s say you claim eight loud bangs that are expected from any large building fire, or from a structure failing by overloading.

Eight bangs who’s audio you manipulated, is that false?

Next, there is no way CD systems would survive the jet impacts and fires to initiate collapse on the floors impacted by the jets as attested to by the video evidence.

Next you claim:

Nature of material used to cut core colums (Nano-thermite anyone)?

If you are saying nano-thermite cut the columns by shockwave, it still would have to create a pressure wave to cut the columns. The energy created by that shockwave is still going to produce audible energy of at least 130 dB.

If you are saying thermite cut the core columns, then why is the no visible white hot sparking from the WTC video evidence. Why would there be “explosive” sounds. Thermite burns relatively slow. Why is there no glowing metal from the collapse video?



Next. You.

Would, lets say, a normal shaped cutting charges even leave this evidence in the first place? Provide evidence for your claim!

But you are not claiming shape cutting charges are you?

You claim eight explosions from the video you “tweaked”?

I did some tinkering with the original video/audio and ended up with this:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Oh. Sorry. You tinkered. Nice that you “tinkered” to create your “evidence” that should be obvious.

Anyway.

You again.

Would, lets say, a normal shaped cutting charges even leave this evidence in the first place? Provide evidence for your claim!

Let’s say you claimed eight loud bands you
Tinkered into “evidence”.

You claim eight cutting charges? Well, flight 175 probably took out about 7 core columns, and the tower did not fall.

Some estimates are more than 7 core columns taken out by Flight 175, with no serious consideration the tower would have collapsed from the jet impact.

That indicates your eight supposed “explosions” could not be cutting charges on individual core columns to take out enough of the 44 core columns to initiate collapse. For you fantasy to work, the supposed explosives would had to be wide area in nature. Not eight shape charges only taking out eight columns. Explosions that would need to take out multiple core columns with each detonation. Explosions that would look like the one event that is known to have taken out 7 core columns, and produced a seismic event of .7 magnitude.




Again. CD systems would not have survived the jet impacts and fires to initiate collapse of the twin towers as attested to by video evidence.

You are falsely confusing expect sounds of “explosions” from a building fire, and expected from a building failing from being overloaded.

You have produced no evidence of explosions with the force to cut steel columns. Explosions that would be obvious, awe inspiring, and echoed about manhattan.
Very similar to the explosive sounds starting around 4:14 mark of the FDR drive video

18 Views of "Plane Impact" in South Tower | 9/11 World Trade Center [HD DOWNLOAD]
m.youtube.com...

How far is FDR drive fromWTC 2?

But you only have audio you “tinkered” with from expected normal building fires, or sounds from a building being overloaded.

You cannot produce physical evidence of columns cut by pyrotechnics. Especially when the truth movement claims the resistance of each floor had to be removed by removing the structural steel of each floor.

a reply to: neutronflux

I just gave you a way to debunk my findings. You won't and can't, so you rant -with some rigor(again).

Snip...

If you are saying nano-thermite cut the columns by shockwave, it still would have to create a pressure wave to cut the columns. The energy created by that shockwave is still going to produce audible energy of at least 130 dB.

Do tell more. How do you know this about nano-thermitic material behavior? You do have proof don't you?