Trying to resolve 9/11

If you truly believe the fire scenario makes sense. Then you should explain why the Penthouse came through the roof and met no resistance on the way down?
The NIST model shows resistance on the eastside? Are you man enough to admit the NIST model of collapse is wrong?

originally posted by: Hulseyreport

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Hulseyreport

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Hulseyreport

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Salander

You

The tendency to deceive and prevaricate comes from humans employed in government.

Like the blatant falsehood that Nukes brought down the WTC. When there is zero evidence of controlled demolition.

Says the fellow who can't see there is fundamental problems with NIST modelling of the WTC7 collapse. 
I still standing by for you reply about the Penthouse and Wave video!
Will you ever discuss that again?

Its not about NIST. You cannot provide evidence of columns being cut from the video, audio, seismic evidence. You cannot produce physical evidence of cut columns. You cannot produce evidence of a pressure wave with the force to cut steel columns. You cannot produce / cite evidence the steel at the WTC was exposed to the temperatures at which thermite burns.

Has lot to do with NIST because they drafted the officiial narrative about the collapse due to fire. 
You clueless about structural engineering too and what NIST said. 
I presented evidence of cuts, breaks, splits, and gaps. I believe I provided 20 images of steel at dumpsite from Oct 2001.
Most debunkers are clueless and think freefall can develop during a fire collapse. 

What do you not get there is zero evidence of controlled demolition.

Again.

Its not about NIST. You cannot provide evidence of columns being cut from the video, audio, seismic evidence. You cannot produce physical evidence of cut columns. You cannot produce evidence of a pressure wave with the force to cut steel columns. You cannot produce / cite evidence the steel at the WTC was exposed to the temperatures at which thermite burns.

Love how debunkers discount the evidence.
You inform me how the Iron melted on 9/11.
I demand a straightforward experiment that matches established conditions on 9/11.

So. Your all talk with no evidence of columns being actively cut with the collapse of each tower on video.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

Again..

Its not about NIST. You cannot provide evidence of columns being cut from the video, audio, seismic evidence. You cannot produce physical evidence of cut columns. You cannot produce evidence of a pressure wave with the force to cut steel columns. You cannot produce / cite evidence the steel at the WTC was exposed to the temperatures at which thermite burns.

You

I presented evidence of cuts, breaks, splits, and gaps.

Pieces showing signs of being overloaded, banged, and smashed in collapse. With on evidence / characteristics of being worked on by explosives or thermite.

By all means. Post those pictures again.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

Still see you will not answer.

What you need to cite. Cite a source that shows aluminum iron oxide thermite can ignite at 430 C, and under what circumstances / conditions.

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



The cuts are like the thermate experiments carried out by enigneer Jonathan Cole.

There alleged piece from WTC7 but I can't confirm it. The slag is Iron.




The cuts not made by human hands that clear as day.

So do I need to continue? You claim there know evidence of cut steel?

a reply to: Hulseyreport



This piece cut during cleanup or to take a sample?

a reply to: Hulseyreport



This piece that had mechanical tearing and shearing that has noting to do with thermite.

originally posted by: Hulseyreport
There alleged piece from WTC7 but I can't confirm it. The slag is Iron.

The cuts not made by human hands that clear as day.

Another piece cut by a larger thermal lance.

originally posted by: Hulseyreport
So do I need to continue? You claim there know evidence of cut steel?

On what. That you don’t know a cut by a cutting torch to save your like? Vs a thermal lance. With you posting random pictures out of context with no link to their source?

a reply to: neutronflux

I thought we were still on the 430 C thing?

Again...

Still see you will not answer.

What you need to cite. Cite a source that shows aluminum iron oxide thermite can ignite at 430 C, and under what circumstances / conditions.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

Moving on. A twofer.

One. The chips Harrit burnt where never positively found to have free Al2 by an actual analysis. If so. Please cite the analysis that positively confirmed free Al2?

Two, two of the chips burnt had less energy per gram than thermite which is strange for a reaction that is self sustaining.

originally posted by: neutronflux
a reply to: Hulseyreport

Moving on. A twofer.

One. The chips Harrit burnt where never positively found to have free Al2 by an actual analysis. If so. Please cite the analysis that positively confirmed free Al2?

Two, two of the chips burnt had less energy per gram than thermite which is strange for a reaction that is self sustaining.

I give up. Just post rubbish all day if you want. I absolutely have better things to be doing. 
You are one of most delusional debunkers i ever come across online and you still repeat questions that have already been answered in this thread.
I don't think you have the IQ to ever understand this topic and that's just life.
If anyone else has a genuine question- leave a reply I get to it. 

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

Then by all means quote where you answer this:
What you need to cite. Cite a source that shows aluminum iron oxide thermite can ignite at 430 C, and under what circumstances / conditions.

Then by all means quote where you addressed this:
The chips Harrit burnt where never positively found to have free Al2 by an actual analysis. If so. Please cite the analysis that positively confirmed free Al2?

Then by all means quote where you addressed this:
Two of the chips burnt had less energy per gram than thermite which is strange for a reaction that is self sustaining. And we are only getting started on your list.

At least I didn’t author this:

We use an inert air environment to avoid contamination from Oxygen and Carbon dioxide.

This is the composition of “air”.

Definition of air (Entry 1 of 2)
1a : the mixture of invisible odorless tasteless gases (such as nitrogen and oxygen) that surrounds the earth

www.merriam-webster.com...

Air has oxygen, and is not inert. So an air test is one with oxygen.

At least I didn’t post this picture of steel cut by a cutting torch as evidence of thermite.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

This is a 'hot' topic and considering the elapsed time since the event I think it highly unlikely there will ever be anything conclusive enough to satisfy everyone.

The grand jury investigation seems to have gone quiet - anyone have info on how that's proceeding?

quote.
Then by all means quote where you addressed this:
The chips Harrit burnt where never positively found to have free Al2 by an actual analysis. If so. Please cite the analysis that positively confirmed free Al2?

I give you one more chance and your last one.

What do you see here?

originally posted by: Pilgrum
a reply to: Hulseyreport

This is a 'hot'

topic and considering the elapsed time since the event I think it highly unlikely there will ever be anything conclusive enough to satisfy everyone.

The grand jury investigation seems to have gone quiet - anyone have info on how that's proceeding?

Grand Jury Tribunal could go on for years if they are going ahead with a new investigation? They generally carry it out secretly behind closed doors. You may only find out something if they prosecute people. I reasonably positive there will be pushback from whoever undertook this operation to bring down buildings on 9/11.  Consider how hard is for 9/11 families to get reports and documents released about the Saudi role in 9/11. The authorities have ruled  Saudi Arabia more important than the American people and 9/11 families knowing the truth.

a reply to: Hulseyreport

You

Then by all means quote where you addressed this:
The chips Harrit burnt where never positively found to have free Al2 by an actual analysis.

Quote what analysis was conducted that returned a positive result for free Al2. Like testing water with silver nitrate for chloride.

The study assumed free AL2 based on ratio to oxygen while totally disregarding other possibilities of the aluminum being bounded to something else.

Assuming based on ration is not a analysis that provides a positive indicator.

On a study that doesn’t explicitly state the size of the iron oxide particles, and doesn’t explicitly cite the size of the supposed free aluminum particles. (Which is hard to do anyway from a study that never isolated the supposed free aluminum particles to run an analysis which would prove positively the presence of free aluminum.). A study that wants to compare its particle sizes which are not explicitly stated to “energetic materials using sol–gel methodologies Author links open overlay panelT.MTillotson” which clearly states particle size.

And you did not answer:

Then by all means quote where you answer this:
What you need to cite. Cite a source that shows aluminum iron oxide thermite can ignite at 430 C, and under what circumstances / conditions.

Then by all means quote where you addressed this:
The chips Harrit burnt where never positively found to have free Al2 by an actual analysis. If so. Please cite the analysis that positively confirmed free Al2?

Then by all means quote where you addressed this:
Two of the chips burnt had less energy per gram than thermite which is strange for a reaction that is self sustaining. And we are only getting started on your list.

So? We are up to the two chips two chips had more energy than is possible