Did nano-thermite take down the WTC?

Did nano-thermite take down the WTC?

www.russiatoday.com

Could the most audacious terrorist attack in history be a “sophisticated masterpiece of demolition”?

(visit the link for the full news article)

Actually a video inteview by Russia Today. So please start the video on the left inside.

It looks like the russian media giant is opening the can of worms. The truth will eventually emerge. It is just sad that people can't see the conspiracy and the facts that a third building collapsed in seconds and it wasnt even hit by a plane.

www.russiatoday.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

This is very interesting and i hope that it catches the attention of more american citizens that just the populatoin of ATS.

reply to post by TheOracle


Russia Today
Nano Thermite Took Down The WTC Part 1 of 2


Russia Today
Niels Harrit "No Doubt" the WTC buildings were Demolished on 9/11 Pt-2

RUSSIA TODAY

Did nano-thermite take down the WTC?


09 July, 2009, 12:40

Could the most audacious terrorist attack in history be a sophisticated masterpiece of demolition?

Thats what chemistry professor Niels Harrit has been asking, following his investigation of the World Trade Centre rubble, which has revealed traces of explosives.

RT: Professor Niels Harrit, you examined the rubble that came from the World Trade Center. What did you find in it?

Niels Harrit: Well, in there we find the remains of what we characterize as thermetic material, and this is a very energetic material which can be used either for melting iron, or it can be designed as an explosive.

Read more

RT: So, what effect would nano-thermite have had on the collapse of the towers on September 11?

Niels Harrit: Actually, within this group of authors behind this paper, which we published in April, there are diverging opinions about what this nano-thermite was used for. And my opinion is: we should not speculate on a scenario for the demolition. There is no doubt that the three towers were demolished on 9/11. But beyond that there is very solid evidence that some thermite has been used for melting the steel beams. We do not know if the thermite that we have found is the same thermite which has been used for melting the beams. Its very, very possible that different varieties were used, and I personally am certain that conventional explosives were used too, in abundance.

RT: When you say in abundance, how much do you mean?

Niels Harrit: Tons! Hundreds of tons! Many, many, many tons!

RT: So we are not just talking about nano-thermite. In fact, we are talking about both nano-thermite and conventional explosives used in large quantities

Niels Harrit: We have not found remains or traces of conventional explosives. Actually, weve suggested and recommended to NIST, which is the National Institute of Standards and Technology, that they should look for remains or traces of explosives, and they have refused to do that every time. They have not investigated it.

Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe
Authors: Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley, Bradley R. Larsen.

The Open Chemical Physics Journal

www.youtube.com...

[edit on 7/14/09 by SPreston]

Thank you Preston, you presented it better than I could have done

Just to be clear for those new to this topic, very few believe that thermite alone brought the towers down.

Most 9/11 researchers believe that conventional explosives were also used as evidenced in videos and multitudes of witness testimony.

Originally posted by SPreston

Niels Harrit: We have not found remains or traces of conventional explosives. Actually, weve suggested and recommended to NIST, which is the National Institute of Standards and Technology, that they should look for remains or traces of explosives, and they have refused to do that every time. They have not investigated it.

It kind of pisses me off that the NIST WTC team, on one hand, admits to never looking for explosive residues of any kind, but on the other hand, says it never found any evidence of explosives. Duh?? What do you think people think, when they see NIST say that they didn't find evidence of explosives? You'd think that they actually looked, then, right? Wrong.

Bush Science.


Btw, I DON'T think conventional explosives were used. At least, if "conventional" means TNT or C4, or anything that common, then no, it's pretty out of the question to me. For a number of reasons: (a) they are primitive technologies that would probably be obsolete to the military for these purposes, (b) they are very common and scientists would naturally look for their signatures, and (c) they are very, very loud, for producing a relatively harmless amount of force. It would take a very large amount of TNT or C4 not just because the buildings were big in dimension, but because steel is so strong that it is hard to pierce with these explosives in the first place.

Something "more" conventional that nano-thermite, in the sense that something was also exploding within the towers, sure, but nothing very conventional I would wager. Even a large bomb in the core is a huge step up over a number of C4 charges imo.

[edit on 14-7-2009 by bsbray11]

Originally posted by _BoneZ_
Just to be clear for those new to this topic, very few believe that thermite alone brought the towers down.

Most 9/11 researchers believe that conventional explosives were also used as evidenced in videos and multitudes of witness testimony.

Yep.

Jones has constructed a rube goldberg contraption whereby thermite was the fuse for the conventional explosives.

It surely wasn't to hide conventional fuses, cuz he says that detonators would also be needed for the thermite.

It is now becoming more widely acknowledged that an advanced thermitic material was found int the dust. However, I don't think thermite alone could have achieved the manner in which the towers collapsed (I'm talking twin towers, WT7 could have been achieved with thermite alone IMO). I have looked into the possibility of a 4th gen nuclear device used in conjunction with thermite or other cutting charges. There is a thread about this here. The thread links to a site written by a Finnish scientist here. It is translated to English from Finnish, so it may seem hard to read at times, but worth a look if you're interested.

Before anyone states what they believe obvious, that a H-bomb would have destroyed all of manhattan, it is believed that the technology is available to create mini-yield, directed fusion reactions which would leave little detectable radiation and produce a directed beam of radiation that would sublimate (directly from solid to a gas state) dense substances such as steel and vaporise water in concrete, turning it into incredibly fine dust.

I'm still on the fence regarding this theory, but it does seem to have some plausible evidence. But I thought I'd just throw it out there for you ATS'ers who hadn't looked into it. Cheers

Originally posted by Curious and Concerned
WT7 could have been achieved with thermite alone IMO

There is a very good interview with NYPD officer Craig Bartmer, who was near the lobby of WTC7 when it began collapsing. You can find the video interviews on YouTube. He says very clearly that an explosion ripped through the lobby at the same instant the building began free-falling. He is very sure about it, saying he knows what a bomb going off in his face is when he sees it. For what it's worth. Also the most powerful seismic signals from WTC7 occurred before the global collapse began and were equal in strength to the "plane impact" seismic signals from the towers. Anyone familiar with the testimony of explosions in the basement simultaneous with the impacts should find that interesting. I doubt that the plane impacts themselves would have actually produced significant seismic signals in the bedrock after the undeniable dampening effects of hundreds of feet of a massive steel frame grid. But no one has to take my word for it. Just my 2 cents I guess.