Explosive Testimony: Niels Harrit – Chemist

Originally posted by benoni
Using randi to debunk the thermite theory reminds me of the Catholic Church turning a blind eye to paedophilia......randi supports the Fairytale, obviously they arent going to agree with Harrit.


...and your right, anonymous posts on randi do not qualify as capable debunks.

Wheres some PHD'ed professionals with sound backgrounds in key areas debunking the thermite theory, rather than some kid sitting in his basement??


Ooops....there are none!

So wheres the repeated debunks roboe???
I'm waiting bud....

dont worry, they are debunking it on the page he posted anyway... ive found a link to this page too

the911forum.freeforums.org...

there you have Dr. Greening discuss his debunking with other people and to be honest, they really kick his ass.
almost every post of him has flaws, and he changes his opinion from 1 post to the next. When some1 comes up with a theory he dismisses it, f.e that they wouldnt use this material cause it would be to expensive... Well thats really science... For me roboe has debunked himself here. He picked one post as an answer and didnt even read the whole thread... Its like kicking yourself in your face...

Funny, because thats their MO it seems.....

Post anything and say anything that will counter the fact that the OS is a Fairytale, even if its a lie!!


So these dudes come on here and go so far as to lie to defend the OS....

Now why would someone do that??

Defending a position with lies is hardly a defence...

maybe roboes new at the job and still finding his feet???

Back to your research roboe.....we are laughing at you!!

Gee, I never saw that reaction coming

Originally posted by roboe
Gee, I never saw that reaction coming

yeah well you should research better... Your defender of the OS Dr. Greening says on the 911forums in his second post.

Just noticed that this topic has already been taken up by the JREFers. I see the debunking crew over there are rolling out the usual suggestion that the red chips come from some kind of paint. This is a very weak rebuttal since ordinary commercial paints - ones that may have been used in the Twin Towers - are not bi-layered or magnetic , as are the red chips in question.

so even he dismisses the fact, that its only red paint...

Originally posted by TrueFalseso even he dismisses the fact, that its only red paint...

He is also dismissing the fact that it is nanuu nanuu therm*te

ETA: Not to mention that his post was made before Sunstealers' two posts over at JREF.

reply to post by binkbonk

Considering, whoever was responsible had already started fires in building 7,

It is comments like this that keep you guys from finding the "truth" you so desperately claim to be in search of .

You have absolutely NOTHING , at all , to substantiate this claim . And yet , you state it as though it were proven fact .

The truth movement sustains itself only by repeating unfounded claims , repeating outright lies , and repeating claims that have been proven time and again to be wrong .

The majority of the TM is like a dog chasing it's tail . It never gets there .

Who started the fires in building 7 , and why ? Please source something showing that WTC7 was already on fire before being impacted by debris . Otherwise , you are doing nothing other than muddying the waters .

One thing that I am curious about ... Has any of this supposed "dust" ever been proven to have come from the WTC ?

I'm not looking for bullshat answers , I want to see chain of custody , etc . I want someone to show conclusive proof that the dust that Jones tested came from WTC . I don't want to take him at his word , I don't want a boat-load of witnesses who claim to know for a fact that it did , and I don't want some link to a truther site .

If you guys are gonna put that much faith into his findings , you should be eager and willing to provide what I'm asking for . Chain of events and chain of custody . Documented / certified by an unbiased neutral .

I'll be waiting . Until then , his findings prove nothing of thermite at WTC . Not that I believe he has made a case anyway .

Originally posted by okbmd
reply to post by binkbonk

 

Considering, whoever was responsible had already started fires in building 7,

It is comments like this that keep you guys from finding the "truth" you so desperately claim to be in search of .

You have absolutely NOTHING , at all , to substantiate this claim . And yet , you state it as though it were proven fact.

The truth movement sustains itself only by repeating unfounded claims , repeating outright lies , and repeating claims that have been proven time and again to be wrong .

The majority of the TM is like a dog chasing it's tail . It never gets there .

Who started the fires in building 7 , and why ? Please source something showing that WTC7 was already on fire before being impacted by debris . Otherwise , you are doing nothing other than muddying the waters .

Well, i can say the exact same thing about people who believe the OS. There is not one DEFINITIVE explanation to why WTC 7 caught on fire. The OS'ers just blindly jump to the conclusion and insinuate WTC 7 spontaneously combusted because the North Tower fell on it. Please, show me your FACTS that substantiate your claims, that falling debris started the fires in WTC 7.

It's the same thing with the OSer's when it comes to the visible squibs that were seen. Again, OSer's are just blindly jumpimg to conclusions and insinuations that this was air pressure being released. NEVER, has this been seen or witnessed in any other collapse, but it has been seen in just about every demolition.

Originally posted by okbmd
reply to post by binkbonk

 

Who started the fires in building 7 , and why ?

The same people that planted and detonated the explosives that clearly (to anyone without a fantasy veil over their eyes) brought down Building 7 in mere seconds, in a controlled demolition...

How did the explosives get planted and detonated in Building 7? How did the fires get ignited? The NIST report doesn't tell us that, doesn't even mention it. That report is a load of crap. And if you buy it, I believe you to be a moron.

As a young College student and a seeker of truth here is what I think relates to 9/11...Just my views from the knowledge I have learned and studied

“Truth about the War on Terrorism”
By Rather Not Say
August 2010

War on Terrorism
What a joke
As the Bush’s and Saudi’s
Make billions off dead bodies
As 9/11 was a hoax
To get the Carlyle Group and the United Defense
To build weapons for the Bin-Laden’s and their trend
As they were big investors
In Bush’s companies and war schemes
Which they made billions from weaponry
That the U.S. uses and abuses
Killing more than a half million Iraqi civilians
Starting in 2003 for oil, gas lines, and fake nuclear crimes
Instead of finding Osama and his Al-Qaeda allies
So Bush invades Iraq who didn’t commit a crime
So Dick Cheney could make a New Iraq
And have Halliburton on his back
As they both commit war crimes
Leaving 5,000 U.S. troops to die
And leaving us all to cry

Start

With the anger from my past
And how I was put into a trance
From birth, youth, and my teen days
I pretend to be something that was made
From athletes, actors, and the media game
I strived to be the greatest thang
From looks to brains
Now I’m about to go insane
As I realize I was something I wasn’t
For caring about what people think
Instead of smoking weed and being a hippie

Now my mind is about to explode
For not giving a # no more
And seeing the truth in the world
And the United States fake wars
As 3,000 people died in 9/11
Which was staged from the very beginnin’
As you can see the bombs exploding in the towers
Killing our fathers, mothers, and children like cowards

Making me want to punch a hole through the White House ceiling
For lying and killing
Innocent Americas for no reason
So Bush, the Bin-Laden’s, and Saudi’s
Could win the whole lottery
And make billions on taxes
To fund wars to kill fake terrorist savages
While we create more
By killing innocent little girls
From bombs, bullets, and grenades
Killing hundreds of Iraqi civilians everyday
Making them want to get revenge
For killing their whole family in a day
As they are left cold and alone
With the will to kill or die a hero
For their families name
That is now with Allah in their dreams

Chorus

War on Terrorism
What a joke
As the Bush’s and Saudi’s
Make billions off dead bodies
As 9/11 was a hoax
To get the Carlyle Group and the United Defense
To build weapons for the Bin-Laden’s and their trend
As they were big investors
In Bush’s companies and war schemes
Which they made billions from weaponry
That the U.S. uses and abuses
Killing more than a half million Iraqi civilians
Starting in 2003 for oil, gas lines, and fake nuclear crimes
Instead of finding Osama and his Al-Qaeda allies
So Bush invades Iraq who didn’t commit a crime
So Dick Cheney could make a New Iraq
And have Halliburton on his side
As they both commit war crimes
Leaving 5,000 U.S. troops to die
And leaving us all to cry

Start Song

With the lies
I am forced to cry
For being so blind
As thousands die
From American crimes
As we didn’t know any better
But to protect our families
From evil terrorist figures

As Bush created the Iraqi War
When there were no missiles
Or a threat from Iraq
Who never killed any of our civilian dads
As we take all of theirs
From false leads and papers
That leave their college men in danger
As the troops bust in their doors at dinner
And point guns at their little sisters
As everyone screams in misery
Asking themselves why their family?

While we live the America dream
And don’t care about looking overseas
As it is really affecting our country
From the government taking our taxes for war
Intend of feeding our families who are poor
As we scrape by to survive
On food stamps and dimes
To give money to war crimes

As our country is not protected
With few troopers and homeland security present
While we leave our boarders open to terror
That is currently happening with the Drug War affair
Or Letting the Saudi’s, Al-Qaeda, and the Bin-Laden’s into our colleges
So they can think of new ways to dissolve us
As 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi’s
And the U.S. didn’t investigate any of their stories
For Saudi Arabia has invested hundreds of billions in America
Owning 7% of our economy figure

So of course Bush wouldn’t interfere
As he and his friends got $1.4 billion to share
For simply making weapons to create warfare
And make American’s fear
His game on the War on Terror
That has left our country crying, alone, and freezing cold
Through 9 years of winter on a downhill soar
That has killed and left many of your troops injured
As the War on Terrorism is Fox News top picture
To protect Bush’s Republican views and stories that are misconstrued
Instead of saving Americans or a few civilians
Who are dying on our streets and in the lands of the Middle East

End with Chorus

War on Terrorism
What a joke
As the Bush’s and Saudi’s
Make billions off dead bodies
As 9/11 was a hoax
To get the Carlyle Group and the United Defense
To build weapons for the Bin-Laden’s and their trend
As they were big investors
In Bush’s companies and war schemes
Which they made billions from weaponry
That the U.S. uses and abuses
Killing more than a half million Iraqi civilians
Starting in 2003 for oil, gas lines, and fake nuclear crimes
Instead of finding Osama and his Al-Qaeda allies
So Bush invades Iraq who didn’t commit a crime
So Dick Cheney could make a New Iraq
And have Halliburton on his side
As they both commit war crimes
Leaving 5,000 U.S. troops to die
And leaving us all to cry

End
The beat that helped me…
Over by Drake

reply to post by Another Vodka

Originally posted by Another Vodka
Dr. Harrit must have struck a nerve. A big nerve. All the debunkers are immediately on this thread, like white on rice. Personally, I'm waiting for Good Ol' Dave to chime in very very soon so he can use the phrase "silly Truthers" again. It's like a favorite ol' comedy one-liner punchline that everyone says in unison.

Dr. Harrit is a scientist, Professor at a well-respected university, researcher etc etc. It is obvious that he has caught the fire of curiosity relative to the fall of the 3 WTC buildings.

Hooper, Alfie, trickoftheshade, airspooner, et al: don't just criticize or try to derail the thread. Bring your own bona fide experts and their findings. I repeat, bring your own bona fide experts and their findings. You are debunked without this.

These debunkers are really on the ball. The thread was opened at 16:11 and alfie was on it by 16:17 with waypastvne chiming in by 16:29. I'm surprised to see okbmd coming in 2 days late but I suppose that even debunkers need time off!

What we know is that the OS has failed and an proper public inquiry is long overdue. Either that or we need to install a new government that will do the job properly.

reply to post by Alfie1


Alfie1:
The YouTube link in the OP is over 8 minutes.
Your 'debunking' reply to the OP was posted around 6 minutes after it went live.

Enough said, really...

reply to post by JohnJasper

I'm surprised to see okbmd coming in 2 days late but I suppose that even debunkers need time off!

Yea , the CIA was hosting it's bi-annual Disinfo 101 seminar and I was obligated to attend . Glad to see that someone noticed I was late getting to this thread . That makes me feel special , thanks .

reply to post by okbmd

Originally posted by okbmd
reply to post by JohnJasper

 

I'm surprised to see okbmd coming in 2 days late but I suppose that even debunkers need time off!

Yea , the CIA was hosting it's bi-annual Disinfo 101 seminar and I was obligated to attend . Glad to see that someone noticed I was late getting to this thread . That makes me feel special , thanks .

You're doing such a good job for them whether intentionally or otherwise so you should get included in any benefits available!

And in reference to an earlier post...

reply to post by okbmd

Originally posted by okbmd
One thing that I am curious about ... Has any of this supposed "dust" ever been proven to have come from the WTC ?

I'm not looking for bullshat answers , I want to see chain of custody , etc . I want someone to show conclusive proof that the dust that Jones tested came from WTC . I don't want to take him at his word , I don't want a boat-load of witnesses who claim to know for a fact that it did , and I don't want some link to a truther site .

If you guys are gonna put that much faith into his findings , you should be eager and willing to provide what I'm asking for . Chain of events and chain of custody . Documented / certified by an unbiased neutral .

I'll be waiting . Until then , his findings prove nothing of thermite at WTC . Not that I believe he has made a case anyway .

It's strange that you would require a greater standard of proof from an alternative theory than you do for the OS. Where's the chain of events and chain of custody from the 9/11 Commission, the documented/certified by an unbiased neutral?

Nope, not there! Notta!

You're happy with NIST changing their story every time one of their half-baked theories gets thrown back in their face but won't accept bullshat answers to do with other theories.

(PS: I don't subscribe to the Steve Jones' Nano-thermite theory and I'm not defending it in particular. I'm defending the ideal of holding governments to at least the same high standards that we would expect of private individuals.)

(PSS: For another insight into how government/military bodies just cannot tell the truth, watch this item on the Cheonan sinking. Obviously-tampered-with CCTV evidence being just one of many clues that the beggars think they can fob us off with any quickly glued-together OS that supports their agenda.)

YouTube - Beneath the Surface: the investigation into the sinking of the Cheonan

reply to post by JohnJasper

It's strange that you would require a greater standard of proof from an alternative theory than you do for the OS. Where's the chain of events and chain of custody from the 9/11 Commission, the documented/certified by an unbiased neutral?

Nope, not there! Notta!

You're happy with NIST changing their story every time one of their half-baked theories gets thrown back in their face but won't accept bullshat answers to do with other theories.

I will say it one more time , for those who don't know my posting history . I HAVE NOT read the 9/11 Commission Report , nor have I read the NIST report . All of my observations and opinions come from actually STUDYING and RESEARCHING 9/11 .

If I say something that agrees with your "OS" , rest assured that I did my own research into it and my observation/opinion did not come from reading any part of the "OS" .

Does my independently reaching the same or similar observation make me a follower of the "OS" ? No , it does not .

You guys play that card without even knowing my thoughts on 9/11 , simply because I disagree with something one of you says . And , just because my opinions may be in agreement with some facet of the "OS" , does not indicate that I , myself , am party to some conspiracy/cover-up .

To be frank , this whole "dis-info , govt. shill , blind-follower-of-the-OS ..." tactic that you guys use every time someone has a different take on 9/11 , is very immature , in my opinion .

I don't require you , or the government , to do my thinking for me . Show me the material , and let me do my own thinking . If it doesn't agree with your views , go ahead and call me names , like a little kid will do .

reply to post by okbmd

Originally posted by okbmd
I will say it one more time , for those who don't know my posting history . I HAVE NOT read the 9/11 Commission Report , nor have I read the NIST report . All of my observations and opinions come from actually STUDYING and RESEARCHING 9/11 .

If I say something that agrees with your "OS" , rest assured that I did my own research into it and my observation/opinion did not come from reading any part of the "OS" .

Does my independently reaching the same or similar observation make me a follower of the "OS" ? No , it does not .

You guys play that card without even knowing my thoughts on 9/11 , simply because I disagree with something one of you says . And , just because my opinions may be in agreement with some facet of the "OS" , does not indicate that I , myself , am party to some conspiracy/cover-up .

To be frank , this whole "dis-info , govt. shill , blind-follower-of-the-OS ..." tactic that you guys use every time someone has a different take on 9/11 , is very immature , in my opinion .

I don't require you , or the government , to do my thinking for me . Show me the material , and let me do my own thinking . If it doesn't agree with your views , go ahead and call me names , like a little kid will do .

Oooh, get you! For someone who is supposed to be an independent researcher, why are you always debunking 9/11 threads? Show me one instance when your research led you in a direction that was contrary to the OS. I've had the misfortune* of reading plenty of your posts on this subject this year and cannot remember one that indicated anything other than "OS believer." If it quacks like a duck...!

Please explain exactly how you're studying and researching 9/11 if you haven't read the OS or any of the NIST reports. (I only want to hear valid answers!) What "material" are you researching? How can you ignore the government's official explanation for the worst terror attack on the continental US?

If I have called you names, then that was remiss of me and I do apologise. I don't apologise for openly wondering why the debunkers are so quick to pounce on every 9/11 thread? That's just something us "truthers" do.


*Misfortune: I say this because you're constantly making statements supported only by your own independent research that just happens to reflect FoxNews and other right-wing sources. You then go on to belittle anyone with an opinion differing from yours including calling them names (such a child!)

Let's randomly review one of your other posts:

Originally posted by okbmd
1) Most of the "cavesquatters" were more than slightly educated , and came from families of above-average wealth . No doubt, you're referring to the Saudi Hijackers here (JJ)
2) The towers did not "explode" , they collapsed . Apparently your research omitted/discounted all of the video evidence taken on the day
3) WTC7 did not collapse " into it's own footprint " ., several surrounding buildings suffered from it's collapse , as well as debris from it crossing a 4-lane street . So you've missed the aerial photos showing the tower neatly collapsed into it's own footprint minus the concrete, desks, computers, etc that disintegrated into dust clouds.
4) The airliners did not impact the towers at "exactly the same tilt angle" . This is nothing but a lie . Liar, liar, pants on fire!
5) " The notion that you can conduct a controlled demolition of a skyscraper by starting a couple of fires on the upper floors is ridiculous. " This is true , so why do truthers persist in calling the destruction of the towers controlled demolitions ? Maybe truthers are "disinfo agents" but, hey, we wouldn't want to call them names!
6) NONE of the steel in any of the buildings "disintegrated". So in your independent research, you ticked off each piece of steel against the itemised list and all were accounted for. Or perhaps, you took somebody else's word for it.
7) You have shown yourself to be a typical uneducated truther (name-calling) , simply by repeating lies you have gleened from other truthers . (possibly slander?)

Do your own research , instead of just following the herd and feeling good that you are part of the herd . (from someone who obviously doesn't do his own research and just keeps repeating the same old oft-disproved 9/11-debunker arguments

Hoisted by your own petard!

reply to post by JohnJasper


Dear John,

I feel your pain when you write "I don't apologise for openly wondering why the debunkers are so quick to pounce on every 9/11 thread?"

I think a simple explanation would be found in a few questions to the Official Fairy Tale guys.

1. Do you believe in the doctrines of the political movement known as "zionism?"
2. Are you getting paid by the CIA or dependent on research grants from the government?
3. Do you support Israel or have an Israeli passport?
4. Do you work for the military industrial prison complex?

It is only with questions one discovers the hidden truth.

Cheers.

reply to post by beijingyank

No.
No.
No.
No.

Now what?

reply to post by roboe


It was 221 posts without a flag. Now what? It's 222 posts without a flag.

reply to post by beijingyank

*shrug*

There's been nothing new coming out of the "Truth" movement for years now, so I don't see any reasons to start new threads and start collecting flags.