Thermite Experiments and Evidence Summary

One of the better videos I've seen to support controlled demolition. Thank you Mr. Cole!

Take the # when you make a post hit the VID:YOUTUBE and add 5d5iIoCiI8g only and it will give you whats above..

Thank you kindly!

reply to post by turbofan


Wow! That is pretty amazing. It would still take a tremendous amount of effort to load the building and get all that stuff to go off just right without someone seeing it being done and reporting it.

I am more interested in why the buildings were taken down than how they were actually taken down. I suppose a false flag operation makes more sense than anything. Great video

that guy spends a lot of money and time, I hope he gets reimbursed when the officials finally decide to actualy do a little leg work and get this ball rolling.

This guy does great work. give him a nobel, or something.

reply to post by turbofan


An interesting video. Is he self-funded or supported by a group?

Jones' does not claim thermate, which is what was said to be used in the video. The elements of thermate were not present and it is questionable even if the elements of thermite were present because of the poor analytical protocol. This means that if you want to claim thermate, Jones theory is out and you should look for evidence of thermate. I think the HE cutter charge theory is also done.

This guy also claims that office fires can't melt steel. This is a pointless argument, as no one has claimed that the cause of the collapse was melted steel. He also uses testimony from fire fighters talking about what they thought was molten steel in the debris to insinuate that this must have been the cause of the collapse. The argument that molten metal from thermite was the cause of the high underground temperatures for many weeks is flawed.

In his next video, he can use cutting torches, hacksaws, and die grinders to show how these could be used to cut bolts and beams and imply that there are dark forces obviously at work. Given his theory of placement of cutter charges, he could claim that instead of placing charges, which may or may not work and leave evidence, the bolts could just be removed by the perpetrators in the same strategic places as cutter charges were to be placed.

Originally posted by turbofan
One of the better videos I've seen to support controlled demolition. Thank you Mr. Cole!

edit on 11-11-2010 by turbofan because: Proper video embed.

best test ive ever seen...

lets wait for the debunkers though, they surely got some good explanations

Originally posted by TrueFalse
lets wait for the debunkers though, they surely got some good explanations

Oh, yes we do...

1) This is an apples and oranges comparison. The steel used in the WTC weren't I beams but box columns, and they were four times as large and ten times thicker. To defeat that type of steel you'd need to place these charges all around the entire perimeter of the beam, meaning you'd need at least twenty times the amount. Claiming that noone in the building would notice rings of mysterious packages suddenly appearing on all the support columns throughout the entire building...and not one building but two... is stretching plausibility into absurdity.

2) The only place such charges actually could do the damage you're describing is if you place them not on the boc columns, but on the horizontal braces that supported the floors, in the plan to cause the floors to collapse one on top of another in a domino effect. Problem is, this is exactly how the FEMA report assessed the buildings had collapsed, meaning that you're only AGREEING with them after all these 10,000 posts swearing up and down that it's a pack of lies. Oh, the irony.

This is neither here nor there. The OP posted a video showing that yes, fires DO have the ability of deteriorating the structural integrity of steel, and your response is to repeat the same make believe accusation the OP posted to debunk to begin with. You'll excuse me if I say your faith based logic has no credibility.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


we, well, atleast I havent discarded pancake theory, but in order for that to be correct, you would need these charges to get that effect. it wouldnt just pancake, but explosives set to trigger a pancake is feasible.

keep it up

Originally posted by Myendica
reply to post by GoodOlDave

 

we, well, atleast I havent discarded pancake theory, but in order for that to be correct, you would need these charges to get that effect. it wouldnt just pancake, but explosives set to trigger a pancake is feasible.

keep it up

...in which case you're necessarily agreeing with the NIST and FEMA reports when they say the collapse was largely due to an Achilles heel inherent in the peculiar design of the building that noone fully understood was there. It's just that you're saying it was explosives that kicked off the chain of collapse rather than thermal expansion from the fires.

Here's the rub- if you're acknowledging that a floor, once severed by explosives, had sufficient force to cause the floors below it to fail and collapse in a domino effect without the need for additional explosives, then you're necessarily agreeing that *all* the floors could have failed from the impact of falling wreckage without explosives becuase every floor was held in air by similar horizontal support braces and had the exact same support limits.

Your beef therefore isn't over any perceived peculiarities with collapse times, structural integrity, or whatever. Your beef is whether or not fires could have caused the initial collase that kicked off the domino effect of cascading structural collapse instead of explosives and all this "it fell at free fall speeds" bit is nothing but unnecessary conspiracy mongoring.

I don't mean to hijack this thread in any way shape or form, and this may even be relative, but is there anywhere a person can go to look at the structural steel floor plans for the WTC's?

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
The steel used in the WTC weren't I beams but box columns, and they were four times as large and ten times thicker.

note the steel got smaller and thinner the higher you went. halfway up the building the steel was typically 12x36 and only 2 inches thick.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
To defeat that type of steel you'd need to place these charges all around the entire perimeter of the beam, meaning you'd need at least twenty times the amount.

I don't think your qualified to tell how much it would take. even if it did take 20 times as much....who cares? also if you watched about 12 minutes into the video, he shows how box columns could be attacked. And this is just some guy coming up with ideas. Hes just showing its possible, not how it happened.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Claiming that noone in the building would notice rings of mysterious packages suddenly appearing on all the support columns throughout the entire building...and not one building but two... is stretching plausibility into absurdity.

i will even bite on your senerio, I will claim no one would notice, put your "rings" above the ceiling around the column right at the top of the deck...99% of people won't see it and the maintence guys up in the ceiling, he probally won't see it, whos gonna think anything of something close to the top of the deck anyways? I don't understand, have you ever looked above the ceiling in any office building? do you understand what maintence guys do? I don't see who else would be in the ceiling besides them. Your full of it dave.

I'm not claiming its what happened or that I even think it. But to claim its not possible... lol

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
2) The only place such charges actually could do the damage you're describing is if you place them not on the boc columns, but on the horizontal braces that supported the floors, in the plan to cause the floors to collapse one on top of another in a domino effect. Problem is, this is exactly how the FEMA report assessed the buildings had collapsed, meaning that you're only AGREEING with them after all these 10,000 posts swearing up and down that it's a pack of lies. Oh, the irony.

Again I don't think your qualified to make such assumptions, and i believe you changing the subject. the video is about proving the "thermite can't do that" theory wrong, such as in the nat geo program. Which you can't even deny (wait wait... im sure you will) it does with flying colors.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
This is neither here nor there. The OP posted a video showing that yes, fires DO have the ability of deteriorating the structural integrity of steel, and your response is to repeat the same make believe accusation the OP posted to debunk to begin with. You'll excuse me if I say your faith based logic has no credibility.

Typical dave, you do have a way with words. You do entertain me. Though I don't think we watched the same video if thats what you think it showed.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
...in which case you're necessarily agreeing with the NIST and FEMA reports when they say the collapse was largely due to an Achilles heel inherent in the peculiar design of the building that noone fully understood was there. It's just that you're saying it was explosives that kicked off the chain of collapse rather than thermal expansion from the fires.

Am I the only one thinking it makes a difference what could have "kicked off" the collapse? huge difference, dave, huge difference. And im sorry you still don't understand basic alegbra, but I've already show'd you how NIST's thermal expansion theory is bull.... I don't know what else I can do for you.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Here's the rub- if you're acknowledging that a floor, once severed by explosives, had sufficient force to cause the floors below it to fail and collapse in a domino effect without the need for additional explosives, then you're necessarily agreeing that *all* the floors could have failed from the impact of falling wreckage without explosives becuase every floor was held in air by similar horizontal support braces and had the exact same support limits.

wow, its almost like brainwash when you talk sometimes.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
Your beef therefore isn't over any perceived peculiarities with collapse times, structural integrity, or whatever. Your beef is whether or not fires could have caused the initial collase that kicked off the domino effect of cascading structural collapse instead of explosives and all this "it fell at free fall speeds" bit is nothing but unnecessary conspiracy mongoring.

*looks back at thread* whos the one that brought up all the "unnecessary conspiracy mongoring" in this thread... Dave epic fail.

Thermite would best explain things.
Although NIST should have tried this experiment,and its cheap to do.
But it probaly wouldnt have gotten the results the gov would have wanted.

reply to post by ohhwataloser


Ya gotta give GoodOlDave his due,or a cookie.

He sticks to his story,even though there no reason to argue it any further.
You see,he has an army of tools,cowards and gatekeepers backing him.

The MSM will never report on this issue any further,as far as they are concerned,its OVER!
And the people holding office,will never open another investigation.

~Insert dead horse here~
~Now beat on it~

This video is great for people like myself who aren't demo experts or chemists. In my opinion its certainly plausible that charges could be set in an office building above the tiled ceiling without being detected or made into an explosive paint as has been suggested in other threads and proven possible in other experiments. But one thing about this thread really bothers me. You guys should not be picking on a member just because you disagree with him

G.O.D. has got more sticktooitiveness in his little finger than Brett Favre has shown in his entire career. Day after day in thread after thread he rolls out the same old tired and mostly ridiculous arguments only to be vehemently opposed, disproven at virtually every turn, jeered and laughed at by most other members, and yet it has no effect on him. To be honest, that kind of gumption is something to be revered even if its for the least noble of causes. In the past I really disliked the guy not just because he had the audacity to claim a handle with GOD as the acronym, but because he would never address any direct question or opposition to his own claims. Although he has done nothing at all to change my mind about the events of 9/11, one thing is for sure, he will keep coming day after day to kick a horse that has virtually decomposed into nothingness...and for that we salute you mister can't help believe in whatever the gov't tells him no matter how much science, evidence, or common sense says otherwise.

This extremely interesting video made by David Chandler (yes, the one who forced NIST to admit to a 2+ seconds free-fall period in the onset of the WTC 7 building demolition) does implicate in my eyes one thing :

That beam or column was a hollow one, and filled with a propellant, either thermate, (which has been shown in the OP's video made by Mr Cole, to be able to explode), or any other, initially unexploded, somewhat exotic propellant/explosive, such as thermobaric thermate (or thermite) or nano-thermite (or nano- thermate) explosive reactants, or any other combination of reactants.
Mr Cole used a mixture of thermate, he even showed its components to the keen observers.

Starting at 1:50 minutes in the video you see a sharp close-up of this phenomenon.
www.youtube.com...

DAVID CHANDLER - AE911TRUTH.ORG

youtube channel: DavidChandler911

1) SOUTH TOWER: SMOKING GUNS
This video narrates a collection of diverse phenomena in the debris cloud of the South Tower that point to explosive demolition. Particularly notable is one projectile (which I have not seen discussed previously) that is shooting to the east, then stops, midair, then turns a sharp corner and shoots straight down trailing white smoke. White smoke is characteristic of aluminum oxide which is a byproduct of the thermite reaction.

-----

2) SOUTH TOWER: SMOKING GUNS (FOLLOW-UP)
After finding the projectile that turns a sharp corner while trailing white smoke I looked for it in other videos and found it in several. The clearest is from a camera with a very similar perspective to the first, but in this video the trail can be followed to the bottom of the collapse. Here I explore the significance of this find.

-----

3) SOUTH TOWER: EXPLODING PROJECTILE
A close-up view of debris being ejected from the South Tower of the World Trade Center as the 30-floor top section falls to the east shows numerous smoking projectiles that look like comets. Several of them can be seen to explode. One such exploding projectile is followed here. It ejects two fragments, both of which undergo secondary explosions. (Note, the rising fragment to the left of the projectile under consideration appears to be a tumbling object that alternates from black to white to invisible. It passes behind one of the fragments described in the video.)

Thus, here we have clear, multiple proof of debris acceleration, after it already had been spewed out from the collapse cloud.
Which was on itself already a non-natural occurring event.
But even during those already extraordinary events, secondary extraordinary events like these secondary explosions in debris descents took place.

I have never seen any other better proof of human intervention in the video taping of the WTC Towers collapses.
Hats off for David Chandler.

So, can we at last start theorizing how and why the perpeTRAITORS put their explosives INSIDE the box type columns and beams?

Why, seems logical. They needed a quiet explosive event.
First melt a V-formed cleavage inside the boxed-in columns, and then the heat of the ongoing reaction explodes the rest of the thermate and that breaks the column. And as we see and HEAR in Mr Cole's video in the opening post, that explosion is a very quiet one, especially since its first force exhibition is contained INSIDE a boxed off column.

How? Just place the thermate packets inside the columns, through the entry holes already there for corrosion inspection.
They for certain used the elevator shafts to get access to the 47 main columns.
And the exterior columns could have been done the same way, but now by the window cleaners, from outside, or by maintenance personnel from the inside. These outside wall panels also had inspection holes at every floor, easily accessible.

One problem I see with this scenario of only thermate, is the lack of photos of thermite cuts of all these columns we saw laying around in the aftermath of the collapses.

That's why I have said for years already, that they have used some sort of weaponized thermobarics, since these leave no trace of explosives.
Since they are basically gaseous explosions, however with a much greater force than the well known earlier basic gaseous explosive devices used by the military.
And I posted years ago already, that the right thermobaric device, placed in or around a thick steel boxed-column, will shatter it as if it were made of glass instead of steel.

And of course there was no need to rig every single piece of column to start the onset of a then following seemingly naturally occurring further gravity driven collapse. They only needed to rig the right columns at the right heights, and then the weight of the compromised building would do the rest of the work.

It is to this very day, extremely difficult to find any detailed references of thermobaric devices, as the ones developed in Russia, in the late eighties already, and in the USA, later, in the Lawrence Livermore Laboratories.
They are quite obviously still top-secret, and that's why you will not find detailed scientific references.

reply to post by pteridine

An interesting video. Is he self-funded or supported by a group?

Who cares?
Thank you for your opinion. To bad you couldn’t debunk the video and the thermite experiments.

This guy just proved how flawed NIST and the government are about their OS.

reply to post by impressme


He used thermate for his demo and his theory. If you accept thermate, it elminates Jones paint-on thermite theory and the cutter charge theory.

He should start looking for some actual evidence of thermate.

Originally posted by pteridine

Jones' does not claim thermate, which is what was said to be used in the video.

Jones' claim is that of an energetic material which is/was more powerful than thermate. Thermate was
used most likely because nano-engineered thermitic material is not readily available to the public.

The points you overlook are:

- that a weaker substance can provide the cutting capability of steel

- that a man in his own backyard proved NIST and National Geographic incompetent

The elements of thermate were not present and it is questionable even if the elements of thermite were present because of the poor analytical protocol. This means that if you want to claim thermate, Jones theory is out and you should look for evidence of thermate. I think the HE cutter charge theory is also done.

If you would like to debate ths points of Jones' paper, please search for a thread called:

"Jones' Science Paper. Common Arguements Addressed" which is located in this forum.

I'm not interested in reading anyone's opinion. There is solid evidence and experiment to put your opinions to rest.

Please support your opinions with fact, science and experiment. Putting your name behind your claim
is also a good start to help your credibilty just as Johnathan Cole, and thousands of other professionals have done.

reply to post by turbofan


Great video, the experiments the guy did was really interesting and if normal commercial thermite can do all that damage to the steel that he was testing, then one has to wonder what Supper na-nothermite can do. Jones said in his Journal that the thermite he discovered was not of any known commercial grade. Jones said it was of a finer grade a much more powerful explosive incendiary, he said now we are talking military science.

There is nothing here for the OS defenders to debunk; the man proved that normal commercial thermite can cut through steel. The man was not trying to prove Professor Jones is wrong like some on this tread are trying to say, but the guy in the video was able to prove the disinformation that the media is spreading and of course the OS defenders are saying and that is, thermite could not cut through steel beams, and office fires melted the steel. He has exposed their lies.