Professional engineer Jon Cole cuts steel columns with thermate, debunks Nat Geo & unexpectedly repr

reply to post by OptimistPrime


There is another one that shows the core standing but it is fleeting as the dust clouds obscure it. I think it is of the same tower. Both videos have been around for a while and there may be others. These are the ones that I am aware of.

And on top of that it is the exact same thing that eventually happened at the bottom of the building.

If you look you can see the diagonal cuts of the charges.

Dude you gotta bring me another view because that doesn't prove anything.

THAT IS THE OUTSIDE OF THE WTC.

THE CORE WAS NOT BUILT IN LONG VERTEBRAL COLUMNS SUCH AS IS SHOWN.

WHAT YOU ARE SEEING IS THE SPIDER WEBS OF CONCRETE AND STEEL RODS OR BEAMS THAT SURROUND THE OUTSIDE OF THE WTC.

Originally posted by Cassius666

Originally posted by OptimistPrime
reply to post by Cassius666

 

I think you are confused brother. Im in the corner of the man with the paper that took 18 months to write.

Whoops yes I meant pterdine. Anyhow we should discuss the topic at hand. Although I dont see what is there to discuss. Evidence for the use of Nanothermite has been found. Looks like pretty much end of story. There is only one way the thread can go from here.

edit on 20-12-2010 by Cassius666 because: (no reason given)

Hi Cassi,
It's evidence for the application of thermate that has been found, agreed that the stuff found at ground zero is more superior and therefore more effective as a tool, but there is still the need for some kind of niddy gritty evidence of igntion at its source.

Originally posted by Nutter
On a side note bsbray: Imagine this setup on two seperate stories near the plane crashes (core included). Do you believe a verinage collapse would ensue?

May I ask, do you believe that the plane was expected to crash into a specific location of the structure with that kind of precision?

I think not.

reply to post by OptimistPrime


Negative evidence is not really conclusive. There are no videos of not finding hacksaw blades but that doesn't mean hacksaws were used.

Originally posted by pteridine
Jones wants to be 'admired' not 'liked.' He wants attention and adulation and needs his ego fed.

Not that I needed any confirmation, but now we know why you post here, thanks to a little something Jung discovered called "projection" of the subconscious.

"Attention" and "adulation" alone don't put food on the table for grown ups, not to mention that those things come with the territory of being a tenured professor at a major university to begin with (ie Jones, Harrit, etc.). Also not to mention that appealing to the "technically challenged" as you put it is not compatible with someone who is craving a pat on the head for being so smart (cough coughhh). I have never in my life heard of someone craving academic attention from stupid people to satisfy an ego deficiency. Talk about contradictions in so many terms. You are reaching so far and hard with these absurd "agenda" motives to discredit these professionals that you are doing OS trusters more of a disservice than I think I even could here.



To recap, in pteridine's world:


Money, power, instant motivation to go to war and reap massive profits and furthered influence, in accordance with PNAC and many others: Not realistic motivation.

Publishing things you secretly know are wrong in order to gain attention and admiration from stupid people: Sheer brilliance!

reply to post by Josephus23


The diagonals were cut with torches during cleanup. Dude.

reply to post by pteridine


At least you can acknowledge that is NOT the core, then I have no problem with your last comment.
Although it is a complete fabrication of the truth.

You are a waste of my time and not too sharp on the debate skills.

A dude makes his own video in a controlled environment and people are sold that thermite brought down the towers. Somebody could show any real video of a UFO event and it would be filled with debunkers saying CGI and tons of other stuff.


I should buy some tin foil stock with my amero's.

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by Josephus23

 

The diagonals were cut with torches during cleanup. Dude.

There is no proof of that, only speculation on both sides. But in light of THIS POST, unless you missed the point, I would suggest it really doesn't matter. We now have evidence that thermite does what you all claimed it wouldn't. You seem to be ignoring this fact.

reply to post by bsbray11


Excellent post and video!

Explains a lot.....

Originally posted by whoshotJR
Somebody could show any real video of a UFO event and it would be filled with debunkers saying CGI and tons of other stuff.

Do you want to make it official: first person to claim the video is CGI?

I predicted it on the 1st page. Anyway he shows you exactly what he does step-by-step so you can try it yourself if you only have the time, skills and resources of any construction worker or welder.

reply to post by pteridine

Jones wants to be 'admired' not 'liked.'

Did Jones tell you that? How do you know what Jones “wants”?

He wants attention and adulation and needs his ego fed

Has Jones confided sweet nothings in your ears about his personal feelings? I would like to know who told you this nonsense and why would you believe in such garbage?

I'm pretty sure I've never posted in this forum.
Haven't spent much time in it, either.
I did, however see that NatGeo truth vs. Science thingy,
and the video in the OI.P. pretty much blew that whole show out of the water.
Nice find, S&F.

reply to post by pteridine


Typical. Hacksaws? Really? Wow guy you really are stretching out the disinfo tactics with that one. Thx for the chuckle though. Nano thermite was found and yet you have still failed to provide any evidence that it wasnt. What a troll. When you have something intelligent to say, please feel free to reply, otherwise do yourself a favor and find a new thread.

reply to post by pteridine

The diagonals were cut with torches during cleanup. Dude.

Besides your unproven opinions can you bring any evidence to the table to support your allegation?

Originally posted by whoshotJR
A dude makes his own video in a controlled environment and people are sold that thermite brought down the towers. Somebody could show any real video of a UFO event and it would be filled with debunkers saying CGI and tons of other stuff.

I should buy some tin foil stock with my amero's.

Hmmm you seem to miss the point.

The video proves that thermite can do what the debunkers claimed it couldn't.

Thermite/thermate have been the most logical explanation for the collapses from day one. The counter argument was that thermite/thermate could not cut through steel columns. Some even tried to claim thermite/thermate didn't even exist.

Now try to tell us how thermite/thermite could not have been used. You don't have much of an argument left.

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by whoshotJR
Somebody could show any real video of a UFO event and it would be filled with debunkers saying CGI and tons of other stuff.

Do you want to make it official: first person to claim the video is CGI?

I predicted it on the 1st page. Anyway he shows you exactly what he does step-by-step so you can try it yourself if you only have the time, skills and resources of any construction worker or welder.

I'm not saying its CGI but I do think you people are nuts. If national geographic did a video saying thermite wouldn't do that then what did they use? How did the experiment differ? How does that really apply to the exact situation of 9/11? How does this video now prove 100% to you that thermite was used in 9/11?

Originally posted by bsbray11

Not that I needed any confirmation, but now we know why you post here, thanks to a little something Jung discovered called "projection" of the subconscious.

"Attention" and "adulation" alone don't put food on the table for grown ups, not to mention that those things come with the territory of being a tenured professor at a major university to begin with (ie Jones, Harrit, etc.). Also not to mention that appealing to the "technically challenged" as you put it is not compatible with someone who is craving a pat on the head for being so smart (cough coughhh). I have never in my life heard of someone craving academic attention from stupid people to satisfy an ego deficiency. Talk about contradictions in so many terms. You are reaching so far and hard with these absurd "agenda" motives to discredit these professionals that you are doing OS trusters more of a disservice than I think I even could here

Jung postulated it; it may not be true. I am not a fan of Jung.

Jones is 'retired' and on a pension so he has food on the table. He is no longer a professor so that 'territory' is lost to him.
You said stupid; do not presume to put words in my mouth, BS. I do not equate lack of technical training with stupid, even if you do. It is easy for someone like Jones to fool bright people who do not understand the details of what he has done and take his word for what it means. He fooled you. He cannot fool people who understand the details of what he has done, without resorting to fraud. I don't believe that this paper is fraudulent but he has forced the conclusion and there is no support for it. The paper is not sound and is bad science. I think he realizes that now and his best play is to remain quiet and not publish further. The promises he made in June 2009 of a second paper have all but been forgotten.
What is an OS truster? What is the OS? As I have said many times, I am disinterested in the outcome of the analyses if they are properly done. Does that mean I am a truster?

reply to post by ANOK


You are mistaken. I never claimed that thermite couldn't cut verticals. I said that it would be difficult. Further, Cole uses thermate, a different material.