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

Originally posted by wcitizen
Excellent. I was surprised when I saw the same kind of smoke being created.

The debunkers are always asking for proof....well, now they've got some!

edit on 19-12-2010 by wcitizen because: (no reason given)

There are people interested in the truth. But its time to finally understand one thing. THE DEBUNKERS DO NOT CARE ABOUT ANY KIND OF PROOF AND NEVER WILL. They only care about advancing their version of events. They do not care what the proof is, nor where it comes from.

reply to post by Cassius666


As a matter of fact I do care a lot about proof. It is because I don't see any from the truther world that I feel obliged to post on here from time to time.

From my perspective, everything I have looked into on the OS side has actually held up to examination and everything on the truther side has crumbled.

If there was any concrete proof of an " inside job " then you don't need a political decision to launch an investigation. Take it to the FBI or the Washington Post. All the time you just keep mumbling on here is proof you don't have anything.

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by Cassius666

 

As a matter of fact I do care a lot about proof. It is because I don't see any from the truther world that I feel obliged to post on here from time to time.

From my perspective, everything I have looked into on the OS side has actually held up to examination and everything on the truther side has crumbled.

If there was any concrete proof of an " inside job " then you don't need a political decision to launch an investigation. Take it to the FBI or the Washington Post. All the time you just keep mumbling on here is proof you don't have anything.

Is this an actual argument with substance or some REALLY POOR attempt to derail the thread?

No one said that this was an "inside job".
The most I will say is that the evidence and the official storyline is not congruent.

That is why we are asking for a new and impartial investigation with civilian oversight.
Perhaps the ones who lost their family in this debacle would love to be on the oversight committee.

Evidence was presented. If you can prove it wrong, then prove it wrong.

You have presented nothing but logical fallacies.

Originally posted by yrwehere1
I remember reading or seeing a video about thermite(not sure on the type) being mixed in with paint, which could explain how it was delivered to the wtc and applied. Who would question painters doing a job and would the paint crew even suspect anything. I'm not saying this is how it was done but it sounds possible. Would it be possible to get enough thermite applied like this?

Any thoughts on this scenario?

Well we would need to know what the result would look like. Are the core steel columns regularly maintained and protective paint applied? We would really need to know what the result would look like if we consider this possibility and if it is consistent with what people saw and heard.

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by Cassius666

 

As a matter of fact I do care a lot about proof. It is because I don't see any from the truther world that I feel obliged to post on here from time to time.

In 2001 the truthers had wild theories and I know how crazy they sounded, so I can emphasize. I did not give them any attention till like 2005, after some of them did some serious work I felt compelled to take the matter to people with education on related fields.

If at this point you say there is no proof to debunk the NIST report and there is no evidence of both the use of explosives and thermite, you are either not educated on the subject or in denial.

reply to post by Josephus23


No-one said this was an " inside job " ? Are you serious ? not even tactfully and delicately ?

Proving that thermite can cut through steel is like proving a bullet can kill someone.

As for the four points:

1) If what you see is thermite, what is all that thermite doing in that specific spot, and why is it only visible in that specific spot and not all over the building? Can we rule out all other materials causing this?

2) Why is there just a single piece of steel which shows this corrosion? Shouldn't samples like this be all over ground zero?

3) In some cases you can actually see those streams accelerate, disproving an abrupt power release, and confirming pressure buildup as result of collapsing floors.

4) Except for a couple of witness reports, there isn't that much evidence of explosion sounds. Besides, explosions can have several other sources.

I don't think any of the evidence is going to hold up in court.

Originally posted by Alfie1
reply to post by Josephus23

 

No-one said this was an " inside job " ? Are you serious ? not even tactfully and delicately ?

Correct.

It would be impossible to say what an "inside job" is until the term "inside job" is defined.

If it were the Israeli's, then would it be an "inside job"?

You do know that the Federal Government is not a part of the contiguous 48, thus the term District of Columbia.
That would make it a FOREIGN CORPORATION.
*Look up the term United States in a law dictionary.

Now with that being the case, how can anyone say that this is at all "inside"?

An impartial investigation with civilian oversight is the only way to truly answer these questions.

ATS should pay for advert to show this. If mass public are aware then the media should latch on.

Originally posted by -PLB-
Proving that thermite can cut through steel is like proving a bullet can kill someone.

As for the four points...

I don't think any of the evidence is going to hold up in court.

You pose some interesting questions so I will address them one at a time.

1) If what you see is thermite, what is all that thermite doing in that specific spot, and why is it only visible in that specific spot and not all over the building? Can we rule out all other materials causing this?

All of the beams in the building were covered in a fire retardant known as asbestos. For the anomalies to have occurred on the day of the WTC explosions, then some type of highly engineered accelerant would have had to be used.

Thermite, or a more specific design of thermite according to not only Dr. Stephen Jones, but several international scientists, known as nano-thermite was used. This could have literally been sprayed on top of the asbestos, or the asbestos could have been removed in order to place the nano-thermite in very specific areas.

But as I have said a ba-jillion times, this is speculation that is best answered with a new and impartial investigation with civilian oversight.

2) Why is there just a single piece of steel which shows this corrosion? Shouldn't samples like this be all over ground zero?

Starting immediately all of the refuse found at ground zero was hauled off and melted down. I believe that this occurred in China. Ground Zero was off limits to everyone but those who had clearance.
Actually, corroded steel was ALL over the place, but we cannot say for sure until we have eye witness testimony.

A photog from FEMA released some pictures a while back that substantiate this.

And don't ask for links. Look for yourself and then prove me wrong.

3) In some cases you can actually see those streams accelerate, disproving an abrupt power release, and confirming pressure buildup as result of collapsing floors.

Please elaborate on this as I do not see it as a valid argument.

4) Except for a couple of witness reports, there isn't that much evidence of explosion sounds. Besides, explosions can have several other sources.

I think that you missed out on a word in your first sentence.

That would be EYE witness reports that most definitely stand up in a court of law. Especially when the people in question were standing directly beside the buildings and stated emphatically that the explosions came from the sub-basements of BOTH buildings.

reply to post by Josephus23


1. This thread is a rerun and old news. See www.abovetopsecret.com... and others. The ATS search function does work.
2. The material used by Cole is thermAte, not thermite.
3. There is no physical evidence for either.

reply to post by Josephus23


Not all the beams were covered in the asbestos.

reply to post by pteridine


There is physical evidence. The physical evidence has not been acquired by the NIST report or the 911 comission, because they did not test for it, but there is physical evidence thermite or thermate has been used, published in a peer reviewed paper. He reproduced the audio and visual effects experienced by whitnesses. The use of thermite and/or explosives is a far more rational explanation than the explanation presented in the NIST report, which has a very very very low degree of probability to occour. What else do yu want?

Originally posted by TheFallOfRa
reply to post by Josephus23

 

Not all the beams were covered in the asbestos.

And yet another reason why this did not occur everywhere, but the nano-thermite explosions seem to have been localized; however...

We will never know until we get an accurate and impartial investigation with civilian oversight.

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by Josephus23

 

1. This thread is a rerun and old news. See www.abovetopsecret.com... and others. The ATS search function does work.
2. The material used by Cole is thermAte, not thermite.
3. There is no physical evidence for either.

1. I like this thread... So if you like the other thread then I would suggest posting in the appropriate thread.

2 & 3. Evidence of highly engineered nano-thermite was found to be used. Again....

This was found by not only Dr. Stephen Jones, but several other international scientists, all of whom found evidence of UNEXPLODED spheres of thermite in the residue.

i truly hope that all the official story gurus that say time and time again that the official story is the only truth seriously take 10 minutes out of their day and watch the video, pretty obvious that the U.S was taken over by means of a fake opts, thanks op for the video, this amazes me how average joes with low budgets can do a better job researching than a commitee backed by millions. again thanks op

reply to post by bsbray11


S&F, man, great find. It still won't be enough to make some believe it, but, those are people who can't be reached anyway. it's too scary outside the matrix for some

Notice how bright the burning of Thermite is? Point out any video of the towers that show any bright burning spots, surly many thermite burns in the towers should be visible in some videos, should it not? I mean that stuff burns with such a luminance one needs eye protection akin to a welders mask, surly lights that bright would be visible through the black smoke.

Remember the molting metal stream in the corner of one of the towers cannot be thermite, and the outer columns are not the load bearing columns anyway, the core columns in the middle of the building are the load bearing columns, the outer columns stiffen the building and hold up the floors, part of the system employed in these two towers and these two towers alone.

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by Josephus23

 

1. This thread is a rerun and old news. See www.abovetopsecret.com... and others. The ATS search function does work.
2. The material used by Cole is thermAte, not thermite.
3. There is no physical evidence for either.

I'm tired of people saying to use the freakin search button. I never knew about this video, and judging by the measly FOUR flags given to the thread in the link you provided, no one on this thread has seen it either. I'm willing to guess you believe the OS and because you can't refute the evidence provided in the OP your last attempt is to belittle people who don't use the search button.

There is a fine line between truthers and OS campaigners.

Originally posted by Illustronic

Remember the molting metal stream in the corner of one of the towers cannot be thermite, and the outer columns are not the load bearing columns anyway, the core columns in the middle of the building are the load bearing columns, the outer columns stiffen the building and hold up the floors, part of the system employed in these two towers and these two towers alone.

You just answered your first question.

And consequently described how an implosion happens.

The first to blow are the middle supports. the outer supports are the last to blow.
the thermite only need be used for the central core of the building, thus no visible signs of the material being ignited.

This is why conventional demolitions are sequenced.

But as has been shown this is not a conventional demolition, if it is even a demolition.

I can not say this enough times.

The evidence does not back up the official storyline. So, the proper thing to do is to re-investigate with an impartial panel and civilian oversight.
TPTB that day (FEMA, NYPD, FBI, CIA)...

They all dropped the ball.
Because the object became to rescue the people trapped in the rubble, it was as if the world forgot that the entire of ground zero was a crime scene.

Crime scenes are cordoned off and all of the rubble should have been KEPT and INSPECTED by an impartial investigator.
But for some reason, everyone in power lost their heads that day, and that includes "President" Bush's secret service detail.

So many points of normal crime scene protocol were breached that this is BEGGING for a new impartial investigation with civilian oversight.

Oh, it's Thermite. I thought the twin towers were brought down by Termite damage.
Silly me.
Great find BsBray!