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

reply to post by wcitizen


Well, I don't want to derail the thread at all, but as you asked for the info, here are two that paint the picture:
213.251.145.96...
213.251.145.96...

Let's not get into discussion about that here though.

well there's no doubt the Israelis were involved. look who was holding the lease, look at how much money he was already paid out and how much he would gain at the end result.
but then you have to see how much haliburton and the rest of the industrial military complex was going to get out of it as well. it was a CIA black flag Op and the bastards are caught red handed.

now the ultimate question is what we the people going to do about it? are we going to wait for them to continue killing our citizens and children and innocent civilians all over the world? or are we going to shut their asses down and run war crime tribunals?

the longer we the people wait, the farther in control they will become. the insanity must be stopped now

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by Josephus23

 

3. There is no physical evidence for Thermite.

This is a lie.

Originally posted by aliengenes
well there's no doubt the Israelis were involved. look who was holding the lease, look at how much money he was already paid out and how much he would gain at the end result.
but then you have to see how much haliburton and the rest of the industrial military complex was going to get out of it as well. it was a CIA black flag Op and the bastards are caught red handed.

now the ultimate question is what we the people going to do about it? are we going to wait for them to continue killing our citizens and children and innocent civilians all over the world? or are we going to shut their asses down and run war crime tribunals?

the longer we the people wait, the farther in control they will become. the insanity must be stopped now

edit on 20-12-2010 by aliengenes because: fixt

OK so go to the police, the FBI, the Washington Post but stop wringing your hands ineffectually on here .

Originally posted by -PLB-
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?

Josephus23 already responded to you but I'll respond too.

It was already alluded to in the video that the one area with flowing, white-hot metal was not the only place where thermite could or would have been set. All the perimeter columns had bolt-access holes on the backs of them that allowed access inside. The corner of WTC2 where the white-hot molten metal was flowing was damaged by the aircraft impact, which is probably the only reason you are seeing it there at all in the first place.

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

Yes, this was not the only sample, and they probably were all over Ground Zero. FEMA only retained a few hundred pieces of debris and the image on page 1 is only of one of the pieces they found that exhibited this corrosion. Another engineer also found the same kind of thing from WTC7.

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.

The same thing happens in the OP video if you watch it without the blinders. The thermate is not technically a high-explosive, it doesn't detonate within a fraction of a second and give off a "sonic boom" effect either. Also the "pressure buildup" excuse is completely gibberish that doesn't stand up to 10 seconds' worth of criticism. For example, if everything from the initiation point down was being destroyed and solid dust and heavy debris being hurled outwards in all directions, what in the hell makes you think that thing was air tight, even between floors??? Windows were already blown out, and would give way much sooner than you would have a massive ejection of solid debris like the ones seen! All you are doing is making weak excuses. Think about what you're saying man.

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

"Couple" means two. Try scores of them at least, and those are just the ones on public record that I can access online.

Here's a link to 46 of them to start you off: worldtradeconspiracy.com...

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

You're right, because others have already tried (Sibel Edmonds, William Rodriguez) and they are invariably thrown out even before a hearing on "states secrets privileges." Look up Sibel Edmonds' case history and see for yourself. It was thrown out once already by John Ashcroft himself citing the states secrets privilege. Only if a jury was filled with people in shock and/or denial would this not stand up to legal scrutiny.

Originally posted by Recouper
reply to post by wcitizen

 

Well, I don't want to derail the thread at all, but as you asked for the info, here are two that paint the picture:
213.251.145.96...
213.251.145.96...

Let's not get into discussion about that here though.

Thanks very much - and I agree, I absolutely don't want to take this excellent thread off topic.

Originally posted by SmedleyBurlap
This only brings up new mysteries, like how the terrorists got thermite inside of the columns, and how they got a hold of nanothermite. Who would have access to a high tech US military grade explosive?

Use some common sense here, if it was military grade thermate, then it was obviously supplied by the military, if it was installed "inside" the box columns, then someone in the maintenance department had access or let someone in with credentials to do the job. That is what I find so funny. 1993, what was that used for, the truck bombing? To test the foundation? To exploit the evacuation of the buildings for prep work? So it is obvious then that a bunch of loosely organized Arabs pulled this off OR the Israeli Mossad, a well organized terrorist unit?

Which is the more likely senario?

reply to post by bsbray11

Something to think about...
Regardless about how many of these theories surface, the government and the majority of our citizens have moved onward. It doesn't matter what 'outsiders' think at this point. Jonathan Cole? Who the heck is Jonathan Cole? Is this another stranger popping out of nowhere? Seriously, unless he is a well-known individual who works for the government, writes endless scientific books, or has won awards for his contributions to society, I don't see why I or anyone else should believe in anything he says.

Jonathan Cole is another complete stranger looking for fame.

reply to post by aliengenes

the insanity must be stopped

You're right , so take a chill-pill . I mean after all , the entirety of the gov is watching our every move and have plans to kill us all , and , here you are rallying for an uprising in your failing attempt to create dissention . Sedition is a crime in the good old USA . Get ur head outta ... well you know .

If you feel this is further evidence of something , which I am not debating , then put it together with facts and march forward in the furtherance of your cause .

If this makes your case , then run forrest run .

Originally posted by pteridine
2. The material used by Cole is thermAte, not thermite.
3. There is no physical evidence for either.

Look at the thread title. Are you talking to yourself?

"no physical evidence," yeah, no, sorry, as overly-dramatic as your rants may be at times, I'm still going to have to go with the opinions of PhD, world-renowned research scientists who have received tenure at major educational institutes (Jones, Harrit, etc.) over what you say by default, even if neither of you had evidence. But from all I've seen, and no big shocker here, those same world-renowned PhDs do have evidence and all you're doing is lashing out at what must be painful ideas on internet forums, because you've never actually debunked their work. I've seen your arguments countless times so there's no point in even going back over them for the 1000th time. We'll just have to agree to disagree I guess. Look up Steven Jones' or Niels Harrit's resumés. You can trash talk them on here all day for their work on the WTC collapses but these guys are no fools, and their paper is not the trash you say it is.

So in the experiment he uses a standard steal I-beam maybe 1/4" thick. The WTC beams were 3" thick. How much Thermite or Thermate would be needed to cut through 3" of steel? Lets see an experiment for that.

Also, this Thermite is only visible at 1 location on 1 of the 2 towers. To bring the towers, I would think this reaction would be seen at numerous locations on both towers. Also, the plane would have severed any wiring to trigger the thermite. So was it battery powered under wireless remote control?

The real question should WHO or WHAT was in control of the planes at the time.

I believe there was more than enough damage done by the planes to bring the towers down without explosive help.

However, I do think the Israeli Mossad orchestrated this.

post deleted..

Originally posted by SmedleyBurlap
This only brings up new mysteries, like how the terrorists got thermite inside of the columns, and how they got a hold of nanothermite. Who would have access to a high tech US military grade explosive?

lol i wonder

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by pteridine
2. The material used by Cole is thermAte, not thermite.
3. There is no physical evidence for either.

Look at the thread title. Are you talking to yourself?

"no physical evidence," yeah, no, sorry, as overly-dramatic as your rants may be at times, I'm still going to have to go with the opinions of PhD, world-renowned research scientists who have received tenure at major educational institutes (Jones, Harrit, etc.) over what you say by default, even if neither of you had evidence. But from all I've seen, and no big shocker here, those same world-renowned PhDs do have evidence and all you're doing is lashing out at what must be painful ideas on internet forums, because you've never actually debunked their work. I've seen your arguments countless times so there's no point in even going back over them for the 1000th time. We'll just have to agree to disagree I guess. Look up Steven Jones' or Niels Harrit's resumés. You can trash talk them on here all day for their work on the WTC collapses but these guys are no fools, and their paper is not the trash you say it is.

edit on 20-12-2010 by bsbray11 because: (no reason given)

Does it not ever occur to you that, if the Jones paper was true, the sky would have fallen in by now ? Fact is no-one gives a damn. Doesn't that tell you anything ?

reply to post by bsbray11


If it is thermate we see on that video, why don't we see it coming from all damaged columns? And why was there so much of it? And if there was so much of it in every column, wouldn't we be able to see at least some effect, like smoke, all over the building?

As for the corroded steel, there should to be evidence of it in abundance, and it should show damage to parts that were vital to the structural integrity. I have never seen such evidence.

Are you saying that regular non explosive thermate charges caused those streams? Can you explain in detail how that would work? Pressure building up as result of the collapse seems the most reasonable explanation to me, not sure why you call it an "excuse". There isn't any reason for it not to happen, if there is a path, air will flow there. The shafts and stairways provided such a path.

Explosion sounds is not evidence of demolition charges. I don't really see the point in using thermate if you are going to use explosive charges anyhow.

reply to post by samkent


Care to provide a source for those 'first gen' videos? Stop talking BS. The newsreel footage was doctored from the outset, they were copied and reproduced faithfully by hundreds of people on the day this all took place.

It's most definitely not about 'youtube doctoring'. Apart from the newsreel, what about the people who provided all the amateur footage being involved in CGI productions at one level or other?

And what about all the confiscated footage of the Pentagon? Where did that end up? Will we ever see footage of the missile - I mean 'plane' that hit the Pentagon? Doubtful.

What about that tiny hole in Shanksville? Where the hell did that plane end up again?


The TV show 'The Event' in my humble opinion (as a writer) is a fine example of allegorical screenwriting. The premise being that planes were made to disappear, things were covered up, and it runs deeper than any of us ever dared to imagine. Oh, and the weird magickal ritual that gets referenced too...

This was a great thread, wow, very interesting im surprised there isn't more questioning of this in the media, im googling it right now to see what else is out there on the coverage.
Im a little confused though, In the video he says there must have been thermite in the building..but is he suggesting it was planted there when they built the towers? or someone places it there before 9/11? how would they place it there i the beams if it was already build? can someone clarify how thermite got into the building beams to begin with?

as he was showing they only needed enough thermite/thermate to weaken the beams or melt the heads off the bolts to release the superstructures of the buildings. gravity takes care of the rest, as you have witnessed with the trade center buildings collapse and through his science.

being the fact that some of these supports were in fact hollow ,they could have filled these boxes full so gravity would feed any amount of fuel needed with pinpoint accuracy at each level, pretty much undetected. the problem was that the airplane damage exposed the column burnouts and gave the media and photographers the fuel for their fires. the smoking gun

There aren't half some waffling posts here, and coming from the usual sources. John Cole has given his ingredients, shown his MO, shown the effects of his MO. So it's all there to be replicated by someone. He has shown that thermate can cut steel in that fashion. So, there is no point being sceptical about his experiment.

reply to post by Mastermook


oxygen and acetylene torches to cut open pour and detonation points throughout all the buildings. could have only taken just a few nights if the devises were made like solid rocket booster fuel to reduce its size and proficiency ?