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

The only one’s I see lying about 911 is the government and the people who support their ridiculous fairytales. A few OS defenders have made up lies by making claims that Jones never found Thermite in the WTC dust samples, yet they cannot give us any proof to back their claims about Jones.

reply to post by Cassius666

Maybe not on ATS, but I've been in debates on other forums, and Truthers are usually outnumbered. Believe it or not, there are still a lot of people out there who don't question the OS. Yes, the Truth movement is big and still growing, but I've been seen as crazy/delusional for believing 9/11 was an inside job, and I've only been a Truther for a little over a year.

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by Cassius666

 

Fame within the circle of their fellow travellers. That tightly-knit, mutual admiration society of CTer's who accept anything that supports their position and deny anything that questions their theories. Those who have predetermined their conclusions with nothing more than gut feelings that "things didn't look right." They have no idea of how things should look other than from what they see in disaster movies and you all know how accurate Hollywood is.Those technically astute individuals that speak of the laws of physics and tout a Doctor of Divinity degree. In short, people like you, Cassie.

What a crock..
Is it not true that no Government body even tested for explosives?
So what are truthers denying???

Mind you, it is odd that there was supposidly a terrorist attack and three buildings collapsed plus the Pentagon hit, but they didn't even consider explosives???
Heck, the hijackers may have smuggled explosives onto the planes for all we know..
So that decision to not test NEVER made sense unless it was them with the agenda..
That being to hide the truth..

If you wish to argue then PLEASE tell me why the never tested for explosives..

Where are all of the full-time ATS debunkers?

I remember arguing with them on vertical thermite cutters. They said it couldn't be done even though old patents existed. This was many years ago on ATS.

Just one argument they will end up ignoring because the evidence is obvious. Debunkers also hate discussing building 7's rate of speed and heavy ejected steel columns.

Originally posted by FlySolo

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by bsbray11

 

Actually, BS, I was talking to those who confused themite and thermate. Many truthers seem to be confused and I

Thermate, thermite, or termites. Who cares? Moot point anyway. The real point is the BS in the OS. Nice try to distract from the content of what really is going on here. And yes, nano-thermite was found so why do you keep saying there was no evidence of it?

Yes, I can see you are interested in truth, vermouth, tooth. Who cares? Moot point anyway, for you. And no, nanothermite was not found, so why do you keep saying that there was evidence of it?

reply to post by pteridine

Yes, I can see you are interested in truth, vermouth, tooth. Who cares? Moot point anyway, for you. And no, nanothermite was not found, so why do you keep saying that there was evidence of it?

Wasn't found or they didn't look for it??
Big difference...

what funny is the government really thinks we're stupid enough to fall for their black ops Bs. now doing something about it is a different story. thats where they will always have us over a barrel , because they have all our money and our military to back up any claim they choose

reply to post by amagnus


Of course it can be done but it is difficult to do and takes quite a bit of thermite. Thermate works much better and that is why Cole used it to show that it could be done. There is equivalent evidence for nuclear weapons and lasers and I am waiting for Cole to show that those can cut steel, too. My favorite theory is hacksaws hefted by a division of the Yugoslavian army that were disguised as messengers and elevator repairmen. A uniform is a uniform.

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by amagnus

 

Of course it can be done but it is difficult to do and takes quite a bit of thermite. Thermate works much better and that is why Cole used it to show that it could be done. There is equivalent evidence for nuclear weapons and lasers and I am waiting for Cole to show that those can cut steel, too. My favorite theory is hacksaws hefted by a division of the Yugoslavian army that were disguised as messengers and elevator repairmen. A uniform is a uniform.

Yep, can't answer the questions so you just post crap...
But it's people like you that continually sprout the crazy theories in the first place..
I think truthers woke up to that disinfo trick years ago..

National Geographic are just government shills just like Popular Mechanics with all their debunking absurdities. All our news is fake. Everything you see on TV is there to brainwash you to think a certain way.

Now imagine what Nano Thermite could do? They say the small particle sizes make this material FAR more powerful than regular thermite and that's what was found in the dust. Only the US military and government have access to that stuff.

I know that nano thermite was used based on the dust analysis and all the molten steel in the buildings before they came down, but I don't think that ONLY nano thermite took down those towers. I think they started with that to weaken a lot of the structure and then used some micro nukes to take it down as the final blow. That's why Tritium levels were FAR above normal and why Dimitri Khalezov's nuclear demolition videos have been repeatedly scrubbed from the web. The powers that be wouldn't keep taking them down if they didn't contain a lot of truth. Research for yourself. Dr. Bill Deagle also has evidence that it was micro nukes also. Watch the shills post after this and tell you it's impossible. It's not only possible, it was the PLAN since the twin towers were created! Dimitri covers how he was informed in the Soviet Union by treaty that the twin towers would be taken down by nuclear demolition at the end of their services lives. They had a big laugh about it because they thought the Americans were crazy to design such a building that was so rigid that this was necessary. You can't just blow the center columns because the outer skin is so rigid and you can't explode all the skin at once either.

Controlled Demolition Inc. got a patent for taking down the twin towers with nuclear demolition when they were built! That's the dirty little secret they have hidden from all of you. Bldg 7 and the twin towers had tunnels put in under the foundations specifically for nuclear demolition charges to take them down at the end of their useful lives. Rockefeller paid them to come up with this demolition plan because it was required before they could build them and nuclear demolition was determined as the ONLY reliable means of bringing them down without taking out other buildings. Here's the evidence for the nuclear demolition with all videos and other things that don't make sense except for nuclear demolition being used as the final blow. Watch all the videos before you make up your mind. Nano thermite ALONE could not take down the twin towers and turn steel into DUST! ONLY the crush zone from a nuclear demolition charge can turn steel into dust. Nothing else.

www.project.nsearch.com...

Well this thread went from goofball to full on looney...


now its nuclear bombs AND thermate / thermite / nano-awesome-sauce-boom-jelly.

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by amagnus

 

Of course it can be done but it is difficult to do and takes quite a bit of thermite.

The main advantage to using nano-thermate is size. By using thermate particulates in the nano range it should take up much less space while remaining effective. Unfortunately, the video depicts thermate but not nano-thermate. It is basic chemistry my friend.

Your argument, along with all of the other debunkers still do not hold.

Originally posted by pteridine

Originally posted by FlySolo

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by bsbray11

 

Actually, BS, I was talking to those who confused themite and thermate. Many truthers seem to be confused and I

Thermate, thermite, or termites. Who cares? Moot point anyway. The real point is the BS in the OS. Nice try to distract from the content of what really is going on here. And yes, nano-thermite was found so why do you keep saying there was no evidence of it?

Yes, I can see you are interested in truth, vermouth, tooth. Who cares? Moot point anyway, for you. And no, nanothermite was not found, so why do you keep saying that there was evidence of it?

Well sir, take a look back on page 7. The clip in the news interview where he found unreacted thermite. I've said it two times and I'll say it again. Fine line between truthers and OS believers. You blatantly ignored the clip and it was posted 3 times.

Your argument about the moot point is potatoes and potaahtoes. Thermite vs thermate is really invalid and you base your premise on that. Cole demonstrates it can be done, and yet again, you chose to ignore. Based on your logic, your just as bad as the truthers. Fine line, fine line

I had realized this for quite some time. The biggest smoking gun is the image on this page just above the firefighters head , . I cannot find the link anymore, but when a building is going through controlled demolition, they pyrotechnic/explosive techs wrap the beam with thermite cord at 45 degree angles. I even watched Gulianni say on national TV on the news today mention the 9/11 volunteer workers were exposed to 2000 degree ground temperatures inside the wreckage. Last time I checked, jet fuel burned at about 1500 degrees, but it does evaporate or burn off, which doesn't explain molten steel in the ground for 5 weeks.
Good find! S&F

Originally posted by cLOUDDEAD
reply to post by Cassius666

 

Maybe not on ATS, but I've been in debates on other forums, and Truthers are usually outnumbered. Believe it or not, there are still a lot of people out there who don't question the OS. Yes, the Truth movement is big and still growing, but I've been seen as crazy/delusional for believing 9/11 was an inside job, and I've only been a Truther for a little over a year.

I remember 'debating' the whole 9/11 issue with some guy who was referencing the FEMA version of events in Popular Mechanics and the NIST (I've often wondered why NIST was an authority on this) reports, and completely overlooking solid evidence. I stopped arguing with him. He will understand when his mind allows him to understand.

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by Cassius666

 

Fame within the circle of their fellow travellers. That tightly-knit, mutual admiration society of CTer's who accept anything that supports their position and deny anything that questions their theories. Those who have predetermined their conclusions with nothing more than gut feelings that "things didn't look right." They have no idea of how things should look other than from what they see in disaster movies and you all know how accurate Hollywood is.Those technically astute individuals that speak of the laws of physics and tout a Doctor of Divinity degree. In short, people like you, Cassie.

It's funny to watch the arguments for the OS devolve in just my short time here at ATS....

When I first became a member, all of the 911 threads were soooooo hotly contested.
They were super moderated and anyone who slung dirt was cautioned.

Now...
This is the detractors argument.

A poorly put together ad hominem attack against a poster, the group to which the poster associates, and the scientists that have put in their hard time and effort for this.

Do you really think that Dr. Stephen Jones is making money off of this?

Do you know that he lost his tenure from BYU and was fired over this?

I hope that he was adequately compensated for his loss.

Do you have any idea what kind of effort goes into getting a Phd????

In Physics, and then what does he really have to gain... FOR REAL.
Not some thrown together ad hominem lob.

Dr. Jones is a patriot with a brass set of stones and he knows it and so do the people who know what really happened on that day.

Cheers.

Originally posted by FlySolo
[Well sir, take a look back on page 7. The clip in the news interview where he found unreacted thermite. I've said it two times and I'll say it again. Fine line between truthers and OS believers. You blatantly ignored the clip and it was posted 3 times.

Your argument about the moot point is potatoes and potaahtoes. Thermite vs thermate is really invalid and you base your premise on that. Cole demonstrates it can be done, and yet again, you chose to ignore. Based on your logic, your just as bad as the truthers. Fine line, fine line

First, he only claims to have found unreacted thermite. Next, he says it is between 10 and 100 tons of "highly energetic" nanothermitic material. Doesn't that number sound a little odd to you? All this super stuff that didn't go off. Maybe it is not so super. Maybe the buildings fell without it. It was painted on in thin layers so how much of the WTC was covered? All of it? Plain old paint, maybe?
Cole demonstrates it can be done. Peachy. Cole is a hero for rediscovering what everyone already knows. Thermite versus thermate does make a difference when cutting steel. Thermate was designed to cut steel. I can demonstrate that linear cutter charges can do it faster and better. An atomic bomb is faster yet. Hacksaws are quieter. Unbolting the sections is even quieter and a lot easier.
What does any of it prove? Nothing. No evidence. Did you see thermate charges going off on every floor in a timed sequence? No. Did Coles thermate react fast enough to cause collapse at the speed we saw? No. Were any ignitors found for the many tons that did go off? No.
Please be a bit more skeptical even though you really want to believe in a conspiracy. There are much better ones out there that might even have a factual basis.

reply to post by OuttaTime


Thrmite does not explain underground heat for weeks either. Underground fires do.
The 45 degree cuts were done by torches during cleanup.

reply to post by OuttaTime


The hottest that jet fuel can burn in an open air temperature is about 700 degrees.

Inside of a jet where combustion happens can get much higher.
Jet fuel A or Kerosene is actually very stable.

I posted a page back or two about the properties of Jet fuel A that make it impossible for it to explode and then burn for 30 minutes.
Unless of course it can somehow violate the second law of thermodynamics.
But why not.

the towers violated every other known law of physics that day.

Like how did the top of the building still have enough kinetic energy to PULVERIZE itself.

The energy would have dissipated with each successive collapse according to how the OS is written.

But heck, it has already violated one law of physics.
Why not two?