Freedom4um

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

9/11
See other 9/11 Articles

Title: 911 and Thermite, The official Conspiracy Theory?
Source: YouTube
URL Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=505uzsWbC30
Published: May 9, 2011
Author: 108morris108
Post Date: 2012-11-23 15:54:13 by GreyLmist
Keywords: 9/11, Andrew Johnson, Steven Jones, Thermites Theory
Views: 1026
Comments: 67

From the Description Section:

Thermite does not turn steel to dust. Thermite does create a lot of flames. Each tower weighed 500,000 tons, no-one has seen anything like the quantity of flames that thermite would have created. Many more anomalies too. Burned out vehicles alongside unburnt paper (a lot of it) left intact. [sic]

Thermite is simply Aluminium and Iron Oxide, two substances which were in great quantity in the Towers.


Poster Comment:

Jones' Thermite Theory evidently not published as peer reviewed.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 28.

#21. To: GreyLmist, *9-11* (#0)

Thermite does not turn steel to dust. Thermite does create a lot of flames.

BTW, did you even know that nanothermite is used in EXPLOSIVES?

From Nano-thermite - Wiki

A Nano-thermite or "super-thermite"[1] is a metastable intermolecular composite (MICs) characterized by a particle size of its main constituents, a metal and a metal oxide, under 100 Nanometers. This allows for high and customizable reaction rates. Nano-thermites contain an oxidizer and a reducing agent, which are intimately mixed on the nanometer scale. MICs, including nano-thermitic materials, are a type of reactive materials investigated for military use, as well as for general applications involving propellants, explosives, and pyrotechnics.

You're hopping up and down saying that it HAD to be a "directed energy beam" that caused the collapses, while ignoring the fact that the DOD has been looking into nano-thermite since the 90's for use in EXPLOSIVES.

FormerLurker  posted on  2012-11-23   22:46:21 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#28. To: FormerLurker, *9-11* (#21) (Edited)

BTW, did you even know that nanothermite is used in EXPLOSIVES?

From Nano-thermite - Wiki

A Nano-thermite or "super-thermite"[1] is a metastable intermolecular composite (MICs) characterized by a particle size of its main constituents, a metal and a metal oxide, under 100 Nanometers. This allows for high and customizable reaction rates. Nano-thermites contain an oxidizer and a reducing agent, which are intimately mixed on the nanometer scale. MICs, including nano-thermitic materials, are a type of reactive materials investigated for military use, as well as for general applications involving propellants, explosives, and pyrotechnics.

You're hopping up and down saying that it HAD to be a "directed energy beam" that caused the collapses, while ignoring the fact that the DOD has been looking into nano-thermite since the 90's for use in EXPLOSIVES.

I haven't been hopping up and down and you are misreading the situation. I'm of the opinion that Directed Energy Weaponry of some sort was probably used in demolishing the Towers and also caused the vehicle damages -- not necessarily from America's arsenal; perhaps from a foreign arsenal or that of some hostile force(s) warring against us, not likely Muslim/Arab nationalists or "Al Qaeda" but most probably are Zio-fanatic and Communistic, Globalist-idealogues, as the evidence widely indicates. Although it's very obvious that conventional controlled demolition cannot account for the WTC devastations on 9/11, I have said that they probably were used as backup and cover for unconventional demolition methods. Also, I haven't ruled out nukes of some sort yet; do suspect it was some combination of conventional and unconventional means -- otherwise, as I see it, the only other alternative is Media-staged Fakery. Your group staying stuck on thermitics that surely don't account for dustification and toasted cars is unrealistic, imo.

So what if the DoD has been looking into nano-thermite since the 90's for use in explosives? It's their job to look into explosive things but that doesn't mean thermite is highly explosive or a superhigh-explosive in nano form because it isn't. My guess is that they've been looking into it as an incendiary for underwater explosives because it can still burn there.

Nanothermite: If It Doesn’t Fit, You Must Acquit! - Veterans Today

just to be safe, perhaps – 9/11 nanothermite advocates also maintain the fall-back position that, even if nanothermite by itself is not a high explosive, when combined with an organic substance (also asserted to not be itself a high explosive), a high-explosive is created. To that T. Mark Hightower responds: “There is only one sure way to make nanothermite a high explosive. If you combine enough high explosives with nanothermite, you can get a mixture that is a high explosive. But the same can be said for my breakfast cereal.”

Edited for grammar.

GreyLmist  posted on  2012-11-26   8:32:57 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 28.

#35. To: GreyLmist (#28)

So what if the DoD has been looking into nano-thermite since the 90's for use in explosives?

Again, name me even ONE hypothetical directed energy weapon capable of bringing down the WTC towers. Don't tell me you can't tell me since it's classified, since you dismiss nano-thermite explosives just because the actual design info for such explosives isn't public knowledge.

FormerLurker  posted on  2012-11-26 13:49:59 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 28.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest