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:985 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.
It's true that thermite, even the minute amounts that cling to processed steel, has explosive and combustible features. The remarkable thing is that these features were not known until after Sept 11th. In fact it was examination of the building debris that made that discovery possible.
Thing is Shoonra, the thermite found wasn't ordinary thermite, it was determined to be nanothermite, which is only available from military weapons sources, or for SOME commericial applications such as explosives.
As far as thermite being present on processed steel, can you find me any sort of reference which makes that assertion?
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
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.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
Weapons grade, availlable only to the military and military connected. Much like the weapon grade anthrax unleashed after 9/11.
I never really looked into nano-thermite in any depth until today. To find out it has been researched for use as an explosive by the military sheds new light on the overall picture.
So THAT is most likely why they found nano-thermite in the debris, IT was most probably the explosive used in the demolition of the towers.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
They had to silence Steven Jones the best they could since he found hard evidence that it was indeed an inside job. He loses his job at BYU, while this nut Judy is still working and trying to sell a book now. They don't fear Judy, she is on their side anyway.
They had to silence Steven Jones the best they could since he found hard evidence that it was indeed an inside job
That is pretty strong evidence that those who attack Jones are the same people who are actively involved in the coverup, knowingly or not.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
No problemo. It's not a no-fun zone and I was busy elsewhere anyway. Btw, I'd like to buy a vowel, please -- in Gentile English. They're out of my price range in the Hebrew language, scarce as they are there. lol Just jesting. :)
To get back on topic, this sounded like another misdirection play. None of them seem to know what caused their collapse, but they definately know what didn't.
I think the best way to get back on topic is with a short review first of Jones' thermitic-ploy to impede and derail the 9/11 Truth Movement -- similar to his Cold Fusion intrigues mentioned in the opening video:
1. Jones appeared as a hijacker of the Truth Movement in 2005 and proceeded to marginalize a number of pioneering researchers, then "synthesize" as his own platform the years of groundwork that had been established and compiled by them and many others prior to his Celebrity-guru casting.
2. Jones wrote a paper in 2006 about molten metal that he had declared as such from photos.
3. Sometime after Jones wrote his paper in 2006, he says a woman contacted him and said she had scooped some dirt off of steel at a 9/11 Memorial site so that it didn't get rained on and saved it in a bucket -- might have been years after 9/11 when she did that (if she even actually did so); might not have been soil from the WTC at all and it might have been in the bucket for years before she sent it to him, getting degraded and compromised by contaminates. She could have scooped up some dust and debris from a welding-area floor and stirred that into the bucket too, for all anyone knows.
4. The dubious chain of evidence on the samples that "Los Alamos" Jones claims were sent to him from others are similarly outrageous and unreliable; and therefore likely to be dismissed as inadmissible in a court of law, unless the judge happens to be utterly corrupt.
[Reference Post #1 and Post #3 at 2010 4um Title: "Evidence Refutes the Official 9-11 Investigation: The Scientific Forensic Facts"]
5. Evidently, Jones has been making a mockery of the 9/11 investigation and using his fans to help him detour it while the perps make their getaway.
6. Research his Cold Fusion manueverings and listen to Jones tell you himself in the video below what I've noted above (2nd and 3rd): 9/11: The Molten Metal "Evidence"
Professor Steven Jones reveals the source of his "molten metal" evidence that he claims is proof that thermite was used to bring down the WTC. The entire video can be found at question911.com [links in the Description Section]
I remember scoffing @ "the anonymous lady with the bucket of wtc scrap" years ago when i saw Jones speak at alex jones 2006 conference. Scientifically thats a deal breaker & not credible at all re: the chain of evidence.
"Even to the death fight for truth, and the LORD your God will battle for you".Sirach 4:28
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.
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.
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
I remember scoffing @ "the anonymous lady with the bucket of wtc scrap" years ago when i saw Jones speak at alex jones 2006 conference. Scientifically thats a deal breaker & not credible at all re: the chain of evidence.
Thanks for that input, Artisan. Hopefully, it will help others to start seeing through his schtick.
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Shortly after he learned that Dr. Wood lost her job and became unemployed, Jones announced he had been “forced out” of his job and diverted attention onto his claims of persecution, playing the victim card again. It became known that Jones had moved to a new residence, then a few months later retired and was promoted to Professor Emeritus, the highest level of achievement for a professor. Someone fired from his job is not promoted. Jones did not go without an income. So, if Jones was not fired but promoted, why has he played the martyr? The timing and focus strongly suggest it was a useful diversion. But no matter the motive, the conclusion is that Jones is dishonest.
And the same can be said of Jones’ thermite myth. Thermite is also a diversion, stalling and playing out the clock for the perps. Thermite is used in welding. It does not turn a building to powder in mid air.
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
_______________________________________________________________________________ The US government has declared civil war on itself. Its lust for war grew so great... Liberty before death. We run , we live, We fight again, till we win. We did not start this fight. We damn sure did not willingly pay our taxes to buy the bullets and drones that shall be used to kill us. We will correct the violations of this rogue nation....our rogue nation. We will fix this because nobody else can. You will work to help me help us all to fix this failure. After you're done educating yourself,Take Action!!!
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.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
Thermite is used in welding. It does not turn a building to powder in mid air.
Keep posting half-truths. It's already clear that the military AND national laboratories have been developing nano-thermite explosives for quite some time prior to 9/11.
AND, nano-thermite WAS found in the WTC debris. How'd it get there, elves perhaps?
As far as turning a building to "powder", ANY controlled demolition would have done that if a top down series of explosions were coordinated with the actual collapse.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
Thermite is used in welding. It does not turn a building to powder in mid air.
Keep posting half-truths. It's already clear that the military AND national laboratories have been developing nano-thermite explosives for quite some time prior to 9/11.
AND, nano-thermite WAS found in the WTC debris. How'd it get there, elves perhaps?
As far as turning a building to "powder", ANY controlled demolition would have done that if a top down series of explosions were coordinated with the actual collapse.
There's a photo of Ground Zero workers sitting in front of a beam that had been cut off with a cutting charge, probably in a clay or porcelain mold. The perfect slag melt with no splatters is proof that the vertical beam wasn't cut (after the collapse) with a wrecker's torch or lance.
No, nano thermite is all the proof needed to swing the guilty from the gallows.
We shouldn't confuse it with fairie dust after the fact.
Shortly after he learned that Dr. Wood lost her job and became unemployed, Jones announced he had been “forced out” of his job and diverted attention onto his claims of persecution, playing the victim card again. It became known that Jones had moved to a new residence, then a few months later retired and was promoted to Professor Emeritus, the highest level of achievement for a professor. Someone fired from his job is not promoted. Jones did not go without an income. So, if Jones was not fired but promoted, why has he played the martyr? The timing and focus strongly suggest it was a useful diversion. But no matter the motive, the conclusion is that Jones is dishonest.
And the same can be said of Jones’ thermite myth. Thermite is also a diversion, stalling and playing out the clock for the perps. Thermite is used in welding. It does not turn a building to powder in mid air.
There's a great video where a guy fills a flower pot with thermite, sets it on a car engine and lights it. 10 or 15 seconds later the pot emerges from the bottom of the engine that it burned through.
I've used thermite once, to weld a ground wire in an airport computer room to bond all of the elevated flooring metal to Earth. (elevated computer rooms allow for easy rewiring of equipment-and whoever spec'ed that thermite welded ground was naive, mechanical ground lugs are much better)
It's not used too often for welding in any other construction field I'm aware of.
No, nano thermite is all the proof needed to swing the guilty from the gallows.
That's why there are those here who are actively dismissing the actual evidence, and are trying to confuse people with regular thermite rather than mentioning nano-thermite.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
There's a photo of Ground Zero workers sitting in front of a beam that had been cut off with a cutting charge...
I remember that. IIRC, it was cut about a 45 degree angle, no?
Godfrey Smith: Mike, I wouldn't worry. Prosperity is just around the corner. Mike Flaherty: Yeah, it's been there a long time. I wish I knew which corner. My Man Godfrey (1936)
...whoever spec'ed that thermite welded ground was naive...
Sounds like it.
[Thermite]'s not used too often for welding in any other construction field I'm aware of.
I think the only welding use of thermite I've ever heard of is field welding railroad rails. Could be wrong about that.
Godfrey Smith: Mike, I wouldn't worry. Prosperity is just around the corner. Mike Flaherty: Yeah, it's been there a long time. I wish I knew which corner. My Man Godfrey (1936)
There's a great video where a guy fills a flower pot with thermite, sets it on a car engine and lights it. 10 or 15 seconds later the pot emerges from the bottom of the engine that it burned through.
Why didn't the flower pot turn to dust?
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Me: So what if the DoD has been looking into nano- thermite since the 90's for use in explosives?
You: 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.
No, you dismiss Directed Energy Weapons, even though some are public knowledge. I haven't dismissed nano-thermite because of some secret design. It doesn't account for the observed evidence. Since you've wildly claimed at Post #36 that ANY controlled demolition would have turned a building to powder if a top down series of explosions were coordinated with the actual collapse, thermite in whatever form wasn't even needed (except by Jones to detour investigations and have his comedic chain of "evidence" laughed out of a court at some point like a bad joke on his congregation). It wasn't even effective as a dramatic 9/11 light-show.
In the Directed Energy discussion, you want to talk about thermite. In a thermite topic, you want to talk about Directed Energy weapons. This is the Directed Energy discussion where I've posted some material for consideration there:
4um Title: 911 What Happened - Not How It Happened - Dr Judy Wood - Post #76
Edited for formatting.
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
No, nano thermite is all the proof needed to swing the guilty from the gallows.
That's why there are those here who are actively dismissing the actual evidence, and are trying to confuse people with regular thermite rather than mentioning nano-thermite.
photo of Ground Zero workers sitting in front of a beam that had been cut off with a cutting charge...
I remember that. IIRC, it was cut about a 45 degree angle, no?
Yes! and the slag was formed in a perfect outside bead with no splash over, (ceramic mold) and it would have been impossible (and entirely too dangerous, even with a crane sling spotting the beam to protect the worker from sudden death) to cut that box beam from the inside with a torch or a lance.
There's a great video where a guy fills a flower pot with thermite, sets it on a car engine and lights it. 10 or 15 seconds later the pot emerges from the bottom of the engine that it burned through.
Why didn't the flower pot turn to dust?
What emerged from the bottom was a sizzling bit of Hellfire like burning solid rocket fuel, and it was not possible to see what if anything remained of the flower pot.
This guy says you don't need evidence, you just need observation.....sheesh, where did he get his science degree?
Say what you like about Jones, but his THEORY is based on evidence at the site:
For example:
Steven Jones, PhD physicist discovers previously molten iron spheres in the WTC dust which blanketed lower Manhattan. Sizes are up to 1/16" diameter. The findings are corroborated by EPA but not explained. Molten iron is the byproduct of Thermite. It contains the chemical signature of thermate.
hysics professor Steven Jones finds, in this previously molten sample from the WTC, the chemical traces of Thermate — including Fluorine, Manganese, Sulphur, Potassium, etc.
The FEMA report notes: "The results of the examination are striking. They reveal a phenomenon never before observed in building fires: eutectic reactions, which caused "intergranular melting capable of turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese.... Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation." NIST dropped this like a hot potato. These are all tell tell signs of the use of thermate (sulphur + thermite) incendiary cutter charges."
Previously molten metal was found "flowing like lava" by the FDNY in the basements of all 3 WTC High-rises. Hydrocarbon fires can burn at a maximum temperature of 1,800°F which is about 1,000° short of the beginning melting temperature of steel. Where did the molten metal come from? Why do FEMA and NIST deny its existence?
If this guy is to be taken seriously, he needs an ALTERNATE THEORY explaining the evidence presented, not his opinion and observations that IGNORE the central evidence presented in the initial theory.
Jones doesn't insist that others accept his THEORY, after all it is merely a THEORY based on the evidence found........but if you want to call bullshit on the THEORY, then offer an acceptable alternative for the evidence presented, such as how does the "energy beam" create molten steal and leave the same chemical compounds as nano termite? How does the "energy beam" theory create the holes in the steal? How does the energy beam create sulfidation?
What physical evidence is presented to merit the "energy beam" THEORY...is there a serious scientific theory presented regarding energy beams? Also, does one theory actually discount the other? Is it possible that two theories have merit? Science has many theories that are compatible........
" If you cannot govern yourself, you will be governed by assholes. " Randge, Poet de Forum, 1/11/11
"Life's tough, and even tougher if you're stupid." --John Wayne
HOUNDDAWG: photo of Ground Zero workers sitting in front of a beam that had been cut off with a cutting charge...
Esso: I remember that. IIRC, it was cut about a 45 degree angle, no?
HOUNDDAWG: Yes! and the slag was formed in a perfect outside bead with no splash over, (ceramic mold) and it would have been impossible (and entirely too dangerous, even with a crane sling spotting the beam to protect the worker from sudden death) to cut that box beam from the inside with a torch or a lance.
Can you post a pic, HOUNDDAWG, or is it in the references below?:
1. The pic in question could be a staged photo op.
2. Cutter charges and even thermite in some form might have been used in the clean up. If so, that might give false readings in test samples taken later to investigate controlled demolition. However, neither Jones' group nor Architects and Engineers have moved to establish test-confirmation of explosives like C4 and PETN to prove controlled demolition. Why not?
3. The angle cut may be telling us more than whatever it looks like at first glance. The structural-strength point being, afaik, that when the sections of steel are removed to make an angled cut like that, the steel still doesn't fall over -- even though it has been so damaged -- until it is torched across from behind on the intact side.
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Say what you like about Jones, but his THEORY is based on evidence at the site
What evidence at the site? His interpretations of photos? Judy Wood has an entire book of that. Jones' supposed "chain of dust and soil evidence" appeared years after 9/11 -- after he wrote his 2006 paper. It is highly suspect and should be declared inadmissable in a court of law.
Yes, it is possible that more than one theory has merit but his doesn't, imo. Even he has claimed that thermite/thermate may have been used simply as an incendiary-ignition for more powerful explosives and not to demolish the buildings but even that much about the matter is speculative on his part.
Without even referencing Judy Wood, there are news reports and photos of the WTC destruction that indicates much more was involved than thermitics and that's not hypothetical, according to what's been shown. It is actually Jones, Architects and Engineers, et al, who have been arguing an alternate and unscientifically based theory. Reference the discussions at this linked site, where it's critiqued as "pyrotechnic pixie dust". In summary, what Jones and other "authority figures" called "evidence" -- unreacted thermitics -- disproves that it brought down the buildings at all and should be viewed with more skepticism as disinfo than it has been:
Niels Harrit [a co-author with Jones]: “You cannot fudge this kind of science. We have found it: unreacted thermite.”
Comment: "What does that statement really mean? 'Unreacted'… is that kinda like finding a few unfired bullets around a dead body and then claiming that proves [someone] was shot? That is why the law states that finding residual traces of EXPLODED conventional explosives proves demolition…
finding unreacted thermite doesn’t PROVE thermite brought the towers down. In fact all it really proves is the 'hundreds and hundreds of tons' of this stuff that Harrit ALSO mentioned in that last video… DID NOT bring down the towers… because it didn’t go off."
Another reference for consideration:
This is Google's cache of http://www.defense.gov/transcripts/transcript.aspx? transcriptid=674. It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on Nov 22, 2012 20:37:13 GMT:
U.S. Department of Defense Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs) News Transcript Presenter: Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen April 28, 1997 8:45 AM EDT
Cohen's keynote address at the Conference on Terrorism, Weapons of Mass Destruction, and U.S. Strategy at the Georgia Center, Mahler Auditorium, University of Georgia, Athens, Ga. The event is part of the Sam Nunn Policy Forum being hosted by the University of Georgia. Secretary Cohen is joined by Sen. Sam Nunn and Sen. Richard G. Lugar.
Others are engaging even in an eco- type of terrorism whereby they can alter the climate, set off earthquakes, volcanoes remotely through the use of electromagnetic waves.
So there are plenty of ingenious minds out there that are at work finding ways in which they can wreak terror upon other nations. It's real, and that's the reason why we have to intensify our efforts,
Edited to correct first link path and for punctuation. Bracketed inserts by me in the excerpts from that link.
Edit to note the online book source where the defense.gov info was first read by me:
Did you even watch your video? He doesn't dispute that nanothermite was found, he disputes the use. He spends most of the video attacking the publishing and in that last few seconds claims he "doesn't deal with the content of the paper"....publishing claims do not discount CONTENT. Even the title of this video is dishonest: begging the question is a common propaganda technique used when the real questions are avoided.
" If you cannot govern yourself, you will be governed by assholes. " Randge, Poet de Forum, 1/11/11
"Life's tough, and even tougher if you're stupid." --John Wayne
He doesn't dispute that nanothermite was found, he disputes the use.
What these pseudoscientists overlook (or deliberately omit) is the fact that the US military, along with National Laboratories, such as Los Alamos, have been investigating the use of nanothermite as an explosive since at least the 90's, as far as what is publically known.
I would bet they had functional nanothermite explosives available prior to 9/11/2001.
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
Did you even watch your video? He doesn't dispute that nanothermite was found, he disputes the use. He spends most of the video attacking the publishing and in that last few seconds claims he "doesn't deal with the content of the paper"....publishing claims do not discount CONTENT. Even the title of this video is dishonest: begging the question is a common propaganda technique used when the real questions are avoided.
Yes, I watched the video. If you review the one of Jones at Post #26, I think you might agree that there is no credible evidence of nanothermite. What Jones and the eight other listed co-authors did was chip in about $88.88 a piece for a publication to decieve people about their alleged "findings".
The Playlist that I posted (at #26 too) has more commentary on the subject, which I'll post here next. The video I posted at #54 is a re-titled mirror of one that was removed by YouTube and the actual title is: "The Thermite Conspiracy"; which is why those words appear first at the opening of the video. I included a copy of the video in that Playlist with the correct title for it and probably should have posted that one instead but I don't think the title of the one that I posted is a dishonest propaganda technique. Both parts of the title are essentially accurate, imo. On the 2nd section: conventional explosives don't explain the evidence at the WTC -- not even with the thermite-additive hypothesis.
I think the first part of the title that asks the question, "No Thermite on 9/11?!", refers to the evasive response by co-author, James Gourley (at the 9:30 mark -- in reply to an imquiry about the concentration level of thermite/thermate), where he says in the first sentence: "we don't know whether nanothermite was used to bring the towers down." He then speculates that it might have been used to keep the fires going long enough to make the fire-induced collapse theory plausible -- and supporting that implausibility was probably the main objective of Jones and the other co-authors. Gourley further speculates that it might have been used in conjunction with high explosives (although they oddly didn't test for demolition-grade explosives), then states that nanothermite matches exist and that he believes they can be used to detonate high explosives. "We really just have no idea how it was used," he says, then concludes with: "The salient point is: it shouldn't be in the WTC dust at all." The real point is: there's no reason to believe it was in the WTC dust, based on the unreliable so-called "evidence samples" that they claim to have used.
Even if we suppose that what Jones claims was "molten metal" pouring out of the window(s) at WTC 2 could possibly have been stage-propped thermitics used for "spectacular special effects", it wouldn't prove that it was also used to demolish the Towers if it turned up in a dust or soil sample -- but they didn't even use any valid test-samplings. On your earlier comment about molten iron spheres, arc gougers are called "welding erasers" because they can vaporize metal into tiny spherical shapes too.
Edited for clarity and readability.
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
It appears that there some people who still do not understand what is being said by the authors of the paper. The authors assert that a thermitic material was used in the controlled demolition of the towers.
In support of this claim they rely on, what they say is, unreacted thermite material found in the debris.
They offer no explanation as to how or why "un-reacted" thermite material would be in the rubble. Nor do they make any assessment of the quantity of thermite material used in the demolition.
As I hope is clear from this video, given the proportions in the one sample that they did weigh, the amount of un-reacted thermite is massive. Assuming that a proportion of the thermite material did ignite/explode then the total amount of thermite material in the towers prior to their collapse increases yet again - by what factor?
The authors also fail to explain how the thermite was used. Their argument is simply this - we found thermite; it should not have been there - you explain it. [Continues at the site.]
-------
"They're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." -- Col. Puller, USMC
Of course the pea brain will not deal with the content of the paper, his job is to discredit it, the content can't be discredited or it already would have been. It was military grade nano-thermite that was used to cut the beams at critical points in the structure and explosives used to turn the concrete to dust for the Hollywood effect they work looking for.
Oh, and if you don't think it was possible in 2001 for a thermite technology to turn concrete to dust, think again!
They offer no explanation as to how or why "un-reacted" thermite material would be in the rubble.
That's a very easy answer since not all the thermite would have reacted. Not all reactions are 100% effective and since explosives were going off all around it at the same time some of it also was put into the particle clouds.
Steven Jones, PhD physicist discovers previously molten iron spheres in the WTC dust which blanketed lower Manhattan. Sizes are up to 1/16" diameter. The findings are corroborated by EPA but not explained. Molten iron is the byproduct of Thermite. It contains the chemical signature of thermate. 
hysics professor Steven Jones finds, in this previously molten sample from the WTC, the chemical traces of Thermate — including Fluorine, Manganese, Sulphur, Potassium, etc. 
The FEMA report notes: "The results of the examination are striking. They reveal a phenomenon never before observed in building fires: eutectic reactions, which caused "intergranular melting capable of turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese.... Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation." NIST dropped this like a hot potato. These are all tell tell signs of the use of thermate (sulphur + thermite) incendiary cutter charges." 
Previously molten metal was found "flowing like lava" by the FDNY in the basements of all 3 WTC High-rises. Hydrocarbon fires can burn at a maximum temperature of 1,800°F which is about 1,000° short of the beginning melting temperature of steel. Where did the molten metal come from? Why do FEMA and NIST deny its existence? 
