See other 9/11 Articles
Title: Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe
Source:
whatreallyhappened.com
URL Source: http://whatreallyhappened.com/conte ... world-trade-center-catastrophe
Published: Apr 5, 2009
Author: whatreallyhappened.com
Post Date: 2009-04-05 01:25:36 by TwentyTwelve
Keywords: 9/11, 911, Thermite, WTC Collapses
Views: 10127
Comments: 690
Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe We have discovered distinctive red/gray chips in all the samples we have studied of the dust produced by the destruction of the World Trade Center. Examination of four of these samples, collected from separate sites, is reported in this paper. These red/gray chips show marked similarities in all four samples. One sample was collected by a Manhattan resident about ten minutes after the collapse of the second WTC Tower, two the next day, and a fourth about a week later. The properties of these chips were analyzed using optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy (XEDS), and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC). The red material contains grains approximately 100 nm across which are largely iron oxide, while aluminum is contained in tiny plate-like structures. Separation of components using methyl ethyl ketone demonstrated that elemental aluminum is present. The iron oxide and aluminum are intimately mixed in the red material. When ignited in a DSC device the chips exhibit large but narrow exotherms occurring at approximately 430 °C, far below the normal ignition temperature for conventional thermite. Numerous iron-rich spheres are clearly observed in the residue following the ignition of these peculiar red/gray chips. The red portion of these chips is found to be an unreacted thermitic material and highly energetic. Webmaster's Commentary: Folks, this is a major story and will be totally ignored by ABCNNBBCBS. This is a peer-reviewed report in a science journal which confirms the presence of a manufactured material consisting of tiny flakes of aluminum metal coated with iron oxide discovered at four different locations in the wreckage of the World Trade Center. Aluminum and iron oxide, mixed equally by weight, is the classic recipe for thermite. This material is very fine, increasing its burn speed, and apparently has some additional components (besides the very fine granular size) which lower the ignition temperature. This report directly contradicts the official government claim that there was no trace of internal explosives in the ruins of the World Trade Center. See Thermite and the WTC Collapses Posted on Apr 04, 2009 at 07:49 Tags: * 911
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-50) not displayed.
.
.
.
#51. To: litus (#50)
So far it has depsite what your short wave radio talking head says - this week anyway. His and the other Jones' "theories" change so often it's hard keeping up with them... an unwillingness to shine a light into .gov's actions, its employees' statements and behaviors, compelling testimony and evidence which contradicts .gov claims, contradictory statements made by .gov and .gov employees, rush to eliminate evidence from a crime scene, not a presumption of "cause" for the collapse...which led to absolutely no investigation of steel support structures of the WTC7, etc. And this is what I Mean...that babble may ahve some code word meaning to you Moonies but it makes 0 sense syntactically or semantically to us normal folk...
Based upon what?
And this is what I Mean...that babble may ahve some code word meaning to you Moonies but it makes 0 sense syntactically or semantically to us normal folk... That is why, I presume, you still have yet to answer the question I posed to you twice, now a third time: You're joking, right? You didn't just ask "why should a criminal investigation investigate the location and debris within and surrounding the area of a crime scene?" War: Nope. You are claiming that a controlled demo;lition occurred. To use one of your fellow Moonbat's phraseology...you can't even support he "effect" of a CD which makes your argument of "cause" moot. So, you are admitting that the investigation into the fire and collapse of a skyscraper, which could have led to the deaths of hundreds of people, began, at the outset, with the presumption that the CRIME SCENE was not, in fact, a crime scene. The authorities (police, FBI, CIA, etc.) ruled out a crime had occurred from the outset, prior to conducting any investigations, gathering evidence, and speaking to witnesses could have occurred. From the moment of the CRIME...it was deemed "accidental" in nature, and the authorities subsequently only followed policy and procedures for accidents!
What does analyzing the steel have to do with how the building fell? /moron
/moron So what would be the problem with analyzing the materials that might have been a contributing cause? Or are you saying the buildings were supposed to fail in this fashion? What is YOUR problem with a complete investigation? What are you afraid of?
What is your true agenda?
Since when, in a criminal investigation involving the collapse of a building, explosions and fire does the investigation not include analyzing the support structures of said building....unless, of course, some kind of presumption was made prior to the investigation, which altered the normal course of investigations normally pursued for arson/criminal investigations. I happen to know that arson investigations go much further into analyzing the "crime scene" than if it was presumed and believed, upon surface investigation that a crime was not, in fact, involved. It was obvious to the entire world that a crime occurred on 9/11....except for the U.S. government, ATF, CIA, FBI, I guess.
*crickets*
They know what the contributing cause was...a fire that burned out of control for six hours compromised the buuilding's support structure.. Is your case that they set those thermite charges to activate after the building burned for six hours?
Is it your case that they set those thermite charges to activate after the building burned for six hours?
Huh?
Based upon what?
Third time asked, third time you've not answered. Simple as that.
That's not an answer to my question, which was: Did you know that when an unattended body is found dead, an autopsy is performed, even when it appears obvious as to the cause of death (i.e., multiple stabbings, gunshot wounds, etc.)? Would a thorough investigation as to the cause of death not be performed, the investigator would be considered negligent in his/her duties if the investigator merely assumed or presumed the cause of death, relying only upon surface level observations. This type of negligence appears to be what the "investigators" of WTC 7 are guilty. And, to me, it appears intentional.
based on claims that it was a "hollow" steel core....I didn't realize that "hollowness" could be grounds for steel melting at temperatures far below the temperature at which fuel burns.
I came upon the following: QUOTE “Video and photographic evidence combined with detailed computer simulations show that neither explosives nor fuel oil fires played a role in the collapse of WTC 7,” Sunder said. The NIST investigation team also determined that other elements of the building’s construction—namely trusses, girders and cantilever overhangs that were used to transfer loads from the building superstructure to the columns of the electric substation (over which WTC 7 was constructed) and foundation below—did not play a significant role in the collapse. According to the report, a key factor leading to the eventual collapse of WTC 7 was thermal expansion of long-span floor systems at temperatures “hundreds of degrees below those typically considered in current practice for fire resistance ratings." WTC 7 used a structural system design in widespread use. A few reactions: This is the result of thermite, which, of course, does not "explode." The NIST has placed a nice strawman in their report they can use to dismiss any possibility of "controlled demolition" by saying there were no "explosions." There's a variant of thermite called "thermate", hotter, faster and contains sulfur. and a comment which sums up what many feel:
The people who believe this are either really stupid or they are shills.
Yep.
Is your case that they set those thermite charges to activate after the building burned for six hours? My case is for a thorough investigation, which includes analyses of materials. I really hope that there was no sabotaging of the buildings.
It's a wonder anyone will enter much less agree to work full time in buildings that have a predilection for total collapse in the event of fires that a good sprinkler system should have been able to put out. You would have thought a thorough investigation would have been a priority since similiar buildings are everywhere. Hmmmmmm
Who claimed that it was a hollow steel core and that steel melted?
Of course there was...the first came in from the north @ 429MPH and the second from the south @ 500+MPH...
Number 7 was hit? Make up your mind.
Of course there was...the first came in from the north @ 429MPH and the second from the south @ 500+MPH... That's your and .gov's problem. The "investigation" proceeded upon certain assumptions and presumptions. A scientific investigation does not go about trying to prove its theory. It goes about trying to disprove it's theory. At least a couple faulty assumptions and presumptions which guided the "investigations" which led to error: 1) Assumption that debris from another building caused the fire. What evidence do they have that suggests that debris from another building caused the fire? Were events such on that day that cause of fire could only have resulted from debris from another building? 2) Assumption that heat from the fire was key in what brought down the tower. In their words: "a key factor leading to the eventual collapse of WTC 7 was thermal expansion of long-span floor systems at temperatures 'hundreds of degrees below those typically considered in current practice for fire resistance ratings.' and, "This was the first known instance of fire causing the total collapse of a tall building," the agency stated. This flies in the face of logic to have made conclusions based upon their preconceived presumptions. Upon what evidence do they base these claims? Their "evidence" to rule out explosives and fuel oil are as follows: FILM? Computer models? They rely upon film and animation devices as a foundation for such absurdities? Why were physical materials (i.e., the steel) from within the building itself not analyzed? What about eyewitnesses? Where are their arson investigators' statements and analysis? The entirety of these claims are too preposterous! .gov proceeded with their "investigations", and continue to maintain, that "events on 9/11 were mutually exclusive". .gov maintains the theory that "a" to "e" occurred: [airplane at WTC1 & 2 -> caused debris to intrude on surrounding buildings -> creating fire -> leading to heat -> caused collapse]; therefore, "aa" [detonation of bombs] could not have occurred, been a contributing factor, or caused the collapse, even though "aa" was never investigated nor ruled out by physical evidence from the crime scene.
The planes didn't explode you idiot, the tanks burst, the fuel caught on fire, and most of it blew out the building in the direction of the original trajectory of the aircraft.
It's become quite clear that war likes to avoid any real investigation, and shouts down with obscenities and idiotic comments anyone looking into the matter...
You are a total moron war. You don't understand simple physics, yet you toss a few words together and hope to impress people. Do you have some sort of psychiatric issue where you need to feel important, or are you getting paid to act this way???
Critter: Everyone who worked at One Liberty Plaza refers to it as OLP. It's becoming quite clear that war is a lying weasle. I bet he's only visited New York at best, and was NOT there on 9/11 as he claims. He tries to use "I was there" as some sort of factor in his credibility. I found it sort of odd when he said he saw the buildings collapse, yet when pressed on it was forced to admit he didn't actually see them collapse because he was too busy running away.
Somebody else used to do that. I want to say Margarite but the memory is vague. I remember one of the people from CP did it all the time.
Yet there are some NY fire fighters who are saying there is. Who knows more about it I wonder, some anonymous poster called war, or NYFD firemen who go public? Hmmmm, that's a tough one.
It's a common tactic amongst Internet trolls and shills.
LOL yeah of that I have no doubt. She seemed to do it for other reasons though. Was an sympathy/attention getter. She played up the fear part, an "oh poor me" thing.
YOU are the lying jackass bud. ANY cursory reading on fires will reveal that BLACK SMOKE is a sign of an oxygen starved fire, whereas WHITE SMOKE indicates a raging HOT fire. Black smoke is ALSO formed by soot given off in fuel fires or tire fires, BUT the fuel burnt out in the first few minutes after the impacts. In regards to the WTC towers, the FIREMEN said the fires were almost out. I believe them before I believe you, a liar who has tried to pass off pictures of Building 5 engulfed in flames as that of Building 7.
The irony in that is breathtaking...
OUtright lie...any fireman will tell you that smoke is an indication of WHAT IS BURNING...ande it's fucking hilarious, given the GAPING holes in WTC to believe that anything was O2 deprived... You can't be that Stupid. Can you? What is your true agenda?
I don't think it is possible to be that st000pid or that stubborn, so he has to be just a POS shill.
It's obvious that if what you claim, and what .gov claims was "crystal clear" and completely forthright and could withstand scrutiny,
#52. To: TwentyTwelve (#38)
A more realistic representation of the backbone of the WTC.
#53. To: war (#51)
rush to eliminate evidence from a crime scene, not a presumption of "cause" for the collapse...which led to absolutely no investigation of steel support structures of the WTC7, etc.
War: Why would any other steel [from WTC7] need to be analyzed? [NOTE to War: No steel, whatsoever, from the WTC7 was analyzed]
The above is only babble to a disinformation .gov shill.
#54. To: litus (#53)
#55. To: war (#54)
What does analyzing the steel have to do with how the building fell?
#56. To: war (#55)
To War: What is YOUR problem with a complete investigation? What are you afraid of?
#57. To: war, mininggold (#54)
(Edited)
What does analyzing the steel have to do with how the building fell?
#58. To: All (#57)
#59. To: mininggold (#55)
So what would be the problem with analyzing the materials that might have been a contributing cause?
#60. To: litus (#57)
Since when, in a criminal investigation involving the collapse of a building, explosions and fire does the investigation not include analyzing the support structures of said building....unless, of course, some kind of presumption was made prior to the investigation, which altered the normal course of investigations normally pursued for arson/criminal investigations.
#61. To: litus (#58)
#62. To: TwentyTwelve (#38)
A more realistic representation of the backbone of the WTC.
#63. To: war (#61)
*crickets* Huh?
#64. To: war (#60)
Is it your case that they set those thermite charges to activate after the building burned for six hours?
Since when, in a criminal investigation involving the collapse of a building, explosions and fire does the investigation not include analyzing the support structures of said building....unless, of course, some kind of presumption was made prior to the investigation, which altered the normal course of investigations normally pursued for arson/criminal investigations.
It appears assumptions and presumptions were made prior to the "investigation."
#65. To: war, TwentyTwelve (#40)
(Edited)
#66. To: TwentyTwelve (#56)
NIST: “Our study found that the fires in WTC 7, which were uncontrolled but otherwise similar to fires experienced in other tall buildings, caused an extraordinary event,” said NIST WTC Lead Investigator Shyam Sunder. “Heating of floor beams and girders caused a critical support column to fail, initiating a fire-induced progressive collapse that brought the building down.”
ENDQUOTE...in Appendix C of its World Trade Center Building Performance Study, FEMA claimed:
Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure. A liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel... The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified.
how ordinary fires could have caused the collapse of steel structures ...
#67. To: litus (#66)
I find it an insult to my common sense that people put forward theories about how ordinary fires could have caused the collapse of steel structures ...
#68. To: TwentyTwelve (#67)
The people who believe this are either really stupid or they are shills.
#69. To: war (#59)
They know what the contributing cause was...a fire that burned out of control for six hours compromised the buuilding's support structure..
#70. To: litus (#66)
I find it an insult to my common sense that people put forward theories about how ordinary fires could have caused the collapse of steel structures ...
#71. To: litus (#65)
based on claims that it was a "hollow" steel core....I didn't realize that "hollowness" could be grounds for steel melting at temperatures far below the temperature at which fuel burns.
#72. To: mininggold (#69)
I really hope that there was no sabotaging of the buildings.
#73. To: war (#72)
Of course there was...the first came in from the north @ 429MPH and the second from the south @ 500+MPH...
#74. To: war, mininggold (#72)
I really hope that there was no sabotaging of the buildings.
“Video and photographic evidence combined with detailed computer simulations show that neither explosives nor fuel oil fires played a role in the collapse of WTC 7...
#75. To: war, mininggold (#8)
The Achilles heel being planes impacting at over 400MPH, exploding
"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
#76. To: mininggold, war (#14)
What do you have against thorough investigations?
"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
#77. To: war, mininggold (#16)
Gravity armed force dynamics helped.
"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
#78. To: Critter, war (#18)
war: I don't know what OLP is
"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
#79. To: FormerLurker, Critter (#78)
I bet he's only visited New York at best, and was NOT there on 9/11 as he claims. He tries to use "I was there" as some sort of factor in his credibility.
"Controlling carbon is a bureaucrat's dream. If you control carbon, you control life." — Dr. Richard Lindzen, MIT Professor of Meteorology
#80. To: war, TwentyTwelve (#25)
There's no gag order.
"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
#81. To: farmfriend, Critter (#79)
Somebody else used to do that. I want to say Margarite but the memory is vague. I remember one of the people from CP did it all the time.
"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
#82. To: FormerLurker, Critter (#81)
It's a common tactic amongst Internet trolls and shills.
"Controlling carbon is a bureaucrat's dream. If you control carbon, you control life." — Dr. Richard Lindzen, MIT Professor of Meteorology
#83. To: war, TwentyTwelve (#29)
OUtright lie...any fireman will tell you that smoke is an indication of WHAT IS BURNING
"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
#84. To: war (#32)
Afuckingmazing how stupid you fucking people are.
"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
#85. To: war (#29)
(Edited)
Again, any firefighter can explain from experience and training that the black, sooty smoke (like that found on 9/11 at the WTC towers) were O2 deprived
#86. To: TwentyTwelve, war (#85)
You can't be that Stupid. Can you?
This guy may be prowling 4um: |
Used Tires Amityville, Babylon, Lindenhurst
#87. To: Critter (#86)
I don't think it is possible to be that st000pid or that stubborn, so he has to be just a POS shill. I agree. Nobody can be that stupid & stubborn.
You can't be that Stupid. Can you?
#88. To: TwentyTwelve (#85)
Any fireman, or Boy Scout above Tendefoot for that matter, will tell you that smoke is an indication of WHAT IS BURNING...and it's fucking hilarious, given the GAPING holes in WTC to believe that anything was O2 deprived...
#89. To: TwentyTwelve (#24)
according to you these fires are oxygen deprived: 
#90. To: war (#89)
They are. There is not enough oxygen in proximity to the flame to support efficient combustion. If you knew anything... if you SHIT about anything, you'd know that. Why the fuck do you think lots of oxygen under pressure is required to get an acetylene torch to get hot enough to cut and weld?
This guy may be prowling 4um: |
Used Tires Amityville, Babylon, Lindenhurst
#91. To: Critter (#90)
Thanks for proving that you are a Moonbat...those fires are anything but oxygen deprived but I will admiot that they were chosen for a certain commonality... Why the fuck do you think lots of oxygen under pressure is required to get an acetylene torch to get hot enough to cut and weld? I would imagine the same reason that pressure pumps are used to get gas out of the station's holding tank and into your car.
They are.
.
.
.
Comments (92 - 690) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest