| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Snowygrouch
Validated Poster
Joined: 02 Apr 2006
Posts: 628
Location: Oxford
|
 Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 8:37 pm Post subject: Take the Thermite Challenge |
 |
|
This is a very very simple challenge open to anyone who can read.
Quite simply all you have to do is put together a short text which proves ANY ONE of the following points "beyond reasonable doubt".
1: Thermite cannot be used for cutting steel
2: Thermite charges could not be electronically triggered
3: Thermite does not produce moulten Iron as a by-product
4: Thermite cannot be altered by the addition of Sulfur as a sucessful accelerant to the process.
5: Thermite cannot be placed in a shaped container to direct the heat release and contain the powder.
6: Thermite cannot be used in quantities small enough to carry by hand to cut through 2" of steel plate.
Absolutely ANYONE who can prove even ONE of the above reasonably and logically will get a cheque for £10 posted to an address and payee of their choice.
The clock is ticking.
Calum
_________________
The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist
President Eisenhower 1961 |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
gypsum
Moderate Poster
Joined: 29 Mar 2006
Posts: 211
Location: Scotland
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 8:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Aww and for a minute there I thought i could have made some easy money. Oh well! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
outsider
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 30 Jul 2006
Posts: 6060
Location: East London
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 9:36 pm Post subject: Re: An Open Challenge to anyone |
|
|
| Snowygrouch wrote: | This is a very very simple challenge open to anyone who can read.
Quite simply all you have to do is put together a short text which proves ANY ONE of the following points "beyond reasonable doubt".
1: Thermite cannot be used for cutting steel
2: Thermite charges could not be electronically triggered
3: Thermite does not produce moulten Iron as a by-product
4: Thermite cannot be altered by the addition of Sulfur as a sucessful accelerant to the process.
5: Thermite cannot be placed in a shaped container to direct the heat release and contain the powder.
6: Thermite cannot be used in quantities small enough to carry by hand to cut through 2" of steel plate.
Absolutely ANYONE who can prove even ONE of the above reasonably and logically will get a cheque for £10 posted to an address and payee of their choice.
The clock is ticking.
Calum |
Make you right, mate. You and Steven Jones have my vote. By their posts shalt thou know them! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
physicist
Moderate Poster
Joined: 09 Jun 2006
Posts: 170
Location: zz
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 10:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thermite produces molten iron not moulten iron.
Please send the money to your nearest PDSA.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hazzard
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 May 2006
Posts: 368
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 12:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
I personally think it was controlled demolitions.
But guess what, PLEASE STOP GOING ON ABOUT HOW FFS YOU PEOPLE ARE DRIVING ME MAD!
FOR GOODNESS SAKE THIS FORUM IS RAM PACKED WITH PROVACATUERS!
_________________
Since when? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kc
Moderate Poster
Joined: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 359
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 8:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.saunalahti.fi/wtc2001/military.htm
| Quote: | | In the cellar, out of all the 47 ultra strong steel pillars, the steel was melted completely at the length of more than 20 meters (approx. 65 ft)...The pillars were far too thick for thermite, which some have suggested. |
Does that do question 6? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ICECOLDMELTZ
Minor Poster
Joined: 04 Jan 2007
Posts: 12
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 10:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| icecoldmeltz |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bushwacker
Relentless Limpet Shill
Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 1628
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 2:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It might be more relevant to prove a positive, for instance can sulphur accelarate the action of thermite sufficiently that it can cut through thick steel plate explosively fast in order to enable the towers to fall as fast as they did?
_________________
".......some partial collapse [of WTC7] would not have been suspicious......." - chek |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Patrick Brown
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 10 Oct 2006
Posts: 1201
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 3:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Bushwacker wrote: | | It might be more relevant to prove a positive, for instance can sulphur accelarate the action of thermite sufficiently that it can cut through thick steel plate explosively fast in order to enable the towers to fall as fast as they did? |
Err I think Jones suggests that there is evidence for explosive as well as incendiary exothermic devices. As with controlled demolition we would expect the structural integrity to be weakened prior to the computer controlled detonation of a series strategically placed explosive devices.
The evidence for these events has been preserved in samples of molten metal as well as the sulphidation of steel. Jones also points out the telltale white smoke which could be aluminum oxide. We also have the molten metal seen dripping from the south tower seconds before collapse which couldn't have been aluminum because of aluminums low emissivity i.e. It appears silvery grey in daylight conditions even at high temperatures.
_________________
We check the evidence and then archive it: www.911evidencebase.co.uk
Get the Steven E Jones reports >HERE<
Last edited by Patrick Brown on Wed Jan 10, 2007 5:32 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Snowygrouch
Validated Poster
Joined: 02 Apr 2006
Posts: 628
Location: Oxford
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 5:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
"It might be more relevant to prove a positive, for instance can sulphur accelarate the action of thermite sufficiently that it can cut through thick steel plate explosively fast in order to enable the towers to fall as fast as they did?"
A good idea; but rather out of bounds from the experimental means at the disposal of most posters here I`m afraid.
The thermite (if it WAS used) did not directly cause the towers to fall. This is stated very clearly in Stevens paper.
Such a reaction would be extremely hard to control in a time frame accurate enough to achieve that.
Ususally in controlled demolition engineers "pre-weaken" the main beams with cutting torches or similar. This is done to minimise the amount ot high explosives finally needed.
If thermite was used it was simply to serve the purpose of "pre-weakining" to enable the RDX (or whatever) to do its job more easily.
This is all stated in Jones paper.
I certianly agree that IF Jones had claimed thermite ALONE had caused the collapses I would not agree with such an analysis. However that is not the case.
C.
_________________
The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist
President Eisenhower 1961 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
physicist
Moderate Poster
Joined: 09 Jun 2006
Posts: 170
Location: zz
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 5:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It was coming down in golden showers.
Definitely molten.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Snowygrouch
Validated Poster
Joined: 02 Apr 2006
Posts: 628
Location: Oxford
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 5:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry but finding a "Syntax error" noes not warrant a financial award; if thats what your`e gunning for. I'm not too sure to be honest.
Moulten is not a word so its clearly a typo.
_________________
The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist
President Eisenhower 1961 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
physicist
Moderate Poster
Joined: 09 Jun 2006
Posts: 170
Location: zz
|
| Posted: Wed Jan 10, 2007 11:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Snowygrouch wrote: | Sorry but finding a "Syntax error" noes not warrant a financial award; if thats what your`e gunning for. I'm not too sure to be honest.
Moulten is not a word so its clearly a typo. |
It was my way of saying you are right.
However, just because something is possible doesn't mean that it happened.
I think it's got a good chance of being true though. Let's hope we find out some day. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Graham
Moderate Poster
Joined: 30 Jul 2005
Posts: 350
Location: bucks
|
| Posted: Thu Jan 11, 2007 5:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Snowygrouch wrote: |
If thermite was used it was simply to serve the purpose of "pre-weakining" to enable the RDX (or whatever) to do its job more easily.
|
Do you know about the siesmic activity at 4.18am on 911? There were also simialr sized "quakes" to the ones on 911, in the months leading up to it, around 2.2 on the richter scale. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Banish
Moderate Poster
Joined: 18 Mar 2006
Posts: 250
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 13, 2007 2:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
All the thermite on the planet would not turn 1m tons of steel and reinforced concrete to micro sized particles in a few seconds seconds. It may have been used to weaken some of the structure, but the building turned to dust from the top down. Nothing hit the ground except dust. Thermite?
Take one floor of the WTC! 1 acre square, 6 inches thick. Concrete weighs 500lb per sq yard. Do the math! An inordinate amount of explosives wolud be needed to turn one floor to dust, making it impractical.
Neither would an airplane penetrate one of said floors, but thats another argument  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Patrick Brown
9/11 Truth critic
Joined: 10 Oct 2006
Posts: 1201
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 13, 2007 3:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Banish wrote: | All the thermite on the planet would not turn 1m tons of steel and reinforced concrete to micro sized particles in a few seconds seconds. It may have been used to weaken some of the structure, but the building turned to dust from the top down. Nothing hit the ground except dust. Thermite?
Take one floor of the WTC! 1 acre square, 6 inches thick. Concrete weighs 500lb per sq yard. Do the math! An inordinate amount of explosives wolud be needed to turn one floor to dust, making it impractical.
Neither would an airplane penetrate one of said floors, but thats another argument |
The Concrete was 4” thick not 6. I also wonder where this idea that vast quantities of steel was vaporised comes from. If the CD theory is true then the basements would have been blown prior to demolition. Just because there's not a mountain of steel in many of the photos doesn't mean that any significant amount of steel was vaporised.
_________________
We check the evidence and then archive it: www.911evidencebase.co.uk
Get the Steven E Jones reports >HERE< |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rodin
Validated Poster
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 13, 2007 11:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree that Snowygrouch's points 1-6 are false statements.
I would like to add points 7 & 8 (I know I should turn them into negatives to match Snowy's format but I can't be bothered and in any case it would probably confuse people)
7. Could enough thermite have been carried into the building to cause rivers of molten steel to persist for days/weeks afterwards?
8. Can thermite cutting charges cause whole beam sections (several meters long) to become orange hot (after an undisclosed cooling off period too)
You can see pics of them being excavated here
Might as well read the rest while you are at it if you haven't already
_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
thought criminal
Moderate Poster
Joined: 19 Apr 2006
Posts: 574
Location: London
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 14, 2007 12:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Banish wrote: | All the thermite on the planet would not turn 1m tons of steel and reinforced concrete to micro sized particles in a few seconds seconds. It may have been used to weaken some of the structure, but the building turned to dust from the top down. Nothing hit the ground except dust. Thermite?
Take one floor of the WTC! 1 acre square, 6 inches thick. Concrete weighs 500lb per sq yard. Do the math! An inordinate amount of explosives wolud be needed to turn one floor to dust, making it impractical.
Neither would an airplane penetrate one of said floors, but thats another argument |
I totally agree.
I believe a controlled demolition took place at the WTC7. This has been verified by many demolition experts, but the unique disintegration of the twin towers needed more than explosives alone. This is why the majority of demolition experts are confused by it, take a look at the burnt out cars within the vicinity. I mean, I am no expert but the amount of explosives needed to do fulfill the required destruction would have been impossible to hide.
No, something more exotic was used on the WTC that day. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ignatz
Moderate Poster
Joined: 14 Sep 2006
Posts: 918
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 14, 2007 12:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Snowygrouch wrote: |
Ususally in controlled demolition engineers "pre-weaken" the main beams with cutting torches or similar. This is done to minimise the amount ot high explosives finally needed.
If thermite was used it was simply to serve the purpose of "pre-weakining" to enable the RDX (or whatever) to do its job more easily.
This is all stated in Jones paper.
|
Hi guys ! Was just passing by to have a look and noticed this.
Snowy - having all this thermite going off in advance but in close proximity to RDX sounds really dangerous.
Your thoughts?
Best regards
Ig
_________________
So remember - next time you can't find a parking spot, go to plan B: blow up your car |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 14, 2007 12:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Banish wrote: | All the thermite on the planet would not turn 1m tons of steel and reinforced concrete to micro sized particles in a few seconds seconds. It may have been used to weaken some of the structure, but the building turned to dust from the top down. Nothing hit the ground except dust. Thermite?
Take one floor of the WTC! 1 acre square, 6 inches thick. Concrete weighs 500lb per sq yard. Do the math! An inordinate amount of explosives wolud be needed to turn one floor to dust, making it impractical.
Neither would an airplane penetrate one of said floors, but thats another argument |
thats strange because i thought it was only the concrete and office items that were vapourised.
theres seems to be lots of steel in all the photo's after collapse. so how did nothing hit the floor but dust? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
