danish scientist Niels Harrit, on nano thermite in the WTC dust
17-04-2009, 09:34 PM
#1
Advanced PassionFord User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 1,564
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
danish scientist Niels Harrit, on nano thermite in the WTC dust
Very interesting so it seems that 9/11 is really is a inside job.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAPQPA4L-Pc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAPQPA4L-Pc
17-04-2009, 10:07 PM
#6
Advanced PassionFord User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 1,564
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trending Topics
17-04-2009, 11:12 PM
#10
PassionFord Post Whore!!
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 5,689
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I find it hard to understand how some dont doubt that theres something/s not quite right about 9/11. Countless experts have said it was not possible to happen like it happened as a result of planes flying into it, but many just seem to disregard that. Theres just too many 'unanswered' questions that im sure will remain 'unanswered'. 
17-04-2009, 11:17 PM
#11
I find it hard to understand how some dont doubt that theres something/s not quite right about 9/11. Countless experts have said it was not possible to happen like it happened as a result of planes flying into it, but many just seem to disregard that. Theres just too many 'unanswered' questions that im sure will remain 'unanswered'.
exactly, you get people like warren who thinks hes mr know it all, he must be right and the eye witnesses and EXPERTS are wrong... laughable really
17-04-2009, 11:22 PM
#13
the only thing im not convienced with is the way the towers fell
they wouldnt fall in a perfect order like a proper demolishing of a building as we have all seen
surely they would fall but then if one floor doesnt break it would stop or fall off at an angle, but each floor blew perfectly for a perfect finishing in demolishing a building
and the fuel would of just evaporated once lite, so what is in those buildings to get it that hot for the steel to melt in the first place as fuel on its own wouldnt do it, it would be hot then then it would just be like a normal fire surely which isnt hot enough to melt steel
they wouldnt fall in a perfect order like a proper demolishing of a building as we have all seen
surely they would fall but then if one floor doesnt break it would stop or fall off at an angle, but each floor blew perfectly for a perfect finishing in demolishing a building
and the fuel would of just evaporated once lite, so what is in those buildings to get it that hot for the steel to melt in the first place as fuel on its own wouldnt do it, it would be hot then then it would just be like a normal fire surely which isnt hot enough to melt steel
17-04-2009, 11:24 PM
#14
10 tonnes, 100 tonnes, they backed an artic up and trundled in with pallets lol!!
I can't say one way or another, but it does seems a little far fetched, and when asked points like that, the argument does seem to fall abit weak - you'd have to ask security as to why they didn't see 100's of pallets being rolled in and then the contents of those pallets distributed??
I can't say one way or another, but it does seems a little far fetched, and when asked points like that, the argument does seem to fall abit weak - you'd have to ask security as to why they didn't see 100's of pallets being rolled in and then the contents of those pallets distributed??
17-04-2009, 11:24 PM
#15
the only way you can find out 100% is to rebuild towers, age them, then crash 2 planes into them 
For every conspiracy thoery video, theres evidence to counter it. Its a tit for tat game.
You really think if it was all planned and covered up by the US that something that big wouldnt leak out????
Go on put foil on your head to stop the aliens stealing your mind
For every conspiracy thoery video, theres evidence to counter it. Its a tit for tat game.
You really think if it was all planned and covered up by the US that something that big wouldnt leak out????
Go on put foil on your head to stop the aliens stealing your mind
17-04-2009, 11:29 PM
#16
the only thing im not convienced with is the way the towers fell
they wouldnt fall in a perfect order like a proper demolishing of a building as we have all seen
surely they would fall but then if one floor doesnt break it would stop or fall off at an angle, but each floor blew perfectly for a perfect finishing in demolishing a building
and the fuel would of just evaporated once lite, so what is in those buildings to get it that hot for the steel to melt in the first place as fuel on its own wouldnt do it, it would be hot then then it would just be like a normal fire surely which isnt hot enough to melt steel
they wouldnt fall in a perfect order like a proper demolishing of a building as we have all seen
surely they would fall but then if one floor doesnt break it would stop or fall off at an angle, but each floor blew perfectly for a perfect finishing in demolishing a building
and the fuel would of just evaporated once lite, so what is in those buildings to get it that hot for the steel to melt in the first place as fuel on its own wouldnt do it, it would be hot then then it would just be like a normal fire surely which isnt hot enough to melt steel
17-04-2009, 11:34 PM
#17
BANNED
BANNED
No avergae bloke will buy into scientific arguments anyway because it draws them too far out of a controlled comfort zone. How about the fact they were announcing the towers collapse on BBC 20 mins before they actually did?!!
17-04-2009, 11:38 PM
#18
the only way you can find out 100% is to rebuild towers, age them, then crash 2 planes into them
For every conspiracy thoery video, theres evidence to counter it. Its a tit for tat game.
You really think if it was all planned and covered up by the US that something that big wouldnt leak out????
Go on put foil on your head to stop the aliens stealing your mind
For every conspiracy thoery video, theres evidence to counter it. Its a tit for tat game.
You really think if it was all planned and covered up by the US that something that big wouldnt leak out????
Go on put foil on your head to stop the aliens stealing your mind
* witnesses and firemen saying they saw/heard/felt the explosions in the towers/WT7
* rudy the mayor admitting on tape that he knew the towers were comming down, then after deneying it
* why there making out that the jet fuel could burn hot enough to melt the steel when its been proved that it couldn't
could go on forever really theres somethings you just cant argue with some of it ye you could think ye that could go either way but with the goverment covering up the investigation, spending so little money on it, not wanting to talk about it what does that tell you? doesn't take a massive IQ to work out that there hiding something
17-04-2009, 11:39 PM
#19
and bush lying about where he heard it and how he heard it,
17-04-2009, 11:47 PM
#24
BANNED
BANNED
17-04-2009, 11:54 PM
#28
14000+ post superhero
weve been through all this before and i dont recal seeing anything posted up that put doubt in my mind.every theory was counteracted by a rational explanation. i dont expect anythings changed.
you can find 'evidence' from any expert to apparently prove anything you wish.
you can find 'evidence' from any expert to apparently prove anything you wish.
17-04-2009, 11:59 PM
#30
post #18 feel free to give me the answers
18-04-2009, 12:10 AM
#31
14000+ post superhero
Numerous unfounded conspiracy theories about the September 11 attacks continue to circulate, especially on the Internet. Some of the most prevalent myths are:
1) The World Trade Center (WTC) twin towers were destroyed by controlled demolitions.
This is how the collapses may have appeared to non-experts, but demolition experts point out many differences:
The Pentagon attack site is shown Friday, Sept. 14, 2001, after a plane slammed into the building on Tuesdady, Sept. 11. The terrorist attack caused extensive damage to the west face of the building. (Š AP Images)
The Pentagon attack site on September 14, 2001. (Š AP Images)
Conspiracy theorists making this claim ignore several facts:
1) The World Trade Center (WTC) twin towers were destroyed by controlled demolitions.
This is how the collapses may have appeared to non-experts, but demolition experts point out many differences:
- Demolition professionals always blow the bottom floors of a structure first, but the WTC tower collapses began at the upper levels, where the planes hit the buildings.
- Non-experts claim that debris seen blowing out of windows was evidence of explosive charges, but experts identify this as air and light office contents (paper, pulverized concrete, etc.) being forced out of windows as floors collapsed on each other.
- Demolition firms had very sensitive seismographs operating at other sites in Manhattan on September 11. None recorded any explosions during the tower collapses.
- Clean-up crews found none of the telltale signs of controlled demolitions that would have existed if explosive charges had been used.
- Cutting away walls, insulation, plumbing, and electrical conduits to place numerous charges on the towers’ structural columns in advance would not have gone unnoticed.
- For more information, see ImplosionWorld’s article on the WTC collapses and Popular Mechanics, parts 4 and 5.
The Pentagon attack site is shown Friday, Sept. 14, 2001, after a plane slammed into the building on Tuesdady, Sept. 11. The terrorist attack caused extensive damage to the west face of the building. (Š AP Images)
The Pentagon attack site on September 14, 2001. (Š AP Images)Conspiracy theorists making this claim ignore several facts:
- The remains of the bodies of the crew and passengers of American Airlines flight 77 were found at the Pentagon crash site, and positively identified by DNA.
- The flight’s black box was also recovered at the site.
- Numerous eyewitnesses saw the plane strike the Pentagon. Some saw passengers through the plane’s windows. Missiles don’t have windows or carry passengers.
- Numerous photographs show airplane debris at the crash site, as was also witnessed by survivors and rescue personnel. See sections 4:57 to 6:00 of the “911 Case Study: Pentagon Flight 77” video for pictures of airliner debris.
- For more information, see “Did a Plane Hit the Pentagon?” and Popular Mechanics, part 6.
- Boeing, which manufactured the planes that struck the towers, stated that all its commercial jet transports are configured so that they cannot be controlled from anywhere except the flight deck of the aircraft.
- Passengers onboard the flights made several phone calls. All reported that hijackers had commandeered the planes.
- For more information, see “Did a Plane Hit the Pentagon?”
- The cockpit voice recorder of this flight was recovered and showed that the passenger revolt caused the hijackers to deliberately crash the plane. The hijackers controlled the plane until its impact. See full transcript.
- The U.S. military did not learn that flight 93 had been hijacked until four minutes after it crashed, as recently released tapes demonstrate.
- The military never gave interceptor pilots authorization to shoot down United flight 93. See article on tapes.
- Listen to the 45-second message left by flight attendant CeeCee Lyles on her home answering machine. Click on the “Lyles” file or the phone icon in the bottom left corner of the flight 93 page.
- For more information, see The 9/11 Commission Report chapter 1, “We Have Some Planes,”pages 13-14.
- This allegation was fueled by a comment by the WTC owner that, after WTC 7 was judged to be unstable, he recommended pulling a group of firefighters out of the building, using the phrase “pull it” in reference to the contingent of firefighters. For more details, see 9/11 Revealed?
- Conspiracy theorists have interpreted the “pull it” remark as slang for demolishing the building with explosives. But demolition experts say “pulling” a building means attaching long cables to a weakened structure and literally pulling it down with bulldozers and other powerful machinery – not using explosives.
- Seismographs recorded no telltale spikes or anomalies that would have indicated the use of explosives.
- For more information, see ImplosionWorld article and Popular Mechanics, part 5.
- The 9/11 Commission investigated this issue in detail, concluding, “Some unusual trading did in fact occur, but each such trade proved to have an innocuous explanation.”
- For example, it stated, “much of the seemingly suspicious trading in American [Airlines stock] on September 10 was traced to a specific U.S.-based options trading newsletter, faxed to its subscribers on Sunday, September 9, which recommended these trades.”
- For other examples, see The 9/11 Commission Report, “Notes” section, page 499, footnote 130.
- It appears from media reports that some 10-15% of WTC victims were Jewish, indicating there were no mass absences.
- The “4,000” figure apparently came from an early statement by the Israeli Foreign Ministry that some “4,000 Israelis” were believed to be in the New York and Washington areas, where the attacks occurred. This figure was apparently seized upon by conspiracy theorists, in an attempt to bolster the false rumor.
- For more information, see “The 4,000 Jews Rumor.”
- Al Qaida leaders, including Osama bin Laden, have repeatedly confirmed that they planned and carried out the September 11 attacks.
- In an audiotape released on May 23, 2006, bin Laden stated, “I was responsible for entrusting the 19 brothers … with those raids ….”
- In a November 2001 tape, bin Laden said, “We calculated in advance the number of casualties … who would be killed …. I was the most optimistic of them all. … Due to my experience in this field, I was thinking that the fire from the gas in the plane would melt the iron structure of the building and collapse the area where the plane hit and all the floors above it only.”
Last edited by fuzzy; 18-04-2009 at 12:20 AM.
18-04-2009, 12:25 AM
#32
14000+ post superhero
* witnesses and firemen saying they saw/heard/felt the explosions in the towers/WT7
* rudy the mayor admitting on tape that he knew the towers were comming down, then after deneying it
* why there making out that the jet fuel could burn hot enough to melt the steel when its been proved that it couldn't
could go on forever really theres somethings you just cant argue with some of it ye you could think ye that could go either way but with the goverment covering up the investigation, spending so little money on it, not wanting to talk about it what does that tell you? doesn't take a massive IQ to work out that there hiding something
* rudy the mayor admitting on tape that he knew the towers were comming down, then after deneying it
* why there making out that the jet fuel could burn hot enough to melt the steel when its been proved that it couldn't
could go on forever really theres somethings you just cant argue with some of it ye you could think ye that could go either way but with the goverment covering up the investigation, spending so little money on it, not wanting to talk about it what does that tell you? doesn't take a massive IQ to work out that there hiding something
you think if it was an inside job theyed tell the local mayor?just how many people were in on this conspiracy?
wheres it been proved the fire couldnt melt the steel? i recall seeing a program that was about missing fire insulation on the steelwork and an ongoing program to get it up to standard.i work in the building trade and even small buildings require adequate fire protection on steel beems as average content fires can melt/distort beams allowing building collapse
imo the government are merely covering up their failure and incompetence in failing to preventing this from happening in the first place.
Last edited by fuzzy; 18-04-2009 at 12:31 AM.
18-04-2009, 12:38 AM
#33
theres just as many witnesses to say they felt no explosions.
you think if it was an inside job theyed tell the local mayor?just how many people were in on this conspiracy?
wheres it been proved the fire couldnt melt the steel? i recall seeing a program that was about missing fire insulation on the steelwork and an ongoing program to get it up to standard.
imo the government are merely covering up their failure and incompetence in failing to preventing this from happening in the first place.
you think if it was an inside job theyed tell the local mayor?just how many people were in on this conspiracy?
wheres it been proved the fire couldnt melt the steel? i recall seeing a program that was about missing fire insulation on the steelwork and an ongoing program to get it up to standard.
imo the government are merely covering up their failure and incompetence in failing to preventing this from happening in the first place.
well seen as though he made the decsions im guessing they would tell him ye, as it seems someone told him the buildings were comming down cause he annonced it on tape before it happened?
so you dont think its abit odd the firemen in the buildings along with witnesses saying they felt the explosions and heard them, finding dead bodys in cupboards? elevators blown out on the lower floors when the planes hit floor 80 etc?
"wheres it been proved the fire couldnt melt the steel?" - so you haven't even watched all the evidence have you? et fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F) then they will argue that it loses 50% of its strength at 1200 yet have you seen the other skyscrapers around the world that burnt for hours and hours on end guess what? i dont think i need to tell you they didn't fall down like a sack of spuds
so back to the original question, where did the
nano thermite
come from?
18-04-2009, 08:43 AM
#36
And what's to say, myself, and countless others haven't actually looked at both sides of the argument, then as sensible and reasonable adults made up our own minds?
I have read, and watched loads (although don't particularly rate YouTube as a source of empirical evidence to be honest) and have made my own mind up.
You believe what you want to believe, and I'll stick to my views.
Conspiracy's are poisonous the truth is not.
I have read, and watched loads (although don't particularly rate YouTube as a source of empirical evidence to be honest) and have made my own mind up.
You believe what you want to believe, and I'll stick to my views.
Conspiracy's are poisonous the truth is not.
18-04-2009, 08:54 AM
#37
14000+ post superhero
it doesnt have to melt the steel, hot enough to distort the steel to cause it to break apart causing collapse.ive seen it in normal buildings. i spent friday cladding structural steel in a 4 storey building with 15mm fire board. that gives it a fire rating of 1 hour to allow people to escape ,after that hour of intense fire anything can happen and thats just a basic internal contents fire. you cant say because a building somewhere else had an internal fire and didnt collapse means something sinister happened. im guessing the other fires you speak off didnt have the energy and heat assossiated with hundreds of tons of jumbo jet exploding into them at hundreds of miles an hour? you dont think that would be enough to topple a building?
how many floors were above the impact floor? imagine 1000's of tons of weight crashing down the 10feet or so onto the impact floor after the structure was weakened, that weight would cause a domino effect collapsing each floor below it and also perhaps giving the impression and sound of explosions above as each concret floor slab hit the next. the resulting wind pressure would blow out the windows below.
looking at it sensible, the logistics behind organising such a huge occurance, the amount of people in the know to order,organise,manage and carry out the placing of tons of explosives, the man hours involved in drilling and placing them, the wiring connecting them all went un noticed by the thousands of people using the buildings on a daily basis? the amount of explosives required to carry this off which although im no expert im sure is tightly controlled with batch numbers and serial numbers etc. is there any evidence of such a large amount of explosives unoccounted for and missing at that time? imagine the confusion involved on the day with people not knowing what was going on and the amount of rumours and mistakes being made would account for the mistaken reports and such like in the media. the american government perhaps took adavantage of the situation as it occured to bury anything they wanted to lose but i cant believe they organised it.
and if it was organised by the government im sure they wouldnt be telling people like mayors who are out of office and writing autobiographies within a couple of years.
as far as i can see conspiracy theorists seem to block out the obvious and pick out individual silly points to highlight as the conspiracy.
ive also not yet heard a valid reason for why it happened in the first place? the owners insurance claim was proved as false, the idea that america needed a reason to invade iraq? they didnt the last time so thats unrealistic to imagine theyed go to such trouble for that.
how many floors were above the impact floor? imagine 1000's of tons of weight crashing down the 10feet or so onto the impact floor after the structure was weakened, that weight would cause a domino effect collapsing each floor below it and also perhaps giving the impression and sound of explosions above as each concret floor slab hit the next. the resulting wind pressure would blow out the windows below.
looking at it sensible, the logistics behind organising such a huge occurance, the amount of people in the know to order,organise,manage and carry out the placing of tons of explosives, the man hours involved in drilling and placing them, the wiring connecting them all went un noticed by the thousands of people using the buildings on a daily basis? the amount of explosives required to carry this off which although im no expert im sure is tightly controlled with batch numbers and serial numbers etc. is there any evidence of such a large amount of explosives unoccounted for and missing at that time? imagine the confusion involved on the day with people not knowing what was going on and the amount of rumours and mistakes being made would account for the mistaken reports and such like in the media. the american government perhaps took adavantage of the situation as it occured to bury anything they wanted to lose but i cant believe they organised it.
and if it was organised by the government im sure they wouldnt be telling people like mayors who are out of office and writing autobiographies within a couple of years.
as far as i can see conspiracy theorists seem to block out the obvious and pick out individual silly points to highlight as the conspiracy.
ive also not yet heard a valid reason for why it happened in the first place? the owners insurance claim was proved as false, the idea that america needed a reason to invade iraq? they didnt the last time so thats unrealistic to imagine theyed go to such trouble for that.
Last edited by fuzzy; 18-04-2009 at 08:55 AM.
18-04-2009, 09:09 AM
#39
as far as i can see conspiracy theorists seem to block out the obvious and pick out individual silly points to highlight as the conspiracy.
ive also not yet heard a valid reason for why it happened in the first place? the owners insurance claim was proved as false, the idea that america needed a reason to invade iraq? they didnt the last time so thats unrealistic to imagine theyed go to such trouble for that.
ive also not yet heard a valid reason for why it happened in the first place? the owners insurance claim was proved as false, the idea that america needed a reason to invade iraq? they didnt the last time so thats unrealistic to imagine theyed go to such trouble for that.
Some people want to believe is was an orchestrated event, and no amount of sense and reason will sway them from that belief.
18-04-2009, 09:28 AM
#40
Advanced PassionFord User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 1,564
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts