The Physics of 911

@Olivier5,

Quote:

No, he's talking of nano-termites. Very very small termites I guess...

And you're still talking shite. I guess every thread needs some comedic relief platform.

0 Replies

@camlok,

I did quote it, way back. Just read p.21, if you care.

1 Reply

@Builder,

Builder wrote:

There's several mentions in this video of temperatures of 2800 degrees F, by people at ground zero during the excavation process.

Why, thanks for the confirmation. I've been saying for days that the rubble fire could have melt some iron...

1 Reply

@camlok,

Okay so you don't care for a FEMA or NIST source. Understood. What kind of sources are you ready to take seriously?

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Quote:

Why, thanks for the confirmation.

No worries. Now, we just have to find out why these demolition sites stayed active underground for six weeks, despite being totally flooded with H2O.

1 Reply

@Builder,

They were evidently not flooded, because no fire can happen under liquid water, not without blowing it up in a huge explosion of vapor. Not even termite fire...

2 Replies

@Builder,

Quote:

@farmerman,
STILL though. You guys seem to have totally dumped Steve Jones as your leader.

Quote:

Builder: The first I'd heard of Steve, was when you mentioned him here.

Steven Jones has stayed relatively low key, just doing the science he has done his whole life. farmerman, the "scientist", brings him up because that is what all the US government "attack dogs" have done and farmerman is simply repeating unsubstantiated nonsense, as he has been doing since he first engaged on this issue, in his usual really sneaky manner, which is what he has continued to the present.

That isn't a scientific at all, is it, farmerman?

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Quote:

because no fire can happen under liquid water,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_hwsQYU3YQ

================
FAQ #8: What Is Nanothermite? Could It Have Been Used To Demolish The WTC Skyscrapers?

FAQ #8: What Is Nanothermite? Could It Have Been Used To Demolish The WTC Skyscrapers?
Did you know that 3 towers fell on 9/11? World Trade Center Building 7 collapsed on 9/11 after the Twin Towers b...

http://www1.ae911truth.org/faqs/646-faq-8-what-is-nanothermite-could-it-have-been-used-to-demolish-the-wtc-skyscrapers.html

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

Quote:

termite

thermite

1 Reply

@camlok,

Not without creating massive amounts of vapor, though... Water boils at 100 celsius. Fire + water --> vapor. Where did all that vapor go?

1 Reply

@camlok,

camlok wrote:

Quote:
termite

thermite

If they don't cause water to boil, they must be termites rather than thermites...

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

Quote:

Not without creating massive amounts of vapor, though... Water boils at 100 celsius. Fire + water --> vapor. Where did all that vapor go?

The video was only 26 seconds long, which I guess far surpasses your attention span. You didn't even watch it. If you had you would have noticed that there was hardly any vapor at all.

Quote:

Thermite contains its own supply of oxygen and does not require any external source of air. Consequently, it cannot be smothered and may ignite in any environment, given sufficient initial heat. It will burn well while wet and cannot be easily extinguished with water, although enough water will remove heat and may stop the reaction.[19] Small amounts of water will boil before reaching the reaction. Even so, thermite is used for welding underwater.[20]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermite

2 Replies

@camlok,

While they're adamant that gypsum shape-shifted to form sulphur adequite to deform heavy steel columns not even in the fire zone, what you're proposing (actual science-based facts) seems to fly right over their collective heads.

0 Replies

@Builder,

Im ondering that, with all the geniuses of the conspiracy ilk coming across with hypotheses that hqve no vidence, WHERE ARE ALL THE JURIED PAPERS and peer reviewed publications about the "TRUTHERS" worldview??
It seems that evrything you guys spout is all as self published stuff.
You throw out little scientistic phrases, probably all of which kind of approves that you have no idea whqt real science is ven about.

Youre spculation about gypum to ulphur is just another misrepresentation and lie by your buds.

I know that JTT is just an insane nutbag without a future and an avowed vicious hater of US, EU and anything other than N Korean propaganda.Whats your schtick?? .

PS Saying that you dont know who Steve Jones has gotta be a big fat lie. Youve been quoting much of his stuff passed on to second and third hand authors. If you dont know that, maybe "research" is not what you oughta call your blather

3 Replies

@Builder,

Quote:

how the titanium jet engines on the plane that allegedly was flown into the Pentagon, managed to enter the building in the middle of the impact zone, as opposed to remaining on their 350 mph trajectory, and striking the building at the measured distance apart of more than forty metres. Signature

ya think that the collapse of the wings at a specific radius had anything to do with it. The Pentagon walls were supporting structures unlike the WTC.

So you deny that a plane flew into the PEntagon too?
Whew, Purim was just last week, youre still playing a fool.

3 Replies

@camlok,

Your video shows a lot of vapor puffing out of the recipient. You can even hear the water boiling.

So you're saying that your alleged nanothermites can melt steel but cannot boil water?

Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha....

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Quote:

It seems that evrything you guys spout is all as self published stuff.

You really are a joke, farmerman. Why have you defrauded the good people of this discussion website, with your nonsense about you being a scientist?

WHY?

Nothing from you, from the get go, has been the least bit scientific. You flit about like a swallow, bobbing and weaving, saying nothing at all.

You can skip the following too. Even though Steven Jones says,

it is ...
easy to understand but reasonably precise
capable of being stated briefly
verifiable by any reader with average computer skills and a grasp of simple mathematics.

that obviously does not describe you. Any idea why everyone but Olivier has fled what is supposed to be a rock solid US government official conspiracy story?

Quote:

116th Peer-reviewed Paper Published in Journal of 9/11 Studies: ‘The Missing Jolt: A Simple Refutation of the NIST-Bazant Collapse Hypothesis’
January 17, 2009
Evidence and Research, Resources and MaterialsControlled Demolition, Foreknowledge, NIST, WTC
by Steven Jones

The 116th peer-reviewed paper was published today in the Journal of 9/11 Studies : “The Missing Jolt: A Simple Refutation of the NIST-Bazant Collapse Hypothesis” by Prof. Graeme MacQueen and Tony Szamboti. Take a look! http://journalof911studies.com/volume/2008/TheMissingJolt4.pdf [link broken – see below]

This fine paper underwent several months of rather arduous peer-review preceding its publication in the Journal of 9/11 Studies. The paper supports work by James Gourley published in the Journal of Engineering Mechanics and recent analysis by David Chandler. A few quotes from the paper should wet your interest:

“In its Final Report on the Collapse of the World Trade Center Towers, the National Institute of Standards and Technology summarizes its three year study and outlines its explanation of the total collapse of WTC 1 and WTC 2.[1] Readers of the report will find that the roughly $20 million expended on this effort have resulted in an explanation of the total collapse of these buildings that is so vague it barely qualifies as a hypothesis. But it does have one crucial feature of a hypothesis: it is, in principle, falsifiable. In fact, it is easy to demonstrate that it is false.

In this paper we will, concentrating on the North Tower, offer a refutation that is:

easy to understand but reasonably precise
capable of being stated briefly
verifiable by any reader with average computer skills and a grasp of simple mathematics.

http://www.911truth.org/peer-reviewed-paper-missing-jolt-refutation-nist-bazant-collapse-hypothesis/

0 Replies

@Olivier5,

You are as patently dishonest as farmerman, without the phony pretense of being a scientist.

Quote:

The water immediately surrounding the Igniting Stick boiled instantly but the relatively large volume of water [one gallon] absorbed most of the heat.

The flames coming out of the top of the bottle are hydrogen and oxygen reacting to form water vapor.

NOTE: This is a potentially dangerous experiment. Do NOT do this with a volume of water less than a gallon because the water will insta-boil and will create a steam explosion or worse, a hydrogen explosion.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_hwsQYU3YQ

The murder of millions and you two clowns are attempting to provide cover for the real criminal perpetrators of this most gigantic of all American frauds.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

As a US prosecutor said, and I paraphrase,

The most heavily defended airspace in the world, with security cameras everywhere, security cameras on all the buildings surrounding the pentagon, tourists with cameras all over the place, and no pictures?

Have you absolutely no sense of shame whatsoever, farmerman?

0 Replies

@camlok,

Hahahahaha... Your termites can vaporise lead, but they can't vaporised water! Hilarious...

You can't even understand what the **** is happening in YOUR OWN YOUTUBE VID! That water was very much boiling, as any water would do placed in contact with fire, and it DOES produce vapor, like any boiling water would do...

1 Reply

The Physics of 911

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know