New(?) 911 bad science

[PhantomWolf]

Thomas Eagar would know more about the abnormalities than I would, but he believes a thermite reaction was seen at the world trade center

I'd be interested in seeing the evidence of this, currently Dr Jones has failed miserablely to produce anything worthwhile enough to be taken seriously by the non-CT crowd.

For example, he says, the cascade of yellow-hot particles coming out of the south tower could be any number of things: a butane can igniting, sparks from an electrical arc, molten aluminum and water forming a hydrogen reaction — or, perhaps most likely, a spontaneous, completely accidental thermite reaction.

Or as Phunk pointed out, it could be burning wreakage of office funiture, surely the most likely explanation as it doesn't require jumps in speculation.

Plus finding out that natural thermite or burning aluminum fits in well with Prof. Eagar earlier assertion that burning aluminum was a factor in weakening the Steel.

NIST already showed that that the temperatures their model returned, a model accepted and used by the industry, and tested again control samples, that the steel would have sufficently weakened without anything else. Why then do we need to go adding in more things?

So Dr. Jones declared that no natural thermite played a part in the collapse, and that gave a real life to his Controlled Demolition theory.
If natural thermite is found Dr. Jones's theory collapses in on itself.
So the thermite aspects have always been the deepest mystery.

No Thermite does the same thing. It's up to those claiming there was thermite, natural or not, to show that it really existed, not just wave their hands about and say that it could have because the conditions were right.

That would have been the perfect environment not only for thermite, and or burning molten aluminum but also for chemical reactions with Iron and sulfur solving two problems at once.

We already have solutions to these things though and no actual proof of thermite, natural or not.

What really convinces me that the terrorist knew what they were doing is if I can figure this out in my back yard, just playing with Aluminum, steel, and fire why can they not.

But this requires that they actauly when out in their backyard and experimented the same as you did. Where is your evidence of that, I just see more speculation on top of previous speculation. At this rate your arms are going to just get tired from the flapping.

True a lot of what I said is speculation

That I think we can both agree with.

[pzkpfw]

...What really convinces me that the terrorist knew what they were doing is if I can figure this out in my back yard, just playing with Aluminum, steel, and fire why can they not.
They had more education than I and more resources than I, I had to scrounge the local Scrap metal yard for the parts I need...

My understanding was that they did not actually expect as much damage as they got.

e.g.

On the tape, bin Laden says he was pleasantly surprised by the amount of destruction caused at the World Trade Center; he only expected the top portion of the twin towers to collapse.

http://www.npr.org/news/specials/res...aden.tape.html

[Laguna]

...What really convinces me that the terrorist knew what they were doing is if I can figure this out in my back yard, just playing with Aluminum, steel, and fire why can they not.

Remember your motivation to go to your backyard playing with iron and aluminium? You tried to get a thermite reaction. Because you tried to prove that there was one in the WTC.

The terrorists had no reason to look for something like that. They just took two planes and flew them into the towers. The collapse was an extra bonus.

[Chainsaw1]

That is one of the things I looked at, I believe they wanted the explosive aspects of thermite, to blow the top of the towers up, but the fires weakened causing the buildings to start to collapse and the collapse and the high energy pressure waves cause pockets of thermite in the building to act explosively.
These guys loved playing with explosive compounds, trying to figure out new ways to blow things up.
All they had to do was to build a Chimney, place aluminum and Iron Oxide in a heat resistant pan, place a plate of some kind over the chimney to guide the hot flames over the aluminum. spray kerosene in the bottom and wait for nature to take its course. While they were waiting they were probably also training shooting, at 1550c and loud noise would have set it off.
Alquida was a well organized organization, they would have wanted to know as close as possible what would have happened when the planes hit the buildings.
It would explain a lot, because the compounds in the buildings PVC pipe, plastics and other compounds would have acted to produce natural thermate like compounds and those are highly reactive on steel.
You also have to remember people have been arguing for years whether Aluminum burns or not, we now know that it does burn when exposed to wave form energy breaking the Oxide coating.

[twinstead]

I just wish I had a back yard big enough to play with aluminium, steel, and fire.

[PhantomWolf]

I guess we'll know who the Al Quaeda terrorists are from now on, they'll be the ones carrying around the chimneys in their backpacks.

[captain swoop]

they would have wanted to know as close as possible what would have happened when the planes hit the buildings.

Yes, big explosions

[MG1962A]

You also have to remember people have been arguing for years whether Aluminum burns or not, we now know that it does burn when exposed to wave form energy breaking the Oxide coating.

I must confess I thought this question was well and truely answered by the battle damage suffered by the British fleet during the Faulklands operations

[Chainsaw1]

The British Royal fleet has argued for years that Aluminum does not burn, as has the Pentagon.
The Marines, Army, and Navy still use Aluminum armor do to the light weight, I wonder if I will now be arrested and locked up somewhere to keep me silent.

[PhantomWolf]

I must confess I thought this question was well and truely answered by the battle damage suffered by the British fleet during the Faulklands operations

Except it's a myth.

The sinking of the Sheffield is sometimes blamed on a superstructure made wholly or partially from aluminium, the melting point and ignition temperature of which are significantly lower than those of steel. However, this story is untrue because the Sheffield's superstructure was made entirely of steel [1]. The confusion is related to the US and British Navies abandoning aluminium after several fires in the 1970s involving ships that had aluminium superstructures.

Of the nine ships sunk in this conflict, only three had aluminium superstructures. All three vessels had steel hulls and in each case the damage inflicted suggested that these vessels would have sunk regardless of the materials of the superstructure. In no case did aluminium burn. HMS Sheffield, the first British destroyer to be sunk, was widely reported to have an aluminium superstructure. This was, in fact, an all-steel ship with a steel hull and a steel superstructure. The Defence White Paper published on 14 December 1982 concluded, 'there is no evidence that aluminium has contributed to the loss of any vessel'.

[Chainsaw1]

The British Royal fleet has argued for years after the Falklands, that Aluminum does not burn, as has the Pentagon.
The Marines, Army, and Navy still use Aluminum armor do to the light weight.
I wonder if I will now be arrested and locked up somewhere to keep me silent.
Also if you had seen the reaction you would not want to ever see it again. I am as soon as I can see good enough going to build a large scale device to show it in the endothermic form not the explosive form.
The key is to burn the aluminum off with wave motion, to get the Aluminum to 1550, then expose the aluminum with Iron Oxide Inclusions to loud shock waves, I used a 22 caliber pistol with a blank cartridge, though a pipe.
I limited the reactions to Just four inclusions about the size of beans, One of the torch tips and the skillet as well as a large section of the steel pipe are still missing I hope to find them somewhere on the farm.
Has anyone else ever thought of mixing thermites rapidly as a liquid within a Liquid?

[PhantomWolf]

Well you can argue it as you like, but the facts are that the three that had aluminium superstructures didn't burn, and the one that did burn, the Sheffield, wasn't make of aluminium.

[Chainsaw1]

I know the Sheffield had steel superstructure, but the fact is aluminum fires were a problem in both the American and the British Navies.

The confusion is related to the US and British Navies abandoning aluminum after several fires in the 1970s involving ships that had aluminum superstructures.

Aluminum will only burn under certain specific conditions, I now know what those are.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Yes, big explosions

And lots of panic and fear, which I'm sure was their primary goal...

They don't care for the most efficient reaction possible, Chainsaw. This wasn't some scientific experiment. Stuff had to blow up and people had to die. That was enough.

[Chainsaw1]

I know but thermite was used extensively in Afghanistan to disable road way Bridges into the mountains so the Russians had to depend on helicopters making them venerable to attack with shoulder fire missiles.
They would have know about thermites, and I think they would have played with the stuff.
I no longer think that they would have gotten a major effect in the capital, because I just did an experiment and the cast iron burns away the aluminum to fast for the really bad action to take place.
I believe you Ladies and Gentlemen are right, I am over analyzing the situation. I just could never figure out why they tried to hijack the planes over seas and fly them into the USA. They should have known that they would never get though NORAD.

[Sigma_Orionis]

Hey Chainsaw, what planes are those

[Chainsaw1]

...What really convinces me that the terrorist knew what they were doing is if I can figure this out in my back yard, just playing with Aluminum, steel, and fire why can they not.

Remember your motivation to go to your backyard playing with iron and aluminium? You tried to get a thermite reaction. Because you tried to prove that there was one in the WTC.

The terrorists had no reason to look for something like that. They just took two planes and flew them into the towers. The collapse was an extra bonus.

Actually it was the knowledge that aluminum burned, and Dr Greenings paper, I always knew that Aluminum burned because I live in a town built where Aluminum manufacture is king and once while going to school on a bus, I saw a large several ton Ingot of Aluminum on the back of a semi on fire with a briliant white flame.
The funny thing is when the semi operator turn off the engine of the Kenworth, the flame instantly died.
I was always told since it was raining that it was a hydrogen aluminum reaction, when Dr Jones told me that he had never gotten hydrogen from aluminum I knew something was wrong with the experiments he proformed in the lab so I decided to see just what was missing from the experiment he preformed.
I was never trying to find thermite I was just curious about the reactions and no one I asked understood the key triggers, I was just told that thermites, form as small particles when heated, or as thermite sparks from impacts.
I was even told that on this very forum, that thermite sparks was all that could be formed in the world trade, now I know that is wrong.
Now I know there are other ways of forming large thermite reactions that no one had even thought of.
It was merely curiosity that nearly killed this cat.

Here is what I asked Dr. Greening after we figured it out,

This does mean that I could have just done an internet seach into Sonochemistry, and not have had to nearly kill myself doing experiments in my back yard does it not?

Here is his reply.

There is no substitute for direct human experience. After all, I can read all the articles I want, but SEEING IS BELIEVING... Cheers, Frank

[Chainsaw1]

Hey Chainsaw, what planes are those

Sorry I should have said plot to fly planes into buildings.

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/1...nes/index.html
They were planing 9/11 for a long time, that is what makes me think it would have been well planed.

[Graham2001]

Looks like it's not just 'Professor' Steven Jones that thinks that thermite is explosive

[Chainsaw1]

NO that is thermite the endothermic, if he had used it in liquid the whole camera would have be vaporized. In other words he would have gotten away with the crime.

[nomuse]

Hard to tell from that article....is the design of those cameras that they are networked to a central storage facility? Otherwise I can't understand how the image could have survived the camera's destruction.

Unless...did he simply put some loose thermite on top of the camera, and the violence of the burning reaction was enough to shove the rest of the mass off without completely destroying the camera?

[Gillianren]

Clearly, seeing isn't believing. Check out the sheer number of HBs who have seen the planes crash into the WTC and still don't believe it.

[captain swoop]

Surely the Russians used Helicopters in the mountains of Afghanistan for the same reasons we are using them, some of the roads are too dangerous to drive down because of AMbush and mines.

As for the RN and Aluminium ships, it was the type 21 Frigates that had Aluminium superstructure. These ships werent designed for the RN but for export, I think they were intended for Iran but taken over by the RN when the revolution came along. They were remodelled and finished to RN spec.

Mine Countermeasures ships have Aluminium superstructures as well.

[Chainsaw1]

Hey I have a question, how do Dr. Jones devices work, in a timed sequence without an almost complete vacuum around the devices to keep transfered ultra sound from the choking effect and turbulence from setting off the particles.
Just for fun I constructed similar devices, and they go off from sound-ultrasound every time.
It looks like controlled Demolition is almost impossible.

I think I could do it, but not Dr. Jones, and you are not going to pin this on me, I was no where near New York and Have never been there.

[jaydeehess]

Does anyone know where this video originates? I don't think the producer of this particular version put it together himself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DzR-q0ijbV0

First question the author of this video asks is why not just push the yoke down and head for the Pentagon?

That would be a very steep dive, first off , pushing the yoke forward enough to send the plane into this dive would result in a high neg g situation, next though a straight in dive would have to be very steep indeed from the location at which the pilot starts the turn. One must assume that the pilot did not actually see his target until that moment.
A steep dive is much harder to control than a less steep desending turn.
One has to wonder what other pilot's would have thought had the plane managed a very steep, controlled dive.


Next the author makes the comment that this pilot seems unconcerned about any intercept by fighter jets. What does this mean?
Whoever was at the controls of this 757 would do what, exactly, if he were worried about an interceptor?
What would he do that would be visible by knowing the flight data of this aircraft?
It is quite obvious that anyone in this situation, that is to say a suicide pilot bent on ramming the Pentagon would do only what he could do. That is fly the plane in a manner in which his mission will be accomplished. There is nothing he could do against an intercept so it is not going to be any concern of his. If the plane is intercepted and shot down then his mission is still not a complete failure since he has killed all on board and managed to force GWB to be his tool in accomplishing that much.


As far as it being impressive maneuvering, perhaps, perhaps not. When he was in the Cessna he would be concerned about dieing, whereas in the case of a suicide pilot he has really no care in the world other than focusing on the task he has set for himself. Hanjour knew what had to be done to pilot that plane, he had had the schooling. He had had trouble in putting it into practise especially in landings but in his final moments his entire focus would have been on accomplishing what he had been instructed in AND he would never have to land a plane, watch fuel pressures, fuel loads, engine rpm or temp., or pay any attention to any warning bells, buzzers or chimes.

I am not sure what the author of that site means by the flight terminates at 180 feet but it is really 480 feet. Are these numbers agl or asl? It seems that the Pentagon is about 40 feet asl, the light poles were on the freeway, about another 50 feet above the Pentagon's level and they were about 40 feet tall themselves all of which adds to 130 feet with the plane 50 feet above that. On the face of it that seems to say that the plane misses the poles but I admit I am estimating these heights and besides at what portion of the plane is the height supposed to be, what is the intrinsic error in the reading on the flight panel? Is the author correct in stating that the plane is at the location of the poles at this point? Does anyone have actual data on these numbers?

[Architect]

I've got a conspiraloon quoting someone called Charles Pegenow at me. Claims to be a structural engineer. Have we encountered this fellow before?

[jaydeehess]

A search of this site for Pegenow nets only your post above.

Nothing on that name over at apollohoax.net either. Must be a new loon.

The only google listing for Pegenow is as the name for a native American tribe.
http://users.rttinc.com/~asiniwachi/wnt.html

[Brumsen]

A search of this site for Pegenow nets only your post above.

Pegelow, not Pegenow.

[Architect]

Good man, Brunsen.

I just made the mistake of listening to Pegelow's section, and will do so again more slowly later once the kids are in bed. To be honest, there's something not right about it.

Anyone else had a chance to go through it? The interview is on the link Brunsen gives and comes in about the 9 minute mark.

[Sky King]

NIST FAQ