science proves twin towers were demolished

[Daedalus]

I prefer this version.

 

A great resource for fact-checking "Loose Change" is, 9-11 Loose Change Second Edition Viewer Guide

 

I realize that people can distort facts, evidence, and just straight out lie to make a point that would convince most people who are not trained to take objective stances on materials they are presented. That is why I said that I am not sure if I completely agree with everything the documentary stated. However, I made a point to state that it was an interesting view on the events of 9-11. Whether or not any of what was said has merit or scientific basis is another argument altogether.

Edited December 10, 2011 by Daedalus

[JohnStu]

I wonder how those scientists became scientists. The twin tower were burned down, 'cause the main steel support crashed down.

 

Standard Boeing 747 have fuel capacity of 1300 ton I believe. 1300 tons!~!

 

how much tons of gas do we have in a truck in comparison? Also, jet fuels are high quality pressurized fuels. Let those 1300 tons of fuel on fire and it could put out a giant building such as the trade centre easy.

Edited February 29, 2012 by JohnStu

[rigney]

The paper by Jones claiming to find thermitic nanocomposite is perhaps the worst piece of analytical chemistry literature I've ever laid eyes on.

 

He displays no knowledge of proper differential scanning calorimetry (DSC) technique, a technique that I have much experience with. I can detail these issues if need be.

 

Basically he claims that he found evidence of a thermitic reaction taking place during DSC but cannot claim such under the conditions he employed.

 

His microscopy work proves absolutely nothing. I work in nanomaterials and have experience with similar methodology.

 

He didn't analyze the rest of the debris samples either. Only the suspected thermite. That is dishonest on multiple levels.

 

His elemental analysis only proves that there is aluminum and iron in buildings, that is hardly surprising.

 

Even if he found a huge piece of thermite and confirmed it, I wouldn't care. You can't user thermite to cut verticle columns, gravity pulls the liquid iron down not sideways. Anyway, the amount of thetmite needed to cut hundreds if steel I-beams would be in the hundreds if tons, reference upon request.

 

Not a question for you personally, but in general. Has anyone considered how cupola convection action increases heat in a furnace? Once the planes hit and the centers were on fire, they were nothing more than hundred story plus, cupolas. Here's a good way to analyze the generated heat. http://www1.eere.energy.gov/manufacturing/industries_technologies/metalcasting/pdfs/advancedmeltingtechnologies.pdf Edited March 4, 2012 by rigney