Yes, the wording is theirs, but the section of the story that you copied made it look like the article agreed with your premise. If someone didn't take the link and read the entire article, they would assume that the article did agree with you.

I apologize if you think I was attacking you, that wasn't my purpose in bringing this up. My purpose was to let the others know that there was more to the story than what you posted. Not everyone takes links, even if the source is stated.

---

Calm Chaos Forum...Join Calm Chaos Now

That's fine Labbie,

I just copied the top section and there it was. That's exactly where the next section would have begun. I thought it was an added jab after you said you thought I had, "reading comprehension issues."


.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

That's fine Labbie,

I just copied the top section and there it was. That's exactly where the next section would have begun. I thought it was an added jab after you said you thought I had, "reading comprehension issues."


.

Yeah, I admit that was a bit much. Sorry.

---

Calm Chaos Forum...Join Calm Chaos Now

Sometimes text comes across differently than it would in a casual conversation. It's something I also do on occasion. Then again... sometimes I can be a real jerk, as well.

I apologize for assuming the worst. Strange times we live in and it's getting to all of us.


Your friend,

mg




.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Isn't it strange that it took these guys years to come up with a scenario for the building collapse yet a group of cowboy construction guys walking away from the building are filmed telling everyone to keep their eyes on building 7 because it's coming down?


.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Isn't it strange that it took these guys years to come up with a scenario for the building collapse yet a group of cowboy construction guys walking away from the building are filmed telling everyone to keep their eyes on building 7 because it's coming down?

"These guys" appear to believe the same thing as the "cowboy construction guys" (how insulting, these people walked into a disaster area to assist the first responders), that WTC 7 came down as a result of damage sustained and additional fire damage. The same is believed by FDNY, both from footage at the scene, and in subsequent interviews. The difference between "these guys" and the people at the scene is that on the scene the appraisal was made on what could be seen, "these guys" have to provide a scenario that takes into account the building design and does not have complete data wrt to the damage resulting from the collapses of WTCs 1 and 2.

Stranger still is that you are trotting out the same line as you did 2 years ago when we discussed the same subject then, when I provided much the same information as here. Still you provide no physical evidence of explosives (or atomic weapons, alien weapons, thermite) despite literally hundreds of people searching the area in the days after. It strikes me as strange that people will believe such stories in spite of the physical evidence and the fact that thermite, nuclear weapons and alien weapons (whatever they might be) have never been documented as used in controlled demolitions before or since 9/11.

As for WTC 7, compare its collapse with those of controlled demolitions again. See how many windows in WTC 7 are blasted out by the explosives you say are there? What about the collateral damage to neighboring buildings from such blasts (at least some broken windows)? Not only are the sounds of explosives missing from any footage of WTC7's collapse, there's nothing in the surrounding area to suggest demolition charges were used.

But then I guess the black ops teams may have gone in and fixed up the neighboring buildings after the fact. Strange how the US government can keep the lid on this but were unable to suppress Watergate, Iran-Contra deal, Abu Ghraib, rendition, bypassing FISA, etc, etc, all brought to the public's attention by "insiders". This one must be up there with JFK, UFOs, the moon landings, etc as just too secret to tell on, right?

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Your side stepping bobby,

But maybe your missing the point.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Your side stepping bobby,

But maybe your missing the point.

Which was? That the collapse of WTC7 was not included in the first report about 9/11 (which detailed the collapses of WTC 1 and 2)? That the first report on the collapse of WTC7 was incomplete (by its own admission) and required further investigation? That from 9/11 onwards the same basic causes for the collapse of WTC7 have remained unchanged (just the specific processes have been re-evaluated)?

Or do you mean I'm side-stepping by calling you out on your lack of any real evidence and the implausibility of a conspiracy?

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

ordinance

;)

and Dr Ceti, too: "Ordinance" is a local law. "Ordnance" is military weapons like rockets, artillery, etc. I worked for the latter for most of my career.

---

Side stepping the acronym personnel, aka, construction cowboys,

And the buildings falling in hours.


You've spoken to hundreds of eye witnesses in what capacity, bobby?

.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

ordinance

;)

and Dr Ceti, too: "Ordinance" is a local law. "Ordnance" is military weapons like rockets, artillery, etc. I worked for the latter for most of my career.

Thanks you!



.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Side stepping the acronym personnel, aka, construction cowboys,

And the buildings falling in hours.


You've spoken to hundreds of eye witnesses in what capacity, bobby?

.

I wrote 4 paragraphs, and spent less than one sentence on that, but if that makes me guilty of sidestepping, then I'm guilty.

What of the buildings falling in hours? I'll admit to being shocked and surprised to seeing the first tower fall, but I certainly did not believe that to be a controlled demolition at the time, and never since.

The hundreds I referred to were firecrew, police, civilians, etc searching the area for signs of life in the days and weeks after. Almost every accessible inch was covered. Then there were the clean up crews and construction workers. Remains were found years after the collapses but never any signs of explosives, why is that?

If I'm guilty of side stepping what is the term for your lack of acknowledgment regarding the lack of physical evidence?

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Thermite has that effect on things,

The pulverization of everything into fine granules is another sign of explosives. Your not watching the videos or listening/reading the findings of the professionals who have been working on this. Reverse engineering is tough when your evidence has been shipped off without a proper investigation. The physics remain in tact.

Side-stepping example:

You've spoken to hundreds of eye witnesses in what capacity, bobby?

.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Thermite has that effect on things,

The pulverization of everything into fine granules is another sign of explosives. Your not watching the videos or listening/reading the findings of the professionals who have been working on this. Reverse engineering is tough when your evidence has been shipped off without a proper investigation. The physics remain in tact.

Side-stepping example:

You've spoken to hundreds of eye witnesses in what capacity, bobby?

[edit]

Are you're referring back to a comment I made on the 8th?

Quite, you believe the snippets of eye witness testimony taken out of context, I believe my own senses and the discussions I've had with hundreds of others that were there on the day. But it's me that's selective.

It would help if you made your questions clear. I used the term hundreds more recently when talking about individuals on the scene in the days and weeks after the collapses, none of whom discovered any signs of explosives.

Capacity? As an individual that worked in an office a block away from the WTC. At the time I was a software support engineer (employed by a large software company) working onsite at a financial services company.

[/edit]

Thermite is not an explosive. Neither has it been used in a controlled demolition before or after 9/11, at least there's no documentation of it being used for such purposes. There's no evidence that it can be used for such a purpose.

You are not looking at the professionals that were there and have looked into the details, you're looking at armchair amateurs and some people that are qualified in other fields (architects are not necessarily experts on demolition - they design and build things, not take them down, likewise physicists are not necessarily experts on explosives - explosives are the province of chemistry).

I've seen one expert on explosive demolition, who's shown the same imcomplete video footage as you include in your first post and asked to comment, apparently he was unaware that WTC7 came down on the same day, and while his first thought is that he's watching a controlled demolition, it's clear that he has some trouble with the idea that it happened on the same day - why is this? Because setting up buildings for controlled demolition takes weeks, and there just wasn't the time, unless, of course you go down the fairy tale route of the believing the explosives were placed in the buildings ahead of time and nobody noticed.

Ask any demolition expert if this is possible and you'll get a flat "no". But that wasn't a question he was asked. Nor was he shown alternative footage, showing different angles, nor was he shown the scene after the building came down to view the lack of collateral damage. Why not, because the so-called "Truthers" are not interested in the truth.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

the so-called "Truthers" are not interested in the truth.

The truth is, we shall never know the truth... ;)

---

It may not be 1984 but George Orwell sure did see the future . . .

You must have missed the traces of thermite found in the wreckage,

Scroll down some bobby.

Or click here.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

You must have missed the traces of thermite found in the wreckage,

Scroll down some bobby.

Or click here.

I see a comparison, I don't see physical evidence, certainly there's nothing in those images that meets that criteria. What you see is something burning, it looks like it's hot, for all I know it could be plastic. It also looks to be isolated to one corner of the WTC. Aren't explosives attached to all supporting pillars for controlled demolition? If this is indeed thermite, then why can't we see the same things from all around the building?

Again, thermite is not an explosive. Again there's no documented case of thermite being used for controlled demolition. Are you now suggesting thermite (rather than explosives) was used? For WTCs 1, 2 and 7?

A search on the page shows that thermite was first mentioned in this thread by me today. What exactly did I miss? Are you referring to one of the pages you linked in that mentions it? Pretty sure I've been to them all (and as my posts show, several others besides). Red flakes are not necessarily an indication of thermite. What color was WRC 7?

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

Woops,

Wrong link.


http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200704/JLobdillThermiteChemistryWTC


Thank you for catching that.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss

Woops,

Wrong link.


http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200704/JLobdillThermiteChemistryWTC


Thank you for catching that.

Very good. Nice to see that sulphur is implicated, not an ingredient in thermite (that's thermate), but present in gypsum, which is used in wallboards. Sulphur reduces the melting point of steel. The article references the same footage presented in the other link, again I wonder why, if this is the result of thermite being used for demolition, it's isolated to one part of the WTC 2. Shouldn't there be multiple sites for this (all supporting beams). As for aluminum being found after the collapse, there were planes in the buildings (which is a fair amount of aluminum), together with who knows what in terms of office equipment that may have been constructed from the stuff (computer cases, etc).

This leaves out the question of thermite's use before and after 9/11 for controlled demolition, which remains non-existant (needless to say, the same is true of thermate). Could it be that relying on comparatively slow chemical reactions is just not organized enough for the professionals?

Also interesting to see the name Professor Richard Sisson in that article, he appears in the BBC Conspiracy Files documentary, talking about a piece of steel from WTC7 found to have a mysterious hole in it:

Professor Richard Sisson says it did not melt, it eroded. The cause was the very hot fires in the debris after 9/11 that cooked the steel over days and weeks.

Professor Sisson determined that the steel was attacked by a liquid slag which contained iron, sulphur and oxygen.

However, rather than coming from thermite, the metallurgist Professor Sisson thinks the sulphur came from masses of gypsum wallboard that was pulverised and burnt in the fires. He says:

"I don't find it very mysterious at all, that if I have steel in this sort of a high temperature atmosphere that's rich in oxygen and sulphur this would be the kind of result I would expect."

I'm sure he'd be interested to know that his work has been perverted to support the thermate hypothesis.

Perhaps a burning wallboard was similarly responsible for the footage from WTC2? I suspect we'll never know, one thing is for sure, we do not know that what is seen is the result of the action of thermite or thermate.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

I'll bet your an older government employee, bobby,

Trench coat, Pentagon, White House, cold war guy?


.

---

"Be who you are and say what you feel, because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." - Dr. Seuss