The NIST 9-11 Report on the WTC Collapse

[Gamolon]

And apparently there were temps in the range to melt steel, as melted steel was seen, and reported,

As has been pointed out to you many times, it couldn't have been molten steel. There were no temperatures high enough.

You fail.

It could have been caused by a eutectic reaction. It could have been molten aluminum.

Keep clinging to your garbage science. Maybe in another 11 years you'll come up with something better.

 

[Mr. Jones]

You still have a MAJOR problem. No temperatures were reported that could melt steel.

Whats the matter? Are you having a hard time connecting the fact that where there is melted steel, there must be the temps to melt it? You really are a fool to assume that there were no temps that high to do so....Or are you still hiding behind the fact that NIST purposefully IGNORED the vast evidence of this phenomena?

That is a fact and completely blows your theory out of the water. On the other hand I can PROVE there were temperatures to melt aluminum. I can prove there was a source for the possibility of aluminum being present.

I'm not here, in this particular thread trying to prove a "theory" idiot...I am here trying to show you fools WHY I don't believe the NIST report was at all accurate, credible, and lacked scientific integrity..
On this melted steel, I have done a far superior job at my task, then some idiot who wants to now argue about aluminum fucking car parts, which is comparable to the proverbial "needle in a haystack", and aluminum never even being mentioned by NIST, or anyone else....

I'd give up now if I were you because you're looking quite the fool. At least I have plausible reasons to show molten aluminum was possible. You got NOTHING.

All you have shown is how utterly fucking ridiculous your premise is, in the face of vastly over whelming odds. You can keep on believing that I have shown "nothing" for the case it was indeed melted aluminum, but you look even more foolish, and a more determined proponent of a wild conspiracy theory then I ever could.
Remember this thread is about the NIST report, and I have shown you one instance of its failure and why there is opposition to it, and in so doing have made you look like the desperate conspiracy theorists that you truly are....Aluminum car parts??? LOL...WHAT A DESPERATE AND WEAK ARGUMENT!!!

EXPLOSIONS do not mean EXPLOSIVES. I guess anytime anyone reports hearing a train when a tornado blows through a town, we can assume it was actually a train.

The question was "what did NIST say or do about these numerous reports" Why do you constantly avoid answering a direct question, and now you're replacing aluminum car parts with tornadoes? LOL!!!

The squib bullshit has already been squashed. Demolition squibs to not jet out in a thin expulsion. You need glasses dumbass.

Your opinion it has been squashed falls on deaf ears, and because you provide nothing in the way of any rational rebuttal....Again your deliberate attempts to hide and keep from answering are being well documented....NIST....you moron.....this is about what NIST says and not your totally stupid opinions...

 

[Gamolon]

Your opinion it has been squashed falls on deaf ears, and because you provide nothing in the way of any rational rebuttal....[/QUOTE]

Yeah. That's why you and your fellow idiots have done SO much in 11 years. Because your proof and evidence is SO convincing.

LMAO!

You dumbasses have nothing. You'll NEVER have anything. Your garbage science and ridiculous blathering will always amount to nothing.

Nobody pays attention to you except people who are in these forums. That's it.

That's why you have less than 1% of the total engineers supporting your crap.

 

[daws101]

What percentage "of cars" were made of aluminum? No cars are made strictly and totally of aluminum idiot..

Let me make this easier for you. What percentage of an average car is aluminum. Do you have any clue?

You aren't making anything easier on yourself by posing such stupid questions, when any rational person can see and understand the point I have made regarding the NIST report and how it deliberately failed in this particular instance..
You try to reach in trying to find anything that may substantiate your assumptions, that NIST left you blowing in the breeze about.
It is one thing to ignore the massive amounts of steel in comparison to the amounts of aluminum in/on the WTC towers, but it is even more embarrassing and foolish to watch you try and quibble over aluminum car parts lol....
Yours is an exercise in futility.....when comparing 200,000 tons of steel...56 tons in the foundation alone, to the miniscule amount of aluminum in a fucking car....

Good grief, give it up, and move on like has been suggested to other parts we can discuss and debate, like the instance where NIST also leaves you hanging regarding the explosions, the squibs, and the eyewitnesses, regarding those events. They are equally important, and have historical precedence attached to the complex.....So what did NIST do and say regarding them???

hold on a sec... you just said, "any rational person", would that mean that the millions of rational people who (like myself) know you're talking out your ass are not as rational as the three of you who are left in the twoofer movement?

 

[Gamolon]

Whats the matter? Are you having a hard time connecting the fact that where there is melted steel, there must be the temps to melt it?

That's your problem Mr. Jones. You are working backwards. You have a preconceived thought and are trying desperately to fit evidence to it. the problem is, the evidence is totally against what you are claiming.

1. Molten steel cannot be identified visually from molten aluminum. That has been proven.
2. There was no temperatures recorded that were enough to melt steel. Not even close.
3. I can come up with sources of aluminum AND the fact that recorded temperatures were high enough to melt it.
4. I also brought up the "eutectic" theory.

Your molten steel theory is based upon people who have said it was molten steel based on seeing the substance. Cannot be done.

You lose.

 

[SAYIT]

Whats the matter? Are you having a hard time connecting the fact that where there is melted steel, there must be the temps to melt it?

That's your problem Mr. Jones. You are working backwards. You have a preconceived thought and are trying desperately to fit evidence to it. the problem is, the evidence is totally against what you are claiming.

1. Molten steel cannot be identified visually from molten aluminum. That has been proven.
2. There was no temperatures recorded that were enough to melt steel. Not even close.
3. I can come up with sources of aluminum AND the fact that recorded temperatures were high enough to melt it.
4. I also brought up the "eutectic" theory.

Your molten steel theory is based upon people who have said it was molten steel based on seeing the substance. Cannot be done.

You lose.

Square peg, round hole. It's the story of the CT's life. As you noted, Jones begins with his preconceived conclusion ("the Jews did it") and works backwards cherry picking and subscribing to half-truths, assumptions, speculation, and outright fabrications found at Nazi web sites like IHR. Yes, it sucks to be Mr. Jones but that's nobody's prob except his.

 

[Gamolon]

The question was "what did NIST say or do about these numerous reports" Why do you constantly avoid answering a direct question, and now you're replacing aluminum car parts with tornadoes? LOL!!!

One can only guess how far you've got your head your ass regarding this conspiracy bullshit.

NIST did address explosives scenarios dipshit. Jesus H. Christ...

To respond to a number of the questions raised about the collapses of the WTC towers, NIST posted a fact sheet in 2006 stating that NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses suggesting that the buildings were brought down by controlled demolition using explosives or by missiles. In 2007 and 2008, additional fact sheets addressed later questions from the alternative theory groups, including questions related to the collapse of WTC 7.
The information from these fact sheets has been consolidated into the current FAQs on the WTC towers and WTC 7.

FAQs - NIST WTC Investigation

Video evidence also showed unambiguously that the collapse progressed from the top to the bottom, and there was no evidence (collected by NIST or by the New York City Police Department, the Port Authority Police Department, or the Fire Department of New York) of any blast or explosions in the region below the impact and fire floors as the top building sections (including and above the 98th floor in WTC 1 and the 82nd floor in WTC 2) began their downward movement upon collapse initiation.
In summary, NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition using explosives. NIST also did not find any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead, photographs and videos from several angles clearly show that the collapse initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed from the initiating floors downward until the dust clouds obscured the view.

9. Weren't the puffs of smoke that were seen, as the collapse of each WTC tower starts, evidence of controlled demolition explosions?
No. As stated in Section 6.14.4 of NIST NCSTAR 1, the falling mass of the building compressed the air ahead of it—much like the action of a piston—forcing smoke and debris out the windows as the stories below failed sequentially.
These puffs were observed at many locations as the towers collapsed. In all cases, they had the appearance of jets of gas being pushed from the building through windows or between columns on the mechanical floors. Such jets are expected since the air inside the building is compressed as the tower falls and must flow somewhere as the pressure builds. It is significant that similar “puffs” were observed numerous times on the fire floors in both towers prior to their collapses, perhaps due to falling walls or portions of a floor. Puffs from WTC 1 were even observed when WTC 2 was struck by the aircraft. These observations confirm that even minor overpressures were transmitted through the towers and forced smoke and debris from the building.

10. Why were two distinct spikes—one for each tower—seen in seismic records before the towers collapsed? Isn't this indicative of an explosion occurring in each tower?
The seismic spikes for the collapse of the WTC towers are the result of debris from the collapsing towers impacting the ground. The spikes began approximately 10 seconds after the times for the start of each building’s collapse and continued for approximately 15 seconds. There were no seismic signals that occurred prior to the initiation of the collapse of either tower. The seismic record contains no evidence that would indicate explosions occurring prior to the collapse of the towers.

FAQs - NIST WTC Towers Investigation

13. Did investigators consider the possibility that an explosion caused or contributed to the collapse of WTC 7?
Yes, this possibility was investigated carefully. NIST concluded that blast events inside the building did not occur and found no evidence supporting the existence of a blast event.
In addition, no blast sounds were heard on the audio tracks of video recordings during the collapse of WTC 7 or reported by witnesses. According to calculations by the investigation team, the smallest blast capable of failing the building's critical column would have resulted in a sound level of 130 decibels (dB) to 140 dB at a distance of at least half a mile, if unobstructed by surrounding buildings. This sound level is consistent with a gunshot blast, standing next to a jet plane engine, and more than 10 times louder than being in front of the speakers at a rock concert.
For the building to have been prepared for intentional demolition, walls and/or column enclosures and fireproofing would have to be removed and replaced without being detected. Preparing a column includes steps such as cutting sections with torches, which produces noxious and odorous fumes. Intentional demolition usually requires applying explosive charges to most, if not all, interior columns, not just one or a limited set of columns in a building.

14. Is it possible that thermite or thermate contributed to the collapse of WTC 7?
NIST has looked at the application and use of thermite and has determined that it was highly unlikely that it could have been used to sever columns in WTC 7 on Sept. 11, 2001.
Thermite is a combination of aluminum powder and a metal oxide that releases a tremendous amount of heat when ignited. It is typically used to weld railroad rails together by melting a small quantity of steel and pouring the melted steel into a form between the two rails. Thermate also contains sulfur and sometimes barium nitrate, both of which increase the compound’s thermal effect, create flame in burning, and significantly reduce the ignition temperature.
To apply thermite to a large steel column, approximately 0.13 lb. of thermite would be needed to heat and melt each pound of steel. For a steel column that weighs approximately 1,000 lbs. per foot, at least 100 lbs. of thermite would need to be placed around the column, ignited, and remain in contact with the vertical steel surface as the thermite reaction took place. This is for one column; presumably, more than one column would have been prepared with thermite, if this approach were to be used.
It is unlikely that 100 lbs. of thermite, or more, could have been carried into WTC 7 and placed around columns without being detected, either prior to Sept. 11, 2001, or during that day.
Given the fires that were observed that day, and the demonstrated structural response to the fires, NIST does not believe that thermite or thermate was used to fail any columns in WTC 7.
Analysis of the WTC steel for the elements in thermite/thermate would not necessarily have been conclusive. The metal compounds also would have been present in the construction materials making up the WTC buildings, and sulfur is present in the gypsum wallboard used for interior partitions.

FAQs - NIST WTC 7 Investigation

For you to ask the question "What did NIST say about it?" implying that they never addressed this is a testament to how much of a lying scumbag you really are.

Do you always like being on the receiving end of verbal beatdowns like this? It seems like it because you never learn and always come back for more.

 

[Gamolon]

On this melted steel, I have done a far superior job at my task,

Stop! Please... My sides hurt from laughing....

Superior as in the only piece of evidence supporting your bullshit molten steel claims is visual identification???? I trumped that already asshole! There were no temperatures recorded, reported, measured, or analyzed showing temperatures hot enough to melt steel.

PERIOD.

You have absolutely nothing supporting your crazy claims. Let me guess. You want to bring in Harrit's Bentham paper findings? Please do so. I'll make you look stupid on that also.

 

[eots]

The question was "what did NIST say or do about these numerous reports" Why do you constantly avoid answering a direct question, and now you're replacing aluminum car parts with tornadoes? LOL!!!

One can only guess how far you've got your head your ass regarding this conspiracy bullshit.

NIST did address explosives scenarios dipshit. Jesus H. Christ...

To respond to a number of the questions raised about the collapses of the WTC towers, NIST posted a fact sheet in 2006 stating that NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses suggesting that the buildings were brought down by controlled demolition using explosives or by missiles. In 2007 and 2008, additional fact sheets addressed later questions from the alternative theory groups, including questions related to the collapse of WTC 7.
The information from these fact sheets has been consolidated into the current FAQs on the WTC towers and WTC 7.

FAQs - NIST WTC Investigation

Video evidence also showed unambiguously that the collapse progressed from the top to the bottom, and there was no evidence (collected by NIST or by the New York City Police Department, the Port Authority Police Department, or the Fire Department of New York) of any blast or explosions in the region below the impact and fire floors as the top building sections (including and above the 98th floor in WTC 1 and the 82nd floor in WTC 2) began their downward movement upon collapse initiation.
In summary, NIST found no corroborating evidence for alternative hypotheses suggesting that the WTC towers were brought down by controlled demolition using explosives. NIST also did not find any evidence that missiles were fired at or hit the towers. Instead, photographs and videos from several angles clearly show that the collapse initiated at the fire and impact floors and that the collapse progressed from the initiating floors downward until the dust clouds obscured the view.

9. Weren't the puffs of smoke that were seen, as the collapse of each WTC tower starts, evidence of controlled demolition explosions?
No. As stated in Section 6.14.4 of NIST NCSTAR 1, the falling mass of the building compressed the air ahead of it—much like the action of a piston—forcing smoke and debris out the windows as the stories below failed sequentially.
These puffs were observed at many locations as the towers collapsed. In all cases, they had the appearance of jets of gas being pushed from the building through windows or between columns on the mechanical floors. Such jets are expected since the air inside the building is compressed as the tower falls and must flow somewhere as the pressure builds. It is significant that similar “puffs” were observed numerous times on the fire floors in both towers prior to their collapses, perhaps due to falling walls or portions of a floor. Puffs from WTC 1 were even observed when WTC 2 was struck by the aircraft. These observations confirm that even minor overpressures were transmitted through the towers and forced smoke and debris from the building.

10. Why were two distinct spikes—one for each tower—seen in seismic records before the towers collapsed? Isn't this indicative of an explosion occurring in each tower?
The seismic spikes for the collapse of the WTC towers are the result of debris from the collapsing towers impacting the ground. The spikes began approximately 10 seconds after the times for the start of each building’s collapse and continued for approximately 15 seconds. There were no seismic signals that occurred prior to the initiation of the collapse of either tower. The seismic record contains no evidence that would indicate explosions occurring prior to the collapse of the towers.

FAQs - NIST WTC Towers Investigation

13. Did investigators consider the possibility that an explosion caused or contributed to the collapse of WTC 7?
Yes, this possibility was investigated carefully. NIST concluded that blast events inside the building did not occur and found no evidence supporting the existence of a blast event.
In addition, no blast sounds were heard on the audio tracks of video recordings during the collapse of WTC 7 or reported by witnesses.

completely false statement

According to calculations by the investigation team, the smallest blast capable of failing the building's critical column would have resulted in a sound level of 130 decibels (dB) to 140 dB at a distance of at least half a mile, if unobstructed by surrounding buildings. This sound level is consistent with a gunshot blast, standing next to a jet plane engine, and more than 10 times louder than being in front of the speakers at a rock concert.

thats only if you used the loudest explosive possible with no sound damping
and does not consider the use of thermite

For the building to have been prepared for intentional demolition, walls and/or column enclosures and fireproofing would have to be removed and replaced without being detected. Preparing a column includes steps such as cutting sections with torches, which produces noxious and odorous fumes. Intentional demolition usually requires applying explosive charges to most, if not all, interior columns, not just one or a limited set of columns in a building.

yet NIST concludes the failure of a single column was the cause of the collapse how can it be both ways ?

14. Is it possible that thermite or thermate contributed to the collapse of WTC 7?

NIST has looked at the application and use of thermite

NIST did no forensic testing for accelerants or incendiaries

and has determined that it was highly unlikely that it could have been used to sever columns in WTC 7 on Sept. 11, 2001.

so not impossible..they just.. feel..it was.. unlikely

Thermite is a combination of aluminum powder and a metal oxide that releases a tremendous amount of heat when ignited. It is typically used to weld railroad rails together by melting a small quantity of steel and pouring the melted steel into a form between the two rails. Thermate also contains sulfur and sometimes barium nitrate, both of which increase the compound’s thermal effect, create flame in burning, and significantly reduce the ignition temperature.
To apply thermite to a large steel column, approximately 0.13 lb. of thermite would be needed to heat and melt each pound of steel. For a steel column that weighs approximately 1,000 lbs. per foot, at least 100 lbs. of thermite would need to be placed around the column, ignited, and remain in contact with the vertical steel surface as the thermite reaction took place. This is for one column; presumably, more than one column would have been prepared with thermite, if this approach were to be used.


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNOM_U5UM6Q]THERMITE CUTTING STEEL - VALIDATED - EXPERIMENTALLY DEMONSTRATED - YouTube[/ame]

It is unlikely that 100 lbs. of thermite, or more, could have been carried into WTC 7 and placed around columns without being detected, either prior to Sept. 11, 2001, or during that day.
Given the fires that were observed that day, and the demonstrated structural response to the fires, NIST does not believe that thermite or thermate was used to fail any columns in WTC 7.
Analysis of the WTC steel for the elements in thermite/thermate would not necessarily have been conclusive. The metal compounds also would have been present in the construction materials making up the WTC buildings, and sulfur is present in the gypsum wallboard used for interior partitions.

FAQs - NIST WTC 7 Investigation

unlikely we... believe...so they dont...know

For you to ask the question "What did NIST say about it?" implying that they never addressed this is a testament to how much of a lying scumbag you really are.

Do you always like being on the receiving end of verbal beatdowns like this? It seems like it because you never learn and always come back for more.

blah , blah, blah ,blah ?

 

[daws101]

The question was "what did NIST say or do about these numerous reports" Why do you constantly avoid answering a direct question, and now you're replacing aluminum car parts with tornadoes? LOL!!!

One can only guess how far you've got your head your ass regarding this conspiracy bullshit.

NIST did address explosives scenarios dipshit. Jesus H. Christ...


FAQs - NIST WTC Investigation


FAQs - NIST WTC Towers Investigation


unlikely we... believe...so they dont...know

For you to ask the question "What did NIST say about it?" implying that they never addressed this is a testament to how much of a lying scumbag you really are.

Do you always like being on the receiving end of verbal beatdowns like this? It seems like it because you never learn and always come back for more.

blah , blah, blah ,blah ?

fyi that eots's fall back statement when the what are you babbling about ploy is negated.
he doesn't understand the concept: discretion is the better of valor.

 

[eots]

One can only guess how far you've got your head your ass regarding this conspiracy bullshit.

NIST did address explosives scenarios dipshit. Jesus H. Christ...


FAQs - NIST WTC Investigation


FAQs - NIST WTC Towers Investigation


unlikely we... believe...so they dont...know

blah , blah, blah ,blah ?

fyi that eots's fall back statement when the what are you babbling about ploy is negated.
he doesn't understand the concept: discretion is the better of valor.

why dont you address the rest of the post loser

 

[eots]

Quote:
13. Did investigators consider the possibility that an explosion caused or contributed to the collapse of WTC 7?
Yes, this possibility was investigated carefully. NIST concluded that blast events inside the building did not occur and found no evidence supporting the existence of a blast event.
In addition, no blast sounds were heard on the audio tracks of video recordings during the collapse of WTC 7 or reported by witnesses.
completely false statement

Quote:
According to calculations by the investigation team, the smallest blast capable of failing the building's critical column would have resulted in a sound level of 130 decibels (dB) to 140 dB at a distance of at least half a mile, if unobstructed by surrounding buildings. This sound level is consistent with a gunshot blast, standing next to a jet plane engine, and more than 10 times louder than being in front of the speakers at a rock concert.

thats only if you used the loudest explosive possible with no sound damping
and does not consider the use of thermite

Quote:
For the building to have been prepared for intentional demolition, walls and/or column enclosures and fireproofing would have to be removed and replaced without being detected. Preparing a column includes steps such as cutting sections with torches, which produces noxious and odorous fumes. Intentional demolition usually requires applying explosive charges to most, if not all, interior columns, not just one or a limited set of columns in a building

.
yet NIST concludes the failure of a single column was the cause of the collapse how can it be both ways ?

Quote:
14. Is it possible that thermite or thermate contributed to the collapse of WTC 7?

NIST has looked at the application and use of thermite
NIST did no forensic testing for accelerants or incendiaries
Quote:
and has determined that it was highly unlikely that it could have been used to sever columns in WTC 7 on Sept. 11, 2001.

so not impossible..they just.. feel..it was.. unlikely

Thermite is a combination of aluminum powder and a metal oxide that releases a tremendous amount of heat when ignited. It is typically used to weld railroad rails together by melting a small quantity of steel and pouring the melted steel into a form between the two rails. Thermate also contains sulfur and sometimes barium nitrate, both of which increase the compound’s thermal effect, create flame in burning, and significantly reduce the ignition temperature.
To apply thermite to a large steel column, approximately 0.13 lb. of thermite would be needed to heat and melt each pound of steel. For a steel column that weighs approximately 1,000 lbs. per foot, at least 100 lbs. of thermite would need to be placed around the column, ignited, and remain in contact with the vertical steel surface as the thermite reaction took place. This is for one column; presumably, more than one column would have been prepared with thermite, if this approach were to be used.

THERMITE CUTTING STEEL - VALIDATED - EXPERIMENTALLY DEMONSTRATED -

Quote:
It is unlikely that 100 lbs. of thermite, or more, could have been carried into WTC 7 and placed around columns without being detected, either prior to Sept. 11, 2001, or during that day.
Given the fires that were observed that day, and the demonstrated structural response to the fires, NIST does not believe that thermite or thermate was used to fail any columns in WTC 7.
Analysis of the WTC steel for the elements in thermite/thermate would not necessarily have been conclusive. The metal compounds also would have been present in the construction materials making up the WTC buildings, and sulfur is present in the gypsum wallboard used for interior partitions.

 

[daws101]

blah , blah, blah ,blah ?

fyi that eots's fall back statement when the what are you babbling about ploy is negated.
he doesn't understand the concept: discretion is the better of valor.

why dont you address the rest of the post loser

I did loser X 10...

 

[daws101]

Quote:
13. Did investigators consider the possibility that an explosion caused or contributed to the collapse of WTC 7?
Yes, this possibility was investigated carefully. NIST concluded that blast events inside the building did not occur and found no evidence supporting the existence of a blast event.
In addition, no blast sounds were heard on the audio tracks of video recordings during the collapse of WTC 7 or reported by witnesses.
completely false statement

Quote:
According to calculations by the investigation team, the smallest blast capable of failing the building's critical column would have resulted in a sound level of 130 decibels (dB) to 140 dB at a distance of at least half a mile, if unobstructed by surrounding buildings. This sound level is consistent with a gunshot blast, standing next to a jet plane engine, and more than 10 times louder than being in front of the speakers at a rock concert.

thats only if you used the loudest explosive possible with no sound damping
and does not consider the use of thermite

.
yet NIST concludes the failure of a single column was the cause of the collapse how can it be both ways ?


so not impossible..they just.. feel..it was.. unlikely

Thermite is a combination of aluminum powder and a metal oxide that releases a tremendous amount of heat when ignited. It is typically used to weld railroad rails together by melting a small quantity of steel and pouring the melted steel into a form between the two rails. Thermate also contains sulfur and sometimes barium nitrate, both of which increase the compound’s thermal effect, create flame in burning, and significantly reduce the ignition temperature.
To apply thermite to a large steel column, approximately 0.13 lb. of thermite would be needed to heat and melt each pound of steel. For a steel column that weighs approximately 1,000 lbs. per foot, at least 100 lbs. of thermite would need to be placed around the column, ignited, and remain in contact with the vertical steel surface as the thermite reaction took place. This is for one column; presumably, more than one column would have been prepared with thermite, if this approach were to be used.

THERMITE CUTTING STEEL - VALIDATED - EXPERIMENTALLY DEMONSTRATED -

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNOM_U5UM6Q]THERMITE CUTTING STEEL - VALIDATED - EXPERIMENTALLY DEMONSTRATED - YouTube[/ame]

Quote:
It is unlikely that 100 lbs. of thermite, or more, could have been carried into WTC 7 and placed around columns without being detected, either prior to Sept. 11, 2001, or during that day.
Given the fires that were observed that day, and the demonstrated structural response to the fires, NIST does not believe that thermite or thermate was used to fail any columns in WTC 7.
Analysis of the WTC steel for the elements in thermite/thermate would not necessarily have been conclusive. The metal compounds also would have been present in the construction materials making up the WTC buildings, and sulfur is present in the gypsum wallboard used for interior partitions.

more specious and silly musing by eots.
so tell me did some one sift through all that debris to steal away with all the sound proofing under their arm ?

 

[Rat in the Hat]

Quote:
13. Did investigators consider the possibility that an explosion caused or contributed to the collapse of WTC 7?
Yes, this possibility was investigated carefully. NIST concluded that blast events inside the building did not occur and found no evidence supporting the existence of a blast event.
In addition, no blast sounds were heard on the audio tracks of video recordings during the collapse of WTC 7 or reported by witnesses.
completely false statement


thats only if you used the loudest explosive possible with no sound damping
and does not consider the use of thermite

.
yet NIST concludes the failure of a single column was the cause of the collapse how can it be both ways ?


so not impossible..they just.. feel..it was.. unlikely


THERMITE CUTTING STEEL - VALIDATED - EXPERIMENTALLY DEMONSTRATED -

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNOM_U5UM6Q]THERMITE CUTTING STEEL - VALIDATED - EXPERIMENTALLY DEMONSTRATED - YouTube[/ame]

Quote:
It is unlikely that 100 lbs. of thermite, or more, could have been carried into WTC 7 and placed around columns without being detected, either prior to Sept. 11, 2001, or during that day.
Given the fires that were observed that day, and the demonstrated structural response to the fires, NIST does not believe that thermite or thermate was used to fail any columns in WTC 7.
Analysis of the WTC steel for the elements in thermite/thermate would not necessarily have been conclusive. The metal compounds also would have been present in the construction materials making up the WTC buildings, and sulfur is present in the gypsum wallboard used for interior partitions.

more specious and silly musing by eots.
so tell me did some one sift through all that debris to seal away with all the sound proofing under their arm ?

The nano termites ate the soundproofing after they finished burning the columns.

 

[eots]

Quote:
13. Did investigators consider the possibility that an explosion caused or contributed to the collapse of WTC 7?
Yes, this possibility was investigated carefully. NIST concluded that blast events inside the building did not occur and found no evidence supporting the existence of a blast event.
In addition, no blast sounds were heard on the audio tracks of video recordings during the collapse of WTC 7 or reported by witnesses.
completely false statement


thats only if you used the loudest explosive possible with no sound damping
and does not consider the use of thermite

.
yet NIST concludes the failure of a single column was the cause of the collapse how can it be both ways ?


so not impossible..they just.. feel..it was.. unlikely


THERMITE CUTTING STEEL - VALIDATED - EXPERIMENTALLY DEMONSTRATED -

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNOM_U5UM6Q]THERMITE CUTTING STEEL - VALIDATED - EXPERIMENTALLY DEMONSTRATED - YouTube[/ame]

Quote:
It is unlikely that 100 lbs. of thermite, or more, could have been carried into WTC 7 and placed around columns without being detected, either prior to Sept. 11, 2001, or during that day.
Given the fires that were observed that day, and the demonstrated structural response to the fires, NIST does not believe that thermite or thermate was used to fail any columns in WTC 7.
Analysis of the WTC steel for the elements in thermite/thermate would not necessarily have been conclusive. The metal compounds also would have been present in the construction materials making up the WTC buildings, and sulfur is present in the gypsum wallboard used for interior partitions.

more specious and silly musing by eots.
so tell me did some one sift through all that debris to seal away with all the sound proofing under their arm ?

no they used back hoes to scoop up tons of concrete dust fragments of office furniture ,carpets, fixtures, etc etc ect in one big heaping pile for dumping what would expect some fragments of soundproofing to look like in the midst of all that ?

 

[daws101]

Quote:
13. Did investigators consider the possibility that an explosion caused or contributed to the collapse of WTC 7?
Yes, this possibility was investigated carefully. NIST concluded that blast events inside the building did not occur and found no evidence supporting the existence of a blast event.
In addition, no blast sounds were heard on the audio tracks of video recordings during the collapse of WTC 7 or reported by witnesses.
completely false statement



thats only if you used the loudest explosive possible with no sound damping
and does not consider the use of thermite

.
yet NIST concludes the failure of a single column was the cause of the collapse how can it be both ways ?


so not impossible..they just.. feel..it was.. unlikely


THERMITE CUTTING STEEL - VALIDATED - EXPERIMENTALLY DEMONSTRATED -

THERMITE CUTTING STEEL - VALIDATED - EXPERIMENTALLY DEMONSTRATED - YouTube

more specious and silly musing by eots.
so tell me did some one sift through all that debris to seal away with all the sound proofing under their arm ?

no they used back hoes to scoop up tons of concrete dust fragments of office furniture ,carpets, fixtures, etc etc ect in one big heaping pile for dumping what would expect some fragments of soundproofing to look like in the midst of all that ?

so you're as always talking out your ass. besides that whole fantasy run counter to Barry Jennings yarn about explosives, if he heard them there is no reason to use sound proofing for one small explosion.

 

[Mr. Jones]

On this melted steel, I have done a far superior job at my task,

Stop! Please... My sides hurt from laughing....

Superior as in the only piece of evidence supporting your bullshit molten steel claims is visual identification???? I trumped that already asshole! There were no temperatures recorded, reported, measured, or analyzed showing temperatures hot enough to melt steel.

PERIOD.

You have absolutely nothing supporting your crazy claims. Let me guess. You want to bring in Harrit's Bentham paper findings? Please do so. I'll make you look stupid on that also.

You're nuts if you think you make any rational sense. It only takes an inquisitive, honest person to see that you have to keep reaching to new heights of absurdity, to say this, let alone even think it.
The temps reached extreme temps, it meted steel wreckage, it was recorded, reported, seen by eye witnesses, no molten pools of aluminum were reported, mentioned, or brought up in any conversation regarding the GZ wreckage being molten.
A reasonable person would consider these facts, and the others such, as the quantity of steel vs aluminum, where the aluminum was placed in/on the towers, where the molten steel was predominately seen, IE: in the centers of the towers, 70 feet deep, not to mention also in WTC 7..
You are delusional if you think reasonable people have not taken these facts into account, while also knowing NIST failed to address these extreme phenomena on purpose..

You are delusional and expect others to reasonably consider these glaring and obvious facts about the melted steel, extreme temps to CAUSE THE STEEL TO BE IN A MELTED STATE, and the willful ignoring of this important fact by NIST,?? Keep dreaming..

The facts are there for people to review, NIST purposefully ignored evidence on many occasions to perpetrate the lie that it was only important to concentrate on planes, fuel that burned well below the melting point of steel, but somehow managed to do so anyway for weeks after the event, and that the explosions with rapid squibs running down the buildings at even greater speeds then the floors could actually have been failing
and way 10-20-30 stories ahead of the "collapse" fronts...

These oddities have been pointed out by credible people in the related fields of study, and they have valid points regarding these facts...

Reasonable people also understand that assholes like yourselves are here to demonizing anyone who dares to challenge anyone, and everything that might undermine the government's claims.

You are here to argue that it is baseless to even question the official account of the 9-11 NIST report, and the other instances where it is obvious that elements of the government have lied to the American people, but you fail miserably.
You and the others stoop to new lows such as trying to blame the GZ workers for not "testing" the molten steel, when it was so fucking obvious what it was, and how it got that way...
You even try so hard to spin the NIST lies and disinformation away from them, by conjuring up pure fucking idiocy about car parts!!! LOL!!! and while trying to pretend the glaring NIST purposeful negligence is somehow meaningless....

It is obvious what a low life scumbag, anti American asshole you are, but you also have no integrity or an ounce of honesty in your spineless body....

I am here to point out why many Americans that include Senators, FBI agents, Doctors, Lawyers, Professors, Scientists, Engineers, Military veterans, CIA, and many more worldwide don't believe the lies that you try to defend and fail miserably at.
You would like to have Americans thinking that these credible people who have the guts to call out the bullshit of NIST and the criminal factions of the US government, when they can see and read it for themselves, are somehow worthy of being deemed and called idiots?
People can see and read all about the many reasons they are right and just and credible, and honest for speaking out against the liars and criminals who are systematically destroying their nation and their way of life, including the freedoms they have taken for granted here in America.

It's really sad when you try to put down others who actually care about their nation and call them names and ridicule them at every turn, when the idiot is you.
You squirm so very hard and whore yourself out and bring up fucking aluminum car parts??? LOL...What a fucking idiot YOU are to even think any reasonable American would ever take you seriously!!!

Your argument is an epic fail, and your rationality and logic is an embarrassment, even to other worthless traitors who try desperately to defend the indefensible...

 

[Gamolon]

blah, blah, blah...

Two things.

First.

There were no temperatures found that were high enough to melt steel. That is a fact and PROVES that what people perceived as molten steel was not molten steel at all. You even refused to acknowledge the eutectic findings.

Second and most important.

You and your idiot brethren have been at the same tired bullshit for 11 years now and you haven't accomplished a fucking thing. Except maybe funding Richard Gage's vacations and salary.... errr... "truth conventions".

How does that feel freak? You and your conspiracy theories get slapped around at every turn. You can't even get more than 1% of the total engineering population to support you. After 11 years!!!! How does it feel to be a failure after 11 years?

Ah well. You continue to have fun with that. I'm adding you to ignore as you have only idiocy left to blather on about.

Good luck with your future in futility...

 

[Mr. Jones]

It really is telling that not a single person who tries to defend the NIST and their willful negligence and non existent explanations, can actually point to any specifics within their report that can be called a "slam dunk" and actually answers anything that others have found objectionable....

I mean we got assholes in this thread, blaming GZ people, saying that hundreds of them are wrong, that it was most likely aluminum in the molted wreckage etc...But their reasons for wanting others to assume their positions can at all be considered the least bit plausible are
fucking shamefully hilarious...These assholes don't know when to stop making fools of themselves

There are many contradictions within the NIST investigation and the subsequent BS reports that real normal everyday folks, that have a semblance of rationality and integrity, and honesty can easily see.
The glaring contradictions and willful obfuscations that the anti American, anti freedom, and pro anti thinking segment in these threads think that they can actually justify BECAUSE NIST as a government controlled agency, WAS purposefully negligent, and avoided doing a real investigation that included ALL MANOR OF EVIDENCE!!! Are fucking obvious to observant American people..

What we are witnessing here are idiots who have no valid arguments for NIST and the OCT, and are appealing to others they hope are as scared and or intellectually dishonest as they are..

It really is so bad that they have resorted to having to disregard any rational thought or logic, and have stooped to speculating about obscure inconsequential aluminum fucking car parts LOL!!

The fact is that these desperate people only are here to slide blame away from the real
criminals who conducted and facilitated these murderous acts upon the nation they were sworn to protect...The NIST report is only a piece of the cover up, and millions know it, and more are tuning in and waking up about it, hence the desperation tactics of trying to lay blame on GZ workers, and the desperate and laughable attempt to even mention aluminum where non was mentioned or could have been present.
Simple common sense combined with the actual reports including eyewitnesses, and the structures themselves, including figures and calculations, that I have used and taken from one of their own so called "debunking sites" will attest to their failure to provide a rational argument against the hundreds of reports, and statements and sightings of this molten steel.
I mean how much more desperate does one get when he has to say that no temps hot enough to melt steel ever existed in the wreckage when all the evidence suggest otherwise? Including the presence of melted and dripping steel in the fucking wreckage itself???

The shills on this thread want Americans to trust the government and its agencies based on what?
The many verified instances that can be easily pointed out to show exactly the opposite?

Have they earned our trust? Or have they violated it over and over again? Those that have
an agenda to protect the cover up, and continue to perpetrate the lies that have been told to Americans and the world would surely want us to continue to be gullible trust them.

What is even more ludicrous is that they even show up in threads like this in packs to attack and ridicule anyone and everything that exposes the lies and criminal behavior of the NIST and the government agencies ,and they are making fools of themselves, while being stripped naked of any honesty, credibility, and integrity in their failed attempts to do so.

Fucking aluminum car parts ...Fucking seriously? You are one disgraceful weak son of a bitch.
With desperate and weak arguments such as those why should anyone in their right mind trust you and your insane opinions?

Again I ask why should any red blooded American man women or child trust NIST or the corrupt US government? Trust them based on what? Have they earned our trust? Or have they violated it over and over again? Is it really absurd to suspect them of heinous crimes when we've repeatedly caught them red-handed, and the instances of the many times they have lied can be pointed out?
And how exactly can we expect to expose any of their crimes if simply denying the charge and attacking their accuser is considered sufficient grounds for acquittal?
They have been exposed by their own works, and their defenders are hoping that we wont expose them, or that fear of ridicule is enough to curtail or halt thinking Americans from even questioning them.
We know the elite lie, we know they can be sadistic, we know they'll stop at nothing to secure and expand their power while diminishing those of the common American.
We know this has always been the case throughout history.
If that isn't enough to warrant healthy skepticism, what is?

It is never absurd to question the statements, motives, or actions, of extremely powerful people. To the contrary, all evidence suggests it is absurd not to.