• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

New theory on 9/11 "Controlled Demolition"

Free episodes:

Status
Not open for further replies.
dB, this is the conspiracy thread. i assumed it is for conspiracy discussions. putting someone with valid points on ignore is a little silly. everyone has a right to their opinions, if we all put someone on ignore because we do not believe what they say, we wouldnt have a forum. fight or flight i say.
 
why do anubis and dB cruise this thread if they do not want to learn something? i am more than willing to look at any evidence you both have to refute what i have posted. i am not afraid of being wrong. go for it.
 
dB, this is the conspiracy thread. i assumed it is for conspiracy discussions. putting someone with valid points on ignore is a little silly. everyone has a right to their opinions, if we all put someone on ignore because we do not believe what they say, we wouldnt have a forum. fight or flight i say.

I have on several occasions posted facts which do not fit this silly theory of yours, and you simply ignore them and insinuate I am an idiot. Now you are wondering why David recommended I put you on ignore.

I could care less what kind of metallurgical experiments you do in your basement. It is obvious you know absolutely nothing about thermite, its composition, its use, nor its effects. However, for the sake of demonstrating once again how stupid this theory is, I will make one more post.

In post #14, you claim that you "know there were explosions in the basements and main floors before the towers fell" and that these explosions were responsible for "molten iron" presumably from the use of thermite.

Unfortunately, that is 100% false.

Thermite cannot be ignited using an explosion. The heat that is required to start the reaction that causes thermite burn in excess of 4000F requires an amount of heat capable of melting the base metal the thermite is made from (most commonly aluminum). Thermite will not ignite when it is red-hot, it requires to be white-hot for ignition to begin. These temperatures cannot be reached with conventional black powder fuses, nitrocellulose rods, detonators, pyrotechnic initiators, or other common igniting substances. However, other metals such as magnesium can be ignited and then used to light the thermite.

Given that thermite cannot be ignited by conventional explosives, how was it ignited? And, more appropriately, what were the reasons for the alleged explosions in the basement moments before the towers fell? If these explosions were the cause of the "controlled detonation" as you claim, the thermite was not used to bring the towers down. If thermite was used, there would have been no explosions. As such, your entire theory begins to unravel. If thermite was not used, then the "molten steel" in the basement of the WTC must have come from the structure itself. If that is the case, then there is no need to think that the building fell for any other reason than a plane flew into it and ignited several floors which led to the eventual weakening of the structural integrity of the steel and concrete that held it together.

Thermite itself is not used for the purposes you claim. It is mostly used as for welding large steel rods together such as railway tracks. As for military uses, thermite grenades were often used to destroy enemy artillery installations. However, the thermite was not used to reduce artillery to molten puddles of steel. It was used to obstruct the barrels of artillery weapons by dropping a thermite grenade inside the barrel and making the weapon very dangerous to shoot. Alternatively, the grenades were forced into the breach of artillery weapons and the breach was closed. The thermite would then weld the breach shut making the weapon impossible to load. Thermite was not used to destroy bridges or buldings. There are simply far better conventional weapons and explosives suited for that purpose.

All of what I have stated in regards to the properties of thermite, structural steel and the internal temperatures of burning buildings can easily be verified in minutes using Google, on conventional websites that were authored by someone other than paranoid nutters badly in need of anti-psychotic meds.

BTW: This is the part where you completely ignore everything I wrote, hit reply and tell me I am an idiot and need to do more research. You can save yourself the trouble. By this time it should be obvious to everyone still reading this thread who is backing up their points posting factual information and who is writing fairy tales.
 
Pixelsmith:

As an addendum, I looked up the basic principals of thermite, its composition and uses:

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

The thought of using a welding medium to bring down the WTC has to be one of the most ridiculous ideas I have heard yet.

Anubis you are right that the thermite story is rediculous. The whole thermite idea is bullshit, and when the problems with it are raised, the idea of this "super thermite" is always brought up. It's crap! There is no such thing.




and for the record, YES, I am a f**king expert

I too find it insulting that someone here keeps using the phrase "if you knew anything about it".....considering the intelligence level of the people posting here, it's beyond insulting, there are thousands of hours of research into the subject that have been done, and I suspect there are more Doctorates here then people will admit as well, well I'm not humble, I'm a f**king PhD in chemistry so when I say it's crap, I ain't pulling this sh*t out of my ass, tell me I don't know what I'm talking about after 8 years of university study and another 11 years as a chemist. I'm a Canadian, am I working for the government? I could give a f**k about the American government, the science does not fit.

Oh, what, the building was made of steel, it was just a little aluminum airplane that hit it? F**k are you serious? It was 400,000 kilograms of aircraft flying at several hundred MPH, anyone want to do the math on the kinetic energy that was conveyed from the aircraft to the stationary buildings on the impacts? Gee let's see, kinetic energy = 1/2 mv squared, m being mass in kgs, v being speed in meters per second.....

ah &*@(@@(@9 why the hell am I bothering?
 
*sigh*

This topic.....

You know what, it was 19 Arabs and that was it. Maybe if I lie to myself enough I will believe it? Then I don't have to see arguements that lead to nowhere and from people who likely haven't oped the 9/11 Commission Report or met a 1st responder. No wonder our society can get ripped off from trillions of dollars. It's a wasted arguement. Thanks ego-maniacs, feds, and misguided folks. The question is when it happens again will we lie to ourselves again or will we stand up? We will do nothing because we are a weak society that is an easy mark that is filled with a laughing, uninformed society of dopes.
 
*sigh*

This topic.....

You know what, it was 19 Arabs and that was it. Maybe if I lie to myself enough I will believe it? Then I don't have to see arguements that lead to nowhere and from people who likely haven't oped the 9/11 Commission Report or met a 1st responder. No wonder our society can get ripped off from trillions of dollars. It's a wasted arguement. Thanks ego-maniacs, feds, and misguided folks. The question is when it happens again will we lie to ourselves again or will we stand up? We will do nothing because we are a weak society that is an easy mark that is filled with a laughing, uninformed society of dopes.

your my hero
 
"Confusion to your Enemys"

i imagine the people (if any survive) responsible for this act, would be laughing themselves silly to think even a tiny percentage of the enemys population would blame their own govt for this.....

confusion indeed.

i know America wants to "own" 911, but the truth is it was a slap in the face to every civilised intellect on the planet.

to my mind ignoring the facts while promoting a conspiracy based on nothing more than speculation, is doing the bastards work for them

if your "confused" about who did this and why, then youve played right into their hands

i would not at all be surprised to find that these "theorys" originate from the same place , the same ideology as the original attack came from.

with the same purpose, to destabilise your trust in your way of life. to make you nervous and keep you second guessing.

just as i defend the conspiracy theorists right to free speech on this, i'll exercise my own and say i think its utterly disgraceful to make these suggestions.
its your right to say it, and mine to say i think its great disservice to your govt to accuse them of this, and a great dishonour to offer the victims and family
 
"Confusion to your Enemys"

i imagine the people (if any survive) responsible for this act, would be laughing themselves silly to think even a tiny percentage of the enemys population would blame their own govt for this.....

confusion indeed.

i know America wants to "own" 911, but the truth is it was a slap in the face to every civilised intellect on the planet.

to my mind ignoring the facts while promoting a conspiracy based on nothing more than speculation, is doing the bastards work for them

if your "confused" about who did this and why, then youve played right into their hands

i would not at all be surprised to find that these "theorys" originate from the same place , the same ideology as the original attack came from.

with the same purpose, to destabilise your trust in your way of life. to make you nervous and keep you second guessing.

just as i defend the consiracy theorists right to free speech on this, i'll exercise my own and say i think its utterly disgraceful to make these suggestions.
its your right to say it, and mine to say i think its great disservice to your govt to accuse them of this, and a great dishonour to offer the victims and family

What about the very family members who openly ask these questions? Are they a disgrace to themselves or does that only apply when you want to label people? Go look up Bill Doyle and tell him and his group of 9/11 family members that they are "dishonoring" themselves. I am sure they will apperciate it.
 
It was 400,000 kilograms of aircraft flying at several hundred MPH, anyone want to do the math on the kinetic energy that was conveyed from the aircraft to the stationary buildings on the impacts? Gee let's see, kinetic energy = 1/2 mv squared, m being mass in kgs, v being speed in meters per second.....

ah &*@(@@(@9 why the hell am I bothering?

you are bothering because the uneducated, such as me, would like to know how it gets figured out. I have absolutely no skills in advanced math, and no clue how to figure out those things. so, Professor, please continue from where you were before you were so rudely interrupted by frustration, some of us really do want to know.
 
you are bothering because the uneducated, such as me, would like to know how it gets figured out. I have absolutely no skills in advanced math, and no clue how to figure out those things. so, Professor, please continue from where you were before you were so rudely interrupted by frustration, some of us really do want to know.

You're smarter then you know my dear :p

but if you really want to know then we need some real numbers, I'll use 400,000 kilograms as the weight of a 747 just because that's a good rough number for one, they run between 800,000 and 1,000,000 pounds depending on the exact model and it's payload. We need a speed of travel for the planes, the speeds have been estimated widely to be somewhere between 400 and 600 MPH, so let's use 500 MPH just for simplicity. Now we need to convert 500 MPH to meters per second which is 223.52 m/s.

So, returning to our equation,

Energy kinetic = 1/2 x 400,000 x 224squared,
Energy kinetic = 1/2 x 400,000 x (224 x 224)
Energy kinetic = 1/2 x 400,000 x 50,176
Energy kinetic = 1/2 x 20070400000
Energy kinetic = .5 x 20,070,400,000
Energy kinetic = 10,035,200,000 joules

if my quick calculations are correct, that's 10,035,200,000 joules, to put that in perspective, a ton of dynamite exploding is approx. 4,200,000,000 joules so divide 10,035,200,000 by 4,200,000,000 gets you 2.3893333 or 2.4 for simplicity. So lets say the planes hit with the energy of 2.4 tons or 5376 pounds of TNT. That's just the potential energy that the moving planes had to transfer into the structure, and that's not at all talking about the energy that must have been produced by the blast wave when the fuel tanks exploded.

should also mention, say the plane were going 600 mph, that 50,176 becomes something over 70,000
 
Do I think that bush and his inner circle new about 9/11 and just set back so they could go and screw us over, absolutely. But on the other hand, controlled demolition, holograms of planes, all those passengers in some compound in the middle of nowhere, gives me a break.
 
Thanks Status 4, aka Science Guru! that makes perfectly logical sense.

Now, on to the molten metal that is referred to still existing after 3 months. Is that credible? If it is accurate, what could account for that?

What happened to building 7? I also read that it was purposely demolished as it was believed the structure would have been compromised by the collapse of the two towers nearby. Why would that be considered a valid statement when so many high-rises have been safely demolished without compromising the integrity of next-door structures?

Many, many strange bits and pieces, many explanations offered, and maybe it is like UFOs. It is so fantastical, we cannot believe it could be natural.
 
Thanks Status 4, aka Science Guru! that makes perfectly logical sense.

Now, on to the molten metal that is referred to still existing after 3 months. Is that credible? If it is accurate, what could account for that?

What happened to building 7? I also read that it was purposely demolished as it was believed the structure would have been compromised by the collapse of the two towers nearby. Why would that be considered a valid statement when so many high-rises have been safely demolished without compromising the integrity of next-door structures?

Many, many strange bits and pieces, many explanations offered, and maybe it is like UFOs. It is so fantastical, we cannot believe it could be natural.

Annette, this idea that the towers fell straight down into their own foundations without touching anything else is utter bunk as well. Dozens of buildings around the complex were damaged, there is one photo which I can't find at the moment, which shows a chunk of the steel frame from one of the towers embedded in the side of another tower. The piece of metal was guessed to be about 30 tons from what I remember, pretty crappy demo job in that case. How about St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church, 155 Cedar St. some 500 ft away from the twin towers, it collapsed and was buried under the debris.

Check out http://www.preserve.org/wtc/index.htm They have an extensive list of the buildings damaged.

90 West St. It was on fire for a day and a half after the fall

130 Liberty St. 40 story tower. A hole torn in the building 24 stories in height, more then half the building.

The Verizon Building

Steel thrown from the collapsing towers went through the building and pierced an underground vault that housed phone lines. A hole in the East side of the building reached from the ground to the 8th floor. 2 foot wide steel columns were bent inward from where WTC 7 fell against the East side of the Verizon building.

What happened to WTC 7? , let's ask the firefighters who were there;



Richard Banaciski of Ladder 22

"-- we actually searched the Verizon building,
because there was reports of fires in there. Basically our
whole house searched that building.

They told us to get out of there because they were
worried about 7 World Trade Center, which is right behind it,
coming down. We were up on the upper floors of the Verizon
building looking at it. You could just see the whole bottom
corner of the building was gone. We could look right out over
to where the Trade Centers were because we were that high up.
Looking over the smaller buildings. I just remember it was
tremendous, tremendous fires going on.

Finally they pulled us out. They said all right,
get out of that building because that 7, they were really
worried about. They pulled us out of there and then they
regrouped everybody on Vesey Street, between the water and
West Street. They put everybody back in there.

Finally it did come down."

Obviously he's working for the NWO. Probably a government agent.


Lieutenant William Ryan, Ladder 85

"A little north of Vesey I said, we’ll go down,
let’s see what’s going on. A couple of the other officers
and I were going to see what was going on. We were told to
go to Greenwich and Vesey and see what’s going on. So we go
there and on the north and east side of 7 it didn’t look like
there was any damage at all, but then you looked on the south
side of 7 there had to be a hole 20 stories tall in the
building, with fire on several floors. Debris was falling down
on the building and it didn’t look good.

But they had a hoseline operating. Like I said, it was hitting
the sidewalk across the street, but eventually they pulled
back too. Then we received an order from Fellini, we’re going
to make a move on 7. That was the first time really my stomach
tightened up because the building didn’t look good. I was
figuring probably the standpipe systems were shot. There was
no hydrant pressure. I wasn’t really keen on the idea. Then
this other officer I’m standing next to said, that building
doesn’t look straight. So I’m standing there. I’m looking at
the building. It didn’t look right, but, well, we’ll go in,
we’ll see.


So we gathered up rollups and most of us had masks at that
time. We headed toward 7. And just around we were about a
hundred yards away and Butch Brandies came running up. He
said forget it, nobody’s going into 7, there’s creaking, there
are noises coming out of there, so we just stopped. And
probably about 10 minutes after that, Visconti, he was on
West Street, and I guess he had another report of further
damage either in some basements and things like that, so
Visconti said nobody goes into 7, so that was the final
thing and that was abandoned."

He's a government stooge for sure!

As for the hot spots, most of the heat was gone by the 23rd.
Keep in mind though, these images they are from Nasa, so they are in
on the plot.
 

Attachments

  • hotspots-compare.jpg
    hotspots-compare.jpg
    79.2 KB · Views: 25
What about the very family members who openly ask these questions? Are they a disgrace to themselves or does that only apply when you want to label people? Go look up Bill Doyle and tell him and his group of 9/11 family members that they are "dishonoring" themselves. I am sure they will apperciate it.

my take on that is that these people are still angry about what happened to them and are looking for someone to blame and punish.
unable to do so with the persons responsible (who are dead and beyond their reach), they invent a new target, one they can actually sink their teeth into.

its a classic stage one and three of the 5 phases of grief as the process is typically observed
 
my take on that is that these people are still angry about what happened to them and are looking for someone to blame and punish.
unable to do so with the persons responsible (who are dead and beyond their reach), they invent a new target, one they can actually sink their teeth into.

its a classic stage one and three of the 5 phases of grief as the process is typically observed

I agree with you
 
Status4:

I wish to say I apologize for my last post. I wrote that this moring when I was half asleep and thought it was a sarcastic retort directed at me. I just reread what yuo typed and realized I completely misunderstood you.

Some of the foolishness being touted as 'facts' in this thread, along with the behaviour of some of the posters participating in iit, has had the unfortunate effect of setting the tone of my replies to 'auto flame'. Again, my ire should not have been directed at you.

Thank you for posting the math behind the kinetic energy of a 175,000 to 220,000 lbs aircraft flying at 500 miles an hour. I cannot even fathom how anyone could possibly argue the impact of such a weight on the WTC would cause little to no structural damage.

Again, my apologies and thanks for your insight.
 
Now, on to the molten metal that is referred to still existing after 3 months. Is that credible? If it is accurate, what could account for that?

This alleged phenomena is attributed to the use of thermite to bring down the towers. While thermite burns in excess of 4000F and is quite capable of melting through iron girders, it is consumed rather quickly and could no way continue burning for three months.

Here is a Wiki on the general principals of this compound, its composition and usage broken down into layman's terms:

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

I strongly encourage you to have a look at the information I have provided and come to your own conclusions. Remember, this theory would require literally hundreds, if not thousands of pounds of this compund in order to bring the towers down and be responsible for the "lake" of molten iron that allegedly remained heated in excess of 2200F for "months".

Again, the very idea that several hundred pounds of a chemical burning in excess of 4000F at ground level in lower Manhattan undetected for months is about as ridiculous as the idea that the moon is made from green cheese.
 
Status4:

I wish to say I apologize for my last post. I wrote that this moring when I was half asleep and thought it was a sarcastic retort directed at me. I just reread what yuo typed and realized I completely misunderstood you.

Some of the foolishness being touted as 'facts' in this thread, along with the behaviour of some of the posters participating in iit, has had the unfortunate effect of setting the tone of my replies to 'auto flame'. Again, my ire should not have been directed at you.

Thank you for posting the math behind the kinetic energy of a 175,000 to 220,000 lbs aircraft flying at 500 miles an hour. I cannot even fathom how anyone could possibly argue the impact of such a weight on the WTC would cause little to no structural damage.

Again, my apologies and thanks for your insight.

No worries, I kind of thought you might have misunderstood me. I quoted your post to start because I agree with you on the whole thermite thing, but yes the rest of the post was directed elsewhere, probably should have been 2 posts, but I figured the big space was enough. Thanks for the apology though, was wondering why I was getting it for being in agreement with you. :)
 
This alleged phenomena is attributed to the use of thermite to bring down the towers. While thermite burns in excess of 4000F and is quite capable of melting through iron girders, it is consumed rather quickly and could no way continue burning for three months.

Here is a Wiki on the general principals of this compound, its composition and usage broken down into layman's terms:

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

I strongly encourage you to have a look at the information I have provided and come to your own conclusions. Remember, this theory would require literally hundreds, if not thousands of pounds of this compund in order to bring the towers down and be responsible for the "lake" of molten iron that allegedly remained heated in excess of 2200F for "months".

Again, the very idea that several hundred pounds of a chemical burning in excess of 4000F at ground level in lower Manhattan undetected for months is about as ridiculous as the idea that the moon is made from green cheese.


I remember watching the news whenever I stopped for gas on that day, trying to catch on to what the hell happened, seeing the towers falling over and over in endlessly repeating loops of film.

I do not doubt the evidence of the people on the street, the reporters working the scene, the emergency personnel desperate to find their buddies in all the rubble and bodies, the grieving families and friends posting photos on the wall, hoping against hope their search would end happily.

But I do submit questions that I hope are logical, thinking maybe calm and rational questions and answers will speak more for the truth than easily tossed insults directed towards conspiracy believers and also conspiracy debunkers ever will.

Belief is fine, if you are looking for the tooth fairy. Facts are better if you are looking for answers.

just my take on this.
 
Just to confirm, is the story still that one of the 'hijackers' was identified after his passport was found on the ground in Manhattan?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top