High Rise Building "Experts Speak Out" about 9/11

There you go again. Unable to make an actual argument, you frantically default to authority.

Too bad your "authorities" are nincompoops.

- - - Updated - - -

Gage does not show us the behavior of all mass. He shows us the behavior of cardboard boxes.

Oh well. No party yet. The cake will have to wait.

 

Your high rise experts are bogus.. Gravity is very consistent.

The buildings were fragile and the planes cut their spines.

Anyone.. everyone .. who was familiar with the construction and design of the towers knew they were going to fall.. The miracle is that they didn't collapse sooner.

 

Every one of your claims is false and I've discredited them all as lies before. I'm not going through them all again, so I'll just pick out this one:-

"The red material contains grains approximately 100 nm across which are largely iron oxide, while aluminium is contained in tiny plate-like structures."

From the very first page of Harrit's paper.

http://www.benthamscience.com/open/tocpj/articles/V002/7TOCPJ.pdf

 

Really? So how do you manage to stand up without falling down?

This conversation is going to be very difficult while you possess the physics education of Herman Munster. Just sayin'.

 

Nice attack. Wrong hill. Let's compare the two statements:

Mine: "There is no evidence of individual elemental aluminum particles of any size in the red/gray chips."

His: "The red material contains grains approximately 100 nm across which are largely iron oxide, while aluminium is contained in tiny plate-like structures."

Thermite does not contain, either before or after combustion, "aluminium... contained in tiny plate-like structures." It contains individual particles of elemental aluminum.

Harrit's assertion is irrelevant hand waving. That you completely misunderstood it to be a contradiction of my statement only shows that Harrit has accomplished his purpose and misled another ignorant individual regarding the nature of his "evidence."

Thanks for playing. Try again.

 

Nano-thermite does.

Aluminium/aluminum nanoparticles are very reactive, and highly effective catalysts and combustion enhancers

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/prep.201000080/abstract



<<< MODERATOR EDIT: REDIRECT/FLAMEBAIT REMOVED >>>

 

No. It does not. And your link (which has nothing to do with thermite anyway) does not disagree with me. Right there in the abstract it says:

When you manage to reconcile "spherical" with "plate-like," come on back and try again.

Yes. They are. Too bad none were ever found in the WTC dust.

ETA: (since you edited your own post) Your second link also does nothing to help your claim. Why did you even bother to post the links? Did you hallucinate I would not look?

 

More lies.

Nano-Aluminum: Aluminum nanoparticles are used in a variety of applications, including but not limited to the following:-

Combustion catalyst for solid or liquid propellent.
Conductive coatings.
Thermal emission devices.

http://www.nanomaterialstore.com/nano-aluminum.php

A method for producing nanoscale, or ultra fine grain (UFG) aluminium powders, a key component of most nano-thermitic materials, is the dynamic gas-phase condensation method, pioneered by Wayne Danen and Steve Son at Los Alamos National Laboratory.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nano-thermite

 

The entity you are replying to is a professional, full time debunker who has been working several threads for almost a decade. He's just a phony wise ass posing as a Democrat fireman and all out expert on almost everything. Of course he's not being truthful. Cheers

 

In the 1940s ARAMCO engineers kept thermite on the top shelves of their bachelor barrasities in case they had to blow the wells because of operation Orient..

 

So... I'm curious. Are you simply too dense to even understand what point you are trying to make? It is as if you are a blind boxer, flailing desperately in the ring hoping that purely by accident you might land a punch. Because nobody has ever said that aluminum is not a component of thermite or nano-thermite.

Here is the issue: All your sources, (when they acknowledge any shape at all) explain that aluminum nano-particles are 1) spherical, and 2) composed of elemental aluminum... period. Nothing even vaguely resembling that has been found in any of the WTC dust.

Harrit says (and you quote him) that "aluminium is contained in tiny plate-like structures."

Here is a sphere:



Here is a plate:



And more to the point... the "plates" that Harrit describes are not elemental aluminum. Instead, they merely "contain" aluminum along with other substances.

Whatever they are... (and we know what they are... kaolin clays from paint) they have nothing to do with thermite.

Come on back when you feel the urge to get slapped around some more.

- - - Updated - - -

Anybody who actually believes that there are such things as " professional, full time debunkers" is already pretty much beyond help.

 

So am I. Why is your tone still condescending after I've just shown that you've lied three times? Do you think I'm going to read your lengthy efforts to avenge being exposed as dishonest?

I'm not.

 

"Separation of components using methyl ethyl ketone demonstrated that elemental aluminium is present."

Harrit's paper, first page.

http://www.benthamscience.com/open/tocpj/articles/V002/7TOCPJ.pdf

 

Get a grip Margot...What kind of an architect would design a fragile 110 story building to be placed into the most densely populated area in the US? What kind of building inspectors would sign off on it. Also, "anyone and everyone who is familiar with the construction of the towers knew they were going to fall" is a bunch of ridiculous crap.

Cheers

 

Okay... you have now leaped downwards to an additional level of density.

The fact that components even needed to be separated with methyl ethyl ketone at all proves that the aluminum did not exist as nano particles of elemental aluminum but was instead "contained" in those plates of kaolin clay along with the other substances from which it had to be "separated."

First rule of holes, QH. Stop digging.

- - - Updated - - -

I have to tell you... the truthers on this forum are much larger intellectual cowards than those I have encountered on any other Internet forum,

 

Any architect with a budget. That would be pretty much every architect. This of course recognizes (as your goofy comment did not) that "fragile" is a relative term.

 

Am I the only person here entertained by the apparent fact that QH's understanding of Harrit's paper extends no further than the abstract? It is certainly the only part of the paper I have ever seen you quote from.

Be honest, QH. You actually have no idea what Harrit is even talking about. Do you?

 

I haven't needed to go beyond that yet because every lie you've so far told has been discredited by the end of the first page of Harrit's paper.

 

LOL... you still don't even understand the argument we're having. I have to tell you, it is no great insult being called a liar by somebody who can't tell the difference between a sphere and a plate, or a particle of elemental aluminum from a chip of kaolin clay.

 

Thermite thread here.

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=293132

No thermite was ever found at WTC. Period.

See post here;

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=293132&p=1062588419#post1062588419

 

Also worth mentioning is that even Harrit's paper never actually comes out and concludes that there was thermite or nano-thermite found in the dust from the WTC collapses. He spends a lot of time implying shenanigans, yet has not the balls to come out and actually say so. The closest he comes is:

My observations of truthers remind me of lots of things. I am too much a gentleman to list them here.

 

Point being that the paper truthers as the gospel of their thermite argument (very few of which have even read it) does not find thermite. At all. The papers conclusions do not match their results. What's more, nothing has ever come of it. Ron Wieck puts it best;

http://youtu.be/2-bdE3uZ5GI?t=12m56s

 

The Ports Authority increased the height of the buildings.

The towers wouldn't have come down if two planes hadn't cut the spine out of them.

Yamasaki devised the plan to incorporate twin towers; Yamasaki's original plan called for the towers to be 80 stories tall, but to meet the Port Authority's requirement for 10,000,000 square feet (930,000 m2) of office space, the buildings would each have to be 110 stories .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Center#Architectural_design

 

Harrit shows himself to be a charlatan by not recognizing that everything he looked at in his chips is supposed to be in PAINT and NONE of it in the super-nano-banano thermite he claimed it to be.

 

Harrit is a 20 year tenured professor of chemistry at Denmark's top university. I think I'll take his expert opinion over total random lies, but thanks for the input.