Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Yet still, even MORE photos of angle slices on WTC beams identical to cuts used in demolitions.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
 
StrictlyRockers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 01:48 AM
Original message
Yet still, even MORE photos of angle slices on WTC beams identical to cuts used in demolitions.








I'm sure the OCTers will have a ready explanation for ALL of these photos that are coming out. They all show steel beams that were sliced through in the identical manner used by controlled demolition experts.

I can't wait so see the mental gymnastics these photos may elicit from the true believers by way of explanation.

SR
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 01:53 AM
Response to Original message
1. What is the source? Are they newly released?
The cuts are so clean . . . looks like that new patented thermite cutting method got an early workout
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
StrictlyRockers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 02:05 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. A couple of these are new to me. I saw them for the first time 6 days ago.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vd1-Dp_-7WI

This video helps explain why the cuts look the way they do. At 8:50 into it is the relevant part.

SR
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 02:37 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. Freeze it between 8:13-8:15
No way that plane exited the other side that fast.

Excellent video. Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 02:16 AM
Response to Original message
3. No mental gymastics needed...
Edited on Fri Feb-23-07 02:20 AM by SidDithers
those are welders cuts, used to cut beams into manageable sizes for removal.

And these photos are not just "coming out". They've been out for years.

Sid

Edit to add link to people who know what they're talking about:
http://www.hobartwelders.com/mboard/showthread.php?t=19417&highlight=thermite
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PerpetualYnquisitive Donating Member (218 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 02:39 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. If that was 'cut' by a torch....
wouldn't the slag be located on the inside of that beam, seeing as cutting metal with a torch tends to cause the slag to accumulate on the opposite side of the metal that the torch is cutting through.

The flame that is produced by a cutting torch is pressurized, which blows most of the slag off of the face of the cut, coupled with the fact that the reverse side of the metal will cool faster than the side facing the torch, allowing the slag to harden quicker and causing more of the slag to 'stick' to the reverse side.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 02:52 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. That's addressed by the welders at the link provided...
they can explain it better than I:

The slag on the face of the beam facing the camera clearly shows that side of the beam was cut AFTER the beam was tipped over! Any cuts from the outside would put a slag pile like that on the INSIDE of the beam.

Look at the picture again! the beam was cut on the 3 far sides, tipped over, and the face was cut. Clearly torchwork to clear debris.


http://www.hobartwelders.com/mboard/showpost.php?s=6a9e08fb4e5146d48085fe5823676ed1&p=212860&postcount=15

Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 03:02 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. Several facts that indicate it was not a torch cut:
Edited on Fri Feb-23-07 03:06 AM by Contrite
http://www.centralmass911truth.org/diagonalcolumncut.html

f you are an experienced torch cutter, light or heavy metal doesn’t matter, the principles are much the same. There are several facts that indicate it was not a torch cut:


1. No cut from a torch accumulates that much hanging slag. Most slag is blown away; this volume would indicate melting with abundant, directed heat but with little or no air pressure eliminating blow torch possibility.
2. Slag cools too quickly. To drip that long, with the beam itself vertical, that much slag would separate and fall to the ground, and would never drip that far even with that bad a cut. The suggested explanation of Thermate with no air pressure at a much higher temperature would account for this.
3. No experienced torch cutter would take a diagonal cut on 4” thick steel tube. And why would even an inexperienced one do so? There would be no possible reason to do it where a horizontal cut is possible, even if above the cut was bent in the direction towards the lower horizontal cut. And the upper horizontal cut can be seen to be cut also on a downward angle thru the steel. No one would angle from horizontal on 4” thick steel and increase the cut to 5 or 6” thick.
4. No one would cut on an angle thinking that it will cause a standing structure to fall a certain direction, just ask any lumberjack.
5. Any metal cutter would also question why the rear cut is not a straight line and it dips drastically in one spot, this indicates possibly the remains of a round cut which would allow inserting Thermate charges inside of the tube to conceal them (more on this regarding the second photo).
6. Someone implied to me that the cutter would have his hand inside the tube cutting the last horizontal leg to explain the slag on the lower horizontal cut. Impossible, that would mean that 3 legs were cut, and then the beam bent so he could reach inside? You would see evidence of the bend if it was bent before final cutting, and you would see evidence of bending at the conclusion of the cut as the weight takes control. Highly unlikely, and there would be few experienced heavy gauge metal cutters who would agree with the torch cut theory.

Here is a supporting document at http://dirk-gerhardt.homepage.t-online.de/Bilder/WTC-controlleddemolition.pdf

(more at first link as well)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 03:15 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. Sorry, I'll take the opinion of welders on a welding board...
over the writings of "Sitting-Bull, 911 truth think tank germany". The welders have no agenda. Can't say the same for Sitting-Bull.

Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jberryhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 05:04 PM
Response to Reply #8
15. Totally Wrong

First, the idea that a welder wouldn't make such a cut is flatly contradicted by a welder MAKING SUCH A CUT at the WTC cleanup site:



Closeup:



A lot of beams were sticking up, and entire sections of beams had to be pulled over. So, yes of course, they made angle cuts.

What's pretty funny is that in this picture, you can see the torch rig sitting right next to the cut beams:



Don't tell me, let me guess, they placed cutting torch rigs near the angle-cut beams during the cleanup, so that people would only THINK they were cutting the beams that way. Then, they put that guy up in the bucket in order to make the same kinds of cuts.

Right.

If you actually READ what the disinterested welders on the Hobart forum say, you'll notice that they refer to making a hole in order to cut large box beams from the inside-out.

Why?

Because if you run a torch across the face from the outside-in, YOU CAN'T SEE IF YOU ARE CUTTING ALL OF THE WAY THROUGH.

That's why when you cut a box beam you do it from the inside-out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Lone Groover Donating Member (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 04:06 AM
Response to Reply #15
28. I have a question about that picture...
It's genuine because I really don't know the answer.

How deep do those cutting torches cut? That beam must be at least 4 foot thick. The angled cut on the side facing wasn't done from the photographer side because the metal bar in front is still intact so it must have been done from the welder side.

Do cutting torches act like laser beams over four foot distances?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 05:16 AM
Response to Reply #28
29. I believe the answer is
that the workers are cutting one side at a time. They don't cut through the entire beam or column at once. The beam may be 4 feet across, but it's hollow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Lone Groover Donating Member (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 05:20 AM
Response to Reply #29
30. OK Boloboffin...
...you don't think the uncut bar in front of the cut presents a problem to your theory?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 05:28 AM
Response to Reply #30
31. Nope. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Lone Groover Donating Member (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 05:32 AM
Response to Reply #31
32. Really?
How did the beam get cut behind the metal bar then? I'd be interested in your theory.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vincent_vega_lives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 07:46 AM
Response to Reply #32
75. Cutting through the bar would be pointless
Metal workers are used to saving time and resources.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jberryhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #32
91. Jiminy Christmas...

You can't figure that out, when there is already a link to a bunch of welders discussing the topic?

If you are cutting a beam like an I-beam, then you can see the torch flame coming through the other side of the metal.

But you can't do that when you are cutting a box beam.

In order to make sure you are cutting *through* the side of a box beam, you have to first make a hole in the beam to get the torch tip inside, and then you have to cut from the inside of the box *outwards*.

Otherwise, the only thing you are doing is running a torch across a beam, with no idea whether you are actually cutting all the way through the metal.

That's really not glaringly obvious?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vincent_vega_lives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 07:47 AM
Response to Reply #28
76. Holy crap Batman
:eyes: Dude you need less 'Lone' and more grooving.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PerpetualYnquisitive Donating Member (218 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 03:36 AM
Response to Reply #6
11. That seems doubtful as,
the cut at the bottom is practically a perfectly straight line, albeit on a bit of an angle. The person making this cut would most likely have to work with their torch in an inverted position as it is 'countersunk' below the edge of the 'cut' on either side, unless you want to argue that they were standing 'inside' the beam, which would make cutting a line that straight very difficult.

Another strange thing I have noticed is that the thickness of the bottom edge seems to be too thin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 03:44 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. Why don't you ask the welders?...
Seems to me, that once the three outside cuts are made, and then the beam is tipped over, with the one remaining edge acting as the hinge, the only way to cut the final edge would be from the inside. No, I don't mean that the welder is standing inside the beam, but that the exposed cutting area is now the inside face of the front of the beam.

Perhaps the hinging of the beam at that lower edge accounts for any "thinning" that you're seeing.

Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 09:12 PM
Response to Reply #12
18. This guy disagrees.
http://worcester.indymedia.org/news/2006/12/6795_comment.php

Repost from the tail end of the WTC fires thread: DIAGONAL BEAM CUT See, The problem is, of course, all evidence is debatable and can be supported from both sides. Government supporting story would be that the supporting column (one of the 47 that the 9/11 Commission Report claims doesn't exist) was cut by iron workers clearing debris. Could be supported by: -testimony from steel worker who cut it (none known) -testimony from eyewitnesses who saw him cut it or gave the order to cut (none known) -looks similar to molten slag from a blow torch cut -Photographer testifying that it was done after iron workers got started cutting steel (not known) Our story claims it was cut by thermate charges to relieve the strength of the supporting columns. Could be supported by: -Shows classic dripping slag from thermate melting -the perfectly angled cut is a classic characteristic of a demolition application to relieve the central support columns -there are piles of rubble everywhere, the metal smiths would not likely be hacking at an undamaged beam to rescue people -any metal smith can tell you that slag does not drip like shown since most slag is blown away and only a ribbon of slag remains above and below the cut typically with maybe a short drip or 2.. -any metal smith can also tell you that any cut would have been traced completely around the outside of the column, torch cutting does not leave slag on the outside of a cut, only on the backside. YOU SHOULD NOT HAVE SLAG dripping on the outside. This proves it was not torch cut and that it was Thermate, with no air pressure behind it which is why there is slag "running" down the inside and outside. -any metal cutter would also question why the rear cut is not a straight line, or why the cuts are not straight or horizontal all the way around.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've used a cutting torch to cut steel before and my experience squares with what this person says. I've never seen molten steel drip like the way it did in the picture. Also, the drips would have been on the inside.

http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=othertheories&action=display&thread=1172112745&page=1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hack89 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 09:24 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. But these photos don't support thermite as the source of ..
the pools of molten steel. None of the columns are melted or deformed by the thermite - even the cuts are not smooth. And the slag on the columns is further proof that the molten steel could not have come from thermite - it all appears to have solidified on the columns.

So what's going on here?

And by the way - are you familiar with thermal lances? A common salvage tool that cuts with temperatures close to those of thermite.

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

http://www.auburn1.com/furnace/lancing.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 09:41 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. There is a new patented thermite cutting process discussed here before
Edited on Fri Feb-23-07 09:45 PM by Contrite
that produces straight, geometric cuts using thermite--specifically, gets rid of "sawtoothed" edges that up until now have been characteristic of thermite. The invention was patented first in 2000, completed testing prior to that, and an ancillary patent application on this invention is pending from 2006.

The discussion was not about molten steel but about the cuts. The link I provided above argues there WOULD be slag from thermite but NOT from a welder's cutting torch.

Did you see photos of any thermal lances on the site?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hack89 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 07:00 AM
Response to Reply #20
39. But where does the molten steel come from?
Since we need pictures to prove any point - show me a picture that proves that the new thermite cutting process actually works and was built. A picture of a sample cut in a controlled environment would be useful for comparison purposes.

Why would a common salvage tool not be used at ground zero? These are not new or uncommon tools - just google it.

Is is safe to assume then that you do not believe that the molten steel comes from the thermite cutting charges? If that slag is from thermite than according to your evidence it could not have pooled in a molten form.




















Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 11:25 PM
Response to Reply #39
58. Thermite produces molten iron slag per the patent description.
Edited on Sun Feb-25-07 12:18 AM by Contrite
The company that produced it is Spectre. I guess one could dig up some documentation or photography. I did see a graphic showing the ancillary patent device that "ganged" the cutters together.

Here is a link: http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6183569-claims.html

Description provided:

http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6183569-description.html

1. Field of the Invention

The present invention generally relates to an apparatus and method for cutting target material. The present invention more particularly relates to an apparatus and method for cutting target material of a substantial thickness using a thermite based charge.

2. Description of the Prior Art

A number of devices for cutting materials of a substantial thickness are known in the art. Many of these devices employ explosive shaped charges which deliver energy to the surface of a material in the form of a high pressure, high velocity shock front. The conical or "V" shaped charge, for example, explodes and focuses cutting energy onto the surface of the material to be cut. A primary disadvantage of explosive shaped charges is that they generate excessive noise and debris upon detonation. This noise and debris can pose potentially serious health and safety hazards to someone using a cutting device which employs conventional shaped charge explosives.

Thermite-based cutting devices which employ a cutting flame produce virtually no extended shock wave and generate relatively little over pressure. Thermite-based cutting devices do not present the same health and safety hazards which are attendant upon explosive shape charge cutting devices.

U.S. Pat. No. 2,587,243 discloses an apparatus for producing a gaseous penetrating jet for cutting materials or objects. This patent uses a chemical charge which, when detonated, ruptures a means interposed along the path of the generated high velocity gases. The means converges upon rupture and causes a material placed beneath the apparatus to be cut by the resultant high velocity gas explosion.

U.S. Pat. No. 4,693,181 discloses a linear cutting charge device including an explosive mass formed in the shape of a bar. Detonation of the charge in this patent is disclosed as stating that it compresses a metal liner and converts the metal liner into an outwardly projected slug of metal, the shape of which is dependent upon the shape of a cavity of the device. It is this outwardly projected slug which penetrates the work surface of a material which is cut or deformed by the detonation and subsequent penetration.

U.S. Pat. No. 4,815,384 discloses a device with a housing for use with joinable or interconnectable cutting charges. The stated purpose of this patent is to avoid formation of a saw-tooth cutting profile on a target work surface acted upon by the device discussed in the patent.


What has not been disclosed in the prior art, however, is use of a thermite-based apparatus for directing or focusing a cutting flame derived from the activation of a thermite charge for the purpose of cutting substantially thick material such as steel plates and bars, for example. In addition, the prior art has not provided a practical solution for effecting an extended, linear cut in a piece of material. The prior art also has not sufficiently addressed concerns related to the health and safety of a user using an explosive shape charge apparatus to create high velocity explosions to cut material. As a result, the prior art has also not adequately considered use of a thermite-based cutting apparatus to alleviate hazards associated with debris, noise and pressure waves generated from using explosive charges to cut material having a substantial thickness.

In spite of the foregoing known apparatus and methods for cutting material, there remains a real and substantial need for an apparatus for cutting material which employs a thermite-based charge to ensure a safe and efficient cutting action.

***********

I believe that such a tool could have been used at the site as well. We simply don't have photos or videos or anything to check against. There are references to diagrams/drawings at the link.

I do believe that the slag pooled in a molten form. The slag doesn't harden until the exothermic process ends. It was ongoing--I believe that it could have continued to feed itself under the pile by thermite residue or by "some other weapon" that is unbeknown to us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 12:32 AM
Response to Reply #58
60. Found some information about Spectre Enterprises
Edited on Sun Feb-25-07 01:32 AM by Contrite
http://tinyurl.com/2zbd6m

It's a translated page from an Italian forum.

In this link a licence (of Mohler/Spectre is described in detail) that Cutting Torch based on the Thermite regards one:

LINK

Reassuming: the licence describes a cutting torch that he is able to cut material (described as steel bars of considerable thickness) with one detonation and one gas blaze to altà speed and temperature.

Why it is important?
- one of the possible uses of the thermite ones demonstrates as it loads from cut
- the use of the thermite ones like demolition instrument demonstrates
- quarry fed demonstrates as it loads from thermite is able to detonate and to produce to a gas to highest speed and temperature.

These information are not a effective test of the thermite use of in the demolition of WTC1, 2 and 7, but they demonstrate as the use of the thermite ones is compatible in that scene.

The thermite presence of has been assumed (and subsequently also experimented in laboratorio*) from S. and. Jones analyzing the test video previous to the landslide of one of the two towers that showed the typical products of one exothermic reaction:
- vapors distinguished aluminum oxide white men in costransto with the other coming from dark smoke from the zone of the impact
- the fall of fused material that it maintained its coloration yellow-hot for all the way of fall.

The tests in SEJ laboratory have demonstrated:
- than the fused aluminum it is not diamond, it has a silver-plated coloration and it is not yellow-hot for via of its reduced temperature of fusion. Therefore it could not be be a matter of the aluminum of Boeing like explained from official sources.
- than the successive answer of the NIST (that is that the coloration yellow-hot derived from aluminum and present mixed materials fused in the plans of the WTC) it was inaccurata, since mixed champions polverizza you of materials available in those plans not mischiavano to the fused aluminum and they did not assume one coloration yellow-hot.


Marked also inaccuracies…
_________________
http://mihop.blogspot.com

From spectreenterprises.com (the grassetto it is mine):
- citation


Spectre Enterprises was formed in 1999 with the acquisition of Energetic Materials Associates. Our chief technologist, Dr. Jonathon Mohler is recognized as to pioneer in the creation of energetic devices using exothermic metal reaction chemistry. As the leader of to first of its kind research team at Mound Laboratory, Dr. Mohler has amassed what is believed to be the single most important knowledge base in this field.

Since its formation, Spectre has generated to phenomenal number of innovative designs for to broad range of applications. Spectre has established itself as the technical leader in engineering-based upon exothermic metal reaction chemistry, thermite torch design and metal-based energetic devices. The company has offices in West Palm Beach, Florida and operates to prototype development shop in Vero Beach, Florida.

from The Explosives and Weapons Forum, speaking about the Spectre Enterprises (http://www.roguesci.org/theforum/showthread.php?t=5971):
- citation

In their Contact Us, the names listed to are Tim Mohler, Chuck Mohler, and Dr. Jonathan Mohler. Obviously this is to family owned business.

Jonathan Mohler previously worked for Monsanto as to defense contractor, and several of his patents to are assigned to the US Government, having stemmed from DoD funded research.

On the situated one of IF some of its products are found/services that they offer for military applications or he trades them. This is interesting:
http://www.spectreenterprises.net/gravity.asp
E' a device that primes one compressed thermite exothermic reaction using and not in powder. Its applications and its power vary with the amount of compressed thermit used: from the destructions of radio number to the demolition of structures.

Present E' also a voice “Breaching and non-explosive cutting” but the info is “coming soon”.

More on this page (which is cached because you can't access the Spectre Enterprises website without being registered now...):

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:CMorRzTIkpEJ:www.spectreenterprises.net/gravity.asp+Spectre+Enterprises+and+thermite+cutting+devices&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=6&gl=us

Also see 2000-618872/59 SPECTRE ENTERPRISES INC AU-200037499-A
Apparatus for cutting a target material e.g., ceramics, metal or plastics includes a cutting flame generator which uses a
thermite-based charge to ensure safe and efficient cutting
Company Code: SPEC- Publication Date: 2000.10.04
Basic No: WO-200054922-A1
IPC: B23K 7/00
Derwent Classes: A97; L02; M23 P55
Latest Priority: 1999.03.15 1999US-268379
Local: 2000.03.15 2000AU-037499
Related: Based on WO-200054922:

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:CMorRzTIkpEJ:www.spectreenterprises.net/gravity.asp+Spectre+Enterprises+and+thermite+cutting+devices&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=6&gl=us

Dr. Jonathan Mohler has been at this for a long time:

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1990inpy.conf....9M

Abstract
A thermite torch was designed and built for use in a space-limited environment. The intended application required that a series of these torches be ignited from a single, external pyrotechnic source. Novel design features and optimized use of a single thermite formulation made it possible to achieve the required performance, within the constraints of the application system.

Presented at the 15th International Pyrotechnics Seminar, Boulder, CO, 9-13 Jul. 1990

http://www.osti.gov/bridge/servlets/purl/481841-hoHxFI/webviewable/481841.pdf

Western State Sectioflhe Combustion Institute 1997 Spring Meeting
April 14 & IS, Livermore, California
SAND97-0186C
Semiconductor Bridge, SCB, Ignition Studies
of AI/CuO Thermitet
Robert W. Bickes, Jr. and David E. Wackerbarth
Sandia National Laboratories
Albuquerque, NM 87185-1453 USA
Jonathan H. Mohler
Energetic Materials Associates, Irtc.
Vero Beach, FL 32968 USA

Ignition difficulties exhibited by many thermite compositions result from their high thermal
conductivity In particular, hot-wire ignition is especially affected because the temperature
rise of the wire is slow and energy transfer from the wire to the thermite is controlled by
conduction. Consequently a large mass of material outside of the critical ignition zone is
unnecessarily heated before achieving ignition, which increases the amount of energy
required from the firing set.

Semiconductor bridges, SCBs, on the other hand, form a plasma discharge in microseconds
which rapidly transfers energy via a convective process to the thermite. This produces a high
power density in the ignition zone with less energy loss to surrounding materials.
Consequently, thermite compositions can be exploited for pyrotechnic igniters without paying
an ignition energy penalty by using an SCB. Through proper choice of charge holder and
component materials, electrical ignition energies that rival more traditional pyrotechnic
igniter compositions can be achieved.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 01:17 AM
Response to Reply #60
61. A company mentioned in the patents, Ensign Bickford, produces FTS
Edited on Sun Feb-25-07 01:24 AM by Contrite
http://www.ebaerospaceanddefense.com/aerospace/flight_term_over.php

Overview

Flight Termination Systems provide a fully redundant explosive assembly capable of terminating the flight of airborne missiles or launch vehicles when they veer from their targeted path.

Longitudinal sections of Linear Shaped Charge are normally used to sever large solid motor cases or large liquid fuel tanks. Subsequent burn through and rupture of the tanks or venting of the solid rocket motor creates termination of thrust. Typically, large coreload LSC is used in these applications.

Dome cutting systems are typically used on smaller vehicles to vent motor cases. Again, Linear Shaped Charge is typically assembled in a ring configuration to sever the dome of the motor casing.

Bulk charges can be used in a similar fashion to the dome cutting system for larger vehicles. Venting of fuel/oxidizer tanks by a bulk charge can create a mass explosion of the fuel tank, resulting in complete destruction of the flight vehicle.

In cases where the vehicle may have sufficient aerodynamic properties to allow significant downrange flight after venting of onboard fuels, it may be necessary to destroy the structure of the vehicle as well. Typically, an LSC assembly can be used to sever a significant structural member (such as a wing or an entire missile fuselage) to create aerodynamic instability and subsequent flight termination.

They also produce Voltage-protected semiconductor bridge igniter elements

Here is a March 2001 patent: http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/6199484-description.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 02:35 AM
Response to Reply #61
64. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 02:52 AM
Response to Reply #60
65. Spectre's "stacked thermite" for deep penetration
Edited on Sun Feb-25-07 02:56 AM by Contrite
This is the text at the cached link I posted above, in case it cannot be opened:

Spectre has begun to design a new class of devices that are an updated version of the earliest use of thermite technology dating back more than 100 years.

These first examples of thermite technology were so-called “gravity flow” devices that generated extremely high temperature metal flows that were used for welding or penetrating metal objects. This approach is not nearly as efficient as our focused jet torches for penetrating or cutting but provides a simple and easy-to-use solution for situations where something other than a highly focused cut is required. Our unique approach has the added advantage of being user-scalable. While our advanced thermite torch designs are carefully engineered for relatively specific requirements, this approach allows users to simply add additional units to a pile of units that will ultimately create a larger mass of super-heated metal. This will allow for additional penetration and target mass destruction when required--by simply controlling the number of units stacked over a target or targets.

Super-heated metals created by thermitic reactions are capable of penetrating and destroying a substantial amount of material including but not limited to plastics, metals and ceramics, using nothing more than the pressure created by the weight of the super-heated metal. The temperatures and volumes of heat that can be generated using this approach are sufficient for the destruction of ordinance of all types. Such an approach provides a number of significant advantages over the use of high explosives for the removal and destruction of ordinance.

General Description

The system is manufactured as modular, rectangular, interlocking blocks. These blocks will contain a unique, hot-pressed thermite formulation that has a high structural strength of its own and is drastically more stable (i.e., safe handling) than traditional powdered thermite compounds. Hot-pressed thermite has a consistency similar to lower density metals such as aluminum and can even be machined using common processes. These units will be pressed into interlocking shapes that will feed into small funnels used to direct metal flows. When reaction of the thermite compound occurs, the flow will ultimately spread and melt or ignite materials below it. If additional thermite gravity units are below a flow, than those units will be ignited and an additional thermite reaction product generated, thereby creating a larger thermal output.

These units will be manufactured in several sizes. Smaller units will be ideal for destroying sensitive equipment such as encrypted radios. Larger units will be suitable for a variety of tasks including disabling or destroying artillery and armor. Larger units could theoretically be used to cause structural damage by stacking units atop bunkers, buildings or bridges. All sizes of these units will be employed for destroying ordinance including captured ordinance, old explosives and ordinance, IED.'s, mines, etc. Units will be easy to handle and stable for transport and storage. Initiation methods include electric match, shock tube and safety fuse, just to name a few. No extensive training is needed. It is not an exaggeration to say that personnel capable of stacking sandbags can be quickly and easily trained to employ this technology.

Bricks can be stacked in square or rectangular piles to create a sufficient mass of super-heated material in order to insure the destruction of the target mass. For ordinance disposal, a modular support system will be developed that will consist of a metal grid connected to four legs. The size of the structure will be variable based upon the addition of grid modules. Each of the four legs will be adjustable so that the grid can be raised up to allow for larger targets. This will allow operators to place the grid over targeted ordinance without having to move or disturb dangerous devices and materials. When the thermite reaction is activated, the superheated metal will pour through the grid (destroying the grid) and onto the target. This system will also be designed to accommodate different sized tasks. Smaller versions could be man-carried to the target. Larger versions could be put in place using cranes or helicopters. Grids can be loaded before being placed or they can be placed empty and thermite bricks stacked onto the grids after placement.

An additional feature of this modular system will be the development of a wheeled self-leveling grid to be used in conjunction with a towing vehicle such as a remotely controlled robot. Self-powered grids will also be developed that will be capable of carrying large stacks of thermite bricks. These will be remotely operated using video navigation. This will allow operators to attack everything from small to very large targets, in place, and from a safe distance.Video cameras allowing operators to view individual legs/wheels will allow for maneuvering in critical situations such as mine fields.

Projected Technical Specifications

• Estimated thermite mass to target mass ratio: 1:2 (idealized), 1:1 (likely performance)

Temperature of reaction product: >3000 C

• Materials that can be destroyed: Plastics, Metals, Ceramics, Energetic Materials

• Storage: No special precautions required. Can be stored with normal ordinance. Material is highly stable in hot-pressed form.

• Transport: Can be transported using normal ordinance transport methods.

• Initiation methods: Electric Match, Shock Tube, Safety Fuse, others.

• Estimated training time: 1 to 2 hours

Applications

• Disabling or destroying armor

• Disabling or destroying artillery

• Disabling or destroying vehicles

• Destroying ordinance

• Mine clearing

• Destroying small arms

• Damaging, disabling or destroying structures

Deployment Options

• Manually and directly applied to target

• Applied directly to target using robot, backhoe or other mechanical devices

• Applied indirectly using manually placed grip apparatus

• Applied indirectly using mechanical device to place loaded or unloaded grid over target
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vincent_vega_lives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 07:28 AM
Response to Reply #65
67. This is nothing new
The Rangers used them at Pointe-du-Hoc to destroy German artillery during D-Day.

It is NOT instantaneous however and would be very difficult to synchronize. Hence ECD firms use shaped cutter charges and a great deal of prep work as all the drywall would need to be removed so the charges can be placed directly on the steel components. The explosive jet is disrupted by any material between. FAR more reliable in brining down a structure.

This is ideal for military applications as it does not produce fragmentation, blast effects, or a great deal of noise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 08:23 PM
Response to Reply #67
94. I suspect it at the basement/subbasement levels, not above. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 08:29 PM
Response to Reply #94
97. But the collapse didn't start there.
In every video out there, the collapses clearly start on the floors at impact level.

Why else use thermite in the basement unless you're going to start the collapse down there? Why start it at the top floors at all?

The point of controlled demolition from below is to use as much of the building's weight as possible to maximize gravity's input on the situation. Since the collapse started above, why do the basement/subbasement levels even need thermite in them?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 08:48 PM
Response to Reply #97
98. To weaken the core.
Edited on Sun Feb-25-07 08:59 PM by Contrite
Fits with Gordon Ross' theory. Also, fits with certain experts suggestions I've read on how they would take it down.

Remember, Rodriquez said he and his co-workers heard and saw explosions before the plane hit. I don't guess stacked thermite explodes but suspect it is merely an incendiary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 09:06 PM
Response to Reply #98
100. So pictures of the bottom part of the core remaining erect would negate that idea, right?
Because they are available.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 09:09 PM
Response to Reply #100
101. Seen "the spire". Only a portion stood erect and not for long. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 09:48 PM
Response to Reply #101
104. Not the spire. The core. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 11:20 PM
Response to Reply #104
105. Are you talking about Biggert's photo?
Edited on Sun Feb-25-07 11:22 PM by Contrite
Or this?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hack89 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 01:31 PM
Response to Reply #58
87. Some problems with your theory
Your photographic evidence show that the slag solidified almost instantaneously. On the other hand you have no photographic evidence of molten steel at all.

Secondly, do you really think the "exothermic process" took weeks to complete? I would imagine it taking merely seconds - can you show where lengthy thermite reactions have ever been observed?

Unknown "some other weapon" is the same as saying you have no idea.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 08:26 PM
Response to Reply #87
95. There is photographic evidence of molten "metal" which some identified as "steel"
Yes, I think the exothermic process could take weeks to complete depending on how much material was provided. Or, it could be another weapon and the small hydrogen bomb is a possibility IMHO based on the high levels of certain toxins at the site and the fact that the firemen/demo men were "aerolizing" the rubble--by admission--more to keep the particulates down than the contain the fires.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hack89 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 09:33 PM
Response to Reply #95
103. Care to show this photographic evidence?
As far as I know, there have never been pictures of molten metal ever posted in this forum so I am sure that many of us would be interested in seeing them.

How do you slow down a thermite reaction? What is the chemistry behind it? You are making an extraordinary claim so I hope you are not offend if I don't take your word for it with out some proof.

I don't think you have a clue how powerful even the smallest hydrogen bomb is - there would be nothing left but a smoking hole. And of course there is the not so minor lack of any radiation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-26-07 12:45 AM
Response to Reply #103
106. Google it yourself
Edited on Mon Feb-26-07 12:46 AM by Contrite
I could post Jones photo but I know you'd call it incandescent. Watch the first part of this video instead:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cx33GuVsUtE

Have you watched the firefighter videos describing what they saw?

http://www.studyof911.com/video/

How do you slow down a thermite reaction? It won't stop until all the aluminum has been oxidized. Even dunking it in water won't work, since the oxygen required for the reaction comes from the iron oxide (or whatever oxide is used) and not from the air around the reaction.

I think both thermite/thermate and a mini-nuke/microfusion bomb may have been used, both because of the duration of the fires, the "hot spots" and also because of the radioactive isotopes such as tritium lingering in the aftermath and producing cancer in rescuers. The thermonuclear bomb used was probably a 'pure' hydrogen bomb, so no uranium or plutonium at all. The basic nuclear reaction is Deuterium + Tritium > Alpha + n. The ignition of this is the fine part, either with a powerful beam array or antimatter (a very certain way to get the necessary effect of directed energy in order not to level the adjacent blocks of high-rise buildings, as well).

http://www.springerlink.com/content/p7568m72q67226rv/

Researching the weapons of the future: ‘micro-fusion’ weapons

By Andy Oppenheimer

Advances in nanotechnology, genetics and nuclear isomers are permitting the production of a new generation of weapons intended to maintain future US military superiority and deter ‘rogue states’ and terrorists.

Forced to consider how to deter threats to its security from ‘rogue states’, terrorist organisations and other groups undeterred by its massive nuclear stockpile, the US is now considering the development of a new generation of weapons.

Most notably, the Bush administration is in the process of trying to develop a new generation of ‘low-yield’ nuclear weapons with yields at or below five kilotons. Development of these weapons would give the US the means to destroy hardened bunkers containing ‘high value targets’ and possibly chemical and biological weapons.

But what lies beyond the ‘mini-nuke’? What kind of arsenals will the US have in the next five to 25 years? An array of futuristic-sounding weapons is moving beyond the imaginations of scientists and military officials into the arena of government and commercial research laboratories. The consequences of the uses of these weapons are yet to be examined fully.

Nanotechnology (NT), the science of designing microscopic structures in which materials are machined and controlled atom by atom, has the potential to produce further miniaturisation of weapons. The ability to build large, complex devices to atomic precision using molecular machine systems was first recognised by US physicist Richard Feynman more than 40 years ago. Assembler-based NT has implications far beyond the Pentagon’s current vision of a ‘revolution in military affairs’, although its applications to advanced weaponry are certainly fertile ground for fantasy. Proponents of ‘micro-fusion’ nuclear weapons insist that they are the only types of warheads capable of retaining relatively high yields of energy through the process of miniaturisation.

The impetus for creating these systems arose from the need to develop extremely rugged and safe arming and triggering mechanisms for smaller nuclear weapons such as atomic artillery shells. In such warheads, the nuclear explosive and its trigger undergo extreme acceleration upon their use. This forced weapons designers to make the trigger’s crucial components as small as possible, for smaller electromechanical systems are more enduring and resistant to exogenous stresses. Controlled microexplosions could be used in weapons if suitable compact triggers were developed.

http://www.janes.com/security/international_security/news/jcbw/jcbw040813_1_n.shtml

How small can a nuclear reaction be? Through hydrodynamic experiments for triggering fusion, extremely low-yield nuclear explosions have been generated on the magnitude of "several Pounds of TNT." As noted above, in 1961 .01 kt was unveiled in 1961. In 1956, the Tamalpais with a yield of 0.072 kt was declassified.

Prior to the demolition of the WTC buildings, the largest imploded building, Hudson's Department Store was 2.2 million square feet with 33 levels and required 2,728 lbs of explosive. The WTC buildings were significantly stronger than the Hudson's building, but it is doubtful more than a 0.01 kt bomb would be needed for the 47 center columns designed to hold many times the weight of the buildings.

This program produced (partial list) the following information for a regular 0.01 kt yields, air ignition: Fireball max light radius = 25.4 meters, Max time light pulse width = 0.011 seconds, Max fireball airburst radius = 10.6 meters, Time of max temperature = 0.0032 seconds, Area of rad. exposure = 0.12 sq. miles; Blastwave Effects: Overpressure = 5 lb/sq. inch (160 mph) radius = 0.09 km, 1 lb/sq. inch radius = 0.26 km; Underground ignition: Crater diameter = 56 feet with a Richter magnitude of 3.52. Thermal radiation damage range is significantly reduced by clouds, smoke or other obscuring materials. Surface detonations are known to decrease thermal radiation by half. A neutron bomb produces much less blast and thermal energy than a fission bomb of the same yield by expending its energy by the increase in the production of neutrons. Even the older neutron bombs produce very little long term fallout, but made considerable induced radiation in ground detonations. The half life of induced radiation is very short and is measured in days rather than years.

Summing up known information, an underground explosion of a pure (most likely) or semi-pure, Minimum Residual Residue direction focused 0.01 kt yield hydrogen bomb with selected enhanced radiation dispersal - most likely neutron since that radiation would be absorbed by the ground and building, and would decrease the blast and temperature effects.

http://www.thepriceofliberty.org/06/09/25/ward.htm

While looking for a bomb with a small size and a strong effect, a pure hydrogen bomb was an obvious solution. When no atomic device is needed for igniting, the size of the hydrogen bomb gets even smaller and the yield (effect) can be set within a wide range, for example between from 1 to 100. This succeeded in the 1980's, as well as the neutron bomb, which kills only living things and leaves most material untouched.

The former Soviet Union is said to have had more than 500 command centers durable for a small nuke. That led into the developing of different types of bunker busters. A working solution is a nuclear missile that directs 96% of its yield into a thin, all penetrating heat+blast wave forward, tunneling hundreds of meters downwards into solid rock. This type of a hydrogen bomb was developed somewhere in the early 1990's. Nowadays, both the yield and the direction of the destructive force of a small tactical hydrogen bomb can be somewhat controlled. The amount of fusion-able materials control the yield (effect) and the shape of the charge as well as the initiation arrangements impress the direction of the explosion wave.

http://www.saunalahti.fi/wtc2001/soldier3.htm

New! Wayne Madsen Report  THE NEWS
http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/

Sept. 12, 2006 -- According to sources who worked with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) at Ground Zero on and after 911, residents of southern Manhattan and rescue and clean-up workers involved in the recovery operations at the site of the former World Trade Center are experiencing an unusually high rate of non-Hodgkin lymphoma -- a cancer that is common among individuals who have been exposed to extremely high levels of ionizing radiation, such as that from nuclear blasts and major nuclear reactor leaks. In addition to the respiratory problems among rescue workers at Ground Zero who breathed toxic "pulverized" concrete and other debris into their lungs, the radiation cancer is of extreme interest to researchers who suspect that the World Trade Center towers and Building 7 were brought down with the help of high energy releases. WMR spoke to a number of individuals who were at Ground Zero on 911 who are now experiencing symptoms resulting from severe damage to their immune systems -- a condition that is common among those exposed to high levels of radiation.

Sources close to FEMA in New York confirmed to WMR that the lymphoma cases are believed to be the result of a release of extremely high levels of radiation from a series of nuclear events on the morning of 911. They believe that explains the reason for the "pulverization" of concrete, molten metals, pyroclastic surges and fallout, and other anomalies resulting from the catastrophe. It was also pointed out that some vehicles parked on the west side of the World Trade Center were "fused" on the sides facing the towers -- the doors being melted into the body frames. Other cars parked nearby were not similarly affected. There is also evidence of explosions and fires on top of the Woolworth Building, three blocks away from the World Trade Center, during the attack on the towers.

FEMA officials from Washington, DC were quick to ban any unofficial photography in southern Manhattan in the weeks following 911. Any photographers who had not received prior permission from FEMA to be in southern Manhattan found their photographic and filming equipment confiscated by the government.

Quote:
Anti-terrorism officials conducted a helicopter survey of New York City's radiation sources in preparation for a so-called ``dirty bomb'' attack -- and discovered a Staten Island park with dangerously high levels of radium, a new report found.

Federal authorities found 80 unexpected ``hot spots'' around New York City, according to the Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of Congress.


http://wcbs880.com/pages/86759.php?contentType=4&contentId=209765

Radiation "hot spots" discovered in NYC

http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=local&id=4586185
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hack89 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-26-07 07:31 AM
Response to Reply #106
108. So to sum up
1. There are no pictures of pools of molten metal - molten meaning in a liquid state.

2. You have made the common CT mistake of calling red hot metal molten.

3. You don't understand chemistry - how much aluminum was there to react?

4. You don't understand nuclear fall out or radiation. Show me a single case of radiation sickness in NY. Wayne Madsen is not a credible source - care to show me some thing from the NY health department? From an environmental organization that has done environmental monitoring at ground zero?

5. You didn't read your link on hot spots - "the radiation found there reportedly comes from a piece of industrial equipment or pieces of old rusty metal."

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-26-07 07:57 PM
Response to Reply #108
117. To sum up.
Edited on Mon Feb-26-07 08:13 PM by Contrite
1. There are videos showing red hot underground fires burning such as the one above and, arguably, photos--the Jones photo commonly brought up has been read by some as simply red hot or "incandescent" but not "molten" since it is not a visibly liquid pool being lifted out of the ground. There are first-hand firemen accounts of seeing "flows" of molten metal like "lava". Do you disbelieve what they say? Recall that FEMA and NYPD were being extremely prohibitive about shooting video and photos of the site.

2. I know the argument only too well of molten metal vs. molten steel. I have not mistaken one for the other.

3. Who knows how much aluminum was there? There is essentially no forensic evidence for even a chemist to analyze, let alone me. It was removed, remember?

4. Radiation sickness or "WTC syndrome"? According to those who are suffering and dying, the diagnoses are vague and unsatisfactory. People are experiencing lymphoma. What causes that in an otherwise healthy individual? Their teeth are falling out. One, police detective, James Zadroga, died of mercury poisoning and lung disease last January. He was 34. A medical examiner linked his death to breathing the toxic dust at Ground Zero. What causes that? Part of the complaint of those who are suffering is the health care they are receiving is nonexistent or inadequate. The funds that were set up for their care have not been disbursed.

"It was like a glass bubble," he recalls, "all these crystals and things just floating around. And you're just looking. You had all kinds of molecules … debris molecules. And we had no idea what they were. No idea."

It turned out the air was filled with pulverized concrete, tiny shards of glass, and agents known to cause cancer."

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6053345

5. Operative word "reportedly". The hot spots link I provided is not the only "hot spots" link out there. There are maps showing the red hot zones as well. http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/wtc/evidence/usgs_hotspots.html

Asked why it took so long to begin a scientific evaluation of the air contamination that accompanied the destruction of the WTC, Cahill said he had assumed that there were scores of agencies and scientists monitoring the air quality in New York City after 9-11.

"I assumed it was happening. I could not believe it was not," Cahill said. "It was all by itself. The EPA did nothing."

The conditions were "brutal" for people working at Ground Zero without respirators and slightly less so for those working or living in adjacent buildings, Cahill, a professor emeritus of physics and atmospheric science, said. "It was like they were working inside the stack of an incinerator," he said.

"The debris pile acted like a chemical factory. It cooked together the components of the buildings and their contents, including enormous numbers of computers, and gave off gases of toxic metals, acids and organics for at least 6 weeks," he said.

The DELTA Group's work revealed the presence of extremely small metallic aerosols in unprecedented amounts in the plumes coming from the burning WTC rubble. Most of the particles in these plumes were in the category of the smallest ultra-fine and nano-particles: from 0.26 to 0.09 microns.

The extraordinarily high level of ultra-fine aerosols was one of the most unusual aspects of the data, Cahill said.

"Ultra-fine particles require extremely high temperatures," Cahill said, "namely the boiling point of the metal."

While Cahill said he was not aware of evidence confirming the existence of molten metal in the rubble of the WTC, his data showing high levels of ultra-fine particles in the smoke plume prove that incredibly intense hot spots, capable of boiling and vaporizing metals and other components from the debris, persisted beneath the rubble for weeks.

"As of 21 days after the attack, the fires were still burning and molten steel was still running," Leslie Robertson, structural engineer responsible for the design of the WTC, said at the National Conference of Structural Engineers on October 5, 2001.

AFP reported in 2002 that pools of "literally molten steel" were seen in the basements of the collapsed twin towers and WTC 7 by contractors hired to remove the rubble.

The official reports by NIST, FEMA and the 9-11 Commission, however, omit any mention of the large quantities of molten metal observed in the basement areas of WTC 7 and the towers. However, by the time NIST began their study nearly all of the critical steel evidence from the WTC had already been melted down in Chinese steel mills, sold to them by Alan D. Ratner of Metal Management (Newark, NJ) who made $2.5 million by selling the crucial evidence of the greatest crime of mass murder in recent history to Shanghai smelters.

http://delta.ucdavis.edu/WTC.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hack89 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-26-07 08:07 PM
Response to Reply #117
119. Well
as pointed out many time, it is most likely that the molten metal was aluminum. I accept the idea of molten aluminum as there is physical evidence that the pile was hot enough to melt aluminum. There is no evidence that the pile was hot enough to melt steel. And if it was, then logic dictates that there also had to be melted aluminum.

I don't understand your aluminum argument - are you saying that structural aluminum in the pile became part of the thermite reaction? Or are you saying that the thermite charges were so massive that it took weeks to react? If the former, care to provide a link or two showing that it is even possible?


You do realize that AFP is a banned anti-semitic site on DU? And that Bollyn is associated with AFP and is not a reliable source?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-26-07 08:12 PM
Response to Reply #119
120. Cahill and the UC Davis Delta Group's findings are in many places.
Edited on Mon Feb-26-07 08:24 PM by Contrite
AFP is merely reporting what others reported and quoting Cahill directly.

But, so as to follow the rules, I deleted the link and substituted one from another approved source.

To answer your question, B. Edited to add, as before, I don't think only thermite was involved.

As Kevin Ryan says, NIST ignores "superthermite"; more independent research and investigation is needed.

http://stj911.org/ryan/NIST_Responses.html

Dr. Jones has noted that NIST’s discussion on the amount of thermite needed to bring down a Tower ignores his and other’s research on explosive superthermite, a form using ultra-fine aluminum and metal-oxide powders. Superthermite is explosive so that much less of this form of thermite would be needed to bring the buildings down.

Researchers including Dr. Jones are testing for the residue of thermite-reaction compounds (aluminothermics) both in the toxic WTC dust and in the solidified metal. They are finding an abundance of Fluorine, Zinc and other elements commonly used in aluminothermics, but not in building materials in the concentrations found. They are investigating the possibility of thermite-based arson and demolition.

Dr. Jones has noted that the presence of aluminothermic-reaction residues in the WTC rubble and dust indicates that some persons brought these compounds into the buildings prior to their collapses. The “fingerprint” of abundant fluorine and zinc in these residues, along with 1,3 diphenylpropane and other unusual compounds, may very well allow us to trace who purchased the chemicals used and in what quantities.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hack89 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-26-07 08:19 PM
Response to Reply #120
121. Having read the report - so what?
it describes what happens when the contents of a modern high rise are mixed together and burned. It creates a chemical witches brew that is very unhealthy. There is nothing suspicious about this report - there is no mention of unexpected chemical that would point towards demolition. There is certainly nothing that would point towards nukes. I fail to see the point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-26-07 08:26 PM
Response to Reply #121
122. I wonder if you were one of the affected rescuers what you would say.
Edited on Mon Feb-26-07 08:52 PM by Contrite
There are nano-particles and toxic dust in this witches brew. Are you suggesting that this is somehow an expected result? How many rescue workers at fire-based disasters, even those involving office equipment and fuel, report these same circumstances and are suffering from/dying from the same illnesses to the same degree?

This is a report of 9/11 workers and cancer from The Village Voice last November:

http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0648,lombardi,75156,2.html

This is not the story of rescue and recovery workers at ground zero getting sick with respiratory illnesses from their exposure; you have read those stories, and you have heard those cases.

This is the story of 9-11 and cancer.

To date, 75 recovery workers on or around what is now known as "the Pile"—the rubble that remained after the World Trade Center towers collapsed on the morning of September 11, 2001—have been diagnosed with blood cell cancers that a half-dozen top doctors and epidemiologists have confirmed as having been likely caused by that exposure.

Those 75 cases have come to light in joint-action lawsuits filed against New York City on behalf of at least 8,500 recovery workers who suffer from various forms of lung illnesses and respiratory diseases—and suggest a pattern too distinct to ignore. While some cancers take years, if not decades, to develop, the blood cancers in otherwise healthy and young individuals represent a pattern that experts believe will likely prove to be more than circumstantial. The suits seek to prove that these 8,500 workers—approximately 20 percent of the total estimated recovery force that cleared the rubble from ground zero—all suffer from the debilitating effects of those events.

(snip)
In many ways, these illnesses suggest the slow but deteriorating health issues that faced the atomic-bomb survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, where thousands died in the years and decades that followed the United States' use of nuclear weapons.

(snip)

The field of cancer research is not known for consensus. But six prominent specialists on cancer and the link to toxins—on the faculty of the nation's top medical schools and public health institutions—all come to the same conclusions when told these statistics. They are Richard Clapp and David Ozonoff, professors of environmental health at Boston University School of Public Health; Michael Thun, director of epidemiological research at the American Cancer Society; Francine Laden, assistant professor of environmental epidemiology at Harvard School of Public Health; Jonathan Samet, chairman of the epidemiology department at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health; and Charles Hesdorffer, associate professor of oncology at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine. These doctors and epidemiologists agree that the incidence of cancer among this subset of workers sounds shockingly high, that they cannot and should not be dismissed as coincidence, and that the toxic dust cloud that hung over downtown Manhattan, and particularly the Pile, likely caused or promoted the diseases. Some even went so far as to say that the blood cancer cases, especially, indicate what could become a wave of cancer cases stemming from 9-11 over the next decades.

"Those numbers seem quite outrageous," is how Hesdorffer puts it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hack89 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-26-07 09:21 PM
Original message
We know exactly what radiation sickness is ...
we have 60 years of data - these illnesses do not match those from Hiroshima or Nagasaki.

of course there is toxic dust - consider for a moment how much asbestos dust alone there was.

We know exactly what was in the dust - it has been analyzed many times. Here is an excellent analysis for example:

http://www.nyenvirolaw.org/WTC/130%20Liberty%20Street/Mike%20Davis%20LMDC%20130%20Liberty%20Documents/Signature%20of%20WTC%20dust/WTCDustSignature_ExpertReport.051304.1646.mp.pdf

it shows PCBs, Dioxins, asbestos and heavy metals - it also explains where they come from.

I have no doubt of the increased cancers but there are many environmental causes of cancer - I think that being breathing PCBs, Dioxins, asbestos and heavy metals is a good a explanation as any. You certainly don't need a nuke to explain it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-27-07 12:03 AM
Response to Original message
129. Read what is said about the toxic dust. It EXCLUDES asbestos.
Edited on Tue Feb-27-07 12:15 AM by Contrite
These people are getting rare blood cancers in "outrageous numbers". The experts clearly do NOT necessarily blame PCBs, dioxins, etc. READ what the reports say and STOP trying to downplay this. People are STILL dying from this and MORE WILL die in the future. The number of victims of 9/11 is GROWING.

"None of the cancers emerging now are the kinds that come only from toxic exposures—like, say, asbestosis, which is caused by asbestos and can take two decades to grow. This sentinel cancer would go a long way toward proving a 9-11 connection.

Despite the lack of definitive data, we may still be in the midst of a cancer epidemic. Indeed, according to these experts, traditional data don't help much here because 9-11 represents such a singular exposure. No one can deny that the workers were exposed to a blend of pulverized and aerosolized toxins that had never existed in any occupational setting before. And this mix of toxins alone is enough to cause more aggressive cancers.

Hesdorffer finds it odd that two of his patients had been diagnosed with the rare cancer after working on the Pile. "It's strange to have two people who were subjected to the same exposure," he says, "developing the same cancer in the same time frame. "Ozonoff puts it more firmly: "For an acute episode like this, it's definitely possible these blood cancers were caused by 9-11."

Ozonoff echoes all five of his colleagues when he draws parallels between the aftermath of 9-11 and that of another massive exposure: the atomic-bombs dropped on Japan. Bomb survivors experienced excessive spikes in leukemia rates within the first five years, a surprising discovery for epidemiologists in the mid 20th century. While this outbreak resulted from radiation, both it and 9-11 involved a sudden and intense blast of carcinogens. For bomb survivors, leukemia appeared first, followed by breast and lung cancer. "That could happen with 9-11," says Samet, the Johns Hopkins epidemiology department chair. "It might be what we're seeing today."

It's also possible that the carcinogens in the Trade Center dust accelerated cancers already dormant or developing in the recovery workers, epidemiologists say.

In reality, the 9-11 fallout was like nothing anyone had been exposed to before. Everything in the towers had been ground into dust—concrete, steel, glass, insulation, plastic, and computers. Dust analyses would detect glass shards, cement particles, cellulose fibers, asbestos, and a mixture of harmful components, including lead, titanium, barium, and gypsum. In all, the dust contained more than 100 different compounds, some of which have never been identified. And then there were the fires that smoldered for three months. They gave off not only the putrid plume, but also a blast of carcinogens—asbestos, dioxin, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, or PAHs. They also emitted benzene.

In one disturbing analysis done by the U.S. Geological Survey, the dust had such high alkalinity levels it rivaled liquid Drano.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hack89 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-27-07 07:36 AM
Response to Reply #129
132. So that leaves PCBs, Dioxin and heavy metals
Edited on Tue Feb-27-07 07:40 AM by hack89
I don't understand your point - your own post supports my position. It seems to be the natural consequence collapsing a huge high rise and burning the contents. Nothing like this has ever happened before on such a scale to such a large number of people - why is it unusual to see effects on people that have never been seen before?


Everything in the towers had been ground into dust—concrete, steel, glass, insulation, plastic, and computers. Dust analyses would detect glass shards, cement particles, cellulose fibers, asbestos, and a mixture of harmful components, including lead, titanium, barium, and gypsum. In all, the dust contained more than 100 different compounds, some of which have never been identified. And then there were the fires that smoldered for three months. They gave off not only the putrid plume, but also a blast of carcinogens—asbestos, dioxin, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, or PAHs. They also emitted benzene.



Again - no sign of nukes.

Here is another analysis of the dust:

http://pubs.acs.org/cen/NCW/8142aerosols.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-27-07 10:31 PM
Response to Reply #132
133. What about these?
Edited on Tue Feb-27-07 10:43 PM by Contrite
It leaves the "some of 100 different compounds that were never identified". It also leaves the problem of the tritium that was found. And it further leaves the problem of NANO-particles. All in all, a blend of pulverized and aerosolized toxins that had never existed in any occupational setting before.

Moreover, the last two replies have you focusing on radiation fallout while conveniently ignoring the rest of the facts which may have nothing to do with a fusion bomb but nevertheless something to do with controlled demolition.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hack89 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-26-07 09:21 PM
Response to Reply #122
124. deleted - dupe.
Edited on Mon Feb-26-07 09:21 PM by hack89
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
StrictlyRockers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Feb-28-07 06:13 AM
Response to Reply #58
135. That sure looks like molten iron slag to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #18
43. Larry, who wrote what you posted... ...
Edited on Sat Feb-24-07 01:47 PM by SidDithers
has the e-mail address info@centralmass911truth.org, and is probably Lawrence Patriarca, part of (owner?) of Central Massachusets 911 Truth Alliance.

Again, I'll go with the impartial welders rather than someone involved in the 9/11 truth movement.

Find an impartial source which disputes the welders at hobarts. Maybe you should try looking outside of the 9/11 Truthiness movement once in a while.

Sid

Edit: forgot the second part of your post:

As far as your link to the board at appolohoax, I think the posters there do a fine job of debating your poster without need of additional input from me.
http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=othertheories&action=display&thread=1172112745&page=1#1172197505
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 01:19 AM
Response to Reply #43
62. See #58. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 09:46 AM
Response to Reply #62
84. OK, I checked post #58...
and it is now abundantly clear to me that the CT crowd are the ones engaging in mental gymnastics to try to find an alternate explanation than the obvious one.

Speaking of mental gymnastics, where did the OP go? Hit and run post?

Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 08:28 PM
Response to Reply #84
96. Don't know where OP went--guess you could mail him/her.
I don't know what "mental gymnastics" are needed here. The components are in place as are the players to pull off certain "alternative" scenarios involving explosives.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 02:57 AM
Response to Reply #3
7. Know about welding or photography?
Edited on Fri Feb-23-07 02:58 AM by Contrite
Seems to me they are discussing at length whether or not the photo is even real.

P.S. I don't see slag on the angle cuts in the other photos, do you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 03:07 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. 5 of the first 6 replies are on topic...
and have the opinion that it was cut with a torch. But you're right, the discussion does seem to wander after the board had pretty much agreed that a torch made the cut.

As far as more slag, I don't know. Seems to me that there probably wouldn't be much slag on pieces that have been taken away, most of the slag would run down below the cut line, not up above it. And if three of the 4 cuts were from the outside, then slag would be inside the box beam. Maybe we're not seeing the correct sides and angles?

Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 11:45 PM
Response to Reply #3
59. Thanks for stating the obvious
Amazing how the nut-jobs can't even comprehend the most obvious concepts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
i miss america Donating Member (822 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 09:27 PM
Response to Reply #3
102. Here's a pic that was taken on 9/11 of beams with diagonal slices
and well before the welders arrived ...



Source: http://worldtradecenter.com/archive/richyako911.html

(sorry if this is a dupe, but it appears to contradict your argument and tends to support the thermate theory)


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-26-07 08:04 PM
Response to Reply #102
118. How does that support the thermite theory?...nt
Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
i miss america Donating Member (822 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-26-07 09:22 PM
Response to Reply #118
125. If you have a better explanation as to what severed those steel columns please share.
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-26-07 09:48 PM
Response to Reply #125
126. So, thermite is the presumed answer...
unless I come up with something better? How about you answer my question. How does that picture support the thermite theory?

Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-26-07 09:53 PM
Response to Reply #102
127. On a second look, are you even sure that's a beam?...
It looks like thin sheet metal, like in this picture from the same series at your link:



Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
i miss america Donating Member (822 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-26-07 11:07 PM
Response to Reply #127
128. Sid, you've raised a very interesting point and you might be right
It's hard to say for sure what is what in any of the pics. However, it does appear that the thing I refer to as a steel beam is quite a bit thicker than the one you've just pointed out. Judging by surrounding material (fire hydrant, papers, etc.) I would estimate that the item I'm referring to is 8"-10" thick whereas the one you reference looks to be about 2 inches thick. Again, this is purely speculation and I don't fault or criticize you if you see things differently.

And regarding your post about thermite, perhaps if we had an honest and thorough investigation many lingering questions might finally be explained...once and for all.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jberryhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-27-07 11:00 PM
Response to Reply #128
134. The thing I think you might be referring to...

Appears to be a piece of metal that was formed with some sort of triangular end with a bolt or rivet fitting that was torn away from whatever it was attached to. If we are talking about the same piece of metal, there is a vertical discontinuity that defines one side of the triangle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vincent_vega_lives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 08:39 AM
Response to Original message
13. Explosives don't cause slag
How exactly do you think the clean up would take place without the cutting of beams?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 09:07 PM
Response to Reply #13
17. Thermite welding does produce slag
Thermite welding is the process of igniting a mix of high energy materials, also called thermite, that produce a metallic slag that is poured between the working pieces of metal to form a joint. It was developed by Hans Goldschmidt around 1895.

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

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 10:28 PM
Response to Reply #17
21. Welding a joint is the opposite of what your theory requires. n't
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 11:21 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. The point is thermite produces slag.
Edited on Fri Feb-23-07 11:27 PM by Contrite
http://www.textfiles.com/humor/thermite.ana

"Thermites are a group of pyrotechnics mixtures in which a reactive metal
reduces oxygen from a metallic oxide. This produces a lot of heat, slag and
pure metal."

All that molten steel in the rubble was slag.

When that slag cools off (i.e., the exothermic reaction ceases to happen) it becomes a hard, lumpen mass.

PATENT #6766744

http://www.dodtechmatch.com/DOD/Patent/PatentDetail.aspx?type=description&id=6766744&HL=ON


Patent #6766744

Description
GOVERNMENTAL INTEREST

The invention described herein may be manufactured, used and licensed by or for the U.S. Government.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates generally to incendiary devices, and more particularly, to incendiary devices for producing controlled-diameter holes in metallic targets.

BACKGROUND

In the disposal of unserviceable explosive ordnances, incendiary devices are often used to burn through the ordnance casing and to ignite or otherwise destroy the ordnance payload. Thermite devices are often used for this purpose. Thermite devices are also used for unconventional warfare activities. Examples include the destruction of machinery or metallic structures, or the destruction of biological agents or precursors.

Destruction of metallic targets can be accomplished by cutting a hole through the casing steel and fusing the gears, pistons, and shaft with a stream of molten iron at 4500.degree. F. It has unlimited uses for attacking and destroying transformers, generators, electric motors, engine blocks, gun barrels, breech blocks, and mines. Storage tanks or drums can be cut through, causing the contents to flow out. If the liquid is flammable a fire and deflagration will result.

Destruction of biological agent and/or its precursor can be accomplished with a minimum collateral release by melting through a steel target (such as fermentation equipment, production equipment, storage drum, or warhead) to render the target unusable to an enemy and destroying the fill material by heating and incendiary action.

Thermite, one of the most common pyrotechnic incendiary agents, is essentially a mixture of powdered ferric oxide and powdered or granular aluminum. When raised to its ignition temperature, an intense reaction occurs whereby the oxygen in the ferric oxide is transferred to the aluminum, producing molten iron, aluminum oxide, and releasing approximately 750 kilocalories per gram. The reaction proceeds as follows:

8Al+3Fe.sub.3 O.sub.4.fwdarw.4Al.sub.2 O.sub.3 +9Fe

This exothermic reaction may produce a temperature of about 4500.degree. F. under favorable conditions. The white-hot molten iron and slag can itself prolong and extend the heating and incendiary action.

Other types of thermites containing the oxides of other metals in place of iron oxide are known: manganese thermite (4Al+3MnO.sub.2), chromium thermite (2Al+Cr.sub.2 O.sub.3), and others. Iron thermite (8Al+3Fe.sub.3 O.sub.4) has proved to be the most effective in incendiary composition for destruction of steel targets because superheated liquid products are formed by the reaction. These molten products affect a high rate of conductive heat transfer to the steel target and, therefore, cause destruction of the target.

However, because of the great difficulty in igniting thermite and the almost complete absence of gaseous reaction products, which causes flameless burning and a small radius of action of the hot thermite, iron-thermite is typically not used alone as an incendiary mixture. It is used in multi-component thermite-incendiary compositions, in which another oxidizer and binder are included, together with thermite. Thermate-TH3, a mixture of thermite and pyrotechnic additives, was found to be superior to thermites and was adapted for use in incendiary hand grenades. Its composition by weight is generally thermite 68.7%, barium nitrate 29.0%, sulfur 2.0% and binder 0.3%. Addition of barium nitrate to thermite increases its thermal effect, creates flame in burning and reduces the ignition temperature.

Previous efforts involving the use of pyrotechnic thermite grenades involved either the welding of two bars or of creating a pile of molten iron slag. Crude and inexpensive pyrotechnic thermite compositions were used to weld railroad rails together without the need for gas torches.

The military application of this technology resulted in the development of the AN-M14 Thermite Grenade circa 1940. It contains approximately 680 g of thermate-TH3 which releases approximately 795 kilocalories per gram of uncontrolled energy through the thin walls of its sheet metal body. This energy however, being undirected, is highly inefficient and insufficient to produce reasonable penetration levels. This M14 grenade would penetrate a 1/8" of mild steel and was used to disable military equipment by placing a large puddle of molten iron slag within a critical part of the item to be disabled.

Current DOD Explosive Ordinance Disposal (EOD) training school identifies the use of the standard AN-M14 incendiary grenade to render disposal of certain explosive ordinances. Unfortunately, the current EOD procedure requires several grenades, as many as 10 grenades, to achieve the desired result and the effect of the grenades in certain applications offers inconsistent effectiveness. Its configuration does not allow sufficient penetration.

A device with greater penetration capabilities is the "Thermite Destructive Device," U.S. Pat. No. 5,698,812 issued Dec. 16, 1997 to Eugene Song. This device was designed to create a forceful jet of molten iron through an opening at the bottom of the containing vessel. One grenade containing approximately 350 g of thermate-TH3 charge is capable of burning through a sheet of 1-inch thick steel plate in about 8 second reaction time. The device utilizes a central core-burning configuration to direct the molten products through an orifice at the bottom of the device.

While this design has merit from a penetration standpoint, and a 350 g charge of thermite could penetrate 1-inch thick steel plate, it is still inadequate to produce reasonable hole size levels. It is only capable of burning a 7/8" diameter hole, which is not sufficient enough for the safe disposal of an unexploded munition. A larger sized hole is needed to prevent a buildup of the internal pressure, and to achieve the successful burnout of the filler explosive. Earlier work has indicated that burning a 3" diameter hole through the outer casing will allow the explosive contained in the bomb to burn without transitioning to a detonation.

For the reasons stated above, and for other reasons stated below that will become apparent to those skilled in the art upon reading and understanding the present specification, there is a need in the art for alternative incendiary devices that are adapted for burning controlled-diameter holes through metallic targets.

SUMMARY

The various embodiments provide an incendiary device utilizing a multiple core-burner technique that facilitates producing large diameter cuts through steel targets. To facilitate this result, the various embodiments incorporate a multiple-core burning design with multiple orifices at the base for directing multiple jets of molten reaction product at the target. The various embodiments further incorporate an optional holding device as a means for locking the device onto a target. Devices in accordance with the invention having a base diameter of 2.312" have been shown to be capable of producing an approximately 2" diameter hole through 1/4 inch thick steel plate using a 275 g thermite charge within a container three-quarters the size of a standard AN-M14 Thermite Grenade package.

For one embodiment, the invention provides an incendiary device. The device includes an insulated housing, a vented plug at a top of the housing and a nozzle plate at a bottom of the housing. The nozzle plate includes a plurality of orifices. The device further includes a thermite charge contained in the housing between the vented plug and the nozzle plate. The thermite charge includes a plurality of cores extending a length of the thermite charge between the vented plug and the nozzle plate. Each core is aligned with an orifice of the nozzle plate.

For another embodiment, the invention provides an incendiary device. The device includes a housing having a top and a bottom, a vented plug at the top of the housing, a lid at the top of the housing covering the vented plug, and a nozzle plate at the bottom of the housing. The vented plug includes an adapter for a remote initiation fuse assembly and at least one vent. The lid has a hole corresponding to each vent of the vented plug. The nozzle plate includes a plurality of orifices. The device further includes a compacted thermite charge between the nozzle plate and the vented plug, the thermite charge having a plurality of hollow cores corresponding to the plurality of orifices of the nozzle plate, and a starter material on top of the thermite charge interposed between the vented plug and the thermite charge. An air space is interposed between the starter material and the vented plug. The device still further includes an insulation liner extending from the vented plug to the nozzle plate and interposed between the thermite charge and the housing and a standoff extending below the nozzle plate. The standoff comprises a lip along the circumference or outer edge of the housing only, so that the nozzle plate is spaced apart from the target surface being penetrated. The device still, further includes impermeable seals covering each vent of the vented plug and each orifice of the nozzle plate.

For yet another embodiment, the invention provides an incendiary device having a thermite charge for burning a hole in a target surface. The incendiary device includes means for igniting the thermite charge, thereby producing molten reaction products, and means for producing a plurality of jets of the molten reaction products in an arrangement approximating a shape of a desired burn in the target surface.

The invention further includes other apparatus of varying scope.

DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1A is cross-sectional view of an incendiary device in accordance with an embodiment of the invention.

FIG. 1B is a bottom view of the incendiary device of FIG. 1A.

FIG. 2 is a top view of a harness for use with the incendiary device of FIGS. 1A-1B.

FIG. 3A is a top view of the harness of FIG. 2 with added hold-downs.

FIG. 3B is cross-sectional view of a hold-down of FIG. 2

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

In the following detailed description of the present embodiments, reference is made to the accompanying drawings that form a part hereof, and in which is shown by way of illustration specific embodiments in which the invention may be practiced. These embodiments are described in sufficient detail to enable those skilled in the art to practice the invention, and it is to be understood that other embodiments may be utilized and that process, electrical or mechanical changes may be made without departing from the scope of the present invention. The following detailed description is, therefore, not to be taken in a limiting sense, and the scope of the present invention is defined only by the appended claims and equivalents thereof.

FIGS. 1A-1B depict an incendiary device 100 in accordance with an embodiment of the invention. FIG. 1A is a cross-sectional view of the incendiary device 100 taken along a line A-A'' of FIG. 1B, a bottom view of the incendiary device 100. Referring to FIG. 1A, the device body comprises a housing 101 and a lid 104 which may be constructed of any suitable material able to withstand the effects of rough handling, e.g., sheet metal or plastic. The bottom of the housing 101 may contain a circumferential skirt 122 having a diameter larger than a diameter of a body portion of the housing 101 containing the thermite charge 114.

The housing 101 has a plurality of exit holes 113 in the bottom, and contains an insulation liner 109 and a nozzle plate 110, made of graphite or other refractory material capable of withstanding the reaction temperature of the specific thermite selected. The nozzle plate 110 has a plurality of orifices 112 in alignment with the matching exit holes 113 at the bottom. A thermite charge 114, suitably of the Fe.sub.3 O.sub.4 and Al type described above, will be consolidated into the insulated housing 101 such that multiple hollow cores 111 extend downward along the entire length of the charge through the matching orifices 112 at the bottom. Illustrative but without limitation, the consolidation may be done in several increments with the consolidation pressure in the range of 3000 to 4000 psig, which will assure a uniform and compact thermite charge. For one embodiment, the hollow cores 111 have a conically-shaped channel having base and top diameter of 1/2-inch and 3/8-inch, respectively. However, the hollow cores 111 may also be substantially cylindrical or have tapers of varying degree. A standoff 115 at the bottom of the device insures a separation between the orifices 112 and the material under attack. The standoff 115 comprises a lip along the circumference or outer edge of the bottom of the device only, so that the exit holes 113 are separated from the target surface 125 being penetrated.

A starter material 108 is pressed on top of the thermite charge 114. The starter material 108 may be any material that is readily ignitable upon application of flame, or lighted fuse, and has sufficient thermal output to reliably ignite the thermite charge 114. One example of a starter material includes a mixture of Potassium Nitrate (66 parts by weight), Titanium (11 parts by weight), Aluminum (8 parts by weight), Silicon (6 parts by weight), Sulfur (2 parts by weight), Charcoal (5 parts by weight), and Polyacrylic rubber (2 parts by weight).

The vented plug 103, made of graphite or other refractory material capable of withstanding the reaction temperature of the specific thermite selected, having one or more vent holes 102, rests over the top of the insulation liner 109. The vented plug 103 acts as a baffle for the exit of molten product materials and also acts as a radiation shield, thus helping retain the heat produced. Manipulation of vented plug 103 and orifice 112 designs make it possible to control the pressure of the jets of molten products of reaction through the orifices 112 at the bottom. The lid 104 has one or more holes in alignment with vent holes 102 and is tightly closed by any conventional means, e.g., crimping. The vent holes 102 in the top and the exit hole 113 in the bottom are sealed from outside by seals 105, e.g., a thin metal adhesive disc of foil 105, preferably aluminum, or other impermeable membrane. The seals 105 serve to inhibit migration of moisture into the body 101.

The multiple hollow cores 111 formed in the compacted thermite charge 114 allow the reaction front to progress both radially outward and axially downward through the charge 114, thus permitting the molten mass to be pushed out of the orifices 112 at the base immediately upon ignition until completion of the reaction. This would result in multiple high velocity jets exiting from the orifices 112, thus facilitating a large diameter circular cut of a steel plate. In addition, the cores 111 increase the burning surface areas and consequently the burn rate. A small air space 107 above the thermite charge 114, suitably about 0.5-inch in height, along with the vented plug 103 provide some restriction of the expanding gases within the device which results in enough pressure increase to aid in jetting of the molten reaction products through the orifices 112. The number and size of the vents 102 can be adjusted to provide a desired backpressure, thereby controlling the exit pressure of the molten reaction products from the orifices 112.

While the orifices 112 and holes 113 are arranged in substantially concentric rings in the embodiment depicted in FIGS. 1A-1B, other arrangements are possible. For example, the orifices 112 and holes 113 may be arranged in oval or polygonal shapes roughly approximating the shape of the desired burn to be made in the target surface 125. Similarly, the arrangement of orifices 112 and holes 113 depicted in FIGS. 1A-1B may include more or less concentric rings for increasing or decreasing the area of burn of the target surface 125.

For safety considerations, the explosive ordnance disposal procedures must generally be performed remotely. A remote initiation fuse assembly is fitted into the adapter 106 in the top of the device. The remote fuse (not shown) may be any type that is capable of igniting the starter materials 108 which in turn ignite the thermite charge 114. The fuse should desirably be an electric or timed fuse.

For one example embodiment, the incendiary device is a cylindrical container filled with approximately 0.6 lb of incendiary mixture. The body is a thin sheet metal cylinder approximately 2.3 inches in diameter by 3.5 inches high, with eight exit holes in the bottom and three vent holes in the top. The device body is equipped with a pre-formed graphite insulation liner with an orifice plate at the base and vent plate at the top. The incendiary fill is consolidated into the insulated body with eight formed hollow cores. The top of the fill and the multiple hollow cores are covered with a starter mixture. The holes in the top and bottom of the device are covered with an adhesive moisture barrier. The device includes 8 hollow cores having a nominal diameter of 7/16 inches, three vent holes having a nominal diameter of 0.2344 inches, and a standoff distance of approximately 0.5 inches. Such a device has been shown to be capable of producing a hole of approximately 2 inches in diameter through a 1/4-inch thick steel plate.

For another example embodiment, the incendiary device is a cylindrical container filled with approximately 3.5 lb of incendiary mixture. The body is a thin sheet metal cylinder approximately 4 inches in diameter by 6.25 inches high, with twelve exit holes in the bottom and three vent holes in the top. The device body is equipped with a pre-formed graphite insulation liner with an orifice plate at the base and vent plate at the top. The incendiary fill is consolidated into the insulated body with twelve formed hollow cores. The top of the fill and the multiple hollow cores are covered with a starter mixture. The holes in the top and bottom of the device are covered with an adhesive moisture barrier. The device includes 12 hollow cores having a nominal diameter of 1/2 inches, three vent holes having a nominal diameter of 1/2 inches, and a standoff distance of approximately 3/4 inches. Such a device has been shown to be capable of producing a hole of approximately 3.5 inches in diameter through a 1/2-inch thick steel plate.

FIG. 2 is a top view of a harness 150 for use with the incendiary device of FIGS. 1A-1B. The harness 150 may be used to facilitate attachment of the incendiary device 100 to a target surface 125. The harness 150 includes a ring 116 having a diameter large enough to fit over the housing 101 of the incendiary device 100 yet having a diameter smaller than the circumferential skirt 122 of the housing 101. One or more hands or other appendages 117 may be attached to and extend from the ring 116 for use in attaching the harness 150 to the target surface 125. In a simple construction, the ring 116 may be a ring of wire. The hands 117 may include a wire loop coiled around the ring 116 for attachment.

FIG. 3A is a top view of a harness 150 having hold-downs 118 attached to the hands 117. The hold-downs 118 are generally adapted to the type of surface to which the incendiary device 100 is to be attached. For example, if the target surface 125 is a ferrous metal, the hold-downs 118 could be magnets. However, it is found that adhesive hold-downs 118 are probably more universally suitable for a variety of surfaces.

FIG. 3B is a cross-sectional view of a hold-down 118 formed of two pieces of double-sided foam tape, e.g., 3M.TM. 4930 VHB.TM. Double Coated Acrylic Foam Tape, available from 3M, St. Paul, Minn., USA. Such tapes contain a pressure-sensitive adhesive on opposing surfaces of a foam carrier. Each surface of these foam tapes contains a removable liner.

A first piece of foam tape 128 can maintain its liner on an outer surface 124. A second piece of foam tape 130 can maintain its liner on an outer surface 126 until ready for attachment to a target surface 125. The remaining surfaces of the first piece of foam tape 128 and the second piece of foam tape 130 may be placed around an arm 117 and attached to each other by their exposed adhesive surfaces. When ready to attach the harness 150 to a target surface, the liner may be removed from the surface 126, thereby exposing its adhesive layer.

CONCLUSION

The various embodiments provide an incendiary device utilizing a multiple core-burner technique that facilitates producing large diameter cuts through steel targets. To facilitate this result, the various embodiments incorporate a multiple-core burning design with multiple orifices at the base for directing multiple jets of molten reaction product at the target. The various embodiments further incorporate an optional holding device as a means for locking the device onto the target.

Devices in accordance with the invention having a base diameter of 2.312" have been shown to be capable of producing an approximately 2" diameter hole through 1/4 inch thick steel plate using a 275 g thermite charge within a container three-quarters the size of a standard M14 package.

Although specific embodiments have been illustrated and described herein, it will be appreciated by those of ordinary skill in the art that any arrangement that is calculated to achieve the same purpose may be substituted for the specific embodiments shown. Many adaptations of the invention will be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art. Accordingly, this application is intended to cover any adaptations or variations of the invention. It is manifestly intended that this invention be limited only by the following claims and equivalents thereof.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 11:24 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. The point is, so does the type of cutting done at the cleanup. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 11:27 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. Draw. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MervinFerd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 11:48 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. Tie---House wins. House rules.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Contrite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 12:16 AM
Response to Reply #25
26. Who's the house? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vincent_vega_lives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 07:18 AM
Response to Reply #26
66. When in doubt, go with the metalworkers forum not the political forum
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 10:52 AM
Response to Original message
14. OMG! More pictures available at the link!!!
http://www.debunking911.com/thermite.htm

Warning, the mental gymnastics involved in understanding this consists of the following leap of logic - looking at a welder at the WTC cleanup actually making an angle cut with his welding tool! OMGWTFBB!!!!!!!1!!!!!!11111!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hack89 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-23-07 07:05 PM
Response to Original message
16. Since you haven't provide pictures to compare them to..
how do we know that they are identical to demolition? Are we simply to take your word for it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CB_Brooklyn Donating Member (162 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 01:42 AM
Response to Original message
27. Excellent Post!
Fire cannot cause clean cuts like that.

What's mind boggling though is that GZ should have had at least 10 stories of steel beams for a standard controlled demolition (10% of original height). But the pile was only about one story high!

I wrote an article about this issue:
http://www.911researchers.com/node/123


Also see these videoclips:
http://thewebfairy.com/911/h-effect/horseshoe.htm
http://thewebfairy.com/911/h-effect/bent.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 06:02 AM
Response to Reply #27
34. How did you figure that out?
that GZ should have had at least 10 stories of steel beams for a standard controlled demolition (10% of original height). But the pile was only about one story high!

Here's a quiz for you. How many miles long is a cubic foot of sand if each grain is laid next to eaxh other (assume a grain size of 0.5 mm)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CB_Brooklyn Donating Member (162 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 09:23 PM
Response to Reply #34
56. sounds like you're saying the steel pieces were about the size of sand
Thank you!

Thanks for confirming.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hack89 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 07:02 AM
Response to Reply #27
41. What about the seven subterranean floors
below the WTC - isn't a lot of that pile below street level?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 07:19 AM
Response to Reply #41
42. It was intact,, no wait - bombs went off in the basement, no wait
it was nuclear bombs in the basement, no -no Dick Cheney was eating lunch in the basement, no, no, wait, let me think, the basement held the dusturdication equipment and infinite energy device needed to vaporize the building in 10 seconds.

Damn this is complicated!!!!!!!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CB_Brooklyn Donating Member (162 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 09:27 PM
Response to Reply #41
57. no steel beams in sub-basements
see photos here (about halfway down): http://janedoe0911.tripod.com/StarWarsBeam4.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Lone Groover Donating Member (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 05:52 AM
Response to Original message
33. Does anyone else know?
To help Boloboffin with his theory perhaps someone else can help.

These pictures...




...are puzzling me.

The beam is at least 4 feet thick. How deep does a cutting torch cut.
It seems unlikely that that the beam was cut from the photographer side because of the uncut bar that is in front of it.

I just want to eliminate the possibility of photo manipulation seeing as these pictures originate from a 9/11 OCT advocacy site.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 06:05 AM
Response to Reply #33
35. First it's not a beam, it's a column, second
it's hollow not four feet thick.

Also do you have the same standards for evidence regarding CT advocacy sites?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Lone Groover Donating Member (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 06:44 AM
Response to Reply #35
36. Yes... yes.. LARED..
But that hasn't answered my question.

And yes I do require the same standard from CT sites as well - manipulated photos are bad... very bad.

So any answers?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 06:45 AM
Response to Reply #36
37. Answers to what? N/T
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Lone Groover Donating Member (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 06:51 AM
Response to Reply #37
38. You know...
...what I asked Boloboffin about depth of cutting torches and is it not a problem that the beam/box appears to be cut but there is an uncut bar in front of it?

Also is this photo faked? It's important, I've seen it used a lot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 07:02 AM
Response to Reply #38
40. Ok
Edited on Sat Feb-24-07 07:09 AM by LARED
The column in the picture is not four feet thick. The WTC columns were "built up" steel fabrications, where the outside dimensions remained consistent to the top, but the inside dimension of the columns changes creating thicker sides at the bottom and thinner side towards the top.

My experience actually using a torch and other cutting tools (like carbon arcs) tells me that cuts seen in the picture are not in the least unusual. I don't know for certain how thick the column walls were in the picture, but cutting through many inches of structural steel is a simple technical feat, requiring no special equipment

The steel bar in front is offset from the cutting area. There is clearly enough room to maneuver a torch around that bar to get to the column steel.

I'm not a expert in faked imagery, but the picture seems quite ordinary. I see nothing that indicates it's faked.

Edit for additional info

Looking at the fabrication weld along the horizontal (as seen in the photo), and comparing it the the man basket handrails which are about 2" OD, indicates the column wall thickness to be perhaps 2 to 3 inches thick. Easily cut with a large touch.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Lone Groover Donating Member (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #40
47. Durh...
I'm not a expert in faked imagery, but the picture seems quite ordinary. I see nothing that indicates it's faked.

Well that's alright then.

It must be genuine.

The steel bar in front is offset from the cutting area. There is clearly enough room to maneuver a torch around that bar to get to the column steel.

Clearly.

The welder took great care not to damage the bar in front.

Nothing to see here.

I can sleep easier tonight.

There is no such thing as faked OCT photography... we all know that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #47
48. Nothing to see here.
You figured it out. Congrats.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Lone Groover Donating Member (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 04:30 PM
Response to Reply #48
49. I sure did....
..and its all thanks to you.

I'm so grateful.

Absolutely nothing fishy about that photo at all.

It all looks normal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 04:42 PM
Response to Reply #49
50. Grateful you should be
No everyone gets to sit at the masters feet. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Lone Groover Donating Member (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 04:45 PM
Response to Reply #50
51. I'm just a "conspiracy theorist"...
...not capable of logical thought like you.

I should have known the uncut bar was a red herring.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 04:48 PM
Response to Reply #51
52. Why, you are getting smarter
The uncut bar is a set up to fool the CT'er into thinking there was as smoking gun. You saw right through the ploy.

Again congrats.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Lone Groover Donating Member (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 04:51 PM
Response to Reply #52
53. I realise that now.
There is an obvious explanation as to why the welder took great care not to cut that bar.

I never went to Smart School. Sorry about that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Lone Groover Donating Member (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #53
54. However...
...I do have an O level Grade A in Sarcasm if that's any help.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 06:24 PM
Response to Reply #53
55. Why does that bar cause problems for you? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Lone Groover Donating Member (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 02:31 AM
Response to Reply #55
63. That photo is repeatly used as an example...
...of angled cutting of the columns at WTC.

We should be certain it's not been photoshopped... shouldn't we?

You think it looks normal... I have doubts about a welder taking care not to cut the bar in front, but actually managing to cut behind it.

And the source of this photo is a 9/11 OCT advocacy site.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vincent_vega_lives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 07:35 AM
Response to Reply #63
70. Why is it that EVERY photo an expert internet CT deducer can't comprehend
is PHOTO SHOPPED? You'd think there's no LEGIT online photo in existance they can't deductify.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Lone Groover Donating Member (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 07:39 AM
Response to Reply #70
72. Thanks for solving the puzzle. nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 07:06 PM
Response to Reply #63
93. So you believe someone may have
photo shopped the picture of the weld but forgot to photo shop the bar in front?

Really? You believe that?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Lone Groover Donating Member (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-26-07 07:56 AM
Response to Reply #93
110. Do you believe its impossible? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LARED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-26-07 08:07 AM
Response to Reply #110
113. Of course it is possible
But why would the deed be done? For what purpose? Why photo-shop the slag and hole but not the bar?

Outside of an active imagination do you have ANY evidence it is faked?

ANY?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Lone Groover Donating Member (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-26-07 08:14 AM
Response to Reply #113
114. Nope... other than it looks fishy.
And it gets used all the time by OCT advocacy sites as proof of angled cutting at WTC.

But I think the picture is a puzzle.

Why photo-shop the slag and hole but not the bar?

Carelessness? Complacency? Stupidity? Yer takes yer pick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vincent_vega_lives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 07:33 AM
Response to Reply #49
68. Instead of the childish pouting
why don't you tell us what you are seeing?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Lone Groover Donating Member (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 07:36 AM
Response to Reply #68
71. I have. Thanks.
I see a puzzle.
And a potentially faked photo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jberryhill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #40
92. Oh geez......

If you don't know, then don't guess. That only makes things worse.

The torch was put in through the hole in the back, and the cut is made from the inside. That's why slag is blown outward. It is also why the bar over that side is not cut. That is why the cut leads down to the HOLE in the back of the column.

You cut from the inside, so that you know you are cutting all of the way through.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kingshakabobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 02:06 PM
Response to Reply #38
44. "photo faked?" What was that about mental gymnastics? LOL.
Clear evidence that your "slag" theories are bullshit........and you cry fake - or "just ask questions" about fake photos.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Lone Groover Donating Member (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 07:34 AM
Response to Reply #44
69. I haven't got any slag theories thanks.
Edited on Sun Feb-25-07 07:35 AM by The Lone Groover
But I am puzzled by that photo.
Is it possible that in their zeal for the "truth" OCTers may fabricate "evidence"?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vincent_vega_lives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 07:42 AM
Response to Reply #69
73. Typical mirror projection if I ever saw one.
I have been here a while and have never seen any evidence of photo-fakery. In fact I think you are the first to accuse anyone of it.

This rather pathetic attempt to level accusation reveals quite a bit about your character.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Lone Groover Donating Member (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 07:43 AM
Response to Reply #73
74. Thanks, you're really helping solve this puzzle. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vincent_vega_lives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 07:52 AM
Response to Reply #74
78. Which puzzle
The 4' thick columns or the impossible-to-cut-behind steel bar? :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Lone Groover Donating Member (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 08:00 AM
Response to Reply #78
80. The puzzle as to why the bar in front is uncut when the column...
...directly behind it is cut.

To me the photo is attempting to give the impression that the cut was from the other side, where the welder is actually cutting. Maybe the hypothetical photo faker didn't think this through so well.

If I was a welder with a big cutting torch I wouldn't be so careful about the bar in front.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vincent_vega_lives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 08:07 AM
Response to Reply #80
81. Why don't you take your 'puzzle' here?
Edited on Sun Feb-25-07 08:12 AM by vincent_vega_lives
http://www.hobartwelders.com/mboard/forumdisplay.php?f=4

Since you won't buy anyone here explaining it to you anyway?


That it was cut from the opposite side???? The welder obviously started on the side facing the pic, cut away the aluminum facade and then made an initial cut in the steel. THEN you go to the opposite side and do the same. Why would you bother cutting the bar? Its obviously just part of the frame for the aluminum facade. It is far enough away to require two cuts...it and the steel behind it. It would be a waste of time, something welders are trained NOT TO DO. Its not a matter of 'careful'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Lone Groover Donating Member (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #81
86. Why cut the bar? Because its in the way?
Are you sure cutters only do a half cut on each side as well? Why? When do they do the full cut?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Lone Groover Donating Member (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #81
89. The half cut business...
and wasting time...

It would be a waste of time, something welders are trained NOT TO DO. Its not a matter of 'careful'.

Where is the efficiency in doing half a cut, moving your rig to the other side (for another half cut?) and cutting that? Then I presume you move your rig back again to finish the cut (and then back again?).

It's a puzzle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bolo Boffin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 02:10 PM
Response to Reply #89
90. What if they are just prepping all these columns?
That's right - prepping them. This is a large section of the perimeter columns that are still standing, all connected. They aren't going to cut through each column all the way!

No, they are weakening each column so that they can bring the whole thing down at one time. That bar could actually have been spotwelded in place to give some more support to the column's dead weight, and would provide little or no resistance when the section is actually brought down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Lone Groover Donating Member (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-26-07 08:00 AM
Response to Reply #90
112. "What if..", "could have.."
This is proof?

"What if.. the photo's a fake?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Lone Groover Donating Member (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 07:49 AM
Response to Reply #73
77. Oh and...
Edited on Sun Feb-25-07 07:51 AM by The Lone Groover
"I have been here a while and have never seen any evidence of photo-fakery."

Except perhaps for CT photos. Did you look really hard at any OCT pictures?

Perhaps you slept through the Pentagon car park video pictures period.

"In fact I think you are the first to accuse anyone of it."

There is also recently Steve Spaks amazing rare "split second" photo as well that has been hidden away for 5 years whilst a debate about the damage to WTC7 raged for 5 years on the internet.

OCTers would never fake evidence would they?

I mean they would never think of ends justifying means would they?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vincent_vega_lives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 07:58 AM
Response to Reply #77
79. Yeahsssss
:eyes: "OCT" pictures. What did Dick take them with his flash bulb camera himself?

No I don't believe that people disinclined to believe MIHOP would need to fake photos.

This FAKE pics or FAKE evidence claim keeps coming up, and only from the side that is arguing MIHOP, usually when claims they make are debunked by said pics or evidence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Lone Groover Donating Member (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 08:11 AM
Response to Reply #79
82. OCT pictures are pictures like the welder picture above..
..that come from OCT advocacy sites.

Take a look at "properties" on that picture.

Cheers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vincent_vega_lives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 08:13 AM
Response to Reply #82
83. Soooo by your reasoning
Edited on Sun Feb-25-07 08:21 AM by vincent_vega_lives
that picture never existed anywhere else and ORIGINATED from "OCT adocacy sites" correct?

http://hereisnewyork.org/gallery/thumb.asp?CategoryID=5&picnum=73


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Lone Groover Donating Member (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 01:51 PM
Response to Reply #83
88. The pictures in this thread came from an OCT advocacy site.
Edited on Sun Feb-25-07 01:51 PM by The Lone Groover
Check the properties. I didn't say it originated there. What exactly is its provenance?

Before people offer "proof" they need to make sure its kosher. Or do we assume OCTers are above all that?

The picture is a puzzle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vincent_vega_lives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 09:01 PM
Response to Reply #88
99. Do I have to SPELL IT OUT FOR YOU
Edited on Sun Feb-25-07 09:04 PM by vincent_vega_lives
http://hereisnewyork.org/gallery/thumb.asp?CategoryID=5&picnum=73

LOOK AT THE LINK. It is the source of the pictures.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Lone Groover Donating Member (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-26-07 07:58 AM
Response to Reply #99
111. No... the pictures posted in this thread came from...
..a 9/11 OCT advocacy site.

You can check "properties".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vincent_vega_lives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-26-07 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #111
115. How do you not get this
THIS IS WHERE THE 9-11 DEBUNKING SITE GOT THE PICTURES FROM.


Sites can embed photos rather than linking them!!!



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Lone Groover Donating Member (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-26-07 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #115
116. But it was posted here from an OCT advocacy site.
Where did originally, originally come from?

Fishy picture.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vincent_vega_lives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-27-07 06:32 AM
Response to Reply #116
131. Ok, one more time
THIS is the original online source of the picture. The "Debunking 9-11" site got it from here:

Maybe I'm being a little unfair. Maybe I just happened to get this from some obscure site. Maybe I work for the government and have a stash of photos the scholars aren't privy to... No, actually I got this from the same place the scholars got their photo.

Scholars Photo:
http://hereisnewyork.org/gallery/thumb.asp?CategoryID=5&picnum=13

The above photo
http://hereisnewyork.org/gallery/thumb.asp?CategoryID=5&picnum=73





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kingshakabobo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 03:30 PM
Response to Original message
45. Ok. Now I'm pissed.
Which one of "the cabal" OK'd marking CLEAR evidence of shape-charge/thermate with the words "save"????? Huh?

How the hell are we to pull off our dastardly plan if you people allow evidence to be marked and photographed???

Somebody needs to be liquidated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MervinFerd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-24-07 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #45
46. Don't worry. The guy who decided to SAVE that steel is Terminated.
Along with the guy who took the picture.

Unfortunate the photo got out, though. It'll be erased by next week.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SidDithers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Feb-25-07 09:46 AM
Response to Original message
85. Hey, OP, you got any comments?...
now that your questions have been answered? Or was this just a drive-by?

Sid
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-26-07 04:22 AM
Response to Original message
107. The answer is self-evident in your first photo.
The two beams cut at an angle are cut at the SAME angle, despite differences in how they lay in the pile. This pretty obviously shows that they were cut by the cleanup workers as part of removing debris.

Much more impressive is the mental gymnastics required to see a number of steel beams which have cut ends sticking out of the pile, and assume that they must have been cut as part of a dastardly conspiracy, and then all conveniently landed cut end up, poking out of the pile, so that we could see them.

I defy you to find any of these angled pieces in the photos taken within the first couple of days after the collapse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
i miss america Donating Member (822 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-26-07 07:53 AM
Response to Reply #107
109. Please see post #102 above taken the day of the collapse.
There are at least two large pieces with angled cuts in the foreground well sourced and posted on an impartial website.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-27-07 02:26 AM
Response to Reply #109
130. Some beams would be expected to shear or deform in the collapse. Note the angle on the beam there.
It's not the kind of angle one would use for a demolition setup, not being steep enough. Furthermore, do you know how many beams you would have to cut to effectively destablize the WTC? It would take days or weeks of cutting crews working around the clock, something that you wouldn't be able to conceal from the people working there.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Twist_U_Up Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Feb-26-07 08:54 PM
Response to Original message
123. Here are more
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 10:50 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC