>> ^Duckman33:

>> ^Jinx:
Sigh
While I applaud the experiments with thermite and acknowledge that the official findings of 9/11 probably miss something I think its a stretch to conclude that this was some sort of sabotage. Not only is there no proof, but I also fail to see a motive. Where's the money or power in this? Or do you think elements of your own government conspired to bring down the Twin Towers, hire Saudi's to hijack the planes all to pin it on Saddam for support with an occupation of Iraq? Come on, whip out the razer for this one. Plane hit building. Building collapse. Its not hard.

No proof? How do you explain the thermite particles found in dust samples collected by people who lived by the WTC? Also, hard to get any other "proof" since the rest of the material from the collapse was conveniently whisked away before anyone could do a thorough investigation. Quite convenient if you ask me.


Yes, the clean-up after is the nefarious part.

The bigger cover up is the crashing of airliners into the towers. That act made it look like there were no pre-planted explosives and that the buildings collapsed as a result of the impact and fires. Quite convenient if you ask Duckman33

>> ^Jinx:

Sigh
While I applaud the experiments with thermite and acknowledge that the official findings of 9/11 probably miss something I think its a stretch to conclude that this was some sort of sabotage. Not only is there no proof, but I also fail to see a motive. Where's the money or power in this? Or do you think elements of your own government conspired to bring down the Twin Towers, hire Saudi's to hijack the planes all to pin it on Saddam for support with an occupation of Iraq? Come on, whip out the razer for this one. Plane hit building. Building collapse. Its not hard.


No proof? How do you explain the thermite particles found in dust samples collected by people who lived by the WTC? Also, hard to get any other "proof" since the rest of the material from the collapse was conveniently whisked away before anyone could do a thorough investigation. Quite convenient if you ask me.

>> ^Enzoblue:

@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/Jinx" title="member since March 21st, 2009" class="profilelink">Jinx,
Royal Dutch/Shell- 4.5 to 8.2
ExxonMobil - 4.7 to 17.2
British Petroleum- 3.4 to 5.9
Chevron Texaco- 1.1 to 3.5
Profits in Billions from 2002 to 2003. (USA Today, 8/28/03)

What has that got to do with the towers collapse though. I don't doubt that many of the motives for occupation in the middle east are based on oil, but as an excuse to go to war 9/11 was a pretty poor one. No doubt the US government used the tragedy to justify war with Iraq, but there really was no connection and thats why I have a hard time believing they engineered the whole thing. If they can go to all this trouble to rig the buildings, get some planes to fly into and succesfully cover it up, why did they put Saudis in the planes? I think its much more likely that this was a terrorist attack and the US government scrambled to use it to their own advantage.


As for how the planes brought the buildings down, well I think I'm happy with the explanation. The fire, while not hot enough to actually melt steel, would have still weakened it sufficiently to allow it to bend and buckle. The floors pancaked and domino'd all the way down the tower. With the floors gone the walls had no support so they fell in too.

It seems to me the problem here is that there were accounts of molten metal which can't have been caused by the fire, and thats the lose end the guy in this video is trying to address. I cannot speculate how the metal melted, but I'm pretty confident that if there had been girders cut through with thermite there would have been evidence. You saw how distincive those cuts are. As for this "nanothermite", my guess would be that it was left there from contruction. Thermite is used in the contruction of railway tracks to fuse the joints together, its not impossible that a similar method was used in the contruction/repair of the towers and that it remained there (along with the balls of iron).

Anyway, tl:dr. Molten metal. Must be conspiracy. lol.

>> ^Jinx:

Sigh
While I applaud the experiments with thermite and acknowledge that the official findings of 9/11 probably miss something I think its a stretch to conclude that this was some sort of sabotage. Not only is there no proof, but I also fail to see a motive. Where's the money or power in this? Or do you think elements of your own government conspired to bring down the Twin Towers, hire Saudi's to hijack the planes all to pin it on Saddam for support with an occupation of Iraq? Come on, whip out the razer for this one. Plane hit building. Building collapse. Its not hard.


I think what's interesting is that like the man says, everyone assumed it was NOT the impact but the jet fuel that brought the buildings down. Unless the offical line is now changing.

I doubt the impact of a fragile aircraft that that disintegrated into a million pieces was enough to bring down a super strong structure designed to resist all that nature can throw at it. To bring down a building that size you would normally have to demolish it...

Still my issue is what the proposed rigging of the building would have looked like. What are they proposing exactly? Would only certain points and floors require rigging?

Sigh

While I applaud the experiments with thermite and acknowledge that the official findings of 9/11 probably miss something I think its a stretch to conclude that this was some sort of sabotage. Not only is there no proof, but I also fail to see a motive. Where's the money or power in this? Or do you think elements of your own government conspired to bring down the Twin Towers, hire Saudi's to hijack the planes all to pin it on Saddam for support with an occupation of Iraq? Come on, whip out the razer for this one. Plane hit building. Building collapse. Its not hard.

For reference...

NIST report and press conference:
Sunder said that his team investigated these hypothetical causes [thermite] and ruled them out. "We asked ourselves what is the minimum amount of charge we could use to bring the building down," he said. "And we found that even the smallest charge would release an extremely loud sound heard half a mile away." There were no reports of such a sound; numerous observers and video recordings found the collapse to be relatively quiet.

FEMA:
The eutectic temperature for this mixture strongly suggests that the temperatures in this region of the steel beam approached 1,000 degrees C (1,800 degrees F), which is substantially lower than would be expected for melting this steel...

FEMA:
Temperatures in this region of the steel were likely to be in the range of 700 to 800 degrees C (1290 - 1470 degrees F).

NIST:
In no instance did NIST report that steel in the WTC towers melted due to the fires. The melting point of steel is about 1,500 degrees Celsius (2,800 degrees Fahrenheit). Normal building fires and hydrocarbon (e.g., jet fuel) fires generate temperatures up to about 1,100 degrees Celsius (2,000 degrees Fahrenheit). NIST reported maximum upper layer air temperatures of about 1,000 degrees Celsius (1,800 degrees Fahrenheit) in the WTC towers (for example, see NCSTAR 1, Figure 6-36).
However, when bare steel reaches temperatures of 1,000 degrees Celsius, it softens and its strength reduces to roughly 10 percent [***NOTE: no reference] of its room temperature value. Steel that is unprotected (e.g., if the fireproofing is dislodged) can reach the air temperature within the time period that the fires burned within the towers. Thus, yielding and buckling of the steel members (floor trusses, beams, and both core and exterior columns) with missing fireproofing were expected under the fire intensity and duration determined by NIST for the WTC towers.

Modulus of Elasticity for Steel:
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/young-modulus-d_773.html

What is concerning is that thermite was rule out because of the noise, and that 1000 lbs would be needed.

Also, no one has explained the UL testing on the steel for 6 hrs at 1000C?

Finally, what is troubling is that softening girders causeing collapse, fine, steel is weakened at 1400degF, but the core wouldn't fall. Certainly wouldn't break apart.

@joedirt, I don't think Mythbusters is trying to cover anything up, their methods compared to this guy are just flawed. If I recall, they deliver the thermite by lighting it on fire in an exposed bucket, losing energy by not having them capped, or continuously moving down. And as for the "Not be allowed for discussion" I think this falls under their "We don't want to show things on T.v. that could be used potentially badly" checkbox. (I.e. they want to do, but aren't allowed, to do a silencer special, because if it's really easy to make a gun silenced, it could be potentially dangerous for the populace to know how)

As for the rest of the video, this guy makes a helluva good argument, moreso then anybody else ever has. It's refreshing to see someone actually prove their facts instead of just basing them on "Nuh uh, it couldn't happen that way.

What I found interesting is that official groups when to great lengths to say thermite cutting is impossible.. Especially mythbusters.. And some guy does it in his backyard. That's what really makes this interesting.

I dont have an opinion on the rest of the bullshit, but I LURV ME SOME THERMITE VIDEO !

This is like me when I as 18, Just full of frustration, and no voice, so what do you do ? you go onto your webcam and upload something to youtube whilst portraying yourself as a pre adolescent teen whining to momma using expletives and not really making a point.




What I suggest to her now that I am ten years down the road... Go hit a cell phone tower with Thermite. Actually make some form of difference rather then flap your jaws. shut up and do something.

Although thermite and communications towers may or may not be over done, that is my suggestion for getting your aggression out.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Thermite Turkey Thanksgiving' to 'Thermite, Turkey, Thanksgiving' - edited by eric3579

Turkey - Check
Thermite - Check
Rock Music - Check
Guns - None

Damn... almost a perfect All-American video.

It's obscured at 6:50 at the bottom, but thermite rail welding

Tamper comes in at 8:34

It's crappy engineering like this that effectively killed one of the most brilliant concept in aviation. Blimps are without question, -the- most efficient design for heavy airlifting. No fuel wasted on lift makes them remarkably cost-effective. But letting designers do idiotic things like use hydrogen as the lifting gas (instead of the non-flammable helium, and/or paint the body with thermite, or build some ridiculous scaffold to hold four partial helicopters has made it so nobody will ever seriously consider them again.

If you cannot pragmatically prove your system works, then it does not work.

Whether the test was flawed or the variables were not well planned for it is clear that this failed.


Should never have made it out of QA.

Thermite