Questions we would like to see answered about 911...

[axiomgate]

Hello Skeptics,

Questions we would like to see answered about 911...

How many of the below can you answer...?

It would be interesting to answer each twice, giving your idea and how you think the Government would answer.

For example:-

Question one
Why didn’t the Pentagon act when the Plane was approaching ?
My Answer:- The area hit was the Financial and accounting area, and could hold a paper trail leading to the true planners of the 911 attacks.
Predicted Government Answer:- There was a routine training exercise in place and it wasn't certain if the threat was real.


Question one
Why didn’t the Pentagon act when the Plane was approaching ?

Question Two
How comes there where bodies within the Pentagon from the plane but no seats ?

Question Three
One of the WTC buildings was hit at an Angle, why did the building not fall to one side ?

Question Four
Who was piloting the Black Helicopter that was flying back-wards at the time of the collapse of WTC's ?

Question Five
Why have the phone messages aired and played live for the world to hear now been removed and deleted from the source ?

Question Six
Seven of Hijackers are still Alive, are there any known interviews with them and their ideas on what happened and how their identity was stolen ?

Question Seven
If the Original list of Hijackers was so wrong and the ID’s could have been stolen, who did Hijack the Planes ?

Question Eight
Israeli connections have been made and not followed up, what do you know of the Israeli connections ?

Question Nine
How did Cellular phones back in 2001 make phone calls at over 8,000 feet ?

Question Ten
How did building 7 fall when no planes hit it ?

Question Eleven
How did the Plane Fuel reach the temperature to melt the Steal ?

Question Twelve
Why was there no bodies found at crash site in Pennsylvania, and very little plane parts, and why was the remains of flight 93 shipped to Iron Mountain ?

Question Thirteen
Why did eye witnesses in Pennsylvania report hearing loud bangs prior to seeing a Fireball of an aircraft hitting the floor suddenly, could it be flight 93 was shot down ?

Question Fourteen
Why do the planes under bodies look different to normal passenger planes of the Jets that hit the Twin Towers ?

Question Fifteen
The towers tossed massive steel beams 200 feet in each direction, can that be done by a gravity of the collapse ?

Question Sixteen
Survivors and fire-fighters report explosions on the lower floors of the WTC towers at the same time as the planes hit it, how is this possible ?

Question Seventeen
Pools of molten Steal were found 7 stories under the towers 6 weeks after the attack, does fuel burn at that temperature and keep steal in liquid form for that amount of time ?

Question Eighteen
What is the suggested cause of the flash on the side of the towers just before the planes penetrate the buildings ?

Question Nineteen
Why is there no CCTV footage showing the "hijackers" boarding any of the planes or even arriving at the Airports ?

Question Twenty
Bush’s own words he states those that fund or train terrorists are terrorists… The CIA trained, funded and armed the Taliban… So does that make the CIA a terrorist cell ?

Axiom Question
Our Final Question and how all the above could be answered:-
Why wont the Government build a replica of one of the towers in the desert and remote control a Jet of the same type (As they do in test crashes at Boeing) and record the results from each floor of the tower and plane to give real answers ?

[Mongrel]

http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/home

http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/


From here: http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=82689

[SimonC]

http://www.911myths.com/index.html

[brettdbass]

http://justfuckinggoogleit.com/

8)

[Mongrel]

http://justfuckinggoogleit.com/

8)

Subtle ;D

[MischiefMonkey]

http://kittens.sytes.org/kitten180.jpg

[axiomgate]

Humm... I have seen the links... But I could put up links for each of my own questions showing why I asked...

I was after your own ideas...

Do you have your own ideas skeptic sheeple ?

[Mongrel]

Yes, and they're guided by information from the overwhelming majority of professionals in the respective fields rather than angsty teenagers who view Youtube as the ultimate proof.

[brodski]

Question one
Why didn’t the Pentagon act when the Plane was approaching ? act how? What did they not do that you expected them to do?



Question Two
How comes there where bodies within the Pentagon from the plane but no seats ?
that is a lie.


Question Three
One of the WTC buildings was hit at an Angle, why did the building not fall to one side ?
Ultimately, physics.



Question Four
Who was piloting the Black Helicopter that was flying back-wards at the time of the collapse of WTC's ? relevance?



Question Five
Why have the phone messages aired and played live for the world to hear now been removed and deleted from the source ? Evidence? and relevance?



Question Six
Seven of Hijackers are still Alive, ? that is a lie.



Question Seven
If the Original list of Hijackers was so wrong and the ID’s could have been stolen, who did Hijack the Planes ? from a faulty premise you ask meaningless question.



Question Eight
Israeli connections have been made and not followed up, that is a lie


Question Nine
How did Cellular phones back in 2001 make phone calls at over 8,000 feet ? ultimately physics, and air-phones are not cell-phones (in the way you use that term).



Question Ten
How did building 7 fall when no planes hit it ? because big chunks of burning, falling, building hit it, and it burned for hours before collapsing.



Question Eleven
How did the Plane Fuel reach the temperature to melt the Steal ? the steel was not melted, weakened yes, but not melted.



Question Twelve
Why was there no bodies found at crash site in Pennsylvania, and very little plane parts, and why was the remains of flight 93 shipped to Iron Mountain ? those are lies


Question Thirteen
Why did eye witnesses in Pennsylvania report hearing loud bangs prior to seeing a Fireball of an aircraft hitting the floor suddenly, could it be flight 93 was shot down ?
eyewitnesses are not always that reliable, especially in high stress situations


Question Fourteen
Why do the planes under bodies look different to normal passenger planes of the Jets that hit the Twin Towers ? because you-tube uses crap compression. Even the LTW loons dropped the "pods" theory, give it up.



Question Fifteen
The towers tossed massive steel beams 200 feet in each direction, can that be done by a gravity of the collapse ? yes



Question Sixteen
Survivors and fire-fighters report explosions on the lower floors of the WTC towers at the same time as the planes hit it, how is this possible ? eyewitnesses are not always that reliable, especially in high stress situations



Question Seventeen
Pools of molten Steal were found 7 stories under the towers 6 weeks after the attack, that is a lie



Question Eighteen
What is the suggested cause of the flash on the side of the towers just before the planes penetrate the buildings ? which false are you talking about?



Question Nineteen
Why is there no CCTV footage showing the "hijackers" boarding any of the planes or even arriving at the Airports ? would it change your mind if it was? Given the number of untruths already contained in your questions, I doubt the basis of this claim in the first place.



Question Twenty
Bush’s own words he states those that fund or train terrorists are terrorists… The CIA trained, funded and armed the Taliban… So does that make the CIA a terrorist cell ? if you want to play those sematic games yes. Bush is an idiot, that dosn't make him an evil genius.



Axiom Question
Our Final Question and how all the above could be answered:-
Why wont the Government build a replica of one of the towers in the desert and remote control a Jet of the same type (As they do in test crashes at Boeing) and record the results from each floor of the tower and plane to give real answers ?

Because it would be a colossal waste of time and money, and paranoid nuts cutting and pasting from the websites of other paranoid nuts would never accept the conclusion anyway.

[axiomgate]

brodski (http://www.skeptics.org.uk/forum/member.php?u=55),

Thanks for giving the time to answer the questions...

Question 1 -
act how? What did they not do that you expected them to do?

Pentagon Orders a Stand down on the planes Approach:- http://www.911review.com/means/standdown.html


Question 4 -
relevance?

The Helicopter was right by the towers the whole time and done some very odd manouvers:- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hxn2kPgKJeM

Question 6 -
that is a lie.

Eh... No it's not...!! There where originally 19 Hijackers reported, 7 are confirmed to be Alive and Well.

Question 7 -
from a faulty premise you ask meaningless question.

See this News Article:- http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1559151.stm

Some are enrolled in the American Army and one is fighting the War on Terror !!

Question 9 -
ultimately physics, and air-phones are not cell-phones (in the way you use that term).

Tests have been done Virtually all known phones around that tme failed at around 4,000 feet, the planes are said to be at 35,000 for the long haul of the flight.

Here is a link to the Physics:- http://physics911.net/projectachilles

[Matt]

Question one
Why didn’t the Pentagon act when the Plane was approaching ?

That's rather begging the question. Who says they didn't act? IN the limited time available a great deal of action was taken, unfortunately not enough to avert disaster.


Question Two
How comes there where bodies within the Pentagon from the plane but no seats ?

Again begging the question - why do you think there were no seats? There were seats.


Question Three
One of the WTC buildings was hit at an Angle, why did the building not fall to one side ?

Build a house of cards, throw a ball at it.

See, it collapses downwards

The impact was not sufficient to knock the tower right over. It was sufficient to do major damage to structutal members including damage to fireproofing. Without sufficent fireproofing the fire that then raged weakend the remaining strurcture already bearing an unballanced load which led to collapse. As is clearly seen in videas of the collapse there is some slight topppling and the building doesn't collapse purely into its own footprint.


Question Four
Who was piloting the Black Helicopter that was flying back-wards at the time of the collapse of WTC's ?

Don't know don't care, given your track record of begging the question I'm not even sure this happened.


Question Five
Why have the phone messages aired and played live for the world to hear now been removed and deleted from the source ?

I have no idea what you're talking about.


Question Six
Seven of Hijackers are still Alive, are there any known interviews with them and their ideas on what happened and how their identity was stolen ?

Ermmm? Are you making this up or what?



Question Seven
If the Original list of Hijackers was so wrong and the ID’s could have been stolen, who did Hijack the Planes ?

Once again, begging the question.


Question Eight
Israeli connections have been made and not followed up, what do you know of the Israeli connections ?

Nothing, however given the poor stadard of proof evidenced by certain members of the 911 truth movement and the anti semitism of a number conspiricy theoists I wouldn't be suprised to find that such connections are largely as insubstantial as the easily disprovable lies that there were no jews in the building on 911, not jews died on 911 etc.


Question Nine
How did Cellular phones back in 2001 make phone calls at over 8,000 feet ?

What height is a problem for radio communication? I never knew. Those idiots keep putting radio masts on top of hills and high buildings I guess thye should be hiding them in basements.

The mobile calls on 911 behaved exactly as you'd expect them two, patchy and intermittant as they flew over areas with lower coverage or the cells failed to hand over a device moving from one cell tot he next at such speed.


Question Ten
How did building 7 fall when no planes hit it ?

The burning debris from the other towers hit it, haven't you seen the the photoes of WTC 7 with a twenty storey hole in the corner of it. The fire didn't help either.


Question Eleven
How did the Plane Fuel reach the temperature to melt the Steal ?

Once again begging the question, as far as I'm aware no steel melted. It was heated and softened but didn't melt.


Question Twelve
Why was there no bodies found at crash site in Pennsylvania, and very little plane parts, and why was the remains of flight 93 shipped to Iron Mountain ?

That's begging more than one question? Bodies were found in Pennsylvania, plane parts were found in Pennsylvania, a whole plane's worth. I've no idea what Iron Mountain is supposed to be (except the location of an unrelated hoax report on the profitablity of war) or why you think parts were shipped there.


Question Thirteen
Why did eye witnesses in Pennsylvania report hearing loud bangs prior to seeing a Fireball of an aircraft hitting the floor suddenly, could it be flight 93 was shot down ?

Once again begging the question. Does eyewitness testimoney really lead one to conclude that this is what happned. Eye witness testimony is notoriously unreliable, how many eye witness report this, what proportion?


Question Fourteen
Why do the planes under bodies look different to normal passenger planes of the Jets that hit the Twin Towers ?

Who told you that they do and why the fuck did you believe them? I've seen photos and vidoes and couldn't see anything I found unusual.


Question Fifteen
The towers tossed massive steel beams 200 feet in each direction, can that be done by a gravity of the collapse ?

Easily


Question Sixteen
Survivors and fire-fighters report explosions on the lower floors of the WTC towers at the same time as the planes hit it, how is this possible ?

It's not before the first plane hit there wouln't have been any firefighters anywhere near either tower. Think about what you're saying here.


Question Seventeen
Pools of molten Steal were found 7 stories under the towers 6 weeks after the attack, does fuel burn at that temperature and keep steal in liquid form for that amount of time ?

No it wasn't, no it couldn't


Question Eighteen
What is the suggested cause of the flash on the side of the towers just before the planes penetrate the buildings ?

What flash? I've seen the impacts and seen no flash - lensflare?


Question Nineteen
Why is there no CCTV footage showing the "hijackers" boarding any of the planes or even arriving at the Airports ?

Again who told you this, is it the same person who told you the rest of this bullshit. Would the cctv footage (http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/prosecution/NT00211.html)used in the trials make you doubt their reliability as a source of infomration.


Question Twenty
Bush’s own words he states those that fund or train terrorists are terrorists… The CIA trained, funded and armed the Taliban… So does that make the CIA a terrorist cell ?

The CIA funded and trained the mujahideen. The mujahideen carried out guerilla warfare against the invading Soviet Army in Afghanistan. They were in every way terrorists and the CIA's continuting programme of black ops in this and other arena is reprehensible. I can think of more clear cut examples than this though.

Some members of the Mujahideen went on to form part of the Taliban. The Taliban though an oppressive regime were not directly a terrorist organisation.

The CIA did not train the Taliban even if certain memebrs of the Taliban had previous been memebers of the Mujahideen and recieved the indirect support of the CIA.

Osama bin Laden was never a member of the Mujahideen though he and his group did fight in Afghanistan alongside them. Being independantly wealthy he had no need of CIA funding or support nor is there any evidence that he recived any.


Axiom Question
Our Final Question and how all the above could be answered:-
Why wont the Government build a replica of one of the towers in the desert and remote control a Jet of the same type (As they do in test crashes at Boeing) and record the results from each floor of the tower and plane to give real answers ?

Are you fucking serious? What on earth do you think that would prove?

[bobdezon]

troofer ::)

Please go away and edumacate yumself O0

[Croydon Bob]

I have many questions for the loonies and liars who promote insane conspiracy theories around the events of 11/09/01. For a start:

If the US faked the events and killed 3,000 of their own citizens just so that they could start a war with Iraq, as many of you idiots alledge. Why did they frame 19 people from Saudi Arabia (their allies) and other countries but nobody from Iraq? Even if it was "the Jews" that did it, or whoever, why frame people from countries that get on with the US, that the US didn't want a war with, when it would have been just as easy to frame people from Iran, Iraq and/or North Korea?

[Mongrel]

I have many questions for the loonies and liars who promote insane conspiracy theories around the events of 11/09/01. For a start:

If the US faked the events and killed 3,000 of their own citizens just so that they could start a war with Iraq, as many of you idiots alledge. Why did they frame 19 people from Saudi Arabia (their allies) and other countries but nobody from Iraq? Even if it was "the Jews" that did it, or whoever, why frame people from countries that get on with the US, that the US didn't want a war with, when it would have been just as easy to frame people from Iran, Iraq and/or North Korea?

And if they could do all that why couldn't they plant WMDs to justify an unpopular war? Why couldn't they silence an intern about a certain...."incident" (Not the Bush administration admittedly but "they" control everything)

[FarSideOfTheMoon]

And if they could do all that why couldn't they plant WMDs to justify an unpopular war? Why couldn't they silence an intern about a certain...."incident" (Not the Bush administration admittedly but "they" control everything)

And why hasn't axiomgate been silenced..... ???

Oh, wait, I get it.....axiomgate is working for the NWO. He's one of them. ::)

[Mongrel]

And why hasn't axiomgate been silenced..... ???

Oh, wait, I get it.....axiomgate is working for the NWO. He's one of them. ::)

That makes sense, no-one could be that gullible for real O0

[SorryImPsychic]

Niels Harrit and 8 other scientists found nano-thermite in the dust from the World Trade Center.

He is interviewed on danish TV2 News.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_tf25lx_3o

Would someone like to explain how pallet loads of Nano-Thermite found its way into the three collapsed buildings. This is not any garden variety type of explosive....very advanced technology >:D.

[Croydon Bob]

Niels Harrit and 8 other scientists found nano-thermite in the dust from the World Trade Center.

He is interviewed on danish TV2 News.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_tf25lx_3o

Would some rational person like to explain how pallet loads of Nano-Thermite found its way into the collapsed buildings. This is not any garden variety type of explosive......very suspicious >:D

http://www.skeptics.org.uk/forum/showpost.php?p=63470&postcount=1045

;D:cheesy:;D

Idiot troll. You've embarassed yourself again!

When are you going to start apologising for all these stupid mistakes you keep making?

[SorryImPsychic]

http://www.skeptics.org.uk/forum/showpost.php?p=63470&postcount=1045


When are you going to start apologising for all these stupid mistakes you keep making?

What mistakes?

I simply asked if someone could explain the presence of nano thermite in buildings?

"
Would someone like to explain how pallet loads of Nano-Thermite found its way into the three collapsed buildings."

It seems there are several explanations...your link being one of them.

Hope no-one is tampering with my posts?

[Matt]

Would some rational person like to explain how pallet loads of Nano-Thermite found its way into the collapsed buildings. This is not any garden variety type of explosive......very suspicious >:D

Begging the question (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question)

What they've found is something that appears to have been painted onto metal. This substance contains aluminum or a compound of aluminium. It burns in air.

The description applies to at least two things. The first is paint. A substance known to be ubiqitous in the world tradecentre and other buildings. A substance which would be expected to be found in the dust.

The second is nano thermite which is a substance that the investagators made up. I mean it could exist. Thermite exists, filings of aluminium and rust could be made finer. Could probably be prepared into some sort of suspension and painted onto metal. Thous wouldn't effect the total amoutn of chemical energy available to the reaction but reacting faster would lead to higher temperatures - however shreading the reactant around as a thin layer would substantially reduce temperatures.

The claim that it's unreacted means that it played no part in bringing down the WTC.

So explain to me why you think this stuff isn't paint?

I can't explain why nano-thermite would be there, but I can explain why paint would be there.

[SorryImPsychic]

(Arrowwind TechImo.com)We must also remember Professor Jones who co-authored the study. He has lost his job at Brigham Young University due to his position on the subject...acutally they were kind to him. He was forced to resign...not fired. He continues to work in teaching people about his findings.

Some of the authors of the paper have lost their jobs at universities and chemistry labs for their outspoken breakdown of what happened at the World Trade Center on 9/11. Kevin Ryan lost his job as a lab director after writing a letter to the National Institute for Standards and Technology(NIST was conducting an investigation into 9/11 at the time) challenging the common theory that burning jet fuel weakened the steel supports holding up the 110-story skyscrapers. Ryan claims that the owner of his laboratory subsidiary "was the company that certified the steel components used in the construction of the WTC buildings,” according to the South Bend Tribune. Dr. Steven E. Jones, a physicist at Brigham Young University, presented a paper in 2005 discussing alternative theories to the commonly accepted 'jet fuel' reasoning. In September 2006 he was placed on paid administrative leave and his paper was removed from the BYU database.

Jones has told Visibility911.com, "In short, the paper explodes the official story that 'no evidence' exists for explosive/pyrotechnic materials in the WTC buildings."

Parts of the report mention other studies being conducted by the scientists that will come out soon. I don't think this issue has reached a conclusion yet. One thing for sure is that anyone who goes against the "official" story is going to be heavily penalized.

[SorryImPsychic]

Begging the question (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question)

I can't explain why nano-thermite would be there, but I can explain why paint would be there.

What the researchers made up Nano thermite like pseudo-scientists made up scalar energy?

Oh what is the world coming to :-*

[Croydon Bob]

What the researchers made up Nano thermite like pseudo-scientists made up scalar energy?


Yes. Well done, you've managed to repeat something correctly. Any chance that you understand what you've just written?

[Trinoc]

For the umpteenth time ... THERMITE IS USED FOR WELDING STEEL GIRDERS!

[Matt]

I don't think this issue has reached a conclusion yet. One thing for sure is that anyone who goes against the "official" story is going to be heavily penalized.

Ah the Galileo fallacy (http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/Galileo_fallacy). As Carl Sagan said "But the fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown. "

Did Kevin Ryan get fired because he dared to question the "Official Story" or was it because he spoke publically in such a way as to give the impression he was speaking on behalf of his employer and that he lied about his employer having been responsible for certifying WTC metal.



his allegations drew a sharp rebuke from UL, which said Ryan wrote the letter "without UL's knowledge or authorization." The company told The Tribune "there is no evidence" that any firm tested the materials used to build the towers.
"UL does not certify structural steel, such as the beams, columns and trusses used in World Trade Center," said Paul M. Baker, the company's spokesman.
Ryan was fired, Baker said, because he "expressed his own opinions as though they were institutional opinions and beliefs of UL."
"The contents of the argument itself are spurious at best, and frankly, they're just wrong," Baker said.


Was Steven Jones sacked or was he placed on administrative leave during an investiagtion after complains of anti semitism in his increasingly accusatory and speculative.

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,645201360,00.html?pg=1


BYU placed Jones on paid leave last week, in part for what it called "the increasingly speculative and accusatory nature of these statements by Dr. Jones."

http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,650200587,00.html



Professor Steven Jones and Brigham Young University finalized a retirement package Friday, six weeks after the school placed the physicist on paid leave to review his statements and research about the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center.

"I am electing to retire so that I can spend more time speaking and conducting research of my own choosing," Jones said in a statement released by the university. "I appreciate the wonderful opportunity I have had to teach and serve and do research at BYU for more than 21 years."

[SorryImPsychic]

For the umpteenth time ... THERMITE IS USED FOR WELDING STEEL GIRDERS!


Sure it is BUT:

The paper also states: “Each sample was found to contain red/gray chips and iron-rich microspheres, which are also peculiar.” Twenty-five pages later, after laying out meticulous details in photomicrographs and spectra analysis of the red-gray chips and microspheres, the scientists conclude: “... the red layer of the red-gray chips we have discovered in the WTC dust is active, unreacted thermitic material, incorporating nanotechnology, and is a highly energetic pyrotechnic or explosive material.”

What gives any of you the expertise to dispute the nano-technology found in these particles or to dispute the competency of the scientists who conducted the study?

How could nano-technology that is known to make thermite much more explosive just happen to show up in dust from the twin towers collapses? This was no ordinary thermite used in welding - it is nanotechnologically produced “super-thermite”.

Have you read the initial report? This may help you farmilarize yourself with the chemistry issues supporting the "super-thermite" findings.

http://www.earthfiles.com/news.php?ID=1555&category=Science

[SorryImPsychic]

Was Steven Jones sacked or was he placed on administrative leave during an investiagtion after complains of anti semitism in his increasingly accusatory and speculativel (http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,650200587,00.html)

This is what Steven Jones is in deep trouble for:

“This nano-thermitic evidence can be ignored
to our peril because something very nefarious happened on 9/11.”
- Steven E. Jones, Ph.D., Physicist

[SorryImPsychic]

Begging the question (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Begging_the_question)



The second is nano thermite which is a substance that the investagators made up.

So explain to me why you think this stuff isn't paint?

I can't explain why nano-thermite would be there, but I can explain why paint would be there.

http://www.earthfiles.com/news.php?ID=1555&category=Science



Nanotechnology-Produced Thermetic Research




http://www.earthfiles.com/Images/news/T/ThermiteLawrenceLabNanoLo.jpg



From Bentham Open Chemical Physics Journal April 2009,
Vol. 2, Pages 7 to 31, "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11
World Trade Center Catastrophe," Footnote [20] Miziolek, A. W. Nanoenergetics:
an emerging technology area of national importance.
Dept. of Defense Amptiac Q 2002; 6 (1): 43-48. (http://ammtiac.alionscience.com/pdf/AMPQ6_1.pdf)
AMPTIAC is Advanced Materials, Manufacturing and
Testing Information Analysis Center in Rome, New York.




WHY IS IT THAT LAWRENCE-LIVERMORE LABS WOULD BE PRODUCING NANOTECHNOLOGY THERMITIC MATERIAL?


Because these are the explosives of the future. There is no doubt that the explosions of the future will be nanothermitic. And they are advertised as ‘smaller, cheaper and nastier.’ That’s the trend. When you are producing the explosives of the future, they will be smaller, cheaper and nastier

[SorryImPsychic]

What the researchers made up Nano thermite like pseudo-scientists made up scalar energy?

Oh what is the world coming to :-*


Yes. Well done, you've managed to repeat something correctly. Any chance that you understand what you've just written?

Bob found some examples of made up nanoexplosives that don't exist even though this guy from DOD is deluded and boasting about them.




Dr. Andrzej W. Miziolek
Weapons and Materials Research Directorate
US Army Research Laboratory

The AMPTIAC Newsletter, Volume 6, Number 1 pp43

Over the last century new chemicals have been discovered or designed
for rapid release of energy in either relatively simple compositions,
like that used in certain warheads, or in more complex
formulations like the advanced composites used as propellants.

Currently, a class of energetic materials known as nitramines are
actually used for both explosives and propulsion applications in
various weapons systems. Some major considerations for successful
weaponization of energetic materials include performance
(e.g. energy density, rate of energy release), long-term storage
stability, and sensitivity to unwanted initiation.

DOE and academic laboratories have active R&D programs
aimed at exploiting the unique properties of nanomaterials that
have potential to be used in energetic formulations for
advanced explosives and propellant applications.

Figure 1 represents
some concepts of how nanomaterials, especially nanoenergetics could be used for improving components of munitions. The figure shows that nanoenergetic composites and ingredients can be used in the ignition, propulsion, as well as the warhead part of the weapon. With regards to the latter application, nanoenergetics hold promise as useful ingredients
for the thermobaric (TBX) and TBX-like weapons, particularly
due to their high degree of tailorability with regards to energy
release and impulse management.

[Croydon Bob]

Bob found some examples of made up nanoexplosives that don't exist even though this guy from DOD is deluded and boasting about them.

Idiot.

[ZERO]

Aluminium and iron are two of the most common minerals in the earth's crust. I can't help thinking that if you really want to find Thermite in a soil sample you could probably do so nearly anywhere on the planet.

[Cuddles]

Niels Harrit and 8 other scientists found nano-thermite in the dust from the World Trade Center.

Is there any nonsense anywhere you don't believe in?

[SorryImPsychic]

Is there any nonsense anywhere you don't believe in?

Why wouldn't I believe in nanomaterials such as nanothermite when the US Army Research Lab actively develops them.


(from my post #29)

Dr. Andrzej W. Miziolek
Weapons and Materials Research Directorate
US Army Research Laboratory

The AMPTIAC Newsletter, Volume 6, Number 1 pp43

Over the last century new chemicals have been discovered or designed
for rapid release of energy in either relatively simple compositions,
like that used in certain warheads, or in more complex
formulations like the advanced composites used as propellants.

Currently, a class of energetic materials known as nitramines are
actually used for both explosives and propulsion applications in
various weapons systems. Some major considerations for successful
weaponization of energetic materials include performance
(e.g. energy density, rate of energy release), long-term storage
stability, and sensitivity to unwanted initiation.

DOE and academic laboratories have active R&D programs
aimed at exploiting the unique properties of nanomaterials that
have potential to be used in energetic formulations for
advanced explosives and propellant applications.

Figure 1 represents
some concepts of how nanomaterials, especially nanoenergetics could be used for improving components of munitions. The figure shows that nanoenergetic composites and ingredients can be used in the ignition, propulsion, as well as the warhead part of the weapon. With regards to the latter application, nanoenergetics hold promise as useful ingredients
for the thermobaric (TBX) and TBX-like weapons, particularly
due to their high degree of tailorability with regards to energy
release and impulse management.

[Graham Lappin]

Hi there Matt - I see your patience is still never ending, I don't know how you do it.

And axiomgate - hi there! I have been away for some time but I see you have not given up yet.

I have a theory that axiomgate is in fact a conspiracy. I think you are really located in the White House, which is just up the road from the headquarters of the Scientologists (how can that be a coincidence)? There is a world wide cunning conspiracy, whereby you spread spurious and incredulous conspiracy theories to divert and distract us from the truth. Your cover is blown, my friend. I will be distracted by you no more. I don't live far from the White House and I am on my way to pay you a visit and see for myself.

[SorryImPsychic]

Aluminium and iron are two of the most common minerals in the earth's crust. I can't help thinking that if you really want to find Thermite in a soil sample you could probably do so nearly anywhere on the planet.

You obviously haven't seen the images of the active thermatic material samples presented in the report - not Fe2O3 + 2Al --> Al2O3 + 2Fe the everyday garden variety thermite.

http://www.bentham-open.org/pages/content.php?TOCPJ/2009/00000002/00000001/7TOCPJ.SGM

Active Thermitic Material Found in WTC Dust The Open Chemical Physics Journal, 2009, Volume 2 11
indicating that the red layer is composed of material that has
a relatively lower average atomic number than the gray
layer.

A higher-magnification BSE image of the corner of one
of the chips, shown in Fig. (4), allows for closer examination
of the difference in grayscale intensity of the two layers and
confirms the higher average atomic number of the gray layer.
The red material also shows specks and other heterogeneities,
in marked contrast to the smooth gray layer.
Newly fractured cross sections of red/gray chips from the
four different dust samples are shown by BSE imaging in
Fig. (5). These four cross sections are representative of all
the red/gray chips studied from the dust samples. The BSE
images illustrate the finding that all of the red layers studied
contained small bright particles or grains characterized by a
high average atomic number. The size and presence of the
particles was found to be consistent throughout the layers,
but the concentration of the particles was found to vary locally,
as can be seen from the images.

[Matt]

SIP, just to let you know that I'm actively ignoring all "evidence" you are posting from Bentham Open Journals. HAd I the necessary money to waste I would do so in a grandiose fashion by paying them to publish an article on the neurological deffincencies of an internet poster using the handle Sorry I'm Psychic.

The fact that there are people who use the vanity press to rediculous and usubstantiated claims doesn't impress me. Were these claims true you'd be able to find better sources.

[SorryImPsychic]

SIP, just to let you know that I'm actively ignoring all "evidence" you are posting from Bentham Open Journals.

The fact that there are people who use the vanity press to rediculous and unsubstantiated claims doesn't impress me. Were these claims true you'd be able to find better sources.

I posted a link to the report - ignore it if you choose but it seems you have judged the report using extraneous reasons which have no bearing on the content of the report. That's being "closed-minded" isn't it.

[Matt]

I posted a link to the report - ignore it if you choose but it seems you have judged the report using extraneous reasons which have no bearing on the content of the report. That's being "closed-minded" isn't it.

You've already seen what I've found out about bentham. I'm not saying that if it is written up in bentham it's crap, I'm saying that if it's only written up in Bentham then there's more than likely a reason for that.

If the only thing you can find to support your argument is the vanity press then I'm sorry. Prior experience and expence ahd lead me to belive strongly that there are better uses for my time.

[SorryImPsychic]

You've already seen what I've found out about bentham. I'm not saying that if it is written up in bentham it's crap, I'm saying that if it's only written up in Bentham then there's more than likely a reason for that.

If its only written up in Bentham.......our speculative reasons can be one of many assumptions.

But some facts about 'reputable' journal publication are:

It would take 2 years plus to go through the standard procedures for journal publication. Also considering the highly controversial findings of the report it would be met with considerable resistance and political pressure not to publish. (and don't tell me this does not happen) Yet the communication of these findings remains urgent and need to be disseminated as widely as possible and as soon as possible.

Gosh just imagine if you were on the review panel....>:D Science is not as objective as we would expect it to be.

[Matt]

If its only written up in Bentham.......our speculative reasons can be one of many assumptions.

But some facts about 'reputable' journal publication are:

It would take 2 years plus to go through the standard procedures for journal publication. Also considering the highly controversial findings of the report it would be met with considerable resistance and political pressure not to publish. (and don't tell me this does not happen) Yet the communication of these findings remains urgent and need to be disseminated as widely as possible and as soon as possible.

Gosh just imagine if you were on the review panel....>:D Science is not as objective as we would expect it to be.

INteresting that you acknowledge that these results haven't been through the standard procedures for peer review and yet spin that to be somehow a positive.

Don't you just love how if a highly qualified academic in the field wanted to rip these findings apart as the sheer bunk they almost certainly are (I say proudly without reading them) in the format of a letter to the editor, then bentham would charge them for the privilledge of publishing their response.

[Cuddles]

Why wouldn't I believe in nanomaterials such as nanothermite when the US Army Research Lab actively develops them.

Firstly, I said nothing about believing in nano-materials, the nonsense I was referring to you is your belief that they were found in the WTC debris. Secondly, as I have now posted elsewhere, if you think that quote says anything about thermite, or if you think thermite is an explosive, then you're an idiot, plain and simple.


If its only written up in Bentham.......our speculative reasons can be one of many assumptions.

No, there are really no assumptions. Bentham is a vanity journal that you pay to have published in. That "paper" was published without the permission, or even knowledge, of the editor-in-chief of the journal (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=141353), who promptly resigned over the fiasco. And they've now sunk even lower (http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn17288-spoof-paper-accepted-by-peerreviewed-journal.html) and established that as long as they get paid they'll even publish randomly generated hoaxes. Which has resulted in yet another editor-in-chief resigning (http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/55759/) after finding out he had no actual control over the journal.


Yet the communication of these findings remains urgent and need to be disseminated as widely as possible and as soon as possible.

Yes, finding paint after a building containing lots of paint collapses really is terribly urgent.


Gosh just imagine if you were on the review panel.

There isn't one. That's the whole problem. Reviewing their accounts to check if you've paid does not count as peer review.

[SorryImPsychic]

Yes, finding paint after a building containing lots of paint collapses really is terribly urgent.


Rave on all you like about the extraneous issues related to report.::) What have you to say precisely about the report...and your quote above does not qualify as being representative in the slightest way of what has been said in the report.

[Matt]

Rave on all you like about the extraneous issues related to report.::) What have you to say precisely about the report...and your quote above does not qualify as being representative in the slightest way of what has been said in the report.

Exactly - Don't you think it's ratehr dishonest of the report to say that the properties of the flakes they've found are consistent with nano-thermite and not mention, as everybody else analysing their findings has done. That these properties are also consistent with paint.

[Cuddles]

Rave on all you like about the extraneous issues related to report.

You really are severely retarded, aren't you? I mean, I thought it was a bit much with Croydon Bob just repeatedly calling you stupid and not actually addressing your nonsense, but you just don't have a fucking clue. Seriously, how can you possibly claim that I'm am "raving about extraneous issues", when my post is sitting right above yours for everyone to see? Do you really think everyone in the world is as stupid as you are and will fail to read the post you're replying to? It would be sad if it wasn't quite so funny watching you make a complete cock of yourself.

I'll try putting this is very simple words that even might be able to understand.
1) The "report" was not published in a real journal. It was a vanity magazine that will accept absolutely anything for publication, including randomly generated nonsense, as long as someone pays for it.
2) There is no chain of custody for any of the samples, so any analysis is completely meaningless, even if done competently.
3) Even so, the analysis does not support the presence of nano-thermite, it supports the presence of paint.
4) Thermite, nano or otherwise, is not an explosive.
5) Please check yourself into a mental hospital as soon as possible. Someone intelligent enough to operate a computer clearly has something severely wrong with their brain if they believe the things you do.

[SorryImPsychic]

I thought it was a bit much with Croydon Bob just repeatedly calling you stupid....

I thought it was a bit much too - but now I think he just needs to let off a little steam and I'm happy to oblige. No harm done.

[Croydon Bob]

I thought it was a bit much too - but now I think he just needs to let off a little steam and I'm happy to oblige. No harm done.

;D Can't you understand anything? Idiot.

[Croydon Bob]

I'll try putting this in very simple words that even might be able to understand.

Nope, you failed. She's even thicker than you thought.

[SorryImPsychic]

Nope, you failed. She's even thicker than you thought.
:knitter:

I really appreciate my life and my ability to be able to "think"! We are
all lucky to have the brains we do.....it is a luxury now cause when we grow older we'll probably get dementia.

[brianp]

I really appreciate my life and my ability to be able to "think"!

If you have the ability to think, why don't you exercise that ability?

[Cuddles]

We are all lucky to have the brains we do.

We certainly are. You, on the other hand, are extremely unfortunate in having one that doesn't actually work.

[SorryImPsychic]

We certainly are. You, on the other hand, are extremely unfortunate in having one that doesn't actually work.

I still feel grateful for everything I have.

[skbuncks]

I still feel grateful for everything I have.

If I were you I would send it back and request a new one

skb

[Pebble]

SIP, just to let you know that I'm actively ignoring all "evidence" you are posting from Bentham Open Journals. HAd I the necessary money to waste I would do so in a grandiose fashion by paying them to publish an article on the neurological deffincencies of an internet poster using the handle Sorry I'm Psychic.

The fact that there are people who use the vanity press to rediculous and usubstantiated claims doesn't impress me. Were these claims true you'd be able to find better sources.

Wise move!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2009/jun/18/science-editor-resigns-hoax-article

The Open Information Science Journal failed to spot that the incomprehensible computer-generated paper was a fake. This was despite heavy hints from its authors, who claimed they were from the Centre for Research in Applied Phrenology – which forms the acronym Crap.

If their papers are accepted, academics pay a fee in return for Bentham publishing the papers online. They can then be viewed by other academics for free.

Davis then withdrew the paper and revealed it as a hoax. Bambang Parmanto has since stepped down as editor-in-chief of the Open Information Science Journal. Parmanto told New Scientist that he never saw the paper.

[Tim the Mage]

Wise move!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2009/jun/18/science-editor-resigns-hoax-article

The Open Information Science Journal failed to spot that the incomprehensible computer-generated paper was a fake. This was despite heavy hints from its authors, who claimed they were from the Centre for Research in Applied Phrenology – which forms the acronym Crap.

If their papers are accepted, academics pay a fee in return for Bentham publishing the papers online. They can then be viewed by other academics for free.

Davis then withdrew the paper and revealed it as a hoax. Bambang Parmanto has since stepped down as editor-in-chief of the Open Information Science Journal. Parmanto told New Scientist that he never saw the paper.

And stupid Government's in the UK and USA are still throwing money at this open source publishing desppite its risks! It's fun not having moderation but not very helpful!!

The problem though is that SiP knows what we're going to say before we do...hence the wit and wisdom of her responses.

[Pebble]

The problem though is that SiP knows what we're going to say before we do...hence the wit and wisdom of her responses.
;D;D;D;D

[skbuncks]

SIP, just to let you know that I'm actively ignoring all "evidence" you are posting from Bentham Open Journals. Had I the necessary money to waste I would do so in a grandiose fashion by paying them to publish an article on the neurological deffincencies of an internet poster using the handle Sorry I'm Psychic...snip


How much exactly does it cost to have a paper published in Bentham?

Maybe we could set up a fund to publish an article to the above effect and, given SiPs propensity for believing any old bull, she would take its findings on board. I for one would be happy to contribute a few quid to the cause*.

skb

*It would also be well worth the cash to have a "peer reviewed" paper to call upon in order to mock

[Pebble]

How much exactly does it cost to have a paper published in Bentham?

Maybe we could set up a fund to publish an article to the above effect and, given SiPs propensity for believing any old bull, she would take its findings on board. I for one would be happy to contribute a few quid to the cause*.

skb

*It would also be well worth the cash to have a "peer reviewed" paper to call upon in order to mock


"Four months later, they were told it had been accepted and the fee to have it published was $800 (almost £500)"

[Pebble]

wrong thread

[SorryImPsychic]

The problem though is....

:witch: Fair is foul, and foul is fair:Hover through fog and filthy air. :thunder:
“MACBETH,” ACT I SCENE i.10

[tolman]

Yet the communication of these findings remains urgent and need to be disseminated as widely as possible and as soon as possible.
I do appreciate that that is standard agricultural practice when it comes to dealing with bullshit, but it doesn't work quite the same way in science.

[tolman]

But some facts about 'reputable' journal publication are:

It would take 2 years plus to go through the standard procedures for journal publication.

Which journals would you be referring to there?

[SorryImPsychic]

Which journals would you be referring to there?

Oh Cash Payments Journal for one? Then there is the Cash Receipts and General Journals.....