World Trade Center Dust Contains Evidence of Explosives

i've just read the paper and its interesting, but the conclusions are a bit wild. the evidence for it being superthermite is a bit flimsy to say the least.
its also hardly a well respected journal, i suspect it was rejected by any of the proper ones.

so.....interesting, but i don't believe a word of it - it sounds more like they are trying to make the evidence fit their theory rather than examining this dust objectively.
 
I can't believe how retarded people are - did they not see the footage of the great big jumbo jet that crashed into the building?

A secret government agency did not plant explosives all over the building and a missile was not fired at the pentagon - does anyone realise how much planning would be involved in either and how many people would have to have been involved - as if even a hanful of US service personnel would get involved in blowing up their own fellow service men in the pentagon or civilians in New York - let alone the numbers required to have planned, prepared and pulled off both of these attacks.

@ people who believe in this **** - you really have failed at life tbh...

http://drjudywood.com/articles/scientific/JonesScientificMethod.html
 
AcidHell2 said:
as the samples where not taken from the WTC and most of them weren't taken straight after, add to that the fact that no thermite was noticed and that thermite can't be used to bring a building like that down and it shows how stupid this paper is. I'm sure they did find some stuff in the samples, but that doesn't have any relation to the wtc destruction. Oh and ontop of that 4 samples, sorry that is not a proper study 4 hole samples wow..
Click to expand...

This paper discusses
four separate dust samples collected on or shortly
after 9/11/2001.

Thus, the Delessio/Breidenbach sample was collected
about ten minutes after the second tower collapsed. It
was, therefore, definitely not contaminated by the steelcutting
or clean-up operations at Ground Zero, which began
later. Furthermore, it is not mixed with dust from WTC 7,
which fell hours later.
Click to expand...
1 of the 4 samples was from ground zero, and the other 3 were taken from areas of less than a mile or so.
I dont understand chemistry enough to argue for the paper or its writers, i can only draw my own conclusion from it, so i hope someone with a respectible background will explain why its not to be considered plausible or even for further research (not a forum member shouting accusations.)

It wasnt just 4 samples though, it was 4 samples with hundreds of chips inside.

I'm sure they did find some stuff in the samples, but that doesn't have any relation to the wtc destruction.
Click to expand...
Why not, it was found in the debris from the building as said above, sounds fairly relative.

add to that the fact that no thermite was noticed and that thermite can't be used to bring a building like that down and it shows how stupid this paper is
Click to expand...
Wheres the paper saying no thermite was present? Also thermite can be used to greatly increase explosive reaction, especially weapons grade, that why they use it in highly explosive weapons. It not like this paper is claiming they found tnt in the rubble.
 
Last edited:
apart from the paper the reality is that if enough thermite was used (enough to effect the structure of a building that size) you would have seen it - the whole world would have seen it - you can't hide it once it starts to go off!

also, as themite is often used in welding large structures i wouldn't at all be surprised if every joint has a small amount that hasn't reacted, and all that would be released as the building crumbles.
all these conspiracy theories are interesting but the tend to ignore the answer that the overwhelming amount of evidence points to - i.e. two hijacked planes flying into the towers.
 
ChroniC said:
1 of the 4 samples was from ground zero, and the other 3 were taken from areas of less than a mile or so.
I dont understand chemistry enough to argue for the paper or its writers, i can only draw my own conclusion from it, so i hope someone with a respectible background will explain why its not to be considered plausible or even for further research (not a forum member shouting accusations.)

It wasnt just 4 samples though, it was 4 samples with hundreds of chips inside.

Why not, it was found in the debris from the building as said above, sounds fairly relative.

Wheres the paper saying no thermite was present? Also thermite can be used to greatly increase explosive reaction, especially weapons grade, that why they use it in highly explosive weapons. It not like this paper is claiming they found tnt in the rubble.
Click to expand...

An n number of 4 is not enough for statistical significance. Yes they found it in all samples collected thus giving a "100%" result from having 4/4, however 4 samples is not enough.
 
aardvark said:
apart from the paper the reality is that if enough thermite was used (enough to effect the structure of a building that size) you would have seen it - the whole world would have seen it - you can't hide it once it starts to go off!

also, as themite is often used in welding large structures i wouldn't at all be surprised if every joint has a small amount that hasn't reacted, and all that would be released as the building crumbles.
all these conspiracy theories are interesting but the tend to ignore the answer that the overwhelming amount of evidence points to - i.e. two hijacked planes flying into the towers.
Click to expand...

I agree, it seems almost super retarded to think otherwise, but its very odd that someone has published something at least with half an attempt of reproducable results and scientific backing.

It also seems that standard welding doesn't produce the same fine mixed thermite that is present in these samples.
Who knows? I dont really know why im defending it :)

int said:
An n number of 4 is not enough for statistical significance. Yes they found it in all samples collected thus giving a "100%" result from having 4/4, however 4 samples is not enough.
Click to expand...

So im to assume that if u take 4 carpet samples from my house and find 100's of my skin cells in each its not statistically significant to say i had been in the house?
 
Last edited:
I bet if you 'analised' the twenty ton of dust that is sitting in ever fricking part of my house at the moment you would find a siemen sample from Gordon Ramsey. For the love of god... please just leave it alone! Its getting boring now!
 
One of my lecturers Dr Keith Seffen wrote a paper on exactly how the towers could easily have collapsed after being hit by the aeroplanes. It explains in a perfectly reasonable, mathematic, peer reviewed fashion how fast progressive collapse was perfectly possible without the need for explosives.

It was a well received paper in the engineering community, and pretty much conclusively demonstrated that the conspiracy theories were a load of crap.

In return for this paper he received a bombardment of hate mail, death threats, and threats of legal action against him and the university. Despite the fact that it's a politically neutral paper, peer reviewed and based on solid well-established theories, the armchair scientists and crackpot conspiracy theorists still reject it. Just google the guy's name and you'll see dozens of hate-filled forum threads.

Gives you an idea of the kind of people that push the crazy theories...
 
If it was an inside job surely a 'truck bomb' in the basement with hidden explosives up the tower was far more efficient than flying airliners into it.
 
um thermaic material??? so rust and allumium? rust in a builing that being supperheated then left out in the elements?? and aluminuim from two aircrafts and god knows how amny windows....
My god we have thermatic materials....
please theramtic is would have ben obvious the building would have literallt blown its top.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom