Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
Thermite is very common. It's used in welding. The more I read about it, the more common it's becoming. The WTC complex is a city of fifty thousand people. It's constantly under construction.
They use thermite to for telecommunications and electrical networks. I can only imagine how many hundreds of thousands of miles of wiring they had in the WTC.
|
I know it's used in some types of welding. But building construction? I don't know. I know they don't use it for wiring up buildings. Maybe the foundation columns of the WTC? You'd have to link me up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
So now after quoting findings by the NIST, your going to tell us there wasn't an investigation. There was multiple investigations done by multiple agencies. You just refuse to believe anything they tell you.
|
They don't present "findings", they present surmises. I believe much of what they say, in that way. It's their conclusions that make no sense based on the "probable" conjectures they present. As I said before the NIST report is a hypothesis of what happened in the building/s up to collapse initiation. They omit or ignore much "evidence" and testimony. They didn't report on the what and the why, and if they performed any forensic analysis it was derived from the actual hands-on work FEMA did before them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
And I love how your implying they didn't have "access to the metal". They sorted everything, conducted multiple investigations, and then... What do you expect them to do with it? Kept it until the end of time? What they do with airplane scraps after their investigation, do they keep the pieces in warehouses until the end of time?
|
If they had access to the metal, they certainly didn't take advantage of it; they based any forensic work on data collected by FEMA who eventually got their hands on some pretty damaged metal that seemed to have been vaporized by nano-thermite. NIST however didn't comment on that, it doesn't back up their theory.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
What building code violation?
Why do we have to have NFPA investigate? Is the NFPA a government agency? Is it required by law that NFPA investigate? How many more investigations do we need?
|
You said something to the effect that the buildings didn't collapse due to code violation. I didn't disagree, I just said that the investigation code created by NFPA and used in every other major disaster, fire, whatever, was not followed after these buildings collapsed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
The debris were removed off site and then reviewed and tested. Their investigation was so detailed that they had forensics experts looking for bone fragments.
|
Something like 80% of the debris was removed without being reviewed or tagged. FEMA wasn't allowed to enter and investigate. Instead, they had to go over debris dumped at landfills before it was hauled off overseas. They were ultimately able to take 100 or 150 pieces out of hundreds of thousands, that were sold.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
And here is something else about thermite.... As they were removing the debris from the WTC, they had to remove these huge steel girders.... Just seems to me they would have used thermite on a daily basis to cut those pieces down to size so they could remove them...
|
As I said in another post, there wasn't that much steel to cut in the pit because it had already been snapped, bent and broken. I haven't heard of any thermite used to cut steel in the debris. Even then, the fine iron spheres and thermite (and especially thermate) wouldn't have ended up in the dust that coated offices and apartments dozens of blocks away, weeks before.
Quote:
Originally Posted by **********
So then.
Everything was pulverized. There were few of any plane parts that could be recovered. Therefore, a conspiracy?
|
You aren't reading or you're following a faulty line of logic. Everything was pulverized. Since steel was removed as though it were trash, it would be difficult to gauge what plane parts could be recovered, and if there were it seems they would have been tiny. Therefore, a very unnatural, non-organic "collapse".
Quote:
Originally Posted by **********
And no, dude, it is not against "all probability". What now? Are you saying that the planes should have bounced off?
|
The pulverization is against all probability in one collapse, much more so in three different collapses.
Collapse itself is against all probability. Sudden onset and symmetrical collapse, not once but in three different instances, is even less likely.
Molten steel is impossible in any office fire; jet fuel cannot melt steel.
Why is it so hard to believe they were demolished, especially when the theory put forward by the government is devoid of evidentiary support, and so much testimony and evidence to any alternative or just another investigative path is just dismissed?
Isn't that in itself suspect?