Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
I thought you said there was no investigation?
|
There was no valid investigation. The 9/11 Commission and such weren't "investigations" but rather reviews.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
A report by FEMA was entirely overlookd by the NIST? I'm sure it was. I'm also sure it happened dozens of times. I'm sure thousands of reports were written by dozens of government agencies, and not every one was taken into consideration.
|
NIST actually used most of FEMA's findings, with the exception of the inexplicable steel damage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
What chain of custody? Dust was collected from around the city by uncertified and untrained cilvilians? That would hardly stand up in a court of law.
|
This is why the chain of custody was verified by the various scientists who established the presence of incendiaries in the dust.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
And it doesn't matter. We've already discussed at length how common thermite is.
|
Thermite has been used for exterior welding purposes. There's no evidance that it was used in the construction of the WTC. Even if it was, there wouldn't be remnants in the dust forty years later. Also, thermite is a common, commercial product. ThermAte is a different product, and copyrighted by different/external agencies...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
So your saying that iron from printer ink and OJ wasn't liquefied in the fireball?
|
Your "fireball" wouldn't be hot enough to liquefy any iron.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
They stand completely outside of normal building construction. I don't think any other skyscrapers have been build like the WTC towers.
|
You may be right. I don't know. But they were buildings, period, and they weren't exempt from the laws of physics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
No, but your use their standard arguments and accept them as fact. The "Iron droplets" is the latest idea the 9/11 Truth Movement has come up with, and it's laughable.
|
It actually isn't the "latest idea" since the RJ Lee Group investigated the damage to the Deutsche Bank in 2003 and found and established the presence of the iron spheres in 2003.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
Are they really debating that the fire wasn't hot enough to liquefy microscopic particles of iron?
|
Yes they are, and the temperatures weren't reported by NIST or FEMA as being hot enough to do this to steel.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
The melting point of iron overall is one thing, but the melting point of a piece of iron that is 1/7th the width of a human hair is another thing - a lot less. And by the way, who in the world claims that liquefied droplets of iron happen at the WTC?
|
Everyone. RJ Lee Group investigating for Deutsche Bank 9 years ago for example. The iron wasn't present in the building as is. It was part of an alloy that composed the steel that made up the structure of the WTC.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
Everything at the WTC originated from someplace else. How the fuck do we not know that a steel beam was created in the 1960s in New Jersey using thermite that created liquefied droplets of iron that wasn't shaken loose years later? How do we know that liquefied droplets of iron came from the towers themselves, and not another part of the WTC complex - such as the millions of gallons of fuel stored for back up power? Maybe they came from the acid explosions when back up batteries exploded?
|
If thermite was used to create beams in the superstructure of the WTC, it isn't documented. If it was, there wouldn't be iron by-products in the final products.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
Do you get my point? We don't know where "liquefied droplets of iron" came from, it shouldn't be that unusual, and it no matter what it's not proof of anything.
|
You're wrong. Iron wouldn't be left behind by any production process, and it wouldn't be cleaned up before delivery.