hot enough

And when science deniers find themselves up a stump, this is the favored tactic, which essentially says, I'm too frightened to continue as it will show I know nothing about this topic. You've been doing that all along, Omni. Never offering anything but your silly campfire science. Anti-truthers!

That is how science deniers/anti-truthers work. They hear some propaganda on some "news" channel and think they know something about 911. Or they watch the "Let's Roll" propaganda movies and discuss the "science" and the "evidence" with their friends. Then they absolutely refuse to look at science right in front of their eyes.

No, you explained nothing. You asserted a lie without any evidence.

See, science deniers can't provide any evidence for the US conspiracy theory nor can they address all the science that shows the nutty US conspiracy theory is pure bunko. The twin towers were designed to take the impact of a 707 travelling at 600 miles per hour. You folks don't want to try to provide evidence/proof for the US conspiracy theory because you know it will illustrate that you know little to nothing about the whole affair. You just got dabs of propaganda here and there.

That is unscientific. You're wrong about the design of the towers and you are wrong about everything you haven't addressed because not addressing the science means you are frightened to do so or you know you lack the competence to do so.

How come you never provide sources or address proof/evidence place right in front of you?

They designed the twin towers for that, but not for nanothermite explosives. How did the 220 acres of concrete become micron sized particles?

Have you seen the missile, nose, ... yet, Wilber, or are you too cowardly to look? The engine that rocketed out of that "jet" and landed on Murray Street was not from the plane that allegedly struck WTC2. Have you read what the LL Lab scientists said about their new generation of super explosives, the new nanothermites?

That you aren't fit for jury duty pretty much says it all about you as a "citizen".

Yeah, another thing that you obviously know nothing about.

Prove it, with sources.

The US invented, US produced, non-commercially available nanothermite, the molten/vaporized steel, the iron microspheres, ... myriad things you all are studiously avoiding.

That's your science, Omni.

Address all the other science issues that were raised first and then we can discuss this.

Address all the other impossibilities that were raised first and then we can address this.

That has nothing to do with science. Why do you make claims to science when you don't do science? How did the nanothermite get there? Answer all the other questions on science that have been posed.

Buildings designed for those impacts, then accelerating collapses which cannot happen with a gravity collapse. Micron size pulverized concrete, 220 acres of 4 to 5 inches thick, with reinforcing steel, which takes an enormous amount of energy, when all that energy is needed to crush the lower portion. The lower 70 floors of WTC1 were stone cold, much much stronger steel than what fell on them and they didn't resist at all. You know that is completely impossible.

Obviously science means nothing to you, Omni, as you refuse to address the science. Nobody who suggests they can make nanothermite knows anything about science or reads anything abut science. Why are you still studiously avoiding the LL Lab scientists describing the new, only US, non-commercially available nanothermite. There are the myriad other things that your "science" fails you on, the cylinder coming out of WTC2, the NEW US nanothermite, which was found at WTC, in the dust. The large volume of iron microspheres, a product of thermitic reactions, found in WTC dust, the molten steel, the NIST lies, the wrong engine on Murray Street, the ... .

Please stop it. You cannot make thermite at the NANO scale. It is NOT powders that have been ground down like regular thermite/thermate. It is a made upwards process at the NANO scale. Describe how that is easy to make. Provide a source that backs you. Did you read the LL lab scientists' explanation. Steven Jones, a PhD, says he has absolutely no idea how they make it.

In this video, you can see how a self admitted explosives amateur can melt and cut steel beams, showing that your "debunkers" like Nat Geo, Popular Distortions magazine, Uof NM, ... are poseurs. At 11:05 on, watch closely, you can see a human being being exploded out a WTC twin tower window. How is this possible when the US official conspiracy theory says No bombs/no explosives? But yet, George Bush describes the same at the twin towers after the planes hit and before the collapses. How are all these impossibilities possible, Omni? How can you maintain you impenetrable wall of what is obviously delusion?

Why are you avoiding the US Lawrence Livermore scientists describing the nanothermite, the same nanothermite that was found at WTC?

Nanothermite is a real thing, a new generation of super explosives. Gravity collapses cannot pulverize concrete in the fashion that the concrete was at WTC - pyroclastic like clouds, including the heat though obviously was not as hot as a volcano. Witnesses reported being hit by powerful clouds of heated, some said, gravel and sand. [bolding is mine]

Yes, you do. And the reason is, it was there. Nanothermite, unreacted particles, also the by product of thermitic reactions, iron microspheres creating "a unique chemical signature of WTC dust containing about 6% iron microspheres/normal dust <1%" that allowed Deutsche Bank to be successful in their lawsuit. There was no legal/legitimate fuel that could have caused the above or the molten/vaporized steel, the molten molybdenum, the vaporized lead. Thermite/thermate can do all that. The new super explosive, Nanothermite can do that and much more. Here's the US scientists who developed the new super explosives, describing why nano scale explosives are so much better than regular explosives/thermite/thermate.

Thank you, Omni. Those are all live shots that make it hard to see. I'll continue to study them. The video I provided stops the motion, walks it thru very slowly, which is what is needed to see such an obviously high speed object. Look at that video.

Ten thousand pages in the NIST "report" on the collapse of the twin towers and nothing on how the towers came down. Why was NIST able to perform a "study" on WTC7 to try and determine its collapse? Why did NIST deny free fall for building 7 and then accept free fall? Why did NIST deny molten steel when there were so many firemen, first responders, cleanup contractors/workers, demolition experts, structural engineers, who described it? Why did NIST state that the molten steel see flowing from WTC2 minutes before it was demolished was aluminum, when they knew full well that it was not aluminum and that it could not be aluminum? Here's Leslie Robertson, you know who he is, don't you?, describing molten steel in the basement of WTC. Watch from 5:20 on to about 7:00. It destroys these latter two myths of NIST.