hot enough Posted July 27, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 27, 2017 10 minutes ago, Boges said: I see, so instead of answering questions you question someone's intellect. Sweet Ad Hominem attack. No ad hominem, just a realization that your ignorance level on this is huge, even humongous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boges Posted July 27, 2017 Report Share Posted July 27, 2017 1 minute ago, hot enough said: No ad hominem, just a realization that your ignorance level on this is huge, even humongous. Well intelligent people don't take joy in insulting someone's intelligence. They would help someone understand their ignorance by answering the question. You don't feel any need to do that. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hot enough Posted July 27, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 27, 2017 9 minutes ago, Boges said: So the families of those that died were in on it to. Gotcha! See what I mean. You make the wildest, goofiest assumptions. Have you read the nanothermite article written by the Lawrence Livermore military lab scientists? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hot enough Posted July 27, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 27, 2017 8 minutes ago, Boges said: Well intelligent people don't take joy in insulting someone's intelligence. They would help someone understand their ignorance by answering the question. You don't feel any need to do that. You run off on wild assed notions before even addressing the US scientists' description of naonthermite. What would you expect? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boges Posted July 27, 2017 Report Share Posted July 27, 2017 2 minutes ago, hot enough said: See what I mean. You make the wildest, goofiest assumptions. Have you read the nanothermite article written by the Lawrence Livermore military lab scientists? No because I'll give you that nanothermite was used. If it was indeed an inside job. But there's so much about the event that doesn't make sense if it was orchestrated by the US government. So I've asked questions of you trying to explain it to me, and you refuse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omni Posted July 27, 2017 Report Share Posted July 27, 2017 4 minutes ago, hot enough said: Those calls have never been proven either. You're wrong again on that. But I'll tell you about some other calls that have conveniently been ignored by the pablum eaters and those are the calls the hijackers made on what they thought was the Icom system's of the A/C to the pax. but they had the switch in the wrong place and were broadcasting on VHF radio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hot enough Posted July 27, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 27, 2017 8 minutes ago, Boges said: No because I'll give you that nanothermite was used. If it was indeed an inside job. But there's so much about the event that doesn't make sense if it was orchestrated by the US government. So I've asked questions of you trying to explain it to me, and you refuse. Nanothermite was used because it was found there, in WTC dust. Forget the possible perpetrators and focus on the science. I agree, there are myriad things that don't make sense. But there are so many more things that don't make sense if it was orchestrated by Arab hijackers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hot enough Posted July 27, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 27, 2017 10 minutes ago, Omni said: You're wrong again on that. But I'll tell you about some other calls that have conveniently been ignored by the pablum eaters and those are the calls the hijackers made on what they thought was the Icom system's of the A/C to the pax. but they had the switch in the wrong place and were broadcasting on VHF radio. Nobody does evidence better than Omni. Another impressive set of evidence, Omni. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omni Posted July 27, 2017 Report Share Posted July 27, 2017 Just now, hot enough said: Nobody does evidence better than Omni. Another impressive set of evidence, Omni. Obviously you know as much about aviation as you do about science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omni Posted July 27, 2017 Report Share Posted July 27, 2017 8 minutes ago, Boges said: No because I'll give you that nanothermite was used. If it was indeed an inside job. I wouldn't even give him that as there is no substantiated proof of nanothermite. Microspheres due to thermitic reaction yes, but that's due to the ferrous oxide and aluminum contained in the buildings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hot enough Posted July 27, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 27, 2017 9 minutes ago, Omni said: Obviously you know as much about aviation as you do about science. More of that great Omni evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omni Posted July 27, 2017 Report Share Posted July 27, 2017 (edited) 7 minutes ago, hot enough said: More of that great Omni evidence. So you are unaware of the fact everything said on ATC radio's is recorded? Edited July 27, 2017 by Omni Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hot enough Posted July 27, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 27, 2017 (edited) 15 minutes ago, Omni said: I wouldn't even give him that as there is no substantiated proof of nanothermite. Yes, there is myriad proof of nanothermite found in WTC dust, Boges. Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe The Open Chemical Physics Journal, 2009, 2: 7-31Niels H. Harrit, Jeffrey Farrer, Steven E. Jones, Kevin R. Ryan, Frank M. Legge, Daniel Farnsworth, Gregg Roberts, James R. Gourley, Bradley R. Larsen3(NH) Department of Chemistry, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, DK-2100, Denmark. Electronic publication date 3/4/2009[DOI: 10.2174/1874412500902010007] Abstract: We have discovered distinctive red/gray chips in all the samples we have studied of the dust produced by the destruction of the World Trade Center. Examination of four of these samples, collected from separate sites, is reported in this paper. These red/gray chips show marked similarities in all four samples. One sample was collected by a Manhattan resident about ten minutes after the collapse of the second WTC Tower, two the next day, and a fourth about a week later. The properties of these chips were analyzed using optical microscopy, scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy (XEDS), and differential scanning calorimetry (DSC). The red material contains grains approximately 100 nm across which are largely iron oxide, while aluminum is contained in tiny plate-like structures. Separation of components using methyl ethyl ketone demonstrated that elemental aluminum is present. The iron oxide and aluminum are intimately mixed in the red material. When ignited in a DSC device the chips exhibit large but narrow exotherms occurring at approximately 430 ˚C, far below the normal ignition temperature for conventional thermite. Numerous iron-rich spheres are clearly observed in the residue following the ignition of these peculiar red/gray chips. The red portion of these chips is found to be an unreacted thermitic material and highly energetic. https://benthamopen.com/ABSTRACT/TOCPJ-2-7 Quote Microspheres due to thermitic reaction yes, but that's due to the ferrous oxide and aluminum contained in the buildings. No Omni evidence again. Thermitic reactions don't come about as a result of collapsing buildings. Another ludicrous Omni suggestion. Edited July 27, 2017 by hot enough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omni Posted July 27, 2017 Report Share Posted July 27, 2017 2 minutes ago, hot enough said: Thermitic reactions don't come about as a result of collapsing buildings. You can create a thermitic reactions in your kitchen. Take 2 rusty steel balls, wrap one in aluminum foil, and then then strike them together. The sparks that are emitted will thrill you. Thermitic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hot enough Posted July 27, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 27, 2017 11 minutes ago, Omni said: So you are unaware of the fact everything said on ATC radio's is recorded? What scientific journal? What people have studied this and found it has any truth to it? Citations! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hot enough Posted July 27, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 27, 2017 9 minutes ago, Omni said: You can create a thermitic reactions in your kitchen. Take 2 rusty steel balls, wrap one in aluminum foil, and then then strike them together. The sparks that are emitted will thrill you. Thermitic. WTC steel got wrapped in aluminum foil and it struck steel girders and made nanothermite. Is there anyone who believes this nonsense besides Omni? Have you got a peer reviewed article to describe this miracle? More Omni evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hydraboss Posted July 27, 2017 Report Share Posted July 27, 2017 9 minutes ago, hot enough said: Yes, there is myriad proof of nanothermite found in WTC dust, Boges. ........................ Steven E. Jones ................................that elemental aluminum is present. The iron oxide and aluminum are intimately mixed in the red material. When ignited in a DSC device the chips exhibit large but narrow exotherms occurring at approximately 430 ˚C, far below the normal ignition temperature for conventional thermite. Numerous iron-rich spheres are clearly observed in the residue following the ignition of these peculiar red/gray chips. The red portion of these chips is found to be an unreacted thermitic material and highly energetic. No Omni evidence again. Thermitic reactions don't come about as a result of collapsing buildings. Another ludicrous Omni suggestion. Steve Jones again. Same conspiracy theorist. No points awarded this round. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omni Posted July 27, 2017 Report Share Posted July 27, 2017 1 minute ago, hot enough said: WTC steel got wrapped in aluminum foil and it struck steel girders and made nanothermite. Is there anyone who believes this nonsense besides Omni? Have you got a peer reviewed article to describe this miracle? More Omni evidence. WTC was held up by steel columns clad with aluminum, and steel horizontal girders that held up the floors. The impact from the planes did immediate structural damage, and ensuring fire caused the girders to lose their strength until they snapped away from the columns and down they came. And we're all still waiting to see how much longer you are going to duck the question of your nano nano installation theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hydraboss Posted July 27, 2017 Report Share Posted July 27, 2017 I just can't seem to figure out, after aluminum planes run into steel girder buildings and burn, where the product of burnt aluminum and steel came from. Science is so.....scientific. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omni Posted July 27, 2017 Report Share Posted July 27, 2017 12 minutes ago, Hydraboss said: I just can't seem to figure out, after aluminum planes run into steel girder buildings and burn, where the product of burnt aluminum and steel came from. Science is so.....scientific. The only obvious conclusion is it was put there by George Bush. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hot enough Posted July 27, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 27, 2017 1 hour ago, Hydraboss said: Steve Jones again. Same conspiracy theorist. No points awarded this round. I never expected better from you Hydraboss, because you never provide better, even good. Neils Harrit is the lead scientist on that paper. I'm not surprised you don't know. The Harrit et al paper has never been challenged therefore it stands as the accepted science today. Are you a scientist? You have never sounded remotely scientific. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hot enough Posted July 27, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 27, 2017 1 hour ago, Omni said: and ensuring fire caused the girders to lose their strength until they snapped away from the columns and down they came. What is an "ensuring" fire, Omni? NIST stated that they never found any steel that was heated above 250C/480F. The notion that the small amount of jet fuel caused the steel to heat up is nonsense, pure and simple. We all know that there have been long, raging fires with no collapse. Omni doesn't even know the official NIST fable. He never gets anything right. Still no evidence from Omni or anyone, like Hydraboss, for the USGOCT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hot enough Posted July 27, 2017 Author Report Share Posted July 27, 2017 1 hour ago, Hydraboss said: I just can't seem to figure out, after aluminum planes run into steel girder buildings and burn, where the product of burnt aluminum and steel came from. Science is so.....scientific. You can't figure out anything and I'm shocked at the general level of ignorance among you science denying anti-truthers. Do you have the foggiest notion of what nano scale is, Hydraboss? You cannot make nanothermite by the crazy method advanced by omni and other wacky US government conspiracy theorists. Michael Hardner knows this, anyone with a brain knows this but the widespread patent dishonesty around here, the fear of being truthful scares everyone away. Except Boges. Well, I guess even he got scared away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 28, 2017 Report Share Posted July 28, 2017 Nobody is scared by moronic theories about super duper nano thermite and WTC demolition. However, it is great fun to laugh at anyone who believes in such crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Omni Posted July 28, 2017 Report Share Posted July 28, 2017 2 hours ago, hot enough said: What is an "ensuring" fire, Omni? Ooops I made a spelling error, and apparently you don't have the wherewithal to conclude that "ensuing" was my actual intent. If you can't get that far in language skills, how are we ever going to take you seriously about your scientific "knowledge"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts