Thermite Was Placed In Box-Columns and Spandrel Splice Gaps to Heat-Weaken WTC Steel.

[Max Photon]

* * *

Mr Skinny,

I shall miss you.

Max

* * *

[pomeroo]

* * *

Uruk,

Thanks for the acknowledgment.

(I sense you are actually intrigued.)

- - -

Mr. Skinny,

"Pin-headed" was h-u-m-o-r.

(Revisit your avatar.)


As for "fantasy theories"...what are theories but fantasies? Am I missing something? What do you think NIST's finite element analysis produces, but fantasia?


Question:

Even if you don't believe the collapse initiation of the WTC towers was catalyzed, which collapse initiation model that exists is - in your estimation - the current best?

Remember, MAX-MIHOP provides both the collapse-initiation catalyzation process, AND the mechanisms for the necessary ongoing dynamic stabilization - or cloaking - of the deception.


So, if you had to chose one, which CD model is currently the best in the world?

(Good scientists would always have a second-best working hypothesis.)


* * *



No, Max, theories are not fantasies. You are not a good scientist: you are no scientist at all.

[MIKILLINI]

An airliner slamming into the towers causing structural damage and massive fires which weakened the steel structure, resulting in collapse.


I don't think any of the current CD models are worth a darn. I admit I kinda enjoyed your laser ignited TDST theory because it was so different, and because I used to find you mildly amusing, but now that theory is on the garbage pile with the rest. You can't support your own theory, so I'm going to give it the attention it deserves - None.

I too was intrigued by Max's hypothesis to a degree, but Max, you tend to walk around the holes in your hypothesis with your cloaking humor (MAXDEC). It gives the impression you are avoiding to answer the holes in your thoery. You should know this, at least you show the intelligence to know this.
People here who are experienced in the fields that your theory uses , such as remote-controlled aircraft, are asking you from their own first-hand experience and knowledge how you came to your conclusions. If you can't answer questions directly, then the impressions you leave are avoidance, or you don't know.

[Mr. Skinny]

* * *

Mr Skinny,

I shall miss you.

Max

* * *
That's touching, Max.

I'll still be here. I just won't waste any more time on laser ignited TDST's.

As MIKILLINI points out, your MAXDEC is poor.

[Max Photon]

* * *

Here is a relevant quote from our very own Apollo20:


"...NIST recovered a lot of WTC steel samples and have always insisted that it had all it needed for its study. But now we find NIST saying:

'It is not possible to extrapolate from such a small sample size' to reach any useful conclusions about the temperatures attained by the core columns.'

Are these guys for real!"



To repeat:

"It is not possible to extrapolate from such a small sample size" to reach any useful conclusions about the temperatures attained by the core columns.


Evidence was destroyed to hide the fact that 911 was an inside job.


Max

* * *

[pomeroo]

* * *

Here is a relevant quote from our very own Apollo20:


"...NIST recovered a lot of WTC steel samples and have always insisted that it had all it needed for its study. But now we find NIST saying:

'It is not possible to extrapolate from such a small sample size' to reach any useful conclusions about the temperatures attained by the core columns.'

Are these guys for real!"



To repeat:

"It is not possible to extrapolate from such a small sample size" to reach any useful conclusions about the temperatures attained by the core columns.


Evidence was destroyed to hide the fact that 911 was an inside job.


Max

* * *


You've been caught lying again. No evidence was destroyed. Your refusal to attempt to read Apathoid's paper, which knocks out the underpinnings of your fantasy, is an admission that your agenda has no basis in fact.

[uruk]

* * *

Here is a relevant quote from our very own Apollo20:


"...NIST recovered a lot of WTC steel samples and have always insisted that it had all it needed for its study. But now we find NIST saying:

'It is not possible to extrapolate from such a small sample size' to reach any useful conclusions about the temperatures attained by the core columns.'

Are these guys for real!"



To repeat:

"It is not possible to extrapolate from such a small sample size" to reach any useful conclusions about the temperatures attained by the core columns.


Evidence was destroyed to hide the fact that 911 was an inside job.


Max

* * *

Check here:
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=3118989&postcount=153

[Max Photon]

* * *

Are you guys aware of both the smoke puffs, and the coordinated smoke releases reminiscent of old fashioned steam-driven pipe-organs that NIST mentions in 1-5A/9/C?

In this video you can see - in seconds 0-4 - both a large smoke puff from the SE corner, AND one of the "steam-driven pipe-organ" releases moving from left of center, to the left.

These are also seen in other videos on other faces.

MAX-MIHOP says these are from planted thermite being ignited by thermite-dusted shock-tube.

Does anyone have a better explanation for these important phenomena?


Max

P.S. Could someone kindly tell me the trick to cutting and pasting from the encrypted NCSTAR reports? I want to be able to provide the actual quotes. Thanks.


* * *

[pomeroo]

* * *

Are you guys aware of both the smoke puffs, and the coordinated smoke releases reminiscent of old fashioned steam-driven pipe-organs that NIST mentions in 1-5A/9/C?

In this video you can see - in seconds 0-4 - both a large smoke puff from the SE corner, AND one of the "steam-driven pipe-organ" releases moving from left of center, to the left.

These are also seen in other videos on other faces.

MAX-MIHOP says these are from planted thermite being ignited by thermite-dusted shock-tube.

Does anyone have a better explanation for these important phenomena?


Max

P.S. Could someone kindly tell me the trick to cutting and pasting from the encrypted NCSTAR reports? I want to be able to provide the actual quotes. Thanks.


* * *


As you know, NO thermite was used at the WTC complex on the day of the jihadist attacks. Why do you continue to lie?

[Max Photon]

* * *

Ever wonder how the iron microspheres were formed?

Here is video clearly showing the process:

South Tower
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KFmyB2IiwY


Max

* * *

[Unsecured Coins]

oh... i see it now.

[Max Photon]

* * *

e^n,

A while back you said that the photos of NIST recovered steel member N8 show grounding wire.

I asked if you THINK that is grounding wire, or if you KNOW that is grounding wire (and if so, how do you know).

Forgive me if you already answered and I missed it.

Thanks,

Max

* * *

[Dave Rogers]

A while back you said that the photos of NIST recovered steel member N8 show grounding wire.

I asked if you THINK that is grounding wire, or if you KNOW that is grounding wire (and if so, how do you know).

It's not grounding wire, it's resistance wire. The resistance as a function of temperature is a classic method of detecting the presence of liquid nitrogen. The wire was used to detect the level of liquid nitrogen in the vessels fixed around the welds in the core columns, and a simple feedback loop to the cryogenic valves enabled the level to be maintained so that the steel would fracture correctly once the collapse initiated.

Dave

[phunk]

I know it's been asked before, but what exactly is thermite dusted shock tube? Is that det cord with a thermite coating or something else?

[Max Photon]

I know it's been asked before, but what exactly is thermite dusted shock tube? Is that det cord with a thermite coating or something else?


Hi phunk, and welcome!

Thermite-dusted shock-tube is my own nomenclature.

It is not detcord.

It is super-tough, hollow, extruded plastic tubing.

The inside surface is lightly dusted with very fine thermite powder.

If the thermite dust is ignited at one end, a burn front will propagate through the tube. (Thermite has its own oxygen source.)

"Shock-tube" is a bit of a misnomer in that the burn front of the thermite does not move with the same velocities of the usual high-explosives in standard shock-tube (which is fast enough to generate a true shock wave).

Think of thermite-dusted shock-tube as sort of a thermite fuse.

The thermite-dusted shock-tube can ignite planted thermite directly; no other ignition mechanism, such as magnesium strips, potassium permanganate, high-explosive detonators, etc., are required.

You can see the white flashes of the thermite-dusted shock-tube moving from the upper right to the lower left in this video (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1035128522922802395&q=wtc+thermite+stabilized&total=3&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0).


I have also put forth the notion that the thermite-dusted shock-tube was ignited by lasers from WTC7.

Everyone here agrees with the concept. :)


Cheers!

Max

* * *

[Unsecured Coins]

wait... so they used something YOU came up with?

OmG... you blew up the towers! SECURITY!!

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Has Max Photon bothered to explain why they would use this (theoretical) "Thermite-dusted shock-tube" rather than traditional det-cord?

[Mr. Skinny]

(snip)

I have also put forth the notion that the thermite-dusted shock-tube was ignited by lasers from WTC7.

Everyone here agrees with the concept. :)



errrr....NO

[JMarshall]

Here's my questions every time I ever hear a theory about thermite, or thermate: Have you ever used thermite? How about thermate? Have you ever seen the aftermath of thermite, or thermate (if your answer is yes, on a video, then I will take that as a big whopping NO!)? Do you know the exact properties of thermite/thermate?

[beachnut]

Has Max Photon bothered to explain why they would use this (theoretical) "Thermite-dusted shock-tube" rather than traditional det-cord?
You have to be special to understand things that are pretend.

[Mr. Skinny]

JMarshall,

Max believes he knows everything, except when asked to present details.

Mr. Photon (ironically) can't provide specifics on the supposed laser used to ignite his TDST's. Not the type. Not the wavelength. Not the power levels. Not the physical space needed to house it. Not the divergence. Not ONE SINGLE THING.

You're wasting your time.



This public service message brought to you by Mr. Skinny.

[JimBenArm]

Max needs to start using the chant I learned long ago when I would start to believe things like this.

You just sit, close your eyes, and say "O wa tafoo liam" repeatedly until the answer becomes clear.

[e^n]

A while back you said that the photos of NIST recovered steel member N8 show grounding wire.

I asked if you THINK that is grounding wire, or if you KNOW that is grounding wire (and if so, how do you know).

I simply gave a possibility, I do not know whether it was grounding wire, it simply seemed to be the most obvious choice. I'm not entirely sure what it would be grounding however, but I was trying to illustrate how it most likely was not 'thermite dusted shock tube' as it was connected to somewhere no thermite could have easily been placed.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

I think Robot Chicken got it right
7QjK1DE4GJ8 (sound is quite low, you'll need to turn the volume up)

[phunk]

Hi phunk, and welcome!


Thanks, I've actually been here a while, I just don't post much.


Thermite-dusted shock-tube is my own nomenclature.

That much is obvious. :)

It is not detcord.

It is super-tough, hollow, extruded plastic tubing.

The inside surface is lightly dusted with very fine thermite powder.

If the thermite dust is ignited at one end, a burn front will propagate through the tube. (Thermite has its own oxygen source.)

"Shock-tube" is a bit of a misnomer in that the burn front of the thermite does not move with the same velocities of the usual high-explosives in standard shock-tube (which is fast enough to generate a true shock wave).

Think of thermite-dusted shock-tube as sort of a thermite fuse.


Thanks for the description. I disagree with your confusing name for it, "thermite fuse" would be more appropriate, but whatever.

I find it unlikely that a light dusting inside a tube would burn reliably, you'd want to fill the tube to ensure continuity of the burn.


You can see the white flashes of the thermite-dusted shock-tube moving from the upper right to the lower left in this video*.


That video shows debris fluttering down reflecting sunlight, not a thermite burn. Thermite doesn't burn that fast, and makes a lot of smoke (Al2O3), especially if it is encased in plastic tube.


I have also put forth the notion that the thermite-dusted shock-tube was ignited by lasers from WTC7.

Everyone here agrees with the concept. :)


The concept, yes. The execution, no. The idea of laser ignition from WTC7 is just absurd. The laser and targeting system would be huge and insanely expensive, and would be left in the rubble pile for cleanup crews to find. A remote igniter could be made for a couple bucks from off the shelf parts, why the hell would a laser be used?


*video link removed by phunk because I can't post urls :rolleyes:

[Max Photon]

I simply gave a possibility, I do not know whether it was grounding wire, it simply seemed to be the most obvious choice. I'm not entirely sure what it would be grounding however, but I was trying to illustrate how it most likely was not 'thermite dusted shock tube' as it was connected to somewhere no thermite could have easily been placed.


Hi e^n,

Thanks for responding honestly (as you always do).

Max

* * *

[Max Photon]

Has Max Photon bothered to explain why they would use this (theoretical) "Thermite-dusted shock-tube" rather than traditional det-cord?



I didn't bother because I thought it was obvious to anyone with a brain stem.

For the stemless...

Detcord is a high-explosive cord.

It creates a huge bang and flash of light.

Detcord does not ignite thermite.


Now, just in case you meant to ask:

Has Max Photon bothered to explain why they would use this (theoretical) "Thermite-dusted shock-tube" rather than traditional SHOCK-TUBE?

The answer is the traditional shock-tube (dusted with HMX or similar) does not ignite thermite.


Max

* * *

[JMarshall]

Actually shock-tube is lightly coated with an explosive film, it isn't thermite, shock-tubing can be set off with a low power blasting cap, while thermite can not. And yes it is called shock-tube because it causes a shock wave to travel down the inside of the tube. If you can actually get your hands on US Army Field Manual FM5-34 "Engineer Field Data" you would be able to see all of this information, unfortunately, the book is a controlled item ,and as such it is impossible to obtain without secret or above clearance...

[Max Photon]

[snip]

That video shows debris fluttering down reflecting sunlight, not a thermite burn. Thermite doesn't burn that fast, and makes a lot of smoke (Al2O3), especially if it is encased in plastic tube.




Tell me phunk, what is the propagation velocity of the burn front of thermite in a hollow tube?

(Please support your answer.)


Also, with regard to thermite making aluminum-oxide "smoke", you are correct! And one can see evidence of the thermite-dusted shock-tube burning.

NIST NCSTAR 1-5A/9/C discusses coordinated puffs of smoke, reminiscent of old-fashioned steam-driven pipe organs. These coordinated smoke puffs can be seen in numerous videos.

They are from the burning shock-tube, and from the planted thermite packs igniting.


Also note that these coordinated smoke puffs are correlated - so says NIST - with other phenomena!

heavy smoke releases
pressure pulses
ejected debris
white glows
metal flows
the infamous "hanging objects seen through open windows" changing locations


Let that in! All of these phenomena are correlated!

My model explains all of these effortlessly.


Please, someone else provide a better explanation for the coordination of these important phenomena that NIST was at a total loss to explain.

I'm dying to see what you guys come up with.


Max

* * *

[JMarshall]

Ok, let me get this straight... Your theory is the government developed a shock-tube like devise with thermite powder inside... Then ran the "thermite-tube" to the thermite tubs used to cut the supports... And then, a laser, which would have to be quite powerful, was used to ignite the "thermite-tubing"... Have I got it all now?

[Mr. Skinny]

Tell me phunk, what is the propagation velocity of the burn front of thermite in a hollow tube?

(Please support your answer.)
Right after you start supporting yours, Max. It's your theory. Why don't you tell us the answer to that question.


(snip)
My model explains all of these effortlessly.
Except for those pesky things called facts.

[Max Photon]

Ok, let me get this straight... Your theory is the government developed a shock-tube like devise with thermite powder inside... Then ran the "thermite-tube" to the thermite tubs used to cut the supports... And then, a laser, which would have to be quite powerful, was used to ignite the "thermite-tubing"... Have I got it all now?


Almost...

I don't know who "developed" thermite-dusted shock-tube - just that it was used on 911.

Also - and this is very VERY important when you are at the feet of 911-God - thermite was not used to cut, slice, or melt WTC steel.

Thermite was used to heat-weaken the steel.


* * *

[Unsecured Coins]

too bad thermite doesn't weaken steel. it goes right through it

[JMarshall]

Thermite was used to heat-weaken the steel.


* * *

And that would be because thermite is so easy to control?!?! As I said before Have you ever used thermite? Or thermate? Have you ever seen the aftermath of thermite or thermate?

I am really having trouble understanding it all, but then again, that may be because I have an expertise in explosives and demolition...

[JimBenArm]

Too bad the shock tubes don't exist, either.

But Max never lets facts get in the way of a good fairy tale!

[JimBenArm]

And that would be because thermite is so easy to control?!?! As I said before Have you ever used thermite? Or thermate? Have you ever seen the aftermath of thermite or thermate?

I am really having trouble understanding it all, but then again, that may be because I have an expertise in explosives and demolition...
Well, there's your problem!

[dudalb]

I have a certain fondness for Max. He is always good for a few laughs.

[pomeroo]

Almost...

I don't know who "developed" thermite-dusted shock-tube - just that it was used on 911.

Also - and this is very VERY important when you are at the feet of 911-God - thermite was not used to cut, slice, or melt WTC steel.

Thermite was used to heat-weaken the steel.


* * *


You've been caught lying again, Max. No thermite was used at the WTC complex on the day of the jihadist attacks.

Incidentally, Apathoid's paper destroyed one of your fantasies. Your refusal to read it acknowledges that fact, agreed?

[pomeroo]

Tell me phunk, what is the propagation velocity of the burn front of thermite in a hollow tube?

(Please support your answer.)


Also, with regard to thermite making aluminum-oxide "smoke", you are correct! And one can see evidence of the thermite-dusted shock-tube burning.

NIST NCSTAR 1-5A/9/C discusses coordinated puffs of smoke, reminiscent of old-fashioned steam-driven pipe organs. These coordinated smoke puffs can be seen in numerous videos.

They are from the burning shock-tube, and from the planted thermite packs igniting.


Also note that these coordinated smoke puffs are correlated - so says NIST - with other phenomena!

heavy smoke releases
pressure pulses
ejected debris
white glows
metal flows
the infamous "hanging objects seen through open windows" changing locations
Let that in! All of these phenomena are correlated!

My model explains all of these effortlessly.


Please, someone else provide a better explanation for the coordination of these important phenomena that NIST was at a total loss to explain.

I'm dying to see what you guys come up with.


Max

* * *


Hmmm. I'm coming up with a plan to induce everybody in the world to ask you why you refuse to comment on Apathoid's paper. You know--the one you refuse to read because it destroys your fantasies.

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

I didn't bother because I thought it was obvious to anyone with a brain stem.

For the stemless...
Reported as Rule 12 violation.

. . .
Detcord does not ignite thermite.

Evidence?

. . .
The answer is the traditional shock-tube (dusted with HMX or similar) does not ignite thermite.
Evidence?

[Bell]

Almost...

I don't know who "developed" thermite-dusted shock-tube - just that it was used on 911.

And your evidence for that would be the bits and pieces of that shock-tube that remained after the collapse. What, you do have physical evidence, do you?

Also - and this is very VERY important when you are at the feet of 911-God -

Mmm...kay... :confused:

thermite was not used to cut, slice, or melt WTC steel.

Thermite was used to heat-weaken the steel.


* * *

And after the steal was 'heat-weakend' by the thermite, then what happened?

[Cuddles]

Has Max Photon bothered to explain why they would use this (theoretical) "Thermite-dusted shock-tube" rather than traditional SHOCK-TUBE?

The answer is the traditional shock-tube (dusted with HMX or similar) does not ignite thermite.

Let me get this straight, shock tube doesn't ignite thermite, so they put thermite on the shock tube in order to make it able to light thermite, except that it can't light the thermite that's been put on it, because the whole reason they put it there was that it can't light thermite.:eye-poppi

[pomeroo]

Let me get this straight, shock tube doesn't ignite thermite, so they put thermite on the shock tube in order to make it able to light thermite, except that it can't light the thermite that's been put on it, because the whole reason they put it there was that it can't light thermite.:eye-poppi


Much of the fun has been removed from this and related threads by the gradual realization that we are teasing someone who is seriously ill.

[JMarshall]

Now far be it from me to stand up for max's wayward ideas, but det-cord and shock-tube won't actually ignite thermite (the reactions of both are too quick to sustain the heat long enough to ignite it, not to mention the fact that the thermite would just get disperced into the surounding area, when the det-cord would go off... And the fact that shock-tubing only has a low level blasting cap on it...), although if you use a nice little piece of magnesium it can ... So instead of making a whole new "thermite-cord", wouldn't it just be easier to insert a magnesium booster?

I am going to assume that you haven't ever had a thermite grenade held in your hands, and as such you wouldn't know how it is constructed... First you have the pin and ring, which holds the spoon, which holds down the hammer, which sttrikes the primer, which ignites the time fuse, wghich ignites the magnesium booster, which ignites the thermite... Follow me? The fact is you have thought up a completely uneeded device (Thermite-cord) to do something that can be done so much more easily!

I mean that makes a whole lot of sence to me, but then again what do I know with my years of experience with explosives and demolitions?

[MIKILLINI]

Ok, let me get this straight... Your theory is the government developed a shock-tube like devise with thermite powder inside... Then ran the "thermite-tube" to the thermite tubs used to cut the supports... And then, a laser, which would have to be quite powerful, was used to ignite the "thermite-tubing"... Have I got it all now?

Not quite J. You need to also know that Max believes there were no hijackers and the airliners were remote controlled to their crash destinations.
There is a paper out there..that, so far, Max has not cared to or doesn't bother to point out any errors pertaining to the remarkable revamping that would have to take place in order for a commercial airliner to be remotely controlled.

http://911myths.com/Remote_Takeover.pdf

[Mr. Skinny]

JMarshall,

Your apparent experience is appreciated by everyone here except Max, I expect.

[JMarshall]

Not quite J. You need to also know that Max believes there were no hijackers and the airliners were remote controlled to their crash destinations.
There is a paper out there..that, so far, Max has not cared to or doesn't bother to point out any errors pertaining to the remarkable revamping that would have to take place place in order for a commercial airliner to be remotely controlled.


Ahhhhh... I guess I did read those theories, but since I have no aeronautical knowledge, unless dating a chopper pilot counts, I relied on the knowledge I did have, the thermite...

[Reality Believer]

Let me get this straight, shock tube doesn't ignite thermite, so they put thermite on the shock tube in order to make it able to light thermite, except that it can't light the thermite that's been put on it, because the whole reason they put it there was that it can't light thermite.:eye-poppi
Here is a video of Max (mustache) explaining the circular reasoning to a forum member (white suit).
3FK2jf8k6FQ

[Max Photon]

Let me get this straight, shock tube doesn't ignite thermite, so they put thermite on the shock tube in order to make it able to light thermite, except that it can't light the thermite that's been put on it, because the whole reason they put it there was that it can't light thermite.:eye-poppi


Now far be it from me to stand up for max's wayward ideas, but det-cord and shock-tube won't actually ignite thermite (the reactions of both are too quick to sustain the heat long enough to ignite it, not to mention the fact that the thermite would just get disperced into the surounding area, when the det-cord would go off... And the fact that shock-tubing only has a low level blasting cap on it...), although if you use a nice little piece of magnesium it can ... So instead of making a whole new "thermite-cord", wouldn't it just be easier to insert a magnesium booster?

I am going to assume that you haven't ever had a thermite grenade held in your hands, and as such you wouldn't know how it is constructed... First you have the pin and ring, which holds the spoon, which holds down the hammer, which sttrikes the primer, which ignites the time fuse, wghich ignites the magnesium booster, which ignites the thermite... Follow me? The fact is you have thought up a completely uneeded device (Thermite-cord) to do something that can be done so much more easily!

I mean that makes a whole lot of sence to me, but then again what do I know with my years of experience with explosives and demolitions?


What both of you are missing is the demolition planners sought demolition tools that used ZERO high-explosives.

Adding a magnesium booster to conventional shock-tube would have left traces of high-explosives, or worse, unexploded high-explosives.

The thermite-dusted shock-tube ignited by lasers leaves no traces of high-explosives, or of the initial ignition mechanism.

In fact, the components are cloaked by ambiguity - plastic, iron-oxide, and aluminum were everywhere in the debris pile.

If you let it in, the thermite-dusted shock-tube is both elegant, and robust.

Furthermore, it is supported by observation:

NCSTAR 1-5A/9/C discusses phenomena consistent with thermite-dusted shock-tube.
Videos show features consistent with thermite-dusted shock-tube.


Max

* * *

[Max Photon]

* * *


Apollo20,

I would like to ask you a simple direct question:

What are your main objections (if any) to the notion that thermite was planted at steel connections at impact floors to heat-weaken the steel, to induce collapse?

Max


* * *

[Max Photon]

* * *


Apollo20,

I would like to ask you a simple direct question:

What are your main objections (if any) to the notion that thermite was planted at steel connections at impact floors to heat-weaken the steel, to induce collapse?

Max


* * *



Apollo responded the question on a different thread:


Max:

I would say it's very hard to ignite the stuff - even with thermite-dusted shock tubes!


* * *

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Apollo responded the question on a different thread:
Max:

I would say it's very hard to ignite the stuff - even with thermite-dusted shock tubes!

Then leave it on the other thread; or should we be asking the mods to merge that thread and this one?

[Mr. Skinny]

Apollo responded the question on a different thread:


Max:

I would say it's very hard to ignite the stuff - even with thermite-dusted shock tubes!


* * *
Yeah. Those specific details about the laser seem to elude you, Max.

Hard to split the beam that many times and have enough power on target to ignite them, particularly when both buildings are swaying in the wind.

Danged details!

[pomeroo]

Almost...

I don't know who "developed" thermite-dusted shock-tube - just that it was used on 911.

Also - and this is very VERY important when you are at the feet of 911-God - thermite was not used to cut, slice, or melt WTC steel.

Thermite was used to heat-weaken the steel.


* * *


Why do you continue to lie? You have been exposed. No thermite was used at the WTC complex on the day of the jihadist attacks. Surely if evidence for your fantasy existed, you'd have presented it by now.

[Mr. Skinny]

Max,

Your "laser ignited thermite dusted shock tube" theory has really been blown to bits.

Personally, I don't feel it's worth much more discussion, and, given your imagination, I'd rather spend my time looking at something new.

Your current theory really stinks, Max. You need a new gig.

Please propose a new fantastical idea.

[MIKILLINI]

Max,

Your "laser ignited thermite dusted shock tube" theory has really been blown to bits.

Personally, I don't feel it's worth much more discussion, and, given your imagination, I'd rather spend my time looking at something new.

Your current theory really stinks, Max. You need a new gig.

Please propose a new fantastical idea.

I got to say the MILDEC is turning to MILDEW.:D

[Max Photon]

I got to say the MILDEC is turning to MILDEW.:D




Sorry Chief, Ben beat you to it:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=98609


* * *

[Max Photon]

* * *

Hi everyone.

I thought it would be a bonding experience for us to read a story together. I know of a really exciting story - one with lots action and mystery - that we can read together and discuss, and just have fun.

I know a number of you really haven't read much of the NIST NCSTARs. Well let me assure you, NCSTAR 1-5A/9/C (draft) (http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/NISTNCSTAR1-5Achap9-appdxsDraft.pdf)- which describes the outer facade of WTC2 from impact to collapse initiation - is a thriller. And this story comes with pictures - lots and lots of great pictures! In fact, we get to watch an awesome slide show, and the ever-so-cool NIST narrates!

So turn off your lights, and lets get started. (This first part is kind of like the - you know - the intro, where there are no pictures yet...but don't worry, the pictures are coming. Okay, shhh.)

- - - - -

* * *

NCSTAR 1-5A
Chapter 9
FIRE BEHAVIOR IN WORLD TRADE CENTER 2

9.1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter describes the fire behaviors observed in World Trade Center (WTC) 2 during the period
following the impact of United Airlines Flight 175 at 9:02:59 a.m. until the tower collapsed at
9:58:59 a.m. The fires had very different behaviors than those observed for WTC 1. In general, there
was much less fire spread, and the total area of the outer façade where fires were observed was much
smaller. For this reason, the discussion will focus on general characteristics and major changes in fire
distribution instead of the details of the fire spread as in Chapter 8 describing the fires in WTC 1.

Façade maps describing window conditions, fire behavior, and smoke observations similar to those
developed for WTC 1 have been prepared based on data sheets derived from the visual database. The
time-dependent results are shown in Appendix G to Appendix J for the four sides of the tower.

Other major differences between the two towers are observations of streamers and falling people. Unlike
for WTC 1, very limited numbers of streamers and falling people were observed for WTC 2.
Observations of these events will be described in the text, but, unlike for WTC 1, separate appendices
summarizing these observations have not been provided.


* * *

[pomeroo]

* * *

Hi everyone.

I thought it would be a bonding experience for us to read a story together. I know of a really exciting story - one with lots action and mystery - that we can read together and discuss, and just have fun.

I know a number of you really haven't read much of the NIST NCSTARs. Well let me assure you, NCSTAR 1-5A/9/C (draft) (http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/NISTNCSTAR1-5Achap9-appdxsDraft.pdf)- which describes the outer facade of WTC2 from impact to collapse initiation - is a thriller. And this story comes with pictures - lots and lots of great pictures! In fact, we get to watch an awesome slide show, and the ever-so-cool NIST narrates!

So turn off your lights, and lets get started. (This first part is kind of like the - you know - the intro, where there are no pictures yet...but don't worry, the pictures are coming. Okay, shhh.)

- - - - -

* * *

NCSTAR 1-5A
Chapter 9
FIRE BEHAVIOR IN WORLD TRADE CENTER 2

9.1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter describes the fire behaviors observed in World Trade Center (WTC) 2 during the period
following the impact of United Airlines Flight 175 at 9:02:59 a.m. until the tower collapsed at
9:58:59 a.m. The fires had very different behaviors than those observed for WTC 1. In general, there
was much less fire spread, and the total area of the outer façade where fires were observed was much
smaller. For this reason, the discussion will focus on general characteristics and major changes in fire
distribution instead of the details of the fire spread as in Chapter 8 describing the fires in WTC 1.

Façade maps describing window conditions, fire behavior, and smoke observations similar to those
developed for WTC 1 have been prepared based on data sheets derived from the visual database. The
time-dependent results are shown in Appendix G to Appendix J for the four sides of the tower.

Other major differences between the two towers are observations of streamers and falling people. Unlike
for WTC 1, very limited numbers of streamers and falling people were observed for WTC 2.
Observations of these events will be described in the text, but, unlike for WTC 1, separate appendices
summarizing these observations have not been provided.


* * *


Ya gotta love it--a guy who is clueless about the NIST Report pontificating to people who have actually read it!

[Max Photon]

* * *

Hey Mr. Skinny, are you out there?

Did you hear the exciting news?

Your buddy Max figured out a simpler initiation mechanism.

The thermite-dusted shock-tube - now just "thermite fuse" - was ignited by...drumroll please...the jet's impact.


I guess it's like Apollo20 said: "Bang, bang Maxwell's thermite hammer..."


So certainly the jet's impact is simpler than a laser.

(However, remember, we did establish lasers can ignite thermite.)

Thanks for sharing your expertise on the topic.


Has my "weakest link" been fortified enough for you to reconsider the entire MAX-MIHOP collection?

I hope so. I miss your needling.


Max

* * *

[Max Photon]

* * *

A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE COLLAPSE OF WTC TOWERS 1, 2 & 7 FROM AN
EXPLOSIVES AND CONVENTIONAL DEMOLITION INDUSTRY VIEWPOINT

By Brent Blanchard


ASSERTION #1
"The towers' collapse looked exactly like explosive demolitions."
PROTEC COMMENT: No they didn't. It's the "where."

When discussing similarities between the towers' collapse and an explosive demolition,
many people overlook the single question most central to any objective investigation. It
is not "how" or "when" the buildings failed, but "where" they failed. That answer holds
the key to understanding almost everything that occurred at Ground Zero.

- - -

Okay everyone, did you get that?

Take it from a guy who is trying to Protec America.

WHERE the WTC towers failed holds the key to understanding almost everything that occurred at Ground Zero.

Where WTC2 failed is at Floor 81 / Column 301 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Frc2hRL4lfA).

You can see Column 301 bow inward and fail, thereby initiating the collapse of WTC2.

(By the way, ever wondered how the iron microspheres were formed? The above video shows their genesis.)

So let's continue reading NCSTAR 1-5A/9/C, and as we do, we'll follow Mr. Blanchard's advice, and keep our eyes on where WTC2's collapse initiated.


Max

* * *

[twinstead]

All I know is this layman relies on experts in the relevant sciences in cases like this.

Max with all due respect I have talked to dozens of REAL experts in my travels, people whom I hold in high regard personally and ethically. Max, to a man they laugh at MAX-MIHOP. Seriously. Not roll their eyes, not crumple their brows, but out-and-out LAUGH at your theories.

This is not meant to be a comment on you personally, but the reaction of these experts is very telling to me.

[Max Photon]

* * *

9.2

9:03 A.M. TO 9:15 A.M.

Figure 9–1 shows an image of the east face of WTC 2 recorded at 9:03:42 a.m., which was 43 s after the
aircraft impact. The numerous white dots are pieces of paper that were expelled from the building due to
the aircraft impact and subsequent fireballs. Extensive fires are visible on the 81st, 82nd, and 83rd floors.
On the two lower floors, intense fires, which fill the windows with flame, appear to be nearly continuous
from around windows 81-321 and 82-322 to the north edges of the floors. On the 83rd floor, the fires are
intense, with considerable flaming outside of windows between windows 83-335 and 83-346. There is
also a region with a lower intensity fire nearer the center of the face on the 81st floor, and there is an
indication of a small fire near window 80-313 on the 80th floor. Despite the numerous fires present, the
amount of smoke being released is relatively small, and it is possible to see most of the east face above
the fires.

The intensity levels of the photograph in Figure 9–1 were adjusted to enhance the visibility of an object
that is identified by the arrows added to the photograph. A blowup of the area of the photograph
including the arrows is provided in Figure 9–2. The object appears as a narrow line that has been draped
inside windows on the 82nd floor extending from at least window 82-321 to window 82-339. This
hanging object will be observed numerous times in images to be shown below. While it is difficult to
identify the object with certainty, the evidence will be strong that it is the end of a part of the 83rd floor
concrete floor slab that has been dislodged from the spandrel located above the 82nd floor and has settled
downward several feet to appear below the spandrel.

http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911_nist9/fig9.1.jpg

Figure 9-1. A view of the east face of WTC 2 recorded at 9:03:42 a.m. is shown. The
original photograph has been rotated, cropped, and enhanced by adjusting intensity
levels. Column and floor numbers have been added. The arrows highlight a hanging
object observed through open windows on the 82nd floor.


http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911_nist9/fig9.2.jpg

Figure 9-2. A section of the image shown in Figure 9–1 is blown up. The arrows point to
the location of an object that is visible through open windows on the 82nd floor on the
east side of WTC 2.

Closer inspection of Figure 9–1 and Figure 9–2 shows that small flames are visible above the object at the
tops of windows 82-335 to 82-337. While not as clear as in these windows, similar fires appear to be
present elsewhere along the top of the line. Heavy flames are coming from windows on the 83rd floor
immediately above this area. This suggests that the flames observed at the tops of windows on the 82nd
floor are burning at the base of a fuel source located on top of the hanging object that is fueling the much
larger flames visible on the 83rd floor. It is likely that this fuel is on top of the concrete floor slab that
was originally attached to the spandrel above the 82nd floor.

The visual evidence supports a conclusion that a substantial length of the concrete floor slab for the 83rd
floor along the east facade of the WTC 2 has been dislodged and has come to rest below the spandrel.
The edge of the object appears to be continuous, suggesting that even though the floor slab has dropped
down, it is essentially intact and is still acting as a single system.

The fact that the hanging object is visible so shortly after the aircraft impact on WTC 2 suggests that it
was dislodged at some point during the impact and subsequent fireball. The discussion in Section 7.4.1
indicates that the 83rd floor was struck by a portion of the aircraft’s starboard wing. Other floors struck
by much larger sections of the aircraft, however, appeared to have intact floor slabs.

In Chapter 7 it was also noted that a substantial flash fire lasting several seconds occurred on the 82nd
floor due to the release of aviation fuel. The sudden appearance of this fire is believed to have generated
an overpressure, that may have been on the order of several psi on the floor (see the discussion in
Section 6.5). This overpressure was likely responsible for the removal of large sections of the curtain
wall on the north and east faces, and it drove additional atomized fuel from the building, resulting in the
formation of fireballs. It is possible that the separation of the 83rd floor slab from the spandrel was due
the generation of sufficient overpressure on the 82nd floor to push the 83rd floor slab upward off of its
seats, allowing it to then settle down below the spandrel.

* * *

[Max Photon]

* * *

Hey Max,

The first photo shown by NIST is a full 43 seconds after impact. That seems odd.

Were there any photos taken between impact and NIST's Figure 1?


Hi Max,

Thanks for your great question.

Yes, there were photos taken earlier.

Fire on the Roof of the South Tower (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=3136318#post3136318)

These photos were a little...inconvenient...to the...flow...of the pre-engineered narrative, so they were rated PG, and removed.

Maybe when you're older...

Max

* * *

[Mr. Skinny]

* * *

Hey Mr. Skinny, are you out there?

Did you hear the exciting news?

Your buddy Max figured out a simpler initiation mechanism.

The thermite-dusted shock-tube - now just "thermite fuse" - was ignited by...drumroll please...the jet's impact.


I guess it's like Apollo20 said: "Bang, bang Maxwell's thermite hammer..."


So certainly the jet's impact is simpler than a laser.

(However, remember, we did establish lasers can ignite thermite.)

Thanks for sharing your expertise on the topic.


Has my "weakest link" been fortified enough for you to reconsider the entire MAX-MIHOP collection?

I hope so. I miss your needling.


Max

* * *
Hi, Max

Sorry, but coincident to breaking your laser ignition "link", others were already breaking the thermite "link".

I suppose you assumed that if you could answer the laser issue (by dropping it from your theory) that I then give your theory serious consideration. However, there's no evidence that any thermite was use in the WTC's, so, no, I'm still not buying it.

I won't be needling you too much, Max, since others here know much more aboute thermite/thermate than I do. I'll let them needle you in my place. :)

Cheers

[Max Photon]

* * *


Mr. Ectomorphic Neoteric Deity,

I know you have not read the NIST reports, but I strongly suggest you read along with this thread as we go through NCSTAR 1-5A/9/C.

It'll be fun and very interesting...I promise.

(Plus, the place wouldn't be the same without you. Just read during work.)

Cheers!

Max


* * *

[Max Photon]

* * *


Can we have some evidence now?

Can we have some evidence now?

Can we have some evidence now?


God, it's like being on The Simpsons...


Gentle (minded) readers, you seem to be missing the essence of MAX-MIHOP.

The NIST reports ARE the evidence, as is the FEMA Report, and others.

The NIST reports do not lie - they tell the ambiguated truth. Ambiguity is used to hide evidence in plain view, to engineer plausible deniability. (Can't get charged with cover-up if you ain't hiding nothing.)

The NIST reports are an ambiguous figure.

You have yet to see the NIST reports as an ambiguous figure, where the same report fits both NIST's narrative, and Max's narrative.


Consider The Spinning Silhouette Optical Illusion (http://www.maniacworld.com/Spinning-Silhouette-Optical-Illusion.html)

Most people have a dominant direction of perceived spin.

(For me clockwise is dominant, though now that I have had some exposure/practice, I can make the figure spin in my non-dominant direction almost at will, though it still takes some effort. Hint: Looking at the fore-shadow created by the foot seems to help flip the spin.)

The point is, there is no dominant direction - this is a perfectly ambiguous figure.

Many neophytes simply can't believe the opposite spin is possible, let alone equal.


You all are neophytes with the NIST reports.

The NIST reports are an ambiguous figure.

Yet you are only seeing one spin.


Thermite initiated the collapse of the WTC towers.

The NIST reports are the evidence.


Max

* * *

[pomeroo]

* * *


Can we have some evidence now?

Can we have some evidence now?

Can we have some evidence now?


God, it's like being on The Simpsons...


Gentle (minded) readers, you seem to be missing the essence of MAX-MIHOP.

The NIST reports ARE the evidence, as is the FEMA Report, and others.

The NIST reports do not lie - they tell the ambiguated truth. Ambiguity is used to hide evidence in plain view, to engineer plausible deniability. (Can't get charged with cover-up if you ain't hiding nothing.)

The NIST reports are an ambiguous figure.

You have yet to see the NIST reports as an ambiguous figure, where the same report fits both NIST's narrative, and Max's narrative.


Consider The Spinning Silhouette Optical Illusion (http://www.maniacworld.com/Spinning-Silhouette-Optical-Illusion.html)

Most people have a dominant direction of perceived spin.

(For me clockwise is dominant, though now that I have had some exposure/practice, I can make the figure spin in my non-dominant direction almost at will, though it still takes some effort. Hint: Looking at the fore-shadow created by the foot seems to help flip the spin.)

The point is, there is no dominant direction - this is a perfectly ambiguous figure.

Many neophytes simply can't believe the opposite spin is possible, let alone equal.


You all are neophytes with the NIST reports.

The NIST reports are an ambiguous figure.

Yet you are only seeing one spin.


Thermite initiated the collapse of the WTC towers.

The NIST reports are the evidence.


Max

* * *


When does this this fact-free fraud run out steam? His falsehoods about remote-controlled planes were destroyed by Apathoid's paper, which he refused to read. There is absolutely no evidence for the use of thermite at the WTC complex and he acknowledges as much. His fantasies about shock-tubes have been laughed out of existence. Enough is enough.

[Max Photon]

* * *


So we have learned from the Introduction of NCSTAR 1-5A/9/C that:

WTC2's fires had very different behaviors than those observed for WTC 1.
there was much less fire spread
the total area of the outer façade where fires were observed was much smaller.

WTC2 - in stark contrast to WTC1 - had a very limited number of:
streamers
falling people


This tells us that the controlled-demolition mechanisms for the two towers were different. In fact, demolition planners chose orthogonal approaches, so that during the investigation and reporting phases, each mechanism could serve as the carpet under which the other's anomalies were swept.

The Introduction tells us that WTC2's fires were localized at the perimeter, consistent with thermite placed in box columns, spandrel splice gaps, and at floor and gusset seats.


Max

* * *

[Max Photon]

* * *


So kiddies, what did we learn from NIST Figures 9-1 and 9-2?


NIST avoided showing any photos between impact and 43 seconds. (Note that photos (which may be fake) exist showing a fire on WTC2's roof during the interval.)

The numerous white dots are pieces of paper that were expelled from the building due to the aircraft impact and subsequent fireballs. (Note that these white dots perfectly cloak any white light on the facade from exposed thermite fuse net that was ignited by the jet's impact.)

Despite the numerous fires present, the amount of smoke being released is relatively small. (Note that one would expect the debris to consist of office furniture, luggage, jet seats, etc., and hence to be producing thick dark smoke. These are clean burning fires. Also note that the black soot marks that lick up the tower were formed at the tail end of the fireball.)

NIST speculates about the hanging object. The object appears as a narrow line that has been draped inside windows on the 82nd floor extending from at least window 82-321 to window 82-339. While NIST it was difficult to identify the object with certainty, NIST says the evidence will be strong that it is the end of a part of the 83rd floor concrete floor slab that has been dislodged from the spandrel located above the 82nd floor and has settled downward several feet to appear below the spandrel. (Note that later in this story, the "sagging floors" seen on the north side magically disappear and reappear.)

Small flames are visible above the object at the tops of windows 82-335 to 82-337. While not as clear as in these windows, similar fires appear to be present elsewhere along the top of the line. Heavy flames are coming from windows on the 83rd floor immediately above this area. This suggests that the flames observed at the tops of windows on the 82nd floor are burning at the base of a fuel source located on top of the hanging object that is fueling the much larger flames visible on the 83rd floor. NIST thinks it is likely that this fuel is on top of the concrete floor slab that was originally attached to the spandrel above the 82nd floor. (Note that the fires could also be from incendiaries placed at floor and gusset seats.)

The fire ball created overpressure which blew off aluminum cladding. (Note that thermite fuse was placed between the cladding and the steel, so where cladding is missing - especially on the north face - one can see the thermite fuse burning.)

The fire ball likely created overpressure that lifted floors off their seats, allowing them to settle. (Note that this assumes that the hanging object seen through open windows [XP] are even floors.)

[JMarshall]

Ok, Max, look here, and listen up! There is no such thing as thermite-tube, or thermite-fuse, or whatever you are calling it nowadays. Even if there was, thermite would not have the sufficient properties needed for fuse use. All of the "fuses" used, including shock-tube, det-cord, and time delay fuse, have a measurable and constant burn rate, that can be maintained throughout the whole length of the fuse. On top of that the "fuses" are not affected by gravity, meaning you can hang it from end and ignite it from bottom to top... Thermite IS affected by gravity, so you would only be able to ignite it from the top and let it burn down, also, thermite does not have a constant burn rate... Please, stop ignoring these facts and understand it is not even close to a posibility!

[pomeroo]

Ok, Max, look here, and listen up! There is no such thing as thermite-tube, or thermite-fuse, or whatever you are calling it nowadays. Even if there was, thermite would not have the sufficient properties needed for fuse use. All of the "fuses" used, including shock-tube, det-cord, and time delay fuse, have a measurable and constant burn rate, that can be maintained throughout the whole length of the fuse. On top of that the "fuses" are not affected by gravity, meaning you can hang it from end and ignite it from bottom to top... Thermite IS affected by gravity, so you would only be able to ignite it from the top and let it burn down, also, thermite does not have a constant burn rate... Please, stop ignoring these facts and understand it is not even close to a posibility!


He was so pleased when he learned the word "thermite," he got too excited to look up its meaning.

[Max Photon]

* * *

http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911_nist9/fig9.3.jpg

NIST Figure 9-3


A view of the north face of WTC 2 recorded at 9:04:13 a.m. is shown in Figure 9–3. The large amount of paper expelled from the tower due to the aircraft impact and subsequent fires is apparent. [The white paper ambiguates the white flashes from burning thermite fuse.] Two areas of intense fire are seen. One of these is located near the east edge of the face on the 81st floor, and the second is on the 79th floor, extending from roughly windows 79-231 to 79-238. In Chapter 7 visual evidence was shown indicating that large piles of debris, presumably a mixture of aircraft and building debris, were present at these two locations. Evidently, these debris piles were ignited during the aircraft impact and subsequent fireballs and continued to burn intensely. Even though there is a large amount of dust evident [remember, NIST will describe aluminum-oxide as "dust", not "smoke"], there does not appear to be a substantial fire in the region between the two burning areas. [This region is called the Cold Spot.]

- - -

Some comments:

Don't the fires seem to be burning too cleanly for debris fires with hydrocarbons?

Doesn't the presence of the Cold Spot strongly suggest to you that there was an obstacle in the path of the jet's debris, and that the only debris to make it to the north face went around or missed the obstacle?

Isn't it claimed that there was a room with UPS batteries in line with the jet's trajectory and the Cold Spot?

Could the UPS battery room be the obstacle that created the Cold Spot?


Max

* * *

[BenBurch]

Physical Evidence Max.

Show us Thermite.

[Max Photon]

* * *

http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911_nist9/fig9.4.jpg

Figure 9-4


A view of the south face of WTC 2 recorded at 9:04:36 a.m. is shown in Figure 9–4. It was taken 97 s
after the aircraft impact on this face. A number of sheets of paper are also visible on this side of the
building. The most prominent feature is the damage caused by the aircraft impact. Two areas of bright
flame are evident in the image on the 78th and 79th floors. On the 78th floor, the fire is located just to the
right of the cavity generated by the aircraft impact, while on the 79th floor the fire appears to be burning
within the cavity. On the 82nd floor there appears to be an orange glow from windows 82-420 to 82-425,
suggesting that a fire is present in this area as well.

There is relatively little smoke coming from windows on the south face at this time. For later comparison
purposes, note that the entire lengths of the 81st and 82nd floors can be seen and that very little smoke is
evident coming from windows on these floors. The only significant plume of smoke is coming from the
83rd floor near the east edge of the face. [This corner panel was heat-weakened, just as the corner panel was at 81/NE. In fact, eventually instability started here, and zipped across the east face to the NE corner, thereby initiating the collapse of WTC2.]


* * *

[Max Photon]

Physical Evidence Max.

Show us Thermite.





Show me electrons.

[Swing Dangler]

Ok, Max, look here, and listen up! There is no such thing as thermite-tube, or thermite-fuse, or whatever you are calling it nowadays. Even if there was, thermite would not have the sufficient properties needed for fuse use. All of the "fuses" used, including shock-tube, det-cord, and time delay fuse, have a measurable and constant burn rate, that can be maintained throughout the whole length of the fuse. On top of that the "fuses" are not affected by gravity, meaning you can hang it from end and ignite it from bottom to top... Thermite IS affected by gravity, so you would only be able to ignite it from the top and let it burn down, also, thermite does not have a constant burn rate... Please, stop ignoring these facts and understand it is not even close to a posibility!

A debunker debunks himself?? Not again...

Now are there such things as thermite-tube or thermite fuses?

If not, why would you proceed to explain something that doesn't exist?

Sorry, for asking such a stupid question.

[JimBenArm]

A debunker debunks himself?? Not again...

Now are there such things as thermite-tube or thermite fuses?

If not, why would you proceed to explain something that doesn't exist?

Sorry, for asking such a stupid question.
Try re-reading it. This time, concentrate on the words that are there, and what they mean. It will become clear, if you actually try, and don't read things into it that aren't there.
Really, it's not hard.

[Good Lt]

Show me electrons.


So you can't show us the thermite placed in the WTC, nor any evidence it was ever there?

Noted.

[pomeroo]

A debunker debunks himself?? Not again...

Now are there such things as thermite-tube or thermite fuses?

If not, why would you proceed to explain something that doesn't exist?

Sorry, for asking such a stupid question.


No, you're not sorry. It's what you do.

[pomeroo]

Show me electrons.


Your fantasy is dead, Max. Utterly, completely, totally crushed by reason and evidence. Instead of standing here in a pool of flop sweat, do what the other frauds do: fabricate some new stuff. Trust me, it will be better than the thermite-dusted shock tubes.

[Max Photon]

* * *

The database does not contain clear images of the west face of WTC 2 in the early period following the
aircraft impact. Figure 9–5 shows an image of the face taken from a video recording made from a news
helicopter at 9:09:34 a.m. At this time there was no visible smoke or fire on the face.
This is consistent with the conclusion in Chapter 7 that the aircraft impact and subsequent fireballs caused no visible damage to the west face of WTC 2.


http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911_nist9/fig9.5.jpg

Figure 9-5. This image of the west face of WTC 2 was captured from a video shot from a
news helicopter at 9:09:34 a.m. Column and floor numbers have been added.


The west face of WTC 2 remained clear of smoke until 9:10:29 a.m. At this time, a plume of smoke
appeared on the 86th floor from near window 86-118. [Not "from" window 86-118, but "near".] This location is well above the floors where fires had been observed, and there is no indication of an active fire on this floor on the other three faces. The possible explanation for the appearance of smoke at this time is that people in the tower broke out a window and released smoke that had built up on this floor. This explanation suggests that smoke was traveling upward through the tower. [A different explanation is that the "smoke" is aluminum-oxide.]


* * *

[Max Photon]

* * *

http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911_nist9/fig9.6.jpg

Figure 9-6. This photograph showing the east face of WTC 2 was recorded at
9:07:04 a.m.


A close-up view of the east face of WTC 2 recorded at 9:07:04 a.m. is shown in Figure 9–6. During the
3 min 20 s since Figure 9–1 was taken,

http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911_nist9/fig9.1.jpg
Figure 9-1

the fire distribution on the face has changed. The large fires that
were burning earlier on the 81st, 82nd, and 83rd floors appear to have died down somewhat. A new area
of intense fire has appeared on the 82nd floor just to the south of where the large fire was visible on the
83rd at the earlier time.

A substantial increase in the amount of smoke coming from open windows is evident when the two
photographs of the east face are compared. The smoke appears to be coming from two separate locations
on the 82nd floor. Videos of the east face show that heavy smoke appeared first from the area on the
south side of the face, increasing rapidly around 9:04:30 a.m. The smoke flow coming from windows just
to the north of the center of the face increased markedly about 50 s later.
[As we shall see, heavy smoke flows suddenly start, and suddenly stop, many times during the time from impact to collapse. Think "visco-elastic dampers."]

* * *

[Max Photon]

* * *

The image in Figure 9–6 provides a great deal more resolution than is evident from the way it has been
sized. Figure 9–7 shows blowups taken from the photograph of the northern and southern halves of the
east face for the floors where fires were present. The north side is at the top of the figure. In this image
the damage to the aluminum façade is evident. The debris that has been piled along the east wall in the
northeast corners on the 80th and 81st floor is visible. There is also a large amount of debris protruding
from the opening created by removing the aluminum panel from the northeast corner of the 81st floor.

http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911_nist9/fig9.7.jpg

Figure 9-7. These two images show blowups of the north and south sides of the east
face of WTC 2 taken from the photograph included in Figure 9–6, which was shot at
9:07:04 a.m. Column and floor numbers have been added.

Heavy fires are burning in the northeast corners of the 81st and 82nd floors. On the 81st floor flames are
coming from windows 81-301 to 81-304 as well as from the northeast corner where the aluminum panel
has been removed. Lower intensity flames are evident in many windows further to the south, extending at
least as far as the last visible window, 81-332. It is likely that the fire is continuous across this entire
length. On the 82nd floor flames are coming from windows 82-301 to 82-309. Flames further to the
south do not appear to be as widespread as on the 81st floor, but there is much more smoke coming from
open windows on this floor. The smoke flow is particularly heavy from windows 82-323 to 82-332. The
smoke flows fill the upper portions of the windows, indicating that a smoke layer exists inside that
descends well below the tops of the windows. A flame can be seen coming from window 82-331.

Small isolated fires are also visible on the 80th floor at windows 80-313, 80-321, and 80-330. Even
though there is a large amount of debris on this floor, the fires are still relatively small. No fire or smoke
is evident coming from windows on the 79th floor, and many windows still have intact glass.

A blowup of the southern side of the fire floors is included at the bottom of Figure 9–7. Flames are
visible on the 83rd floor over a length from near window 83-331 to window 83-338. The intensity of
these flames has died down considerably from that observed at the earlier time in Figure 9–1. It can be
seen that a considerable amount of the aluminum facing on this floor has been removed.

Unlike in the earlier photograph, intense flames are now visible in windows 82-341 to 82-349. Flames
fill these windows and in many cases extend from the openings. Heavy black smoke is coming from the
flame area as well as from windows immediately below on the 81st floor, particularly window 81-345 and
window 81-346. Smoke is also coming from numerous windows to the north of the visible fire on the
82nd floor. This smoke has obscured the windows where the hanging object was identified in Figure 9–1
and Figure 9–2. Note that the aluminum panel on the southeast corner of this floor is pushed out, but is
still attached.

On the 81st floor the last window to the south where a low-intensity fire is observed is window 81-333. It
is interesting that despite the fact that there is a great deal of damage to the aluminum façade on this floor,
there are several windows for which the glass is still in place. The small spot fire present in window
80-330 can be seen in the overlapping lower image as well. Several window panes are also still in place
on this floor. No fire or smoke is visible on this half of the 79th floor.

* * *

[Alt+F4]

Your fantasy is dead, Max. Utterly, completely, totally crushed by reason and evidence. Instead of standing here in a pool of flop sweat, do what the other frauds do: fabricate some new stuff. Trust me, it will be better than the thermite-dusted shock tubes.

You're right Ron, it is just Max's fantasy. Like the other troofers who post on this forum, if Max is so certain his thermite theory is 100% correct why waste his time here? I'd go to the Bush hating New York Times and convince them to publish my findings. I do anything/everything in my power to get my message out.

Max is just like the Pentacon nuts, Judy Wood and the Loose Change morons...they don't care one bit about 9/11 and all the suffering of so many people, they only want someone to pay attention to their sad, small, miserable lives.

[Max Photon]

* * *

Figure 9–8 shows the north face of WTC 2 at 9:07:23 a.m. This is 3 min and 10 s later than the image of
the north face included in Figure 9–3 [included below Figure 9-8 for comparison].
The view of the fires in the current image is more complete due to
the angle and distance from which it was shot. The two large fires that were observed on the 79th and
81st floors at the earlier time continue to burn vigorously. The fire on the 79th floor still consists of two
large tongues of flame at the same locations however, flames are visible further to the west than at the
earlier time, now reaching at least as far as window 79-228. In the earlier photograph, windows 79-228
and 79-229 appeared to have intact glass. The intense fire on the east edge of the 81st floor is in roughly
the same location as earlier. In Figure 9–3 it was not possible to determine whether the 82nd floor was
burning. It is clear in the later image that there is a fire on the 82nd floor, with flames coming from
windows 82-252 to 82-258. It was difficult to see this area immediately following the aircraft impact
because of the amount of debris released and the large flames present on the 81st floor. A review of
images indicates that the 82nd floor was burning in this corner as early as 9:04:25 a.m.

[These two fires are peculiar. Note how clear-burning they are.
We will also see that they seem to have an inexhaustible supply of fuel.]

In Section 7.4.2 it was noted that there was a large rectangular area on the east side of the north face
where large fires did not grow. For this reason, the area was referred to as the “cold spot”. The area ran
between columns 238 and 250 and included the 80th, 81st, and 82nd floors. Later in this chapter an
infrared image will be reproduced that shows that this area was indeed at a much lower temperature
compared to the surrounding locations where large fires were present. The rectangular area stands out
distinctly in Figure 9–8 because it lies between two intense fires, and most of the aluminum cladding in
the area has been removed. Recall from the discussion in Chapter 7 that the largest fireball that formed
on the north face of the tower following the aircraft impact came from the general area of the cold spot.

http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911_nist9/fig9.8.jpg
Figure 9-8. This image captured from a video shows the north face of WTC 2 at
9:07:23 a.m. Column and floor numbers have been added.
[Sorry about the large spacing.]



http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911_nist9/fig9.3.jpg

Figure 9-3


Figure 9–8 provides a good view of much of the north face with sufficient resolution to resolve details on
the face. For instance, the open windows on the 78th floor near window 78-225 can be discerned. There
is no indication of fire or smoke at locations removed from the area that was originally damaged during
the aircraft impact and subsequent fireballs.

* * *


ETA:

Isn't it possible that the Cold Spot was formed because there was an obstacle in the path of the debris?

Isn't it likely that the Cold Spot is made up of walled-off rooms? (How else does one explain the lack of smoke, or that fires don't migrate into this area?)

Isn't it possible that debris collected against the perimeter on both sides of the Cold Spot exactly because there was an obstacle?

Note that the debris collected at column splices. MAX-MIHOP says burning thermite spewed from box column bolt-access-holes onto the piles of debris that collected against the perimeter on both sides of the Cold Spot.

Note how peculiar NIST comments are that the large fireball came from the area of the Cold Spot, and all the aluminum cladding was blown off the Cold Spot, yet there is no fire or smoke (and little debris).

I believe that the photographic evidence actually shows the fireball emerging from the circumference of the Cold Spot (that is, the fireball went around the obstacle), and then when the fireball filled in the gap, superposition created a larger fireball, that appeared to emerge from the Cold Spot. (See attached photos. Ignore the yellow arrow in the first.)

In the first attached photo, does it not seem that the fireball is going around the Cold Spot?


* * *

[TheRedWorm]

I don't see the therm*te, Max. Would you be so kind as to point it out?

[Max Photon]

MAX PHOTON TURNS UP THE HEAT


It is a simple affair to logically arrive at the WTC demolition planners' target temperature range to induce heat-weakening in WTC steel.


250 C - The temperature at which paint cracked in NIST's tests
500 C - Steel becomes incandescent (faint red)
580 C - Steel is blood red
590 C - The critical temperature of steel
625 C - Spheroidization of pearlite (after 15 minutes exposure)
660 C - Aluminum melts
690 C - Steel is medium cherry
700 C - "Significant" heat-weakening takes place (NIST FAQ #12)
727 C - Austenite begins to form / decarburization


Also note that parabolic oxidation becomes more vigorous as the temperature increases in this range.

(Remember, as Max said: The Rust is a Bust!)


Looking at these constraints, it is easy to see that the WTC demolition planners' steel temperature target range is close to, but below 625 C.

This is the range that best balances heat-weakening the steel with avoiding detection.


Note that there were planned exceptions.

For example, WTC2/81/301 was heated to about 1000 C - 1100 C.


Max Temp Photon

* * *





From NIST Metallurgy Division Publications - NISTIR 7248:

All steels lose strength with increasing temperature;
By 600 °C, most structural steels have lost more than half their strength;
At intermediate temperatures the strength is independent of time,
Above 500 °C, creep, or time-dependent deformation, further reduces the load-carrying capability



Get that?

Above 500 C (burr) a new emergent phenomenon spontaneously appears in steel-world - time!

And what do we see when we look at our brand new steel watches?

That's right class...creepy things.


Above 500 C, steel creeps. (Remember that.)


To help us remember, I'm going to add this to our trusty Max Photon Steel Temperature Targeting Matrix:


250 C - The temperature at which paint cracked in NIST's tests
500 C - Steel becomes incandescent (faint red)
500 C - Time-dependent deformation, or creep, emerges
580 C - Steel is blood red
590 C - Steel's critical temperature (at which it loses 1/2 its strength)
625 C - Spheroidization of pearlite (after 15 minutes exposure)
660 C - Aluminum melts
690 C - Steel is medium cherry
700 C - "Significant" heat-weakening takes place (NIST FAQ #12)
727 C - Austenite begins to form / decarburization



You see, Tc, the critical temperature of steel - at 590 C - is not really an important number; it is an arbitrary number (the T that results in 1/2 max strength).

But the temperature at which time dependent deformation appears - 500 C - now that's an important number!


I hereby adjust MAX-MIHOP's predicted target steel temperatures sought by demolition planners to be between 525 C - 600 C.

This range is above the minimum temperature needed for creep, and below the temperature that can be detected by NIST's tests for spheroidization of pearlite, etc.

The cooler end would be sought so that incandescence is minimized.


Max

* * *

[Max Photon]

* * *

WTC2, Floors 79-82, had a stair system located outside of the east face of the core, at the SE corner of the core.

The stairs only served those four floors.

I wonder if the stairs were used to help shatter the jet's aluminum, to enhance the phreato-thermatic explosion?

I also wonder if the stairs were used to help protect the enclosed room - the obstacle - that created the debris shadow, and the Cold Spot?


Max

* * *

[MIKILLINI]

Show me electrons.


http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1144/733061472_b407a6c1e8.jpg?v=0

Now about that thermite...

[Max Photon]

* * *

NIST Figure 9-9

An image of the fires on north and east faces shot from the northeast at 9:06:53 a.m. is shown in
Figure 9–9. It provides a good view of the debris that was protruding from the northeast corner of the
81st floor, as well as an indication of the actual extent and intensity of the fires burning in the northeast
corners of the 81st and 82nd floors. The cold spot on the north face is easily identified from this angle.

http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911_nist9/fig9.9.jpg

Figure 9-9. This cropped photograph showing the northeast corner of WTC 2 was taken
at 9:06:53 a.m. The image has been enhanced by adjusting the intensity levels. Column
and floor numbers have been added.


That is a pretty sweet shot of the Cold Spot.


Another thing:

When you look at that fake-looking corner fire over the "50 minute hour" - keep the following in mind:

There were eight column splices in a row at the 81st corner. (See the attached photo below.)

MAX-MIHOP says that somehow - (I am not clear on the exact mechanism) - thermite or thermite product was made to spill or spew onto the floor and/or the debris pile, from the column's bolt-access-holes.

The hot material created NIST's variations of "fires burning on piles of debris."


Are you starting to see the picture?


There was an obstacle in the path of the jet.
The obstacle created the Cold Spot (and the phreato-thermatic explosion).
Debris went to either side of the Cold Spot, and was netted by perimeter columns.
The debris collected near rows of column splices.
Thermite heat-weakened the columns, and created and sustained the "fires on piles of debris" that were supposed to be the fires that weakened the columns.
Choreographing other fires created the illusion of "migrating fires".


By the way, my Profile photo (http://forums.randi.org/z/index.php?z-profile=Max-Photon) shows the infamous 10-minute metal fire, right at Column 301's upper bolt-access-hole (see the attached photo below).


But alas, we are getting ahead of overselves...

* * *

[twinstead]

I wish you could present your evidence in a court of law Max and have it scrutinized by court-acknowledged experts in the relevant fields.

They would have a field day with this. It would be fun.

[Max Photon]

* * *

NIST Figures 9-10 and 9-11

An image of the south face of WTC 2 taken from a video recorded at 9:06:31 a.m. is shown in
Figure 9–10. This is slightly less than two minutes later than the image shown in Figure 9–4. Even
though the latter image is clearer and shows more detail, it can still be seen that the appearance of the face
has changed somewhat during this short period. A new fire has appeared on the 81st floor near window
81-430 that was not apparent earlier. The fire that was burning within the cavity created by the aircraft
impact on the 79th floor seems to have moved toward the west and can now be seen on top of a pile of
debris through open window 81-436, as well as at multiple locations on the debris within the impact
cavity. In the later image there is no indication of a fire burning on the 82nd floor above the aircraft
impact cavity.

http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911_nist9/fig9.10.jpg

Figure 9-10. This image showing the south face of WTC 2 is a frame captured from a
video recorded at 9:06:31 a.m. It has been enhanced by adjusting the intensity levels,
and column and floor numbers have been added.

In Figure 9–10, smoke is coming from open windows to the east of the aircraft impact cavity on the 81st
floor, and there is an indication of flames in the area. In the earlier photograph, this area was clear of
smoke, and some details on this floor as well as the one above could be identified. Apparently, a fire has
grown quickly on the 81st floor in this area. Interestingly, a photograph of the east face taken around this
time (see Figure 9–7) shows very little smoke and no visible flame near the south edge of the face. This
suggests that the fire growing at this location was ignited near the aircraft impact location and is moving
toward the east.

http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911_nist9/fig9.11.jpg

Figure 9-11. This photograph of WTC 2 was taken at 9:07:56 a.m. from the southeast and
shows the south face and a portion of the east face. The intensity levels have been
adjusted, and column and floor numbers have been added.

Another view of the south face at roughly the same time is shown in Figure 9–11. It was shot from
further east than Figure 9–10. From this angle fires are visible at multiple spots inside the aircraft impact
cavity, including locations corresponding to the 78th, 79th, and 80th floors. The smoke coming from the
windows to the east of the aircraft impact cavity on the 81st floor is also visible. Apparently, the fires growing on this floor are also venting through the aircraft impact cavity since a large amount of smoke is
flowing from the opening just to the west. This photograph confirms that little smoke and no flames are
visible coming from windows on the 81st floor of the east face that are adjacent to this area.
The fire distribution and growth seen on the south face of WTC 2 suggests that small fires were ignited at
multiple locations surrounding the aircraft impact cavity. The ignitions most likely resulted from the
fireball that formed on the south face following the aircraft impact. These fires had very different
behaviors than the large intense fires established on the large piles of debris in the northeast corner during
the same period.

* * *


Comments:

Note that we now have small migrating fires, and large intense stationary fires, and that their behaviors are very different.

The migrating fires are important to the narrative, because Bazant has suggested that if a simple majority of perimeter columns give, the tower is doomed.

Fires will migrate west on the south face, as they will on the north face. The east face is fire-affected across its face. A simple majority will be reached.

(Also, note the vigorous activity at the SE corner. Both the SE and the NE corners are getting worked.)

* * *

[Max Photon]

* * *

Originally posted by Max Photon

Note that my hypothesis is consistent with NIST's bizarre language (as it engineers plausible-deniability into the report). As I have pointed out in the past, NCSTAR 1-5A/9/C - which describes the observed "fire" behavior for WTC2 - almost exclusively uses the peculiar phrase "fires on debris," rather than "debris on fire."

Gravy responded: (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2790758#post2790758)

Max, the phrases "fires on debris" or "fire on debris" or "fire in debris" do not appear anywhere in the report you cite.

Please try, Max, to see your behavior as a stranger might. Please try.


- - -

From NCSTAR 1-5A/9/C:

"The fire that was burning within the cavity created by the aircraft impact on the 79th floor seems to have moved toward the west and can now be seen on top of a pile of debris..." (p. 305)

"These fires had very different behaviors than the large intense fires established on the large piles of debris in the northeast corner during the same period." (p. 308)

...a small fire is now visible on the 80th floor in windows 80-238 to 80-240, burning on a debris pile. (p. 313)

"The appearance of the fire burning on the debris pile located at the western edge of the aircraft impact cavity on the 79th floor is similar to that seen earlier, while the fire on the 78th floor seems to be slowly spreading across debris piled within the cavity." (p. 314)

"On the 79th and 81st floors these fire were burning on large piles of debris located just inside the façade." (p.315)

"With the exception of the fire burning on a debris pile near the center of the north face..." (p. 317)

"...most likely associated with the small fire burning on the debris pile in window 80-241." (p. 321)

"A narrower bright region above the 79th floor reflects the fire burning on the pile of debris on the 80th floor..." (p. 321)

"Recall that a pile of debris in this area of the 79th floor was present immediately following the aircraft impact. An intense fire had been burning on this debris since the impact..." (p. 331)

"These fires were ignited during the aircraft impact and subsequent fireballs and appeared to be burning on piles of debris that resulted." (p. 332)

"Fires that were ignited on piles of debris located in the northeast corners of the 81st and 82nd floors continued to burn over the period,..." (p. 334)

"The fires continued to burn on the debris piles at the eastern edges of the 81st and 82nd floors and closer to the center of the face on the 79th floor." (p 335)

"The fires burning on piles of debris on the 79th and 80th floors have comparable intensities to
those seen in recent images." (p. 352)

"Figure 9–51 provides good views of the fires that continued to burn on the east edge of the north face on the 81st and 82nd floors and on the piles of debris on the right side of the cold spot..." (p. 355)

"The fires on the 79th and 80th floors near the center of the north face continue to burn on
the piles of debris." (p. 356)

"Fires on the north face that were ignited on piles of debris on the 79th, 81st, and 82nd floors shortly after the aircraft impact..." (364)

...along with a fire that grew somewhat later on a debris pile on the 80th floor continued
to burn throughout the period." (p. 364)

"...fire is burning on top of the object." (p. 365)

"It may be that the 80th floor slab is missing in this area and that the fires visible on the 79th and 80th floors (see Figure 9–61) are actually burning on the same pile of debris." (p. 365)

"...the fires visible on the 79th and 80th floors are burning on a single large pile of debris,..." (p. 368)

"The fire on the eastern edge of the 81st floor seen in Figure 9–65 continued to burn on the debris pile in this area." (p. 369)

"On the 79th floor the fire burning on the debris pile..." (p. 380)

"...the fires on these two floors were burning on a single pile of debris..." (p. 386)

"Fires dying down included those burning on debris piles..." (p. 397)

"A fire that had been burning on a pile of debris in the northeast corner of the 81st floor since the aircraft impact was still present." (p. 390)

"On the 79th floor this fire growth took place from the large fire burning on a pile of debris just
to the east of the center of the face." (p. 403)

"These fires were located on piles of debris created during the aircraft impact..." (p. 403)

"...where a fire spread onto a pile of debris..." (p. 403)

- - -

Comments:

Most people say "the house is on fire," not "the fire is on the house".

Why does NIST use variations of the phrase "fires on piles of debris," instead of "piles of debris on fire"?

Answer:

Thermite or its hot product was made to spew out onto piles of debris. This use of the incendiary ensured that fires would continue to be visible even after the fuel in the piles was exhausted.

(Highly-visible fires - and migrating fires - are essential to NIST's pre-engineered narrative.)

So technically, the debris is not really on fire - there is just hot material on and mixed in with it.

The NIST Report creates plausible deniability by using variation of "fires on piles of debris" because indeed that is accurate language!

See, the NIST Reports never lie; they just tell the ambiguated truth.


Max


P.S. Why ever trust Gravy again?

* * *

[phunk]

Thermite or its hot product was made to spew out onto piles of debris. This use of the incendiary ensured that fires would continue to be visible even after the fuel in the piles was exhausted.


That's just wrong. Thermite used as an incendiary only starts the fire, and burns out quickly, leaving the rubble burning on its own. It would be gone in seconds, it would not magically keep burning after the fuel in the rubble piles was exhausted.

So technically, the debris is not really on fire - there is just hot material on and mixed in with it.
So the debris is fireproof? What magical thermite resistant materials did they use for office furnishings in the WTC?


The NIST Report creates plausible deniability by using variation of "fires on piles of debris" because indeed that is accurate language!

See, the NIST Reports never lie; they just tell the ambiguated truth.


What fantasy world do you live in where that's a valid defence? If it's proven that 9/11 was a conspiracy and NIST knew, the authors of the report couldn't get away with it by saying "but look, we didn't lie because this phrase can be interpreted in more than one way!" That's just lunacy. Saying "fire on the debris" rather than "debris on fire" does not create any plausible deniability.

[pomeroo]

* * *

Originally posted by Max Photon

Note that my hypothesis is consistent with NIST's bizarre language (as it engineers plausible-deniability into the report). As I have pointed out in the past, NCSTAR 1-5A/9/C - which describes the observed "fire" behavior for WTC2 - almost exclusively uses the peculiar phrase "fires on debris," rather than "debris on fire."

Gravy responded: (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2790758#post2790758)

Max, the phrases "fires on debris" or "fire on debris" or "fire in debris" do not appear anywhere in the report you cite.

Please try, Max, to see your behavior as a stranger might. Please try.


- - -

From NCSTAR 1-5A/9/C:

"The fire that was burning within the cavity created by the aircraft impact on the 79th floor seems to have moved toward the west and can now be seen on top of a pile of debris..." (p. 305)

"These fires had very different behaviors than the large intense fires established on the large piles of debris in the northeast corner during the same period." (p. 308)

...a small fire is now visible on the 80th floor in windows 80-238 to 80-240, burning on a debris pile. (p. 313)

"The appearance of the fire burning on the debris pile located at the western edge of the aircraft impact cavity on the 79th floor is similar to that seen earlier, while the fire on the 78th floor seems to be slowly spreading across debris piled within the cavity." (p. 314)

"On the 79th and 81st floors these fire were burning on large piles of debris located just inside the façade." (p.315)

"With the exception of the fire burning on a debris pile near the center of the north face..." (p. 317)

"...most likely associated with the small fire burning on the debris pile in window 80-241." (p. 321)

"A narrower bright region above the 79th floor reflects the fire burning on the pile of debris on the 80th floor..." (p. 321)

"Recall that a pile of debris in this area of the 79th floor was present immediately following the aircraft impact. An intense fire had been burning on this debris since the impact..." (p. 331)

"These fires were ignited during the aircraft impact and subsequent fireballs and appeared to be burning on piles of debris that resulted." (p. 332)

"Fires that were ignited on piles of debris located in the northeast corners of the 81st and 82nd floors continued to burn over the period,..." (p. 334)

"The fires continued to burn on the debris piles at the eastern edges of the 81st and 82nd floors and closer to the center of the face on the 79th floor." (p 335)

"The fires burning on piles of debris on the 79th and 80th floors have comparable intensities to
those seen in recent images." (p. 352)

"Figure 9–51 provides good views of the fires that continued to burn on the east edge of the north face on the 81st and 82nd floors and on the piles of debris on the right side of the cold spot..." (p. 355)

"The fires on the 79th and 80th floors near the center of the north face continue to burn on
the piles of debris." (p. 356)

"Fires on the north face that were ignited on piles of debris on the 79th, 81st, and 82nd floors shortly after the aircraft impact..." (364)

...along with a fire that grew somewhat later on a debris pile on the 80th floor continued
to burn throughout the period." (p. 364)

"...fire is burning on top of the object." (p. 365)

"It may be that the 80th floor slab is missing in this area and that the fires visible on the 79th and 80th floors (see Figure 9–61) are actually burning on the same pile of debris." (p. 365)

"...the fires visible on the 79th and 80th floors are burning on a single large pile of debris,..." (p. 368)

"The fire on the eastern edge of the 81st floor seen in Figure 9–65 continued to burn on the debris pile in this area." (p. 369)

"On the 79th floor the fire burning on the debris pile..." (p. 380)

"...the fires on these two floors were burning on a single pile of debris..." (p. 386)

"Fires dying down included those burning on debris piles..." (p. 397)

"A fire that had been burning on a pile of debris in the northeast corner of the 81st floor since the aircraft impact was still present." (p. 390)

"On the 79th floor this fire growth took place from the large fire burning on a pile of debris just
to the east of the center of the face." (p. 403)

"These fires were located on piles of debris created during the aircraft impact..." (p. 403)

"...where a fire spread onto a pile of debris..." (p. 403)

- - -

Comments:

Most people say "the house is on fire," not "the fire is on the house".

Why does NIST use variations of the phrase "fires on piles of debris," instead of "piles of debris on fire"?

Answer:

Thermite or its hot product was made to spew out onto piles of debris. This use of the incendiary ensured that fires would continue to be visible even after the fuel in the piles was exhausted.

(Highly-visible fires - and migrating fires - are essential to NIST's pre-engineered narrative.)

So technically, the debris is not really on fire - there is just hot material on and mixed in with it.

The NIST Report creates plausible deniability by using variation of "fires on piles of debris" because indeed that is accurate language!

See, the NIST Reports never lie; they just tell the ambiguated truth.


Max


P.S. Why ever trust Gravy again?

* * *



Max Photon was caught lying about the use of thermite at the WTC complex on the day of the jihadist attacks. He was unable to comprehend Apathoid's paper, which destroyed his fabrications about remote-controlled Boeing 757s and 767s.

Why trust Max--ever?

[Max Photon]

At 9:10:01 a.m. a videographer recorded a closer view of the north face of WTC 2 than those presented
thus far. Figure 9–12 shows a frame captured from this video. The image shows that the fires burning on
the 79th, 80th, and 81st floors have not changed markedly since 9:07:23 a.m. (see Figure 9–8). The cold
spot is also distinct. The increased resolution of Figure 9–12 allows a detail to be resolved that was not
easily identified in the earlier images. There appear to be two objects hanging across a length of open
windows on the 80th floor. The arrows added to the image indicate these objects. One of the objects
appears as a line running from at least window 80-255 to window 80-243. The second object also appears
as a curved line. It is visible above the first object starting near the top of window 80-247 and extending
west to at least window 80-241.

http://www.sharpprintinginc.com/911_nist9/fig9.12.jpg

Figure 9-12. An image of the north face of WTC 2 captured from a video recording at
9:10:01 a.m. is shown. The intensity levels of the image have been adjusted, and column
and floor numbers have been added. The arrows highlight hanging objects observed
through open windows on the 80th floor.

Closer inspection of Figure 9–12 shows that flames are visible above the first object in windows 80-249,
80-252, and 80-253. These fires have similar locations and appearances to the numerous fires that were
observed at the tops of windows in WTC 1 (see Chapter 8) and were attributed to burning thermal
insulation located above the windows. In this case this explanation seems unlikely since the aluminum
façade has been removed from the columns adjacent to these windows. Using Figure 9–12 as a guide,
Figure 9–8 was reviewed more carefully to look for indications of these objects and fires. It is possible to
barely discern the first of the objects, and the fires above the objects are clearly visible at the earlier time.

The appearance of the objects and the presence of fires immediately above them are similar to the long
hanging object seen across a number of windows on the 82nd floor of the east face (see Figure 9–1 and
Figure 9–2 and related discussion). Based on the same arguments, it is possible that the hanging objects
in Figure 9–12 are portions of one or more floor slabs that have detached from spandrels on the north face
and have settled down below the spandrel at the base of the 81st floor. If the objects are portions of a
floor slab, their appearance indicates that they are continuing to function as intact systems.

There is insufficient detail available in Figure 9–12 to provide a confident explanation for the presence of
two objects. If both are indeed hanging floor slabs, one could postulate that the floor slab on the 81st
floor has pulled away from the façade and, in the process of settling downward, has split into two sections
along a line parallel to the face to form the two separate objects or perhaps that two separate floors (e.g.,
81st and 82nd floors) have settled to this location from above.

Since images of the north face at the earliest times following the aircraft impact lacked sufficient
resolution to observe the hanging objects, it is not possible to conclude that they were formed during the
aircraft impact and subsequent fireballs. However, this seems to be the most likely scenario. It may be
significant that they are present at the same locations where the largest fireball formed on the north face
immediately following the aircraft impact (see Chapter 7). This is consistent with the hypothesis, as
surmised for the hanging floor slab on the east face, that the partial collapse of the floor slab was due to
overpressure created by the rapid burning of aviation fuel on the floor(s) below.

More details concerning the rectangular cold spot running from columns 238 to 250 on the 80th, 81st, and
82nd floors are visible in Figure 9–12. There is a pile of debris in the lower right-hand corner, and white
smoke is coming from the 80th floor at window 80-238. Small flames are also visible in windows 80-249
and 81-249. Even so, there continues to be a remarkable lack of smoke and fire in the area.

* * *


First, note that NIST is not certain that the hanging objects seen through open windows are hanging floors.

Yet NIST does not tell us what alternative hypotheses are?



Question: Do the hanging objects match floor trusses?

Question: What is your best alternative hypothesis to what the hanging objects are?

Question: What is creating the Cold Spot?

Question: If the Cold Spot is created by sealed off rooms (how else does one explain the "remarkable" lack of smoke), then what created the overpressure that knocked the cladding off in front of the Cold Spot?

Question: If the Cold Spot is created by sealed off rooms, how are we seeing floor trusses that span the Cold Spot and it's exterior?


Stare at this photo for awhile and really ponder what you are looking, because it really is an incredible shot.

Doesn't that corner fire look unusual? (It's behavior over time is unusual.)

Isn't the smoke- and fire-free Cold Spot bizarre?

Aren't the "hanging floors" questionable?


* * *

[pomeroo]

The curtain is coming down, Max. The Photon Phollies was booed off the stage and canceled for bad reviews.

[Apollo20]

Max:

I still say thermite would be too hard to ignite. Why not go with Apollo20's patented, and conveniently self-igniting (at about 300 deg C), super-AP poured into those perimeter column holes?

[MIKILLINI]

Max Photon was caught lying about the use of thermite at the WTC complex on the day of the jihadist attacks. He was unable to comprehend Apathoid's paper, which destroyed his fabrications about remote-controlled Boeing 757s and 767s.

Why trust Max--ever?

Good question. Now those who are in on it include NIST. Gee Max, plausible deniability for some if they're asked a specific question. This conspiracy sure goes to Extreme lengths to cover their scheme. Many phases, many potential witnesses, many links in the chain of events that had to go right in order for this to be a successful operation.
Hypothetically Max, what would have been enough to shock the public was seeing airliners crashing into the WTC towers, along with the destruction at Shanksville and Pentagon crash sites.
Adding more potential and complicated scenarios with possible failures, thereby increasing the risk of the plan to backfire, makes no sense.
And nobody has come forward to even hint about this scheme. No one.

[Max Photon]

Max:

I still say thermite would be too hard to ignite. Why not go with Apollo20's patented, and conveniently self-igniting (at about 300 deg C), super-AP poured into those perimeter column holes?




Apollo20,

Trust me, I'm game.

If the collapse initiation were controlled demolition, then there are two parts to the problem:

the mechanism
the catalyst

As to the mechanism, I think the information is in the errors.

NIST - in NCSTAR 1-5A/9/C - describes some very strange and poorly explained phenomena - and, if you read carefully - they are all correlated! (I hope to illuminate these as this thread progresses.)

These phenomena include:


smoke puffs that zip across the face reminiscent of old-fashioned steam-driven pipe-organs (to use NIST's description)
pressure pulses
debris ejected at high speeds
7 major smoke releases, all 1 minute +/- a few seconds
hanging objects (supposedly floors) changing their positions
white smoke releases
white glows
a 10-minute metal fire
metal flows

That these are all correlated suggests they might have a common origin.

That these phenomena with possible common origin are occurring right where WTC2's inward bowing columns are seen on the east face, and at the bizarre corner fire where column 301/81 - sight of the 10-minute metal fire - visibly fails, and around the mysterious Cold Spot, is suspect.

That these phenomena reached a crescendo right before collapse, is also suspect.

Fortunately, the perimeter system is so simple that if there is controlled-demolition work being done - it is likely at the connections, and there are only:

columns splices
spandrel splices
truss seat / top chord connections
gusset seat / bottom chord connections

All have exploitable susceptibilities.


What about the catalyst? I am completely open to possible catalysts. I consider AP and thermite the two best contenders.


Now it's just a question of best fit.

For example, does AP fit the 10-minute metal fire at Column 301/81? (See attached photos.) Note that the metal fire is 2/3 up the window, which is the same height as the bolt-access holes of 301.


By the way - and I've asked this before - could you describe what burning AP would look like if it were poured into columns? I understand that using a different mode - AP soaked into insulation - that the AP would burn very slowly, and heat the steel for an extended time. How would AP poured into columns burn?


There is no question that the self-igniting dimension of AP is a huge simplification. However, I feel the self-ignition might be a liability because the evidence of smoke puffs zipping across the face, reminiscent of old fashion steam driven pipe organs (which you can see in video if you know what to look for), along with the visible white flashes in some video, seem to indicate some kind of fuse or ignition system. (Remember, all those phenomena described earlier are correlated, and they seem to start with these smoke puffs and white flashes.)


With that said, I think it is remarkable - and encouraging - that your AP model and my thermite model are identical in that they are based not on cutting, but on heat-weakening steel, AND that the NIST report is the evidence - in other words, that our collapse initiations are consistent with the NIST reports observations (just not the conclusion).


Max


ETA: Don't forget the iron microspheres.

* * *

[MIKILLINI]

I still say thermite would be too hard to ignite. Why not go with Apollo20's patented, and conveniently self-igniting (at about 300 deg C), super-AP poured into those perimeter column holes?

Max:
With that said, I think it is remarkable - and encouraging - that your AP model and my thermite model are identical in that they are based not on cutting, but on heat-weakening steel, AND that the NIST report is the evidence - in other words, that our collapse initiations are consistent with the NIST reports observations (just not the conclusion).


Between the both of you, now your adding scientists as more potential witnesses. The scheme grows larger by each hypothesis..imagine that.

[tomwaits]

Paranoid? MAX-MIHOP will solve it!
Hate the government but don't know why? Just use MAX-MIHOP!
Have a broken arm? A little MAX-MIHOP will cure you!

It's all that and more! Step right up!

[Mr. Skinny]

I thought this Ammonium Perchlorate thing had already been put to bed. It's incompatible with metals, gets rather explosive in contact with organics, is hygroscopic, becomes shock sensitive, etc.

Seriously, AP does not sound like something that is very safe to handle, much less something that would remain stable for any period of time when placed in structural members of a skyscraper.

I'm no chemist, but perhaps a chemist on here could explain how AP is in any way a cromulent theory.

http://physchem.ox.ac.uk/MSDS/AM/ammonium_perchlorate.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ammonium_perchlorate

[A W Smith]

Funny how when Max Mihops on a different horse he is always facing the wrong direction. Sort of like a clown at a circus.

[MIKILLINI]

I thought this Ammonium Perchlorate thing had already been put to bed. It's incompatible with metals, gets rather explosive in contact with organics, is hygroscopic, becomes shock sensitive, etc.

Seriously, AP does not sound like something that is very safe to handle, much less something that would remain stable for any period of time when placed in structural members of a skyscraper.

I'm no chemist, but perhaps a chemist on here could explain how AP is in any way a cromulent theory.

http://physchem.ox.ac.uk/MSDS/AM/ammonium_perchlorate.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ammonium_perchlorate


I figured this paragraph was very informative:

Explosive when mixed with combustible material. Incompatible with organics, paper, wood shavings, etc.May explode if heated under confinement or as a result of friction. Incompatible with metals.

It appears AP is better left in its pure form, not good to mix with organics.
But I suppose that applying it to a synthetic type of insulation alleviates this problem?

Even so, it's still got these characteristics which have to be dealt with;

Ammonium perchlorate (NH(4)CLO(4)) is a white crystalline substance. It is a powerful oxidizing material. It is stable in pure form at ordinary temperature, but decomposes at a temperature of 150 degrees C or above. It becomes an explosive when mixed with finely divided organic materials. AP exhibits the same explosive sensitivity to shock as picric acid (Class A explosive). Sensitivity to shock and friction may be great when contaminated with small amounts of some impurities such as sulfur, powdered metals and carbonaceous materials. AP may explode when involved in fire.

[beachnut]

Apollo20,

Trust me, I'm game.

If the collapse initiation were controlled demolition, then there are two parts to the problem:

the mechanism
the catalystAs to the mechanism, I think the information is in the errors.

NIST - in NCSTAR 1-5A/9/C - describes some very strange and poorly explained phenomena - and, if you read carefully - they are all correlated! (I hope to illuminate these as this thread progresses.)

These phenomena include:

smoke puffs that zip across the face reminiscent of old-fashioned steam-driven pipe-organs (to use NIST's description)
pressure pulses
debris ejected at high speeds
7 major smoke releases, all 1 minute +/- a few seconds
hanging objects (supposedly floors) changing their positions
white smoke releases
white glows
a 10-minute metal fire
metal flowsThat these are all correlated suggests they might have a common origin.

That these phenomena with possible common origin are occurring right where WTC2's inward bowing columns are seen on the east face, and at the bizarre corner fire where column 301/81 - sight of the 10-minute metal fire - visibly fails, and around the mysterious Cold Spot, is suspect.

That these phenomena reached a crescendo right before collapse, is also suspect.

Fortunately, the perimeter system is so simple that if there is controlled-demolition work being done - it is likely at the connections, and there are only:

columns splices
spandrel splices
truss seat / top chord connections
gusset seat / bottom chord connectionsAll have exploitable susceptibilities.


What about the catalyst? I am completely open to possible catalysts. I consider AP and thermite the two best contenders.


Now it's just a question of best fit.

For example, does AP fit the 10-minute metal fire at Column 301/81? (See attached photos.) Note that the metal fire is 2/3 up the window, which is the same height as the bolt-access holes of 301.


By the way - and I've asked this before - could you describe what burning AP would look like if it were poured into columns? I understand that using a different mode - AP soaked into insulation - that the AP would burn very slowly, and heat the steel for an extended time. How would AP poured into columns burn?


There is no question that the self-igniting dimension of AP is a huge simplification. However, I feel the self-ignition might be a liability because the evidence of smoke puffs zipping across the face, reminiscent of old fashion steam driven pipe organs (which you can see in video if you know what to look for), along with the visible white flashes in some video, seem to indicate some kind of fuse or ignition system. (Remember, all those phenomena described earlier are correlated, and they seem to start with these smoke puffs and white flashes.)


With that said, I think it is remarkable - and encouraging - that your AP model and my thermite model are identical in that they are based not on cutting, but on heat-weakening steel, AND that the NIST report is the evidence - in other words, that our collapse initiations are consistent with the NIST reports observations (just not the conclusion).


Max


ETA: Don't forget the iron microspheres.

* * *Your post get dumber each time ...

[uruk]

Fires on piles
Piles on fire

Get on the plane
Get in the plane

Yes that convinces me. Missed placed idioms are definitly irrefutable proof of complicity.

[Max Photon]

Input please...

What happened to perimeter box columns when they were heated by external fires and heat transport? Did pressure build up inside of them? Did the columns blow off whatever covered the bolt-access-holes?

If so, could this be a possible explanation for WTC2's 66 observed pressure pulses?

[adoucette]

Well considering that a floor contains over 10,000 times as much volume as a 3 story column, I'd say, not likely.

Arthur

[Unsecured Coins]

all I really wanna know is...

how they kept the thermite from eating away at whatever it was holding it in so it couls heat weaken the steel, and why they didn't find any of these containers in the rubble.