Have any CT's done any experimentation?

[FramerDave]

I was watching an episode of Mythbusters today and something struck me. In all the threads, videos and research papers put out by proponents of the 9/11 conspiracy theories, I'm not sure I've ever seen any practical experiments carried out.

For instance, some of them have repeatedly claimed that thermite cutting charges were used in the supposed controlled demolition. They've mentioned shaped thermite charges as an explanation for the clean diagonal cuts seen on some beams from WTC 1 and 2.

So my question: Have any in the truth movement been able to demonstrate that such a thing exists or could be done? Has anyone obtained an I-beam and the materials needed for thermite and shown how it could be done? I'm sure a few calls to scrap metal dealers would turn one up. It doesn't even have to be one the size that was used in the WTC. We're talking a proof of concept here. And I believe that the materials used for thermite are fairly easy to obtain as well. So have they tried to make and demonstrate a shaped thermite charge?

Now something like the Pentagon is another story. It's not like just anybody can obtain a missile and fire it at a convenient masonry building. But surely in all of the vastness of the web there must be some pictures of missile strikes on similarly robust structures. Maybe even videos. And of course nothing is real unless it's on the WWW. Unless it was faked, as we all know.

And back to NYC. Has anyone in the truth movement done what surely must be the simplest test and heated steel to temperatures similar to what was found in WTC 1, 2 and 7? I believe NIST did, but of course their results can't be trusted.

I simply find it hard to fathom that with so much at stake, the very survival of our country and the preservation of freedoms and justice, that nobody has put forth the time, effort and wherewithal to put their own claims to the test and present their evidence.

Now if someone has done so, and I mean other than the guy who lit chicken wire and a couple paving stones on fire, please do direct me to their results.

[TriskettheKid]

I think the closest they've come to actual experimentation is Sofia using a stop-watch to time how quickly she could say "clunkity-clunk" 110 times.

[firecoins]

how do you use experimentation for secretly placing invisible explosives inside 3 skyscrapers filled with people?

[Reality Believer]

The closest thing is the pathetic "Truth Burn" at "Burning Man". http://911truthburn.blogspot.com/

[Totovader]

I was excited when they were going to do their burning man tower of truth with thermite. The fact that they had to get an unrealistic amount of it- and then it never happened anyway was quite telling- although none of them will admit it.

I've always said that all their little chicken-wire buildings and plastic tray representations show they have a complete lack of an understanding as far as science is concerned. When they start doing their own Myth Busters experiments- I will be happy.

Now ask yourself- why won't they?

Because "science is out to get them"? Or is it because they know that science simply debunks their claims?

[Gravy]

Steven Jones dropped a piece of concrete on another from 12 feet and concluded that concrete wouldn't pulverize when a 110-story building collapses. He also poured molten aluminum on some rusty metal and didn't get a thermite reaction.

Ken Dewdney flew some cell phones up to 8,000 feet in Canada, determined that cell phone calls could not have been made from the four hijacked planes, and published his results in an online journal dedicated to Holocaust denial.

Here's some more quality experimental science.

A man, a rabbit fence, and a weekend pass from the asylum



The same man hatches a plan in the asylum's wood shop

Same man, same rabbit fence, different weekend.



Another inmate: If the Twin Towers had been made of paper and tape, they would
have been badly damaged if a giant bucket of sand had fallen on them.



Different person, same M.O. Here's why they don't test automobile safety by crashing toy cars.



He doesn't trust computer models, so he models the twin towers with Coke cans. Don't do drugs!



Mr. McGuire: "I want to say one word to you. Just one word."
Benjamin: "Yes, sir."
Mr. McGuire: "Are you listening?"
Benjamin: "Yes, I am."
Mr. McGuire: "Plastics."

[FramerDave]

Originally Posted by firecoins

how do you use experimentation for secretly placing invisible explosives inside 3 skyscrapers filled with people?

Maybe find a vacant office building, rent for a week or so. Find a controlled demolition company to "rig" it with dummy explosives and time how long that would take. Then scale it up.

Not absolutely scientific, but enough to get a good idea of it could be done and how long it would take.

Seriously, if any truther out there can show us how a shaped thermite charge could be attached to an I-beam and then cut it as they claim it was done, I will pay for all the materials needed to do so.

[Gravy]

Originally Posted by FramerDave

Maybe find a vacant office building, rent for a week or so. Find a controlled demolition company to "rig" it with dummy explosives and time how long that would take. Then scale it up.

Well, no, you'd have to do that while the building was occupied, with security and maintenance staff in place, and do it invisibly.

Quote:

Seriously, if any truther out there can show us how a shaped thermite charge could be attached to an I-beam and then cut it as they claim it was done, I will pay for all the materials needed to do so.

Such a device could certainly be built, but it would be big and expensive.

[ConspiRaider]

I think Judy Wood can lay claim to doing the most testing in the field of woogonomics concerning 9/11.

Her devastating pennies on the windowsill test, is what turned me around and caused me to aim my bedroom-peeping field glasses skyward. I wanted to be the one to first see the Orbiting Beam Behemoth - the one with the WTC notch on its Hubble-Hating Holster. Envious of the headline-grabbing Hubble Telescope, Behemoth tried, but alas failed, to climb into Hubble's orbit and shoot it between the eye. So - it had to settle for mere penny-laden skyscrapers.

Judy proved it all, double-proofed and vacuum-sealed and partially read by some people between rerun Gong Show contestants. That's all the peer review I need. She was later awarded the Copper Tooth - I mean Copper Twoof - Award. Pennies from heaven, indeed.

[R.Mackey]

Originally Posted by FramerDave

I was watching an episode of Mythbusters today and something struck me. In all the threads, videos and research papers put out by proponents of the 9/11 conspiracy theories, I'm not sure I've ever seen any practical experiments carried out.

I'm a huge fan of that show.

The difference between Adam and Jamie and the Truth Movement isn't that the Truth Movement doesn't do experiments. The difference is that, unlike the Truth Movement, the Mythbusters actually try to make their experiment work.

Suppose, for sake of argument, the Mythbusters started out as Truthers. (They won't; they quite reasonably refuse to even discuss Sept. 11th myths on their show.) They might start in subscale, with rabbit cages and twelve-foot drops of concrete, sure. But they wouldn't stop there.

Instead, they'd gradually crank up their experiment, approaching full scale, or trying to find what they were doing wrong. And they'd find it. They'd find that you just can't scale down the situation linearly, for instance. Or that going from a rabbit cage to a 10-foot model made it easier to get a total collapse, up to a 100-foot model easier still... Or crashing a model plane at 5 knots would bounce off in one piece, but a junkyard Bonanza on a sled at 50 knots made a big mess, and a Gulfstream I swung from a crane at 100 knots led to some serious devastation.

At the end, they'd be forced to conclude the "OCT" was plausible, at least. The closer they'd get to reality, the easier it would be to replicate the desired results. That's what they'd find.

The Truth Movement? Heck, no. They start at subscale, get the result they want, and then make a YouTube video of it. No analysis. Not even an honest attempt to demonstrate what happened. They want a negative result, so they'll take anything that looks that way.

The guy you want is CrazyChainsaw. Haven't seen him around for a while. He's got his own ideas about what happened (as well as personal safety!), but he actually tries to make things work, things like spontaneous thermite reactions and low-temperature steel sulfidation. And guess what, when one actually tries to make things work, they sometimes do.

The moral of this little parable should be self-evident.

[buka001]

I came across a posting on Spooked911's blog, where some guy put a barbecue grid on two bricks. The bricks represented the floors of the WTC, and the grid represenetd the perimeter columns of the WTC. He then put a beer can on the grid and hit it with a sledgehammer. The can didn't go through, so he proved conclusively that the plane wouldn't have been able to penetrate the WTC.

Read about it here and the responses he got from me.

http://covertoperations.blogspot.com...-jet-fuel.html

[hellaeon]

hahaha Gravy, cheers for those those idiots you posted. Great stuff. Some of the comments rule.

[buka001]

LOL I see those experiments were carried out by the number 1 loon - Spooked911!
What a surprise!

[Sunstealer]

Quality. I wonder when one of these oxygen thieves is going to win themselves a Darwin Award whilst carrying out this incredibly realistic chicken wire modelling.

I suppose they spend all their cash on bacofoil so can't afford to produce a proper model even if they clubbed together.

[qarnos]

Originally Posted by Gravy

Another inmate: If the Twin Towers had been made of paper and tape, they would
have been badly damaged if a giant bucket of sand had fallen on them.
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/cons...wer-medium.jpg

I wonder what would have happened if he had set it on fire...

[Anti-sophist]

Any time anyone makes a post about experimentation and/or the scientific method I always getting excited because I know Gravy is gonna show up with his collection of truther-science.

That collection of experiments is and was an instant classic. It's everything that is wrong with the truth movement.

I do say that, though, with the caveat, that these people building coke-can towers and karatechopping plastic-paper-holder towers are, at least, trying.

[vidiviciveni]

Trying as in "getting on one's nerves"? or trying as in "doing their best to explain what may have happened"?

[JAStewart]

Quote:

Have any CT's done any experimentation?

Only with hallucinogenics

[Gravy]

Originally Posted by R.Mackey

I'm a huge fan of that show.

Me too, although I only have broadcast TV. One weekend I rented several seasons of MB and watched them practically continuously. (Okay, I do have a crush on Kari Byron.) One thing I really like is how they'll revisit myths and re-do experiments based on viewer comments. That's the kind of do-over I appreciate.

Originally Posted by Anti-sophist

I do say that, though, with the caveat, that these people building coke-can towers and karatechopping plastic-paper-holder towers are, at least, trying.

I'd like to think that these people learned from their mistakes, but that may be overly optimistic in most cases. Criticism seems to run off Spooked's back like water off a Teflon duck. Steven Jones' recent claim that thermite residue may have caused the WTC vehicle fires indicates that he's given up even trying to appear rational.

The one exception I can recall is the karate-chop plastic tray guy. He gets props for accepting an invite to this forum, arriving with a chip on his shoulder, and leaving somewhat humbled by the rational responses (by Dave Rogers in particular, IIRC) about why his ideas of scaling were wrong.

[DarkMagician]

"This one time, at Truth Camp..."

[Norseman]

Here is another example by a Norwegian truther:


Source
It is posted in a thread on a Norwegian GPS discussion board where the administrator is a big Judy Wood fan. All in Norwegian.

The poster just forgetting details like cutting out about 25 000 windows, to scale the gravity correctly, etc.

[leftysergeant]

Originally Posted by FramerDave

Seriously, if any truther out there can show us how a shaped thermite charge could be attached to an I-beam and then cut it as they claim it was done, I will pay for all the materials needed to do so.

Making the charge is not the hard part. You mix a little calcium sulphate and water into the mixture, let it dry, treat the outside with linseed oil and duct tape it in place.

The hard part is to get it inside the central core and on enough of the perimeter columns and then figure out how to remotely ignite them, all without causing a mess that the janitorial staff would gripe about for months later.

[ElMondoHummus]

Originally Posted by FramerDave

I was watching an episode of Mythbusters today and something struck me. In all the threads, videos and research papers put out by proponents of the 9/11 conspiracy theories, I'm not sure I've ever seen any practical experiments carried out.

For instance, some of them have repeatedly claimed that thermite cutting charges were used in the supposed controlled demolition. They've mentioned shaped thermite charges as an explanation for the clean diagonal cuts seen on some beams from WTC 1 and 2.

So my question: Have any in the truth movement been able to demonstrate that such a thing exists or could be done? Has anyone obtained an I-beam and the materials needed for thermite and shown how it could be done? I'm sure a few calls to scrap metal dealers would turn one up. It doesn't even have to be one the size that was used in the WTC. We're talking a proof of concept here. And I believe that the materials used for thermite are fairly easy to obtain as well. So have they tried to make and demonstrate a shaped thermite charge?

Now something like the Pentagon is another story. It's not like just anybody can obtain a missile and fire it at a convenient masonry building. But surely in all of the vastness of the web there must be some pictures of missile strikes on similarly robust structures. Maybe even videos. And of course nothing is real unless it's on the WWW. Unless it was faked, as we all know.

And back to NYC. Has anyone in the truth movement done what surely must be the simplest test and heated steel to temperatures similar to what was found in WTC 1, 2 and 7? I believe NIST did, but of course their results can't be trusted.

I simply find it hard to fathom that with so much at stake, the very survival of our country and the preservation of freedoms and justice, that nobody has put forth the time, effort and wherewithal to put their own claims to the test and present their evidence.

Now if someone has done so, and I mean other than the guy who lit chicken wire and a couple paving stones on fire, please do direct me to their results.

The Burning Man demonstration (don't know if I'd call it an "experiment") was already mentioned above. But to answer your question, no, the specific examples you mentioned outside of the Burning Man event don't appear to have been done.

Spooky tried to demonstrate that "jet fuel can't melt steel", but that's a red herring (which has been discussed ad nauseum elsewhere on this site; on a tangental note, I've always wanted to quiz Spooky on the concepts of "modeling" and "scaling" to measure the ratio of self-perceived understanding vs. actual understanding, but some tests are too cruel). Besides which, many of their allegations are not subject to that sort of easy testing: Part of their argument is not just that the steel melted, but that the conditions in the towers weren't sufficient to lead to a molten state. Reproducing those conditions outside of a computer simulation would be very difficult.

Instead, they've concentrated on other experiments or other approximations of science. Steven Jones, for example, tested what he called the "Orange Glow" hypothesis; that's written up here:

http://stj911.org/jones/experiments_...ypothesis.html


Moving further down the line, this example isn't an experiment or set of experiments, but rather measurements: Some of the micronuke-as-WTC-demolitions fantasists have been trying to take measurements of background radiation and, in my linked example, the levels of isotopes that they believe will prove their thesis.

http://www.rense.com/general76/wtc.htm

Originally Posted by Ed Ward, MD, "911 Ground Zero Tritium Levels 55x Over Normal Update On The Micro Nukes In The WTC"

Verifying the Source of Tritium Levels 55 X the Normal Environmental Amount
Certified Laboratory Testing of WTC Debris Currently In Progress

Now, in this last link, it's tempting to discount the findings due to the participants (all you have to do is Google for "Dr. Ed Ward" and "Dr. Bill Deagle" for proof of this... and what exactly is the qualification for an "Author/Artist/Survivor/Patriot" anyway?...), but the results themselves wilt nicely on their own. View Dr. Buzzo's and my posts in this page of this thread linked here:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.p...hlight=tritium


Rob Balsamo claims to have done analysis of the flight data recorder. There are many threads here in this forum that deal with his arguments:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=65369
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=62553
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=65369

... and some posts getting down into the details of an argument:

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.p...55#post1972055
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.p...15#post1972315


But I think it's been shown in these few examples that the approximation of science much of the 9/11 Conspiracy Fantasy movement indulges in is more akin to Cargo Cult methodology than it is to anything approaching real science. It doesn't even approach the level of "fudge factoring" and "seat-of-pants-approximating" that "MythBusters" frequently does.1



1. Don't get me wrong, I like MythBusters too and watch it all the time, but what they do is not science or engineering. It's sort of extreme tinkering, with cool explosions.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Originally Posted by FramerDave

Maybe find a vacant office building, rent for a week or so. Find a controlled demolition company to "rig" it with dummy explosives and time how long that would take. Then scale it up.

Not absolutely scientific, but enough to get a good idea of it could be done and how long it would take.

Seriously, if any truther out there can show us how a shaped thermite charge could be attached to an I-beam and then cut it as they claim it was done, I will pay for all the materials needed to do so.

I have built the device, it was not that difficult, I used a thermite like reaction to heat the steel not to hot, but just enough I used high pressure steam to cut though the steel, the device actually works quite well as long as you vent the hydrogen flame produced to prevent an explosion and to keep the steel heated.
The trick is not to over heat the device just channel the heat into useful work and use the steel itself as the main fuel similar to what an Oxyacetylene torch does it is basically the same principal only a different oxygen source, and a lot more pressure.
The device starts slowly and gently builds up pressure as it heats and cuts so it does not destroy itself and fall off the beam, there actually is a separation joint between it and the material being cut to prevent over heating, and a hydrogen explosion.
I am thinking of patenting the device one day.
I have even thought of a way to make a smaller device move along the Columns face so a smaller device and cut a larger beam.
The device has to move anyway otherwise the steel burning over heats it and destroys it.

[OldTigerCub]

Originally Posted by Reality Believer

The closest thing is the pathetic "Truth Burn" at "Burning Man". http://911truthburn.blogspot.com/

Reality Believer beat me to it. The closest thing I have seen troothers do (involving actual science) was burning up some metal with thermite. It took a whole lot more than they thought it would (approximately 80 pounds) and the metal was laying on the ground (a horizontal burn). It was kinda cool watching it, though....a really blinding bright light that lit up the whole area of the desert they did it in.