Nano-Thermite in 9/11 dust?...

Thought this was interesting, they found nano-thermite in the dust from 9/11? Suggesting anywhere from 10 to 100 tons of it was inside?

*Yawn*  Old news.  People have been claiming there was thermite in there since 2001.

There are a lot of fishy details beyond the possible presence of thermite.

But as much as people talk about errors in the official story, no one to my knowledge has come up with a reasonable, cohesive and substantiated alternative.

Original Post by jewelsmcblah:

*Yawn*  Old news.  People have been claiming there was thermite in there since 2001.

 So.... the research and actual tangible evidence of the nano-thermite is just what?

People saying it kind of looked like thermite is a lot different than actually holding up different samples with unignited nano-thermite in it....right?

Either these people did the research and studies on the material and found nano-thermite in it (which they have the research on and published it) or they didnt do anything and are just making it up (which should be easy to find out).

If there was really nano-thermite, I'm no expert...but from what the expert says, it means very strong evidence that something is going on? Right? 

I'll listen to theories on possible things that went on and consider it with a large grain of salt...but when they actually start holding up evidence to back themselves up, it gets a lot harder to just dismiss it as "wishful thinking"....

I watched te video and although it is interesting, I choosing to disregard it.  I spent too much time chasing conspiracy theories about 9/11 and trying to link the missing pieces...  I just assume not put those thoughts in my mind.

Original Post by osainto:

I watched te video and although it is interesting, I choosing to disregard it.  I spent too much time chasing conspiracy theories about 9/11 and trying to link the missing pieces...  I just assume not put those thoughts in my mind.

 Its not a conspiracy theory... its simply a group of scientists publishing as study that says

1) there are little chips of stuff the dust of some material in all the dust from the explosion

2) these chips are un-reacted nano-thermite (which needs to be produced, not naturally accuring)

3) here is all the research and studies we did to determine this

I'm sure their results could be verified to... so... wouldnt it at least warrent an investigation of some kind?

Its like if someone died and a scientist did a bunch of work on determining why the person died...then a few years later published there was an un-noticed knife in the back. Now, they arent saying the knife actually killed the person...they arent saying who put the knife there....they are just saying there is a knife in the back (which most likely had something to do with the death, duh). Those with some kind of interest in the person should at least want to figure out the reasons surrounding that knife being in their friends back....

Haha, but peoples reaction seems to be "oh, yea....no that knife isnt real. The person died of cancer....end of story". I dont really understand that reaction.

There has been actual tangible evidence of thermite residue for years.

I don't understand, what is the "conspiracy"?

Original Post by cptbunny:

I don't understand, what is the "conspiracy"?

 Well...add into it the WTC7 thing....and things get fishy.

I kind of thought there was something strange about the metal in the building melting from the fuel, but *shrug* I guess it could happen? Didn't really know about that stuff so figured the planes made it crash (with a little bit of doubt).

But, now it seems there is much more to it than that. Apparently WTC7 was pretty much controlled demolished (with eye witness reports from the inside). The video looks a lot like a controlled demolish too (i hadnt seen that before). So....thats really strange....

And then you have the nano-thermite from the dust ...meaning there was thermite blowing stuff up / cutting stuff.... that seems pretty bad also.

Basically, its getting hard to believe the planes really did do all the damage. Its looking more and more like something planned. Then, you just have to think who would have / could have done that.....and it doesnt leave you with a very comforting answer.

So yea, with all the evidence and false / changed official reports...along with eyewitness and experts in the fields stepping up with hard data....there is a strong feeling of conspiracy. Unless somehow the terrorists did it, but why fly planes into the building when they already had it rigged to demolish?

Thermite isn't some magical thing.  It's just rust and aluminium, two substances that are abundant in a 50 year old building.  They guy in the video claims there were something like 100 tons of the stuff?  No effing way.  It would have looked like a damn volcano when the towers were coming down.  We know based on the videos that there was a definite "thermite like" reaction.  It's that molten sparky stuff we saw coming out of the south tower.  We've found residue of the said reaction and we've found elemental aluminium and iron oxide in some kind of "organic substrate" (possibly the red paint used to coat the steel beams).  We do not know if thermite was actually in there.

Just for reference here is what 10 pounds of thermite looks like.  Can you imagine what 100 tons of the stuff would look like?

WTC7 had some serious structural damage near the bottom of the building.  There are lots of pictures (that you can find on skeptics websites, not the truth movement websites) that show elevators from the middle of WTC7 laying in the street.  That was the only building that collapsed from the bottom which looks just like a controlled demolition.

Why rig the building to melt when you are going to fly a plane into it?

Original Post by jewelsmcblah:

 We've found residue of the said reaction and we've found elemental aluminium and iron oxide in some kind of "organic substrate" (possibly the red paint used to coat the steel beams).

 Werent they saying part of the reason the metal was melting was because the coating was knocked off in places by the impact? ....hmm...why use thermite-like substance for heat resistant coating?... it wouldnt have been my first pick i guess.

And not all thermite looks like a huge explosion, you can use it in shaped charges and all kinds of applications (and nano-thermite reacts faster / differently, from what i hear).

As for wtc7.... there were eyewitness reports of explosions. The official report was that a fire did it, but (again, im no expert on building collapses) it doesnt seem like a fire would suddenly force a building to collapse like that? If it were that easy to collapse a building in such a controlled way, why do we need specialists with huge amounts of work on the building first?....

The paint would be the highly flammable stuff, not the coating.  Fire retardant was sprayed on them.  The fire retardant was knocked off because a big ass plane crushed into them

Free aluminum (elemental) is a very common paint additive.  It was probably even more commonly in use at the time the building was put together.  The size of the particles found in the "nano-thermite" weren't really all that small.  You can buy free aluminum in smaller particle sizes than the 90 nanometers that they found.  So this stuff wasn't some extra special super secret military grade powder. 

Iron oxide is also a very common paint additive. 

The towers were stuffed to the gills in asbestos.  They didn't bother trying to remove that proven dangerous stuff.  Maybe the same can be said of the highly flammable paints they used. 

Nano thermite is the same thing as thermite except it burns bigger, brighter, faster, and hotter because there is less surface area.  It usually burns straight down.  You can see in that video I posted the table still stands but the thermite burned a hole through the middle of the table.  It's not really an explosive like would be used in a demolition.  There is no boom or shock-wave with thermite (tiny particles or big particles alike).  That's because thermite doesn't burn gasses (like TNT or C4 do).  It just creates heat.

In order for this finding to mean a damn they'll have to prove there was some kind of gas producing agent otherwise they're just proving that aluminum and rust reacted in a thermite-like fashion and weakened the structure and that we already knew.  The "organic substrate" might be a gas producing agent but they didn't test to see what it was.  If the next test they do finds nitrogen, or something like it, in the substrate then I'm all aboard.

There were eyewitness reports of explosions in towers 1 and 2 also.  Eyewitnesses aren't very reliable.  That's Psychology 101. 

Here are some pictures of WTC7's structural damage.  So structural damage at the bottom of the building + fires + iron oxide and aluminum based paints = totally weakened structure doomed to collapse from the bottom.

I'm also fully aware of the power outages and "construction" that was going on weeks prior to the attacks.  I know that Marvin Bush (W's brother) was the head of security for the WTC and his office was in building 7.  I know Silverstein earned a lot of money from the collapse (then he went out and bought the Sears Tower apparently).  I know Giuliani totally effed up the investigation (if you could even call it that).  I also understand why a government would do this kind of thing to her people and I believe our government WOULD do something like this, they have before.  Why stop now.

So I'm not in denial or naive.  I just don't think this is proof of foul play.  Not yet anyway.

Yes nano-thermite  1/1000000000th of a meter =1 billionth of a meter

Simply mix  1- 1/1000000000th of aluminum particles with 1-1/1000000000th particles of iron oxide I believe with your electron microsope and presto you have your stuff. Be sure and get the right

mix,you could probably do it on the kitchen table. Sounds like a piece of cake. And I forgot you can probably purchase what you need at the corner drug store or maybe the super market.

NEVER EVER SMOKE IN A HIGH RISE  IT COULD FREE FALL IN SECONDS
AND TURN TO DUST BEFORE IT HITS THE GROUND

Am I right in thinking that nano-thermite particles are created during the welding process?  The sparks that fly off....?   Any building that is constructed with a welded metal frame would therefore contain particles.

This puzzles me.  Why do so many people still think it's unreasonable that very tall, very heavy structures after being severely damaged (effectively severed) high up by intense fire and impact would not eventually collapse?  And, conversely, why do people think that wanton destruction and the deliberate sacrifice of several thousand innocent citizens by a government (?) is a more reasonable explanation?

Also... if a war-hungry government were to go to the trouble of setting explosive charges around a building in order to create said wanton destruction, why go to the bother of the whole messy business of recruiting crazy people to fly planes into it as well?   Wouldn't it be simpler to just press the 'detonate' button and then call the local paper in a foreign accent?