New 911 Scientific Evidence - Experts Speak Out, Chemical Engineer Mark Basile

[fourfingerz]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMkSP0_kUgM&list=QL&playnext=1



Remember - I'm rooting for you - we're all in this together


fourfingerz

[Hiram]

Brilliant.

There needs to be a National Press Club conference scheduled with this evidence once we have independent verification from multiple parties. We are very close on this. I think if we follow the nano-aluminum particles, we could even get to a source for this material pre-September 11th 2001.

This could lead to a potential suspect(s).

Just off the top of my head, I would say that if that investigation is done properly, it will probably lead to a sub-contractor for the US Department of Defense, which also happens to employ those with duel citizenship.

Where is Carmody for comment on this nano-Aluminum? I know he has thought about this.

[truthseekerdan]

9/11: Chemical Engineer Mark Basile Found Nanothermite in WTC Dust (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frIpyTBAV_Y)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=frIpyTBAV_Y

[Luke]

ok, folks, reality check.
What is thermite? : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermite
It is used to melt things.. and it needs time to do it. This is why you DO NOT USE IT during demolitions of steel frame buildings, as it will weld and fuse material instead of bringing it down. Nano-T just works in tad higher temperature but not even close to steel vapuorisation. Especially instantaneous.

You use classic high explosive cutting charges to cut the frame and "slurry"/HESH charges to move pre-cut elements out of supporting positions. You remove support, thing go down. Simple physics. Under no circumstances you do not want it to weld though.

Ah, 1000 lbs of thermite vs SUV .. for those wanting to know what we are talking about.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lIpa1K51os4&feature=related

Great method to destroy some evidence, but not for bringing skyscraper down in few minutes

[Hiram]

Thanks for the video Luke. Very informative.

Nevertheless, the special nano-thermate is there, and in a form that is really only created and available for very "official" groups. The materials are there. That is becoming quickly indisputable. The analysts themselves state pretty clearly that this is no "ordinary" Thermite. I think he is pretty clear about that. Its present. Its strange. Its been assembled in a very official capacity. Not made in a cave. It should NOT be in the dust.

At a certain point it becomes a greater stretch to try and prove the official version of events, then to concede that the official 911 story just doesn't add up. It just doesn't. The official story is just kookie. Its more of a conspiracy theory than the conspiracy theory. So there is....there ARE questions there...and someone makes the decision to actually believe what the government tells them??

With all due respect, who in the world does that? I can't fathom it? Why in the world would they tell us the truth? Their track record of telling the truth is horrible. Abysmal. Its actually criminal (government agencies have been brought up on criminal charges for lying to the American people).

And yet, here, in this one instance, here they ARE telling us the truth?

Come on.

[Luke]

By no means they are telling the truth.
From day one all "official explanations" including "scientific investigations" are bad joke for anyone understanding base laws of physics. Yet, it seems for many "official seal of approval" means more than logic. Sad.

As for nanothermite/thermate. I am saying that this is not mean to bring towers down, but it is great way to destroy evidence. Thermite is often used in toxine/chemical weapons diposal, because it is capable of burning the stuff to non-toxic components. It is also cheap per bulk.. so you can say deploy few trucks in basement filled with it, ignite, and watch how any positive proof of any meddling is just vaporized. From on site reports we know there were pools of molten metal in basement still hot after weeks from incident.
IMO, the most simplistic way to bring towers down would be rig towers , so the core columns would be cut and displaced about 20 floors under planned point of impact , this way core structure will behove like a piston, with core columns from upper floors going in spaces between lower columns. This way you will utilize "pipe-in-pipe" construction of towers. On the footage we see telltale twist of upper section that displaced the core. It will then ride down the core, like on the guide, upper part will expand and crack outer shell. On the end of the ride this "piston" would dip in lake of molten termite in the basement, destroying any direct evidence of using explosives.
Now, I'm not saying that this is only possible option. This setup needs very careful modelling and placing of explosives. Such thing takes pro's weeks to prepare. sure we know that bomb patrols were ceased in towers some six weeks before incident, but still it is very difficult to cover op this size. We are talking of tons of conventional explosives. On the other hand often purported nukes are not suitable for this job, due minimal size/yield of device .. they will blow up midsection leaving very clear outside signature. As for real "exotics", I simply do not know possible specs to speculate. But my point is, given time and concealment of the charges, you can do it conventional way. If you have stuff that packs similar punch in fraction of the package, the better for a plan.

Also, if you have documents or evidence you WANT to go missing .. lil bit of thermite in same room timed to ignite just before the incident is great way to make it gone :P .. I'm specifically think of Giuliani's "crisis centre" in WTC7

[Hiram]

By no means they are telling the truth.


As for nanothermite/thermate. I am saying that this is not mean to bring towers down, but it is great way to destroy evidence. Thermite is often used in toxine/chemical weapons diposal, because it is capable of burning the stuff to non-toxic components. It is also cheap per bulk.. so you can say deploy few trucks in basement filled with it, ignite, and watch how any positive proof of any meddling is just vaporized.........
Also, if you have documents or evidence you WANT to go missing .. lil bit of thermite in same room timed to ignite just before the incident is great way to make it gone :P .. I'm specifically think of Giuliani's "crisis centre" in WTC7


Well thought out reasoning. This makes sense to me. I couldn't agree more that thermite alone would not bring the towers down. Not at that speed. Its presence is just another smoking gun that all was not as it seems with the collapse (explosion).

Whats very interesting to consider, is the fact they used a completely different method to bring down Bldg. 7. Why? They blow the towers up...essentially...and then bring down Bldg 7 quietly and smoothly. So whomever wired the towers, wired Bld 7 differently. A decision was made to do it differently.

What do you think the reasoning for that was? To explain the first collapse as having ostensibly been caused by the planes perhaps? With building 7 maybe they wanted it to look as if the Base was damaged?

Fascinating.

[Hiram]

BTW, do you see the way the SUV looks after the Thermite has reacted? Does that look familiar?

Watch the video here and tell me if that looks similar http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread615762/pg1

[bluestflame]

I found this site on the net , interesting information and stuff about bubbling dust and the like

http://drjudywood.com/wtc/

Figure 32. A video clip of steel turning to steel dust.
http://drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/dewpics/dustspire.gif

stills of above http://drjudywood.com/wtc/pics/Image42_ss.jpg

¤=[Post Update]=¤

he suggestion is some form of energy weapon , that caused the molecules in the building to literally disintegrate , again what powders concrete and makes steel flop round like rubber

am getting an advance on tesla tech , think philadelphia experiment

[Zook]

Hi Bluestflame,


I found this site on the net , interesting information and stuff about bubbling dust and the like

http://drjudywood.com/wtc/

Figure 32. A video clip of steel turning to steel dust.
http://drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/dewpics/dustspire.gif

stills of above http://drjudywood.com/wtc/pics/Image42_ss.jpg

¤=[Post Update]=¤

he suggestion is some form of energy weapon , that caused the molecules in the building to literally disintegrate , again what powders concrete and makes steel flop round like rubber

am getting an advance on tesla tech , think philadelphia experiment

If you look at the video, there's a reference point on the spire (a bulbous-looking structure about an inch from the top) which clearly descends in free fall motion. If it were an energy beam weapon (EBW), I would think there would be more of a disintegration effect with the bulbous structure in approx. the same place throughout the disintegration. Or if EBW was used to soften the steel, as opposed to disintegration, then you would expect the softened steel to deform and fall in one direction, e.g. the direction of its weakness; not sway about like rubber. The swaying is a clear indicator of hardness. Indeed, communication towers are tethered by guyed wires; else their height alone would sway the most rigid steel structure to dangerous angles. Check the wires on these giraffes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hillmorton_radio_masts.jpg

I would also draw attention to the second and third of the four still photographs above. Please observe the top of the spire which is visible in the first three stills. Compare it to the rooftop of the nearby building. It is in a different vertical position in stills two and three (suggesting some degree of free fall) ... and in a different horizontal position in stills one and two (suggesting the swaying of the spire - again, an indicator of hardness, not rubbery softness.

:typing:

[ponda]

Hi Bluestflame,



If you look at the video, there's a reference point on the spire (a bulbous-looking structure about an inch from the top) which clearly descends in free fall motion. If it were an energy beam weapon (EBW), I would think there would be more of a disintegration effect with the bulbous structure in approx. the same place throughout the disintegration. Or if EBW was used to soften the steel, as opposed to disintegration, then you would expect the softened steel to deform and fall in one direction, e.g. the direction of its weakness; not sway about like rubber. The swaying is a clear indicator of hardness. Indeed, communication towers are tethered by guyed wires; else their height alone would sway the most rigid steel structure to dangerous angles. Check the wires on these giraffes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hillmorton_radio_masts.jpg

I would also draw attention to the second and third of the four still photographs above. Please observe the top of the spire which is visible in the first three stills. Compare it to the rooftop of the nearby building. It is in a different vertical position in stills two and three (suggesting some degree of free fall) ... and in a different horizontal position in stills one and two (suggesting the swaying of the spire - again, an indicator of hardness, not rubbery softness.

:typing:


Well it looks as though it breaks down into a powder to my eyes

[Zook]

Hi Ponda,


Well it looks as though it breaks down into a powder to my eyes

If that is indeed the case, friend, Controlled Demolition Inc. should rescue its demolition methods from the collective inefficiency of wiring sloth, exothermic cutter charge placement difficulties, sound and debris pollution (e.g. explosives going off), detonation sequence precision difficulties, etc. ... and upgrade to a point-the-ray-gun-and-zap energy beam powderization protocol. Cleaning would be a lot easier, too. Simply hire a couple of guys with Caterpillar plows, a dump truck, and a weekend to burn ... and voila! The savings would be immense. And think of all the golf courses and sand traps that would benefit from a steady supply of granular dust ... not to mention man-made inland beaches and backyard sandboxes! The owner of the building-be-to-not-to-be could probably absorb the demolition fee without having to write a cheque. "Destroy her boys ... and stuff your pockets with all the gray gold you can cart and carry!"

:typing:

[bluestflame]

was just offering me observations and an interesting link i found ,

still getting the hang of things how to convey a little more acurately

basically i found a site that lots of interesting things on it , I think it's one that looks from a few different angles ,
the think that stuck out for me was the structures powdering before they even hit the ground

the rubbery reference was about other stuff i found on the site I know what i posted was not verbally precise, but hey , it's all food for thought

[Zook]

Hi Bluestflame,


was just offering me observations and an interesting link i found ,
still getting the hang of things how to convey a little more acurately
basically i found a site that lots of interesting things on it , I think it's one that looks from a few different angles ,
the think that stuck out for me was the structures powdering before they even hit the ground
the rubbery reference was about other stuff i found on the site I know what i posted was not verbally precise, but hey , it's all food for thought

Thought for thought. That's how we break things down and get to the truth. Who knows, your understanding of the details of the false flag may turn out to be closer to the truth than mine, Blu'. We won't know until the truth is fully liberated. Of course, with the preponderance of available evidence, one truth has already been liberated, namely, 9/11/2001 was not and could not have been the work of Osama bin Laden and his alleged cadre of box-cutter wielding Saudi Arabian misfits.

:typing:

[bluestflame]

Zookumar , I rekon that's a good way to look at it , the process of uncovering true events

[ponda]

Hi zook and blu,

The way 911 happened appears to be multi layered.The mainstream view is that planes and fire caused the fall but there appears to be evidence of explosives as well as other anomalies.911 was used to start wars but also woke a lot of people up at the same time.

There's plenty of good info on Dr Wood's web site that give some different perspectives on some of the available evidence.

[bluestflame]

possibility it was a package deal , i.e. a combination of methods

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

Well it looks as though it breaks down into a powder to my eyes

There is now clearer footage of this. Its just dust falling from the metal. Its in the new NIST release. See the other thread I started. No beam weapons here. Move along. :) Only more evidence for explosives.

[ponda]

There is now clearer footage of this. Its just dust falling from the metal. Its in the new NIST release. See the other thread I started. No beam weapons here. Move along. :) Only more evidence for explosives.


I beg to differ.I've gone through Dr Woods site and there seems to be plenty of evidence that points to the use of some type of energy device as well as explosives.For example the buildings collapsed down to virtually nothing.There was hardly any rubble left.What happened to it all ? Yet there was an incredible amount of fine powdery dust everywhere.You might find some of the info on this link interesting.

http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/DEW/StarWarsBeam3.html

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

Please dont shoot the messenger but that page has not been updated for 3 years.

Since, then she has been totally debunked. I am afraid you are flogging a dead horse.

She clearly has no idea what she is talking about as this interview with her makes obvious:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-558096240694803017#

Please take time to watch it.

Also, I see nothing on her site that cannot be explained in other ways. I suggest you read the Themrite paper that was peer-reviewed and publoshed in 2009 (I.E. more recent and scientificly sound) as well as look at the new video evidence released by NIST last month that shows ample video and photographic evidence of the survival of undustified columns. Judy Woods ideas are not scientific and do not hold up I am afraid.

[ponda]

eyes wide open,

i believe that there are many unknowns and unexplained aspects to the whole 911 event.i also believe that Dr Wood's has uncovered some interesting perspectives of 911 that no one else has.i'm open to the way that she has presented her interpretations of the available evidence.To say that she "clearly has no idea what she is talking about" is a fairly big call in my opinion.If you want to believe that she has been "totally debunked" then that's fine.If you want tow the nist line then that's fine too.Everyone is entitled to their opinion.cheers

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

How many of the new NIST videos have you watched? Did you watch the interview of Judy Wood I posted?

[ponda]

Here is something of relevance in regards to our discussion.i don't know if you are aware of this or not.i uncovered some info that states that.... "Dr Judy Wood filed an official Request for Correction (RFC) with the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) citing fraud and deception in the 9/11 NIST Report."

Here are some more quotes from the article...

"Her RFC, along with its two Supplements, are archived on the official US Government Department of Commerce website. In her RFC Wood clearly explains how NIST misled the public with their report. She also shows evidence for directed energy weapon usage.

In Dr. Wood's first Supplement, she exposes the fact that NIST contracted with a major manufacturer of directed energy weapons for the 9/11 NIST Report.

The company in question, Applied Research Associates (ARA), is not only a manufacturer of directed energy weapons, but is also a founding sponsor of Directed Energy Professional Society (DEPS).

DEPS, founded in 1999, put out their first newsletter one year before 9/11. An excerpt from this newsletter is as follows:

"Lasers in space, lasers in the stratosphere, lasers
on and over the battlefield — we're at the
beginning of an evolutionary new wave of weaponry."

http://www.deps.org/DEPSpages/graphics/wavefront2.pdf

More recently Dr. Wood and her attorney revealed that another company NIST contacted with for their Report, Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC), is also a manufacturer of directed energy weapons.

In Dr. Wood's second Supplement she explains that testimony given by Emergency Medical Technician Patricia Ondrovic during the WTC Task Force Interview is consistent with directed energy weapon evidence usage at the World Trade Center."


here's the link: http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/911-twin-towers-destroyed-by-directed-energy.html

cheers

[PookztA]

Please dont shoot the messenger but that page has not been updated for 3 years.

Since, then she has been totally debunked. I am afraid you are flogging a dead horse.

She clearly has no idea what she is talking about as this interview with her makes obvious:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-558096240694803017#



EyesWideOpen,

I am not sure what you see in that interview, but here is my opinion of it.

I am very grateful to Dr. Greg Jenkins for conducting his ambush interview of Dr. Judy Wood, because he exposed his true intentions and shed more light on the overwhelming amount of effort being put forth to discredit Dr. Wood and convince people to not look at the overwhelming sum of evidence she has gathered. I find it very interesting that Dr. Jenkins, who works/worked for the Department of Energy, showed up with full lighting and camera crews at the very end of a conference Dr. Wood was attending but not speaking at, around 12am, and spontaneously confronted her and asked her to do an interview on the spot. Why didn't Dr. Jenkins contact Dr. Wood ahead of time to get advanced permission for the interview? Why didn't Dr. Jenkins attend the conference, but only showed up at the very end of it for the specific purpose of asking Dr. Wood to do this spontaneous interview? Why did Dr. Jenkins show up with full lighting and camera crews, yet he only brought one black and white photo of the thousands of full color photos, videos, documents, and graphs Dr. Wood has gathered, only to later insert the full-color copy of the image into the edited video recording of the interview?

Here is the transcript from the interview, which allows for a more detailed analysis of the dialogue: http://drjudywood.com/articles/transcript/Jenkins_transcript.html

:)

Cheers,

-Abe

Abraham Hafiz Rodriguez
M2 Medical Student
B.S. Biology / Neurobiology

http://youtube.com/pookzta
http://facebook.com/AbrahamHafizRodriguez

[PookztA]

I wanted to add one more thing about Greg Jenkins quickly:

I find it admirable that Dr. Wood was right all along about the fact that the majority of the WTC buildings were transformed to fine dust, especially considering that she has been trying to wake the public up to that fact for over 4 years now. Others are still catching up, as today it is a commonly known fact that the WTC buildings were primarily turned to dust on 9/11. I wonder if Dr. Jenkins has corrected his false claims that the buildings were not turned to dust, or if he still believes the nonsense he was trying to promote throughout the interview... As Dr. Wood often says, you first need to determine WHAT happened, before you determine HOW it happened. If you skip the first part and assume you know what happened, further discussion tends to be rather meaningless and unscientific. Dr. Wood identified that the buildings were transformed to dust, and for some strange reason, Dr. Jenkins really wanted to avoid discussing that topic.

Dr. Judy Wood held strong in her scientific position all these years, and thank goodness she has. Her observations were correct, right from the start. It was this fortitude of hers which has forced Richard Gage (and others) into finally acknowledging the fact that the majoritiy of the WTC buildings turned to dust in mid air. However, that puts Richard Gage and Dr. Steven Jones in a very difficult positon, because thermite does not turn buildings into powder in mid air, nor do explosives of any kind... :)

Again, here is the transcript from the interview, which allows for a more detailed analysis of the dialogue: http://drjudywood.com/articles/transcript/Jenkins_transcript.html

and here is a brief summary of the thousands of photos, videos, graphs, and documents Dr. Judy Wood has gathered, which explosives of any kind do NOT explain: http://www.drjudywood.com/wtc

Has the 9/11 "Truth" Movement Always Been Corrupt? http://axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/Article_61147.shtml


Thank you for your time, consideration, and help.

-Abe

Abraham Hafiz Rodriguez
M2 Medical Student
B.S. Biology / Neurobiology

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

Hi Guys. Thanks for the replies. very interesting. much appreciated.
Here is another clip from the NIST database about explosives before the planes hit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6KIbqMRclc&feature=player_embedded

Also here is a new thermite experiment that proves NIST wrong. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5d5iIoCiI8g&feature=player_embedded