Creative Speculation

dougolat

(716 posts)

30. There you go again with that 'silent explosives' canard.

Wed Dec 9, 2015, 04:39 PM

Dec 2015

First, any thermate used merely crackles and sizzles.
Second, in the standard demolitions you use for comparison, the windows have been removed and the steel to be cut is exposed and not covered back up, the doors and furnishings are removed, and the immediate area is cleared, and the surrounding audience hushed for the countdown. Hardly an apt comparison.

And it's not just 'any detail' it's the crucial, precipitating detail for their secretly derived hypothesis.

As for the fires, in the areas that did burn, once the furnishings are consumed, any lost strength in the heated steel returns as it cools, and steel's conductive heat transfer is fairly efficient. Even NIST says most locations that burned did so for only 20 to 30 minutes.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

34 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Forensic engineer/university prof to run an open evaluation of the NIST WTC 7 collapse model [View all] JohnyCanuck Nov 2015 OP

thanks for posting. looking forward to it. Check this video... wildbilln864 Nov 2015 #1

Sounds like the Prof is on top of things. JohnyCanuck Nov 2015 #2

k&r nationalize the fed Nov 2015 #3

I wonder how whitefordmd Nov 2015 #4

you are... wildbilln864 Nov 2015 #5

Thanks for the typo correction whitefordmd Nov 2015 #6

that depend upon wildbilln864 Nov 2015 #7

You're avoiding the issue.... whitefordmd Nov 2015 #11

No. They're not "my guys". wildbilln864 Nov 2015 #13

Look at the damned NIST report: dougolat Dec 2015 #28

"good enough" for what purpose? William Seger Dec 2015 #29

There you go again with that 'silent explosives' canard. dougolat Dec 2015 #30

The thermite hypothesis was invented by Steven Jones... William Seger Dec 2015 #32

To what NIST report are you referring? whitefordmd Dec 2015 #31

The study is already biased before it begins William Seger Nov 2015 #8

unike NIST wildbilln864 Nov 2015 #9

If the study shows that fire could have destroyed WTC7 William Seger Nov 2015 #10

I accept that now! wildbilln864 Nov 2015 #12

Very interesting William Seger Dec 2015 #14

nope! wildbilln864 Dec 2015 #16

Watch THIS video William Seger Dec 2015 #17

do you realize wildbilln864 Dec 2015 #18

And if they needed magical silent explosives to do that William Seger Dec 2015 #19

Silent demolitions? whitefordmd Dec 2015 #20

I doubt it would be silent but wildbilln864 Dec 2015 #22

Ok not silent, but concealed. whitefordmd Dec 2015 #24

the demos were not wildbilln864 Dec 2015 #25

I think I am getting it whitefordmd Dec 2015 #26

You Do Realize That Physics Do Not Support Such Nonsense ProfessorGAC Dec 2015 #33

well that's obvious bullshit! wildbilln864 Dec 2015 #34

Just curious whitefordmd Dec 2015 #15

NIST described some of the "fiddling" they did William Seger Dec 2015 #21

well that's more nonsense but wildbilln864 Dec 2015 #23

Why is that nonsense? whitefordmd Dec 2015 #27