Discussion thread for 9/11 issues

The comments on our John Gross article are becoming massively unwieldy so we are opening this thread for continuation of the discussion on this or any other 9/11 issues. Please feel free to contribute any thoughts but try to source your claims of fact


Kit Knightly is co-editor of OffGuardian. The Guardian banned him from commenting. Twice. He used to write for fun, but now he's forced to out of a near-permanent sense of outrage.

Filed under: 9/11, 9/11 fifteen years on, discussion threads, latest

by

Kit Knightly is co-editor of OffGuardian. The Guardian banned him from commenting. Twice. He used to write for fun, but now he's forced to out of a near-permanent sense of outrage.

newest oldest most voted
Notify of
pavlovscat7
Reader
pavlovscat7

THE DISSOCIATION CONSTANT..you witnessed it on the material on the day…THE DISSOCIATION CONSTANT..you dwell in it today because you have never seen it before that day. Dr Judy Wood is showing you..Read it! Comprehend it. The technology to distort and disrupt molecular valency exists. It was used by the ” good guys”, right in front of your eyes. Read her. She is correct. Architects and Engineers (sic) is a stalking horse. ‘Where Did The Towers Go?’… THE DISSOCIATION CONSTANT! read it. Comprehend it…Be the first on your street. Woods is correct…. Thermite is a distraction for dilettantes. WOODS IS CORRECT.… Read more »

Bumblebee Batteries
Reader
Bumblebee Batteries

Bumblebee Batteries are Hybrid Battery Specialists based in Portland, Oregon. If you are looking for Honda civic hybrid battery or Toyota hybrid battery support, contact Bumblebee Batteries.
Bumblebee also offer Hybrid Battery Replacements and Hybrid Battery Repairs.

thenewnationalist
Reader
Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

Fact based Huh what a laugh here are a couple facts for you.
http://www.google.com.uy/patents/US4076640
http://www.rjlg.com/environmental-health-and-safet/case-study/do-engineered-nanoparticles-emitted-from-laser-printers-have-health-implications/
Millions of Nano Microspheres in those buildings, the cover up of intellectually dishonestesty should never be tolerated.

Admin
Reader

We’ve been over this. You have been given ample opportunity to explain your case. No one denies nanoparticles can be derived from different sources but you need to prove the WTC particles were from the sources you claim, and explain why FEMA considered the presence of these specific particles to be a unique indicator of WTC dust. Failing this, you need to stop asserting it as fact and merely suggest it as a theory. You refuse to do either of these thing. In addition you keep evading straight questions, changing your story without acknowledging you are doing so, contradicting yourself… Read more »

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

It was the large number of Iron rich particles not the Type that made the particles significant.
There was an amount of iron rich particles never seen before.
That could be because of significant use of magnetic toner in the buildings, banks, government offices, and shippers use magnetic toners for automatically reading documents by computers.
We knew there were no banks, government offices, or shipping companies at world trade center on 9/11 right? (Sarcasm intended.)
There are numerous sources of Microspheres that is exactly the point yet Jones infers in his supposed scientific work that they are from Thermite!
He offers no other known examples!

Admin
Reader

Right – thank you for posting a rational observation that can be responded to rationally.
“That could be because of significant use of magnetic toner in the buildings, banks, government offices, and shippers use magnetic toners for automatically reading documents by computers. “
Just to clarify. The presence of very large amounts of toner could, in your view, account for the iron-rich spheres.
Question: Is there any way in which this potential origin for the spheres can be proved or eliminated?

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

No. [edited for content-free ad hom – Admin]
The Cement kilns produce moly spheres because they burn car tires with coal to heat lime stone to make concrete.
There is a good paper on the process, some of the dust samples Jones collected were from the apartment of a welder sculptor, and some on a bridge where vehicular traffic would have created Microspheres.
Microspheres are meaningless. [edited for content-free ad hom – Admin]

Admin
Reader

We’re removing the repeat ad hom which only dilute and confuse.
You are saying there is no way to prove the iron-rich spheres originate from toner.
Then you can’t be sure they do. This is – to repeat – a theory, not a proven fact.
Question: how much toner would be required to produce the number of spheres observed by FEMA and others?

jaques
Reader
jaques

Admin: I think it’s time to give up on Carraol: he is disengenous and moves the posts. He addresses some questions, ignores others. His theories do not stand up to scrutiny. He has been shown to make baseless claims as fact. He has said the microsphers come from: a) ink toner b) light switches c) a welders apartment d) fly ash e) elevator grease f) are meaningless there are probably more sources he claims- I havn’t bothered to look them. Problem is: none of his theories can explain the presence of iron microsperes that measure up to 1.5mm- and in… Read more »

pavlovscat7
Reader
pavlovscat7

R J LEE wouldn’t be complicit or compromised would they jaques? The presence of iron in its many manifestations after the dissociation of most of the material elements of building containing mega amounts of steel is not a tool for you to steer people to the stalking-horse of A@E….through the confused proxy of Carraol. Go to Judy Wood for edification on iron presentation states in WTC detritus dear students….. Shills and dilettantes excluded of course.

Brian Harry, Australia
Reader
Brian Harry, Australia

Don’t waste your time arguing with someone who is clearly trying to throw confusion into the argument(and thereby refocus the discussion AWAY from the “controlled demolition” of the Towers on 9/11).
He or she? has sent ‘rabbits running’ in all directions and you simply can’t(and shouldn’t) try to chase them all…….

jaques
Reader
jaques

Admin: a better use of you time would be to correct all my spelling errors above 😉
and I just remembered two more sources he claimed:
g) from the highway
h) car tyres
just above he said it was a ‘few tonnes’
then he says, “about 200 kg’s per floor” which would equal 60 tonnes between the two buildings…
If the spheres represented %5 of the dust by weight- that would mean the total dust production for the WTC collapses would equal 1,200 tonnes.
Given that the dust blanketed most of lower Manhattan- in places up to 6 inches deep- this figure is patently absurd.

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

A few tons, not unexpected given the amount of toner in the buildings, and the residual toner from years of usage in the buildings.
[edited for OT -Admin]

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders
Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

There is no way to actually know how much because of the possible build up of toner particulates over Decades.
Frank Greening once estimated 200 kg per floor, and 100 kg per documents
The buildup could have been probably another 200kg per floor.
In unaccessible places like inside perimeter columns.
They were and are essentially a form of modem air pollution.

Admin
Reader

Can you be more precise? How many tons of toner, in a ballpark figure?

MFitz
Reader
MFitz

Ummm,… no. The only thing(s) that need to be proven are in regard to the claim that said nano particles are relevant. So the people claiming they are relevant to TT collapse have the burden of proof.

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

The particles are Iron Fe 304, FeO, Fe. Spacificly manufactured for Xerography, copiers, they perfectly match all the Spectra of RJ Lee, Dr. Jones and Dr Greening, Greening’s spectra is from fly ash, the particles are manufactured from fly ash. I do not Claim all the particles at world trade center are from copiers as there was a huge variety of particles, found. I believe RJLee is right, some were created by Gasious flows reducing rust. In the fires, point is Jones not disclosing the fact that significant Microspheres were in the buildings after being told the fact of such… Read more »

jaques
Reader
jaques

I have a very simple question for you Carrol:
what is the average size of an ink toner microsphere?
That’s it- as you are a self professed expert on all matters pertaining to microspheres (greater than Dr R J Lee) it shouldn’t give you any difficulty to give me an answer?

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

That depends on method of manufacture milled Toner Microspheres are limited to 7um, Chemically prepared toners Microspheres can me significantly smaller down too a few nano meters.
The average depends on the manufacturer and method used to manufacture, the developer Microspheres.

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

Sorry I can not link PDFs.
Effect of Micro- and Nanomagnetite on Printing Toner Properties – Hindawi Publishing Corporation
Hindawi Publishing › journals › tswj
by M Ataeefard – ‎2014 – ‎Cited by 4 – ‎Related articles

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

Yes since smallest particle size, would produce sharpest image.

Admin
Reader

Evasive. Does the article state the sizes of the particles, yes or no?

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

Admin I expect you to erase and hide the obviously dishonest behavior of Jones once again, that is why I saved the page for off line reading.
And also had others screen capture it to verify the proof.
Ask Jones the honest questions you should be asking see if he replies!

Norman Pilon
Reader
Norman Pilon

[moved from another thread]
“There is no film evidence of a plane hitting the North Tower.”
Yup, no film evidence whatsoever, not even one single take from one single angle of one of the planes:

paulcarline
Reader

There are of course plenty of ‘images’ of a plane apparently hitting the South Tower – indeed from different angles. But the simple fact remains that, as with the Pentagon and Shanksville, there is no physical evidence to support the claim of planes crashing into the towers. The images are NOT physical evidence – but what is most interesting is that they themselves disprove the theory that what they show is a real plane. Large commercial jets like the 757 and 767 Boeings allegedly hijacked on 9/11 have high-altitude cruising speeds of over 500 mph. This is because the air… Read more »

jaques
Reader
jaques

“Examination of the videos reveals that the apparent plane (supposedly UA175) was travelling at 580 mph. This is physically impossible. Therefore the images cannot be of a real plane.:” this is wrong statement. It is true that +500 Mph was way above the 9/11 planes max VMO’s (maximum operating speed) at 1000 feet – but it is not beyond ALL planes- and not strictly impossible for commercial jets. The high speeds at low altitudes, and the subtle last second adjustments made to the plane paths in NYC- all indicate that the planes were remotely controlled- and possibly upgraded/ modified/switched from… Read more »

pavlovscat7
Reader
pavlovscat7

With respect…your belief is wrong. The construct was initial, internal fireball explosions at the appropiate places, and broadcast of CG Images of plane impacts and disingenuous news commentary.. initiation of the dissociation technology within the artificially created static field..the “smoke” ensuing to be interpreted as fire smoke. At the eventful time..the material and matter of the buildings, effervescing up and cascading out in the very manner that we all witnessed. Add a little bit of moms apple pie and waving the flag over mr. with us or a’gin us and we reported for duty and went in search of the… Read more »

paulcarline
Reader

Sorry, but you seem not to have read my comment properly. The aeronautic engineer stated that a large jet would begin to shake and break up at speeds a low as 220 mph. The official story obviously needed the impossible high speeds in order to convince a non-expert general public to believe that the towers collapsed due to plane impact and jet fuel fires. Norman Pilon’s suggestion that a commercial jet could penetrate such a building is quite unrealistic. Planes have been forced to land after a collision with a single large bird – which can rip a large hole… Read more »

Norman Pilon
Reader

@ paulcarline You write: “Norman Pilon’s suggestion that a commercial jet could penetrate such a building is quite unrealistic . . . Any kind of plane crashing into a high building would leave large pieces of debris on the outside. . .” For a thorough rebuttal of this nonsense, see A Critical Review of Morgan Reynolds’ “Why Did the Trade Center Skyscrapers Collapse?”> by Jim Hoffman To be brief and to quote Jim Hoffman: The idea that the wings should have bounced off reflects a failure to appreciate the effects of inertia in such a high-speed collision. Yes, we might… Read more »

paulcarline
Reader

Hoffman has no credibility in the serious 9/11 truth community. He is not an expert. I would point you again to the John Lear video. The impossible speeds and the multiple videos of planes either ‘melting’ into a tower without an explosion, or losing a wing and then regaining it, and the total absence of wreckage is already sufficient to dismiss the idea of real planes. I genuinely fail to understand why some people still cling to the idea of planes at the WTC, when the official documents clearly say that AA11 did not take off that day. Is it… Read more »

jaques
Reader
jaques

Unadulterated garbage. There WAS wreckage, there IS footage, there ARE innumerable eyewitnesses. You have made many assertions above that are demonstrably wrong. When confronted with this you have either repeated the lie- or replaced it with a fresh one. Forgive me for assuming you are probably a disinformation agent sent here to try and steer us off into the realm of sci-fi fantasy? If you are not an agent- but genuinely believe what you write: go do some fact checking. You are wrong.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DdWQ1OCWlk8

Norman Pilon
Reader

For a man without the leas bit of credibility, Hoffman seems to have earned the respect of at least one very prominent researcher and one very serious scientist in the 9/11 truth movement: Dr. Steven E. Jones, a physicist formerly with Brigham Young University, has credited Hoffman’s WTC7.net website and described his work as an inspiration for conducting his own analysis of the WTC building collapses. Hoffman’s book and websites are cited in Jones’ essay “Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse?”.[12] Hoffman has also been cited by author David Ray Griffin.[13] Source: here Reijo Yli-Karjanmaa also acknowledged a debt… Read more »

jaques
Reader
jaques

that is so silly! this is the type of flaw in your thinking: “If there were real planes at the WTC, why was it necessary for the perpetrators to plant false evidence – such as the alleged landing wheels, which are of a different type to those on the alleged Boeings?” you are saying- there was evidence of the plane wreckage- and somehow -that proves their were no planes? ??? You say it was ‘planted’ evidence- what’s your evidence for that assertion? The fact that some people have claimed the parts do not match the commercial airliners they supposedly came… Read more »

paulcarline
Reader

What tens of thousands of people? Two researchers checked all the recorded eye-witness statements and found only a handful who claimed to have both seen and heard a plane. The FBI has admitted that not one single piece of positively identified wreckage from the alleged planes was ever found. Experts have clearly stated that the alleged parts found do not match the equipment on the alleged planes. Are you such an expert? The two alleged ‘landing wheels’ were both hidden behind tarpaulin-covered scaffolding. It is entirely impossible for such a heavy piece of equipment as a landing wheel to crash… Read more »

moriarty's Left Sock
Reader
moriarty's Left Sock

The flight speeds being impossible for a Boeing 767 is a valid point. Though the conclusion ought to be “it wasn’t a 767”, not “there was no plane.”

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

Why would the flight speed be impossible, do you have evidence of this I see no reason flutter would be induced.
The speeds are outside the safe operations envelope, but not impossible for someone commuting suicide and mass murder.

jaques
Reader
jaques

‘I see no reason flutter would be induced…’ that’s an audacious call… You are an expert in splitting hairs with a chainsaw Carrol: not an expert in aerodynamics. I am not an expert either but I see several possible reasons to worry about flutter: the aircraft were flying WAY over their max operational VMO’s at those altitudes: up to 150 knots! They were flying at well over double the speed commercial airliners usually fly at those altitudes. The air resistance at those speeds would have made the planes challenging to maneuver and control- even for experienced pilots. Many automatic alarms… Read more »

Moriarty's Left Sock
Reader
Moriarty's Left Sock

I’m not an aerospace engineer or a pilot so I don’t claim anything as fact, but very strong cases have been made for the aircraft breaking up under the stresses imposed by being so far outside it’s upper limits.
The only way to verify it would be through computer and real-world testing.
Do you have data to support your claims?

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

Some one should discover how parts in engines or on planes can be updated with newer better parts, and the old parts discontinued but still in use on planes not yet updated.

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

Water Jet Cutter Cutting Two Inch Steel: http://youtu.be/-E7u0LNUpO4

Norman Pilon
Reader

Did anything crash in the Towers?

paulcarline
Reader

Hi Norman, you might find this interesting: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rs5RQ_5nu4k It’s a video produced by Pilots for 9/11 Truth and mainly covers flight simulator attempts to duplicate the speeds and descents claimed by the government and NTSB. In all cases (WTC1&2, Pentagon) the simulator shows unequivocally that real aircraft would have broken up before they hit the target – even assuming that the alleged hijackers were capable of flying a large jet (for which there is no evidence). However, I question the authors’ apparent belief that the videos depict real aircraft – though they are clear that these could not have been… Read more »

paulcarline
Reader

I don’t believe that anything crashed into the towers – nor into the Pentagon. I’m convinced by Barbara Honegger’s research to the effect that all the damage attributed by the official story to Flight 77 (which was not in the air on 9/11) was caused by pre-planted explosives (which also created the ‘plane-shaped’ hole in the South Tower. However, I also accept her very persuasive evidence that a smaller plane – perhaps a drone – did crash at the Pentagon, but further along the side of the building than the alleged impact zone of the impossible AA77 and minutes before… Read more »

Norman Pilon
Reader

@ paulcarline
“the “holographic image generator” is technological fact, not fantasy.”
Can you cite one instance of such a generator projecting an image of the quality witnessed and recorded by the various cameras that comprise the montage I posted above?

pavlovscat7
Reader
pavlovscat7

All the image constructs were created in the editing house before they were publicly broadcast and subsequently put into the http://www…. I think you know it.

Norman Pilon
Reader

Lets talk about Judy Wood, shall we, since this a more appropriate thread in which to do it, so as to help you out, Mr. Cat, set everyone straight about “what really went down on 9/11.” But wait, I have an even better idea. Why don’t we have a brief listen to Judy Wood herself set us all straight instead of perhaps inadvertently or even maliciously putting our own words into her mouth: You Tube summary: Published on Jan 31, 2013 Judy Wood is one of the first and foremost supporters of the hypothesis that so-called (imaginary) “Directed Energy Weapons”… Read more »

Norman Pilon
Reader

By the way, since I think you mention something about Judy Wood, a link to post by Craig McKee written as an invitation to calmly and rationally discuss her views as pertains to what she believes are overlooked anomalies about the collapse of the Towers. I haven’t yet had time to work my way through the comments, but do have a look, and tell me what you think. Do make an effort to make your comments less cryptic than usual and try to remain focused on the ‘issues’ and less on yourself and how you imagine you “feel” about the… Read more »

Norman Pilon
Reader

Yoo–hoo. Over here.
What? You couldn’t find your way back?
And just a reminder: evidence, please.
Otherwise, it’s just trolling, eh.
And do try to express yourself in a manner accessible to ordinary readers of English. Otherwise you leave no impression at all.

paulcarline
Reader

I merely stated that the projector was a reality, thereby leaving open the possibility that something of that kind was used. It is generally recognised that military technology is often far more advanced than we think. Likewise, Judy Wood’s suggestion that DEWs (Directed Energy Weapons) were used on 9/11 cannot be dismissed as fantasy. If such advanced technology exists, we the public would be the last to know about it. However, technology which makes us ‘see’ something that is not there is in regular use – in the weather forecasts, for example, or in ‘green screen’ technology. I’m not saying… Read more »

johnschoneboom
Reader
johnschoneboom

If you’re willing to entertain the possibility of totally unknown technologies, such as extremely advanced holograms and directed energy weapons — and good for you for having an open mind — what is so utterly off-the-table about advanced planes that go faster than normal 767s at low altitude?

Brian Harry, Australia
Reader
Brian Harry, Australia

A B25 Bomber hit the Empire State Building in NY in 1945 killing 14 people including all on board. It lodged in the building and had to be removed later. The hole was repaired and today you can’t tell it was hit by anything.
I think the planes everyone saw hitting the Tower on 9/11 was done by a computer geek. What Paulcarline has written is right. It is so obvious that the plane would have been demolished on the outside of the building, had it actually hit the building.

Janey
Reader
Janey

It could be manipulated though. There is some reasonable evidence to discuss about the planes.
The weird phone calls, were they possible or not?
The plane-shaped hole in WTC1, would that happen?
The fact the bits of alleged wreckage found do not seem to belong to a 767.
The TV footage that seems to show the second plane emerging from the other side of the building with its nose intact. Is that possible?
Where were the four huge 767 engines?

BigB
Reader
BigB

The weird phone calls, were they possible or not? This has been extensively researched be David Ray Griffin – its a complex subject – but the short answer is no. Of the two most famous calls – the Barbara Olson call is the easiest to deal with and requires no technical insight – it simply didn’t connect (lasted 0 secs according to the FBI.) That this was used to found the ‘hijackers with boxcutters’ meme – and seed the story that the pilot (‘a really tough guy’) his crew and passengers were herded down the back of the plane as… Read more »

Norman Pilon
Reader

One can certainly debate whether any hijacking occurred, or whether the planes that were flown into the Towers were in fact civilian airliners, or whether they were such airliners but were hijacked by remote control . . . At this point, it is all conjecture and speculation . . . And who knows what really hit the Pentagon, if anything, or what crashed in rural Pennsylvania . . . “The plane-shaped hole in WTC1, would that happen?” Yes. Of course, that would happen. That’s a lot of kinetic energy going through one relatively thin layer of steel girders . .… Read more »

pavlovscat7
Reader
pavlovscat7

Norman Pilon deposition…. “I don’t think anyone can seriously doubt, however, that the towers were hit by planes.” My deposition…I don’t think that anyone (save for dills or shills) can seriously doubt that an alloy airframe can penetrate in its entirety into a steel and concrete building like a hot knife through butter. Decades of Hollywood and media output have made the suspension of disbelief endemic in the audience on this side of the media event horizon. The script called for the buildings to appear to be burning from the inside to initiate the “collapse”..this required the computer generated imagery… Read more »

Admin
Reader

NOTE – we’ve removed a long section of this thread as it was adding nothing to the debate and simply consisted of one commenter making self-contradictory claims regarding his own previous statements about his own actions.
Let’s keep this discussion fact-based and ad hom- free

Rhisiart Gwilym
Reader
Rhisiart Gwilym

Don’t you guys see how time-. space- and PATIENCE-consuming these long troll-generated stichomythia passages are. They cause the real discussion of what happened to run into the sands and get lost. And that’s exactly their troll purpose. The thing to do with such wreckers is contained in my acronym invented to deal with wrecker-trolls generally, in whatever discussion: DR.DADE: Don’t Read. Don’t Answer, Don’t Engage. Apply this rule as soon as you’ve given the troll enough rope to hang itself, and you’ve been able to decide, on the evidence, that this is real trolling. After that, Admin. should delete their… Read more »

jaques
Reader
jaques

I think you meant ‘rescind’.
Steven Jones, Niels Harrit and Richard J Lee all were not afraid to publish their work. You are a self professed expert in all matters related to the science of 9/11: why don’t you want you ‘findings’ published online?

nobunaga
Reader
nobunaga

There are 5 kinds of 9/11 deniers out there: 1. The DTKs: Dedicated Truth Killers. They just try to kill any story or evidence without even looking at it. The MDBs: Misinformed Duped Believers. They Believe the lies that the government has told them without questioning anything. The CGNs: Clueless Gullible Ninnies. They are just stupid airheads. The SEDs: Steadfast Evidence Deniers. These wonders will acutually look at undeniable proof and still deny it. The GELs: Government Employed liars. These are real scum who troll the net and deny everything they find that doesn’t go along with the official government… Read more »

jaques
Reader
jaques

I don’t subscribe to the ‘no planes’ in NYC theory. I just watched some of that video you linked… and I am still not a subscriber… There is simply way too much evidence of planes crashing into the twin towers- and the very idea that some kind of elaborate (possibly non-existent) hi tech system involving real time editing of multiple video feeds- and the holographic projection of planes over NYC- is frankly absurd- in the realm of ‘dustification’, ‘particle beams’, ‘Mini-nukes and variants therof’, ‘hollow towers’, ‘no jumpers’, etc. To me it smells of disinfo. as to what if anything… Read more »

Rhisiart Gwilym
Reader
Rhisiart Gwilym

Jacques tells it accurately, in brief. This is a good summary. The delay in demolishing 7 was probably because – as J says – the real conspirators didn’t get a plane to hit it as was – perhaps – intended. Also, remember the hardened Emergency Control Centre that the NYC Mayor – Giuliani, another prime suspect – had previously installed in 7. Strong suspicion that this was the line-of-sight control centre from which the demolitions of the Towers was initiated. Remember too the concentrations of documentary evidence of major crimes committed by members of the US ruling establishment, which were… Read more »

jaques
Reader
jaques

when Barry Jenning’s reached the OEM bunker in Bld7 not long after the first plane strike on 9/11 he found it abandoned: but – he saw cups of steaming coffee sitting on desks… What the hell was that all about? The OEM bunker in Building 7 was fully evacuated- whilst people in the South Tower of the WTC were being told to go ‘back to their offices- it is safe to do so’. Some of those who did go back-nwere trapped and killed when flight 175 struck. Who gave the order to evacuate Building 7? Who gave the order NOT… Read more »

jaques
Reader
jaques

go on Carrol: are you now going to tell us that when they built the Twin Towers they forgot to put in sprinklers, forgot to add fire doors, forgot to have fire extinguishers throughout the building?
Did you ‘prove’ that ‘some time ago’- on some forum- somewhere?

pavlovscat7
Reader
pavlovscat7

Shills are like those arsehole chickens that that seek out the infirm in the coup and incite the other chickens to help them peck the weakened to death. …………..Gallio Proconsul

Brian Harry, Australia
Reader
Brian Harry, Australia

Well done.. putting all those together……..We’re drowning in Bullshit. But, thanks to the American government…..the farce goes on, distracted by ‘The War On Terror’…………’Keeping you safe’……….”Putin’s hackers”……….”Trump vs Clinton”……..Kim Kardashian’s ARSE………etc…..etc……etc……

Mr Bagelstein
Reader
Mr Bagelstein

There is so much hot air here. It was an inside job for the reasons stated by others, namely wars for Israel etc etc. Destroy all secular Arab states. The method of destruction of the twin towers was thermonuclear bombs. This explains the total destruction of towers, molten steel and steel beam flying over hundreds of metres.

Brian Harry, Australia
Reader
Brian Harry, Australia

I really thought that the discussion got “bogged down” by a few Trolls overwhelming the contributions of fair minded theories with ridiculous pedantic tripe, and people fell for it. It just went on and on. “Freyer” and Sanders, ‘milked it mercilessly. I think it’s a good idea to not respond to provocation. Vote FOR what you like and vote DOWN what is irrelevant…

marc
Reader
marc

Brian Harry, i also think it worth trying not to get bogged down by a few Trolls.
Here you see an example of two, tagging each other, (Sanders, Bagelstein) appearing to be in disagreement, but in essence, promoting nonsense.
Steven Jones debunked the ‘nuclear’ nonsense:
“Hard evidence Repudiates the Hypothesis that Mini Nukes were used on the WTC Towers”
http://www.journalof911studies.com/letters/a/Hard-Evidence-Rebudiates-the-Hypothesis-that-Mini-Nukes-were-used-on-the-wtc-towers-by-steven-jones.pdf

Brian Harry, Australia
Reader
Brian Harry, Australia

“Sanders, Bagelstein appearing to be in disagreement”………You got it right……and, I bet they keep the bullshit coming……….in HUGE quantities……

jaques
Reader
jaques

“”We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.”
William Casey- ex director of the CIA

pavlovscat7
Reader
pavlovscat7

Thank you for your agency. Are you ready now for the interfering fields reality yet?

CloudSlicer
Reader
CloudSlicer

Admin,
I hope you will not be offended if I suggest that it would be useful if you could provide a time-stamp, in addition to the current date-stamp, for comments.
As these comment threads on 9/11 grow they do become unwieldy, as you say, and I think a time+date stamp would be useful for readers to navigate the chronology and time-line of the conversation. It would also make it possible to reply to a specific comment by reference to the commentators name plus the time+date of the comment.

Admin
Reader

Would that we could do as you ask. ATM, being hosted by WordPress, we are incredibly limited in how we can handle comments. But fret not, we are planning to move to our own webspace in the next few months when comments, and much else, will have an overhaul.

CloudSlicer
Reader
CloudSlicer

Thanks Admin. Keep up the good work – you’re all doing a great and important job at Off-Guardian. We need alternative voices like yours.

Greg Bacon
Reader
Greg Bacon

If there were any doubt that the 9/11 attack was a False Flag, set off by American traitors in the WH, the Pentagon, the CIA, FBI and CIA, along with help from at least one of our ‘allies,’ the fact that the USA is giving political backing, weapons and air support in Syria to Fatah al Sham, which was al Nusra, which had been al Qaeda in Syria, those doubts should be put to rest. Add in these phony ‘al CIA Duh’ propaganda videos, designed to get Americans enraged about some US/Israel/Saudi Arabia backed terrorist group, the War of Terror… Read more »

CloudSlicer
Reader
CloudSlicer

Before announcing his departure from these pages, a certain Jerome Fryer said (over on the ‘Thermite or no Thermite’ thread) that he understood Newtonian physics well and that the behaviour of material during the collapses of the towers was “exactly as you would predict” in a gravity driven collapse. I asked him to explain how, during such a collapse, heavy beams and girders could experience high velocity lateral expulsions, along upward and outward trajectories, travelling hundreds of feet away from the building. I also requested that he state the physical mechanisms involved, which would be capable of producing these effects.… Read more »

Rhisiart Gwilym
Reader
Rhisiart Gwilym

Cloud Slicer’s point about the trajectories of the steel pieces ejected upwards (sic!) and outwards is a key question. Clearly visible on all the online videos of the actual Twin Tower demolitions, the plain fact is that there is no – repeat no – explanation of those trajectories that can come from a ‘natural’ collapse. They were created by explosives. Notice the great plumes of debris surrounding the destruction zones as the Towers fall. The bulk of it is made up of material driven outwards and frequently upwards as well. Explain that denialists! In a way that actually sits within… Read more »

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

Steel transmits impact energy at 5900meters per second, as the energy of the impacts builds the core columns vibrate from the reflected energy
Of the impacts that movement that vibration causes the core columns to eject material from the upper mass that impacts them.

MFitz
Reader
MFitz

OK then,… out of curiosity. how much of and what type of explosive does it take to laterally project a steel column weighing in excess of 1.5 tons 450-600ft in an arcing trajectory at high velocity? How loud that have to be? How far would the supersonic shock wave such an explosion creates reach? How much damage would the shock wave do? If such a force can project an object that large, unwieldy and un-aerodynamic that far, what would it do with smaller objects? Wouldn’t it create a shower of thousands of pieces of high-velocity fragments which would be potentially… Read more »

MFitz
Reader
MFitz

CloudSlicer – I can explain how [em]heavy beams and girders could experience high velocity lateral expulsions, along upward and outward trajectories, travelling hundreds of feet away from the building.[/em] Quite simple really – none of that ever happened. Well yes, column sections did end up some distance away from the Tower footprints but they didn’t get there via [em]high velocity lateral and upward expulsions[/em]. The how is quite simple and obvious when you take a big-picture view and I mean literally big picture. Usually where these claims come from is someone looking at say a close-up shot of a bit… Read more »

CloudSlicer
Reader
CloudSlicer

“Quite simple really – none of that ever happened” As a serious explanation for the lateral ejection of heavy building components, that takes some beating. It never really happened! So people are just seeing things when videos of the explosive collapse of both towers clearly show beams and the like being hurled out of the collapse wave, amidst massive clouds of pulverised concrete and other office contents being likewise expelled. The people who documented the distribution of the rubble within a wide radius around each tower were all just seeing things or lying. And, “Short of a multi-kiloton nuclear blast… Read more »

jaques
Reader
jaques

“Of course if you want to claim that column sections weighing between 1 and 10 tons were subjected to [em]high velocity lateral and upward expulsions to hundreds of feet away[/em] that’s fine, but I would request you state the physical mechanisms involved that would be capable of producing these effects. Personally I can’t. Thermite certainly can’t do it. Cutter charges definitely can’t do it.” there’s on thing you left of that list? One obvious thing: High Explosives they can explain it- and they can also explain the witness testimony to large secondary explosions, the damage in the basement prior to… Read more »

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

You do understand that banzant titled his paper, a (Limited Case)?
Limited case means it is a not real hypothetical paper not ment to represent the real event.

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

Banzantian bull isn’t real it was labeled a hypothetical from the start, only Truthers think the Banzant papers are real.
The columns could never have perfectly aligned.

jaques
Reader
jaques

OK- chalk it up- expert ‘hair splitter’ Carrol has now claimed intellectual and professional superiority over the following people: Bazant Richard J Lee David Chandler Niels Harrit Steven Jones. yet the only expertise he has claimed is ‘hard work’. I guess shameless bulshitting is hard work Carrol? However even a stopped clock is correct twice a day and for once you have split a decent hair Carrol: yes indeed ‘Bazantian Bull’ as you put it is garbage- albeit far more sophisticated rubbish than your patently absurd ‘ink toner= microspheres’ and ‘beam bending plane’ theories. However you couldn’t get the time… Read more »

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

They didn’t personally debate Jones I did, and did experiments into this.

Admin
Reader

1) the email you sent us contains very little evidence of you debating anyone. Jones barely addresses you directly and you are merely a CC recipient of most of the conversation.
2) even if true – what bearing does this have ?
None of the replies to Jaques’ post of Chandler’s video (here: https://off-guardian.org/2016/10/08/discussion-thread-for-911-issues/comment-page-1/#comment-44837) have any factual content and are simply clogging up and confusing the thread. We’ll be deleting them soon.

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

Check the first part of the debates, before it went private. There are were also other emails between myself and Jones and a personal phone call to Jones in 2005. The Emails were only the part of the on going debate, in fact I was working on preparing a list of sources of micro spheres that could have been created Without CD, when talks broke down because Jones was not interested in quantifying natural sources. If you read the Emails you would see Dr. Greening revered to me as having more knowledge of natural sources than he did. He knew… Read more »

Norman Pilon
Reader

You are correct. Except for this, eh: Quote begins: During the destructions of the twin Towers, massive steel beams, weighing 4 – 20 tons or more, were ejected horizontally as much as 520 feet. Their motion can be examined as for projectiles. Projectile motion consist of a vertical and a horizontal component of velocity. If a beam were ejected from the 95th floor of WTC1, the height at ejection is 95/110 x 1365 = 1179 feet. The time to hit the ground is given by distance = ½ x g x (time)² where g= 32.2 ft/sec² is the acceleration due… Read more »

Admin
Reader

The airplane impacts chucked a few beams a fair distance – the perimeter column with the landing gear in it photographed on the street in front of St Nicholas Church for example – but certainly not in an up-and-over high-velocity trajectory.

You’re suggesting the beams that ended up hundreds of feet away, in one case embedded in the Deutsche Bank building, got there before the towers fell down, and were propelled out of the buildings by the plane impacts?

MFitz
Reader
MFitz

I suggested nothing of the sort.
[you suggested exactly that – see your own post above. OffG ed]

jaques
Reader
jaques

that is exactly 100% what you indelibly suggested? It’s right there in plain English- do you take us for morons- or are you a moron? Perhaps you have Alzheimers in which case it’s forgivable.
I will have your own words back to you again:
“The airplane impacts chucked a few beams a fair distance – the perimeter column with the landing gear in it photographed on the street in front of St Nicholas Church for example – but certainly not in an up-and-over high-velocity trajectory.”

MFitz
Reader
MFitz

Wow, you people sure do love your quote-mining out of context.
Any particular reason you CHOSE to ignore not just the context of that statement (which was actually one of a list of things that WOULD NOT have caused the high velocity lateral and upward expulsion of heavy steel members) but also the entire paragraph before that where I describe the ACTUAL real-world mechanism that resulted in steel memebers falling as far as Bankers Trust (and the Wintergarden and 7 WTC for that matter)?

Greg Bacon
Reader
Greg Bacon

That 20 ton steel beam that was ejected from one of the Twins, and flew over 350 feet and impaled itself into the Deutsche Bank Building, violating the laws of gravity, to ask questions about that is called a ‘conspiracy?’
Horizontal ejection of materials – but force of gravity is vertical
http://www.scientistsfor911truth.org/introduction.html
Dang scientists, always stirring up trouble!

MFitz
Reader
MFitz

You aren’t asking questions, you are making assumptions. If you were asking questions you would look at your assumption and say ‘well if this violates the laws of gravity then it couldn’t possibly have happened like that.’ If you did that you would be spot on. The various bits hanging out of the DB were at the top of a section of perimeter wall dozens of stories tall that peeled away and toppled over. If you look at an overhead shot of the sight this becomes painfully obvious.

jaques
Reader
jaques

actually he did pretty much what you suggest- only he didn’t question his own assumption but the official narrative:
” If you were asking questions you would look at your assumption and say ‘well if this violates the laws of gravity then it couldn’t possibly have happened like that.”
he looked at the Governments claims about the collapse- and said “this violates the laws of gravity” so “it couldn’t possibly have happened like that”
and he is 100% correct!
and your banana story is frankly bananas. The clear video evidence of the collapses does not support it.

MFitz
Reader
MFitz

This photo amply demonstrates the peeling Banana theory. As the TT’s collapsed the perimeter columns lost their connection to the core as the floor trusses failed one after another. This left sections of perimeter column dozens of stories high in some cases teetering perilously until they heeled over. That is how steel beams ended up hundreds of feet away from the TT’s – they were at the top of these large unsupported column sections that tipped over. But of course if you would like to ignore the photo and cling to the idea that column sections weighing between 1 and… Read more »

johnschoneboom
Reader
johnschoneboom

Two immediate problems sort of leap out at me here from your diagnosis, which is at odds with the NIST version by the way. The first is that, if the collapse was caused by columns (and presumably beams and girders) losing their connection to the core structure, then the core should still be there. The core, as you may know, was a massive structure not likely to faint from shock. This is why they abandoned the pancake theory by the way (in favor of a bland assertion of inevitability). You can’t have floors that lose their grip from columns without… Read more »

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

You mean like Maxwell’s equation for a pinned beam?
Which is actually used to describe the phenomenon?

moriarty's Left Sock
Reader
moriarty's Left Sock

You’re doing it again, citing random irrelevant pieces of physics or chemistry to try and one-up people or to sow confusion or both.
What the hell has Maxwell’s Reciprocal Theorem (if that’s what you’re rambling on about) to do with anything?
And just try to bear in mind you have to explain why these three buildings collapsed in a new and unique way – so citing common substances in the buildings or the universal mathematics of of stress and compensation do not cut it.

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders
Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

Unsupported huh,
9/11: Enhanced WTC1 “spire” (On Native Soil): http://youtu.be/06NKgMHJNlA
The Spire video points to ROOSD, being the main fracture mechanism.

johnschoneboom
Reader
johnschoneboom

I refer mainly to the vibrating-the-connections-off theory. I am sorry to be amused, but you must be aware of how novel and speculative that is, and how it flies in the face of easily look-up-able building specs (designed to withstand airliner impact, robust lateral load resistance, etc.).

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

The columns will be so vibrated it cracks the welds holding them together.
The spire one column and part of the core did survive for a little while after the collapses.

johnschoneboom
Reader
johnschoneboom

A fascinating, if entirely unsupported, theory.

MFitz
Reader
MFitz

“Pancake” collapse IIRC included all components of the building failing more-or-less together – floor trusses, perimeter and core columns all failing simultaneously. That didn’t happen. The collapse PROGRESSION stage was floor led with the failing floor trusses leaving the core and perimeter disconnected from and unsupported by each other. Neither the core nor the perimeter were designed to be able to stand on their own – they were part of an integrated support system which included the floor trusses – so I am not sure where you get “the core should still be there” from. Or the perimeter columns for… Read more »

moriarty's Left Sock
Reader
moriarty's Left Sock

The mere fact it was thought necessary to invent a “new” collapse mechanism for the buildings on 9/11 is enough to indicate we need more investigation. This “banana theory” (you at least admit it is a theory) needs to be established as possible in the real world. There is no really substantial photographic evidence for it in those images and nothing supports that theory in any of the videos. Where can we see the perimeter columns peeling back? But at least that part of your claim is remotely plausible – the rest is not. Your suggestion that “collapse progression” is… Read more »

johnschoneboom
Reader
johnschoneboom

There is much nonsense in what you say, particularly with regard to the building structure and what it was designed to do and not do. However, with regard to the specific point about embedded beams having more or less fallen into nearby buildings rather than explosively ejected: OK. Seems reasonable. The larger point being that you are out on an isolated limb with your theory of how the collapse progressed, because as you must know, NIST punted on that one. It’s tough to explain why a 75% (or so) undamaged building representing the path of greatest not-the-least-bit-weakened resistance offered approximately… Read more »

David
Reader
David

The planes were full of high-octane Jet fuel,maybe the collision and the ensuing explosion caused the towers to collapse.

shoobridge
Reader

Theres no “maybe” about it. The destructions of the WTC towers are problems in thermodynamics. There either is sufficient potential and kinetic energy available in known sources to result in the observed effects, or there isn’t; and one must therefore infer the presence of some additional, unknown source. Examine some of the computations prepared by physicists for this system. The lateral ejection of steel beams and the almost total pulverization of concrete, other building materials, fixtures and fittings, and human bodies, (not to mention the vaporization of steel, the extent of which was covered up by the rapid removal of… Read more »

Rhisiart Gwilym
Reader
Rhisiart Gwilym

Exactly so Shoobridge. Oh, and beware of MFitz. Another identifiable time-wasting troll.

Brian Harry, Australia
Reader
Brian Harry, Australia

“The planes were full of high-octane Jet fuel, maybe the collision and the ensuing explosion caused the towers to collapse”
Auto gasoline is octane rated ’98’……..Kerosene is Octane rated ’15-20’….
“maybe” is not scientific , it’s a wild guess………

windjammer
Reader

Most of the kerosene ignited immediately, and outside of the buildings. That’s why there were big fireballs, followed by oxygen-starved black smoke. The impact zone in the North Tower wasn’t that hot, that’s why there’s video and photos of people standing in the hole trying to get fresh air.

Admin
Reader

Neither NIST nor FEMA claimed the jet fuel or anything else “exploded,” in fact they deny there was any explosion. Just a gravitational collapse. Since gravitational collapses don’t expel steel beams hundreds of feet and since NIST didn’t even manage to explain how this alleged collapse actually happened in terms of physics, there are obvious unanswered questions.

jaques
Reader
jaques

funnily enough- it may be ‘proved’ in some FEMR document- yet if you watch the videos of the actual event: you don’t see ‘peal out’. You see items ‘thrown out’ violently ejected in upward and outward trajectories. This is no banana ‘unpealing’. You also see narrow directed horizontal blasts issuing from the tower many stories below the collapse zone- at high speeds- explosions that look just exactly 100% like demolition squibs- they are indistinguishable- given all the other evidence of explosive demolition I feel quite happy to conclude that those blasts were indeed demolition squibs. Go ahead: tell me they… Read more »

Admin
Reader

Can you try to be more clear? It’s hard to understand what you mean sometimes.

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

The buildings were over a thousand feet tall as ROOSD Connection failures cause floor overloading and collapse the perimeter pealed over like the skin on a banana that cause a whipping action throwing beams out away from the Over 1000ft. Tall buildings easily going several hundred feet. Rapid, Open, Office, Space, Destruction. Basicly a type of rapid connection failure that occurs because mass quickly accumulated, inside the tube frame, and connections could only resist with the limited amount of energy- strength stored in them, that was insufficient to arrest collapse. I have a drawing that explained it to a five… Read more »

jaques
Reader
jaques

what nonsense. On the Gross thread you claimed to have greater expertise than Dr Richard J Lee of the R J Lee group. I did some googling of your name and I found some ‘evidence’ of your ‘expertise’ on youtube: some years ago you managed to cut a human hair with a chainsaw into perhaps 20 pieces… beyond that I can find not one scrap of information about your ‘expertise’ in any matters at all. I will say it again: I believe you are an apologist and defender of mass murderers. You make up lies to cover up a crime… Read more »

Admin
Reader

But this – like the controlled demolition idea – is just another hypothesis is it not? What evidence is there for these banana peel/whiplash events? Have they been recorded as happening to other similar structures?

Admin
Reader

Update on the email correspondence Carroll Sanders provided. If we recall Steve Jones agreed to the publication of this correspondence, provided it was complete, included every email he wrote and received and – particularly – included the emails from David Chandler. The email Sanders has provided is quite obviously NOT complete and contains no contributions from Chandler. Jones has asked us to pass this on: From Steven Jones: “It appears to me that this assembly is far from complete, and thus represents cherry-picking (avoiding THAT was a pre-condition for approval of publication). For example, I recall specifically delineating the emails… Read more »

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

Chandler was not part of the Microspheres debate as far as I know I saved the entire debate,that I received.

Admin
Reader

You said you gave your word to Jones, not Greening. You keep changing your story.

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

Jones though Greening as part of a group discussion arranged by Jones and Greening, not by me. I was simply included because of the value of my knowledge. Jones and Greening also had private conversations I was not party too. You now know that Jones knew Microspheres would be in toner, he should have checked them before going and publishing a stupid article, claiming they were thermite residues. I am not responsible for lack of communication and I was not part of the missing jolt debate. All Jones’s had to do was call a toner manufacture and get the EDX… Read more »

Admin
Reader

So you are asserting as fact the microspheres were produced by toner? Yet you have never produced any coherent data or written a paper, and no other authority seem to agree with you – is that correct?

jaques
Reader
jaques

don’t try and hold Carrol to his word- he is an expert in splitting hairs (and nothing else as far as I can tell- or as far as he has shown):

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

Attacks on me will not work the truth is the truth, Jaques your attacks even if allowed By Admin are worthless, because the truth is the truth!

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

It is in the emails it was to be kept within the group, Ziggi is the web master at 9/11 blogger if he shared it with Ziggi I consider that publication since ziggi has been leaking details. Of that and other conversations.
Jones also promised not to publish.
Ziggi knew the date, and what the discussion related too.

Admin
Reader

You have never before said anything about Jones promising not to publish. Your original claim was that you had promised Jones not to publish. Period.
You keep changing your story about every aspect of everything you claim,
I’m afraid you are being revealed as a serial, persistent, if incompetent, liar.
Unless you can explain your repeat contradictions and apparent lies we will have to start treating your posts like spam.

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

h71036.www7.hp.com/hho/cache/342575-0-0-39-121.html

jaques
Reader
jaques

sure sure- your an expert (better than Richard J Lee, Steven Jones and Niels Harrit- all accredited sconetists) and know for a fact that ‘the beam was bent by impact with the plane, and ‘the location of the bean is known’ – only problem is the engineer you claim as your source ‘died’ and all his evidence ‘irretrievably lost’ and what was published on some forum ‘now deleted’. Sure I believe that story. Not. And then the ink toner… garbage wrapped up in pseudo scientific gibberish. Show me an image of a single ink toner spherule with a diameter of… Read more »

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

edited for inappropriate content – OffG ed.

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

Norman when you accused me of quote mining did you understand that I emailed RJ Lee, and looked myself at Jones data and understood that Jones was presenting the data for Fe 3O4, or did you just assume I didn’t understand the data? Jones was comparing his commercial thermite spheres to the sphere spectra in the dust, many commercial thermite use cheap Black iron oxide sand, Fe 3O4, not Fe 203, they do produce Microspheres of Fe 3O4 from left over oxide. I have also recovered Fe 3O4, FeO Microspheres from Fe 203, thermite reactions. The theory is the hot… Read more »

Norman Pilon
Reader

According to you, Jones writes: “I propose we either take the discussion, with data, to a private, closed forum (a friend of mine knows how to get this started quickly, a couple of days), or continue by email with the proviso that the emails are not to be quoted without permission from an author.” This is not, as I read it, an injunction not to share or publish the content of what had until then been exchanged, but a condition being stipulated for continuing the discussion. Furthermore, it is not an unreasonable request because ‘quote mining’ can easily lead to… Read more »

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

In Jones own words which he broke! “*I propose we either take the discussion, with data, to a private, closed forum (a friend of mine knows how to get this started quickly, a couple of days), or continue by email with the proviso that the emails are not to be quoted without permission from an author. The little group on this mailing list seems like a good one — I think we all seek understanding of these microspheres and red/gray chips. I have SEM/EDS data, others have other data, and we all have expertise to bring to the table. I… Read more »

Admin
Reader

So, you admit you made the promise and broke it. Ok.
The emails you posted will now be deleted.
Stop lying. Stop switching your stories. Stop evading. Any more examples will be deleted as spam.

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

Admin it was agreed that this information would be kept in the group and not shared it Jones has been sharing it he broke the groups trust in him.
He need to state whether or not he gave the Emails to Ziggi, if he didn’t then I apologize, but this goes to his credibility.
Ziggi states he knows what these emails contain.
Ps. Chandler was never part of the Microspheres debate, it broke off where the emails ended.
The Microspheres debate is the only part that there was expected privacy, at Dr. Jones’s request.

Admin
Reader

You said you promised Jones not to publish. Now you say “it was promised in the group.”
Please answer this simple question –
Did you promise Jones not to publish?
An honest witness does not keep changing his story.

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

I am not lying Jones is and he broke the promise by sharing the emails with Ziggi.
Ziggi was not part of the group and should not have known the contents.
Jones had to have mace the contents available to ziggi.

Admin
Reader

YOU claim to have made the promise not Jones. He can’t break a promise YOU made. And sharing an email with one person is not “publishing” them.
Stop trying to evade. It’s ridiculous. Either you lied about promising Jones not to publish the emails or you have now broken you promise – which is it?

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

Will you now confirm that it was Jones who asked for privacy as I stated or since by Jones’s own actions and correspondence to you In am free of my promise, I will post it myself.

Admin
Reader

We can’t confirm anything and don’t need to. YOU are the one who claimed to have promised Jones not to publish, and YOU are the one who has now published.
You need to explain – were you lying when you claimed to have made this promise or have you broken the promise?

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

The comments in capitals are Steven E. Jones’s the others are Dr. Frank Greenings.
Jones knew that there were Microspheres in the buildings before the collapses that matched his spectra.
He ignored them in the energetic chips paper.
That is scientific misconduct, and intellectually dishonest behavior.
Do you also want me to post where Jones requested a private conversation?
Let Jones for the record make an excuse for it, and for sharing the emails with Ziggi who knew the contents of the Emails!

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

Admin, Jones informed you that he didn’t make me promise to keep them secret, now one of us must be lying I am not going to continue being attack for telling the truth.
Either we can have a rational discussion or not.
Ziggi on the other thread said he knew what was in the Emails,
I did not give Jones permission to publish my knowledge or inform Ziggi of the Email contents so Jones has obviously violated my trust!
Jones has already violated the agreement.

Admin
Reader

Jones did NOT so inform us. Jones informed us that he could not remember asking for such a promise. If you know he did that does not justify you breaking the promise. Jones also said he released you from any promise you may have made – provided you published ALL the correspondence, particularly those involving David Chandler. What you have done is the very opposite of what was asked. Your claim Jones already “published” these emails because some man says he heard about their contents is simply more of your trademark obfuscation. You have either lied about the promise you… Read more »

Admin
Reader

Carroll – you informed us that you had promised Jones not to publish these emails and would need his permission. He gave his permission but under the proviso the entire conversation as published.
You have now published a part of the conversation here, which is expressly what Jones asked you NOT to do.
So, either you are admitting you never made such a promise, or or have broken your word.
Please explain which of these it is. if the former you need also to explain why you lied initially. If the latter we’ll have to remove this comment of yours.

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

No the US. Patent office, the makers of toner, and Dr. Jones’s and Dr. Greenings work both agree with me. The toner is manufactured from Fly Ash magnetite. The developer used for years was fly Ash magnetite. There would have been several types of iron spheres in the dust from the fires, construction and natural pollution, but the ones searched for by Dr. Jones because they matched the paint chip evidence were definitely from xerography, used in the xerographic process. They are what make the process work. If a natural source can be found an unnatural source can be excluded.… Read more »

jaques
Reader
jaques

what is a direct lie is your oft-repeated claim that Jones and Harrit came up with the 6% figure. the actual figure was 5.87% and came from the RJ Lee group study into the environmental affects of 9/11- which I posted a link to in the Gross thread. You can wilfully ignore that fact- and be seen for what you are- a liar- or you can take this opportunity to retract your slander. You claim without any evidence that you ‘know more than Lee’ because you ‘put in the hard work’. That really is going too far by a country… Read more »

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

Liar, Jones and Harrit misrepresented R J Lee’s figure for all microspheres.
Jacues you can ignore the truth all you want but Jones was told Microspheres would be in those building in the toner even before they collapsed and said nothing about them.

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

There was the exact ratio of 3O4 in Jones’s Microspheres spectra the exact same spectra as fly ash.
He was complaining Greening’s spectra was too low.

Admin
Reader

The US Patent office, the makers of toner, Dr. Jones’s and Dr. Greenings work all agree the microspheres in the WTC dust were produced by toner?
Citation needed.

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

When thermite launches a microsphere into the air it oxidizes, That’s what made Jones think the Fe 304 Microspheres were thermite. He was fooled into believing toner spheres were thermite residue. Admin you have all I have, I have an old damaged hard disc drive from my old computer don’t know if anything didn’t make it onto the DVD, or the spots on the DVD that were unreadable, years have past, that is all I could recover. I believe though you have all I received, if not you can contact the other parties to the conversation and see if they… Read more »

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

Admin You have the Emails the patent has been posted and you can contact any supplier and get a chemical composition, for toner microspheres again this is 40 year old technology.
Or do you want me to post it off the emails myself?

Admin
Reader

We are asking for a citation showing anyone of the above mentioned or anyone at all beside yourself has claimed the WTC microspheres were produced by toner. Do you have such a citation?

Norman Pilon
Reader

Since you, Carroll, claim that the iron spheres Jones and everybody else found in the WTC dust are the magnetite from Xerox toner, what is the chemical formula for a) the magnetite of the Xerox toner and b) the iron spheres deemed to be a signature characteristic of the WTC dust?
Don’t bother replying unless you have citations to sources other than the authority of your grandiose utterances.

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

Make Thermite out of Sand: http://youtu.be/73YmP_JSrlU
Fe 3O4 can also be used in thermite and it does create sparks of magnetite, Jones actually tested cheap black sand thermite.
Iron Microspheres also can oxidize in air, forming magnetite, if the spheres are small enough in size.

Norman Pilon
Reader

See, everything is magnetite, and you can’t tell it apart from Xerox toner, according to you. So if I show you a magnetite rich spherule, how are you going to decide whether it came from a Xerox toner cartridge or from a thermitic reaction, Carroll?

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

Directly from Jones’s own mouth. He is questioning the low Oxygen in Greening iron sphere spectrum.
“2. Where is the oxygen in the spectrum? The oxygen content is
significant, yet the spectrum appears to be skewed, cut off at low X-ray
energies… please explain — how much Oxygen was present? Oxygen must be
present in a spectrum to provide a match with spectra I have shown — not
the case in the one example you provided!”

Norman Pilon
Reader

Are you daft? If the “iron to oxygen” ratio means anything, there is oxygen present. If there is more oxygen than iron, then it isn’t likely you have “elemental” iron. On the other hand, if you have 4 times more iron than oxygen, then you do have “ELEMANTAL” iron. . . you know, Fe and not just Fe3O4 or Fe2O3. When Jones here writes, ” Where is the oxygen in the spectrum? The oxygen content is significant . . .,” he doesn’t mean the “amount” of oxygen he found was “significantly more than” whatever you might want to imagine, Carroll,… Read more »

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

Yes magnetite can also contain Fe O as well as Fe 3O4.
Both further oxidize to Fe 2O3.

Norman Pilon
Reader

So,
a) if thermitic reactions produce ‘magnetite rich spheres,’ then you don’t know that what you have are spheres from Xerox toner, do you?
&
b) how do you explain “elemental iron” in a ratio of 4 to 1?

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

Admin do you honestly believe Copy machines with Microspheres from fly ash, that have been produced since 1975, would not have been inside a 110 story office building?
You even have Dr.Greenings estimates in the Emails.
Point is Jones agreed fly ash matched his spectrum, It was agreed Copy machines would be in the building and copy machines contain fly ash produced Microspheres.
Do you want to continue pretending Copy machines do not exist, or that Jones and Greening spectra did not match?

Norman Pilon
Reader

Look, Sanders, you just told us that thermitic reactions produce magnetite and that that is what the “iron rich spherules” are, magnetite. Can you quote a source that will attest to your claim, namely that thermitic reactions produce magnetite rich spheres?

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

Jones’s spheres were iron oxide magnetite oxidized iron by his own spectra.
He found Fe 3O4, Because microspheres from thermite tend to Oxidize from the contact of air and heat of the reaction.
I have Jones emails and Spectra.

Norman Pilon
Reader

Does this sound like magnetite production to you from a thermitic reaction: A conventional quantitative analysis routine was used to estimate the elemental contents. In the case of this iron-rich spheroid, the iron content exceeds the oxygen content by approximately a factor of two, so substantial elemental iron must be present. This result was repeated in other iron-rich spheroids in the post-DSC sample as well as in spots in the residue which did not form into spheres. Spheroids were observed with Fe:O ratios up to approximately 4:1. Other iron-rich spheres were found in the post-DSC residue which contained iron along… Read more »

Admin
Reader

Do we have all of those emails?

Norman Pilon
Reader

Wait. What are you saying? Let me quote you: “He found Fe3O4 because miscrospheres from thermite tend to Oxidize . . .” Did I hear you correctly?

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

Doesn’t matter,http://microspheres.us/microspheres/magnetic-microspheres
The microspheres manufacturers have tons of data on them are you too stupid to research it yourself this is 40 year old technology.

Norman Pilon
Reader

“Magnetite”: Fe3O4
here
“Iron” from thermitic reaction: Fe (i.e., 2Al + Fe2O3 = Al2O3 + 2Fe)
here
Question: is elemental iron the same as magnetite? Is it iron oxide? Do you think the phrase “iron rich spheres” means the same as “magnetite rich spheres” or “iron oxide rich spheres?” Is there a difference, in your opinion? Could there be a difference?

Carroll Sanders
Reader
Carroll Sanders

The same as the fly ash ore it is made from at 1200C.
The same Fe 304 spheres Jones found the same spectra Dr. Greening showed Jones.
They are manufactured by xerox and other copy machine manufactures.
The chemical composition doesn’t change during sphere formations.

Norman Pilon
Reader

What was my question, Carroll?