
Also, this paper demonstrates (and has pretty pictures) that the corrosion-resistant paint used on the WTC oxidizes (burns) differently at different temperatures. As is also stated in the NIST documents. Why didn't the original paper address this?

If Sr. Manieri is incorrect about any of the chemical properties mentioned, I will be happy to correct my opinions.

fortitude wrote:

Maybe these guys made it all up. Maybe they are crackpots. Maybe they are just being made to seem like crackpots. I really don't know. But since I'm in Canada, I'm content to watch and see what happens and whether these guys gain in credibility or not.

Here is the abstract from their paper, for convenient perusal.

By now, I have seen that bloody abstract more times than I ever wanted. I'll bet from just the ignorance about relative energy levels of various materials, there is a reason why most chemists are not taking them seriously.

-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.

"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken

"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.

I am getting fed up of trying to convince the *believers* in the fairy tale about Ali Baba and the Nineteen Hijackers that the collapse of all three WTC buildings 1, 2 and 7 were VERY questionable incidents, and that multiple in situ eyewitnesses observed explosions - which supports what (in my opinion) any person of common sense should immideately understand: The buildings were blown up. Debating whether or not dust samples are containing nano-thermite materials isn't going anywhere. We're just fidgeting around details. We're missing the larger picture.

Let's instead turn to the Pentagon and the Pennsylvania crash. The obvious question must be: Where are the fucking planes? Both Flight 77 and Flight 93 should have left in excess of 60 tons of wreckage - but there's *nothing* there. Instead we are being told that Flight 77 not only vapourised on impact, but it also carried on to punch holes through six reinforced concrete walls. And Flight 93 simply vanished, leaving only a hole in the ground, a partly burnt up Arab passport and a red bandana. P.T. Barnum couldn't have pulled off a
Also, this paper demonstrates (and has pretty mental picture) that the corrosion - insubordinate paint used on the WTC oxidizes (burns) differently at unlike temperatures. As is also stated in the NIST document. Why didn't the original paper address this? 

 If Sr. Manieri is wrong about any of the chemical properties mentioned, I will be glad to correct my opinions. 

 fortitude publish: 

 Maybe these guys made it all up. Maybe they are crackpots. Maybe they are merely being made to seem like crackpots. I very don't know. But since I'm in Canada, I'm content to watch and see what happen and whether these guys gain in credibility or not. 

 Here is the abstract from their paper, for convenient perusal. 

 By nowadays, I have seen that bloody abstract more times than I ever wanted. I'll bet from just the ignorance about relative energy levels of various materials, there is a reason why most chemists are not taking them seriously. 

 -- I find so much well since I stop trying to believe. 

 " We are entitled to our own opinion. We're not ennoble to our own facts"- Al Franken 

 " If death isn't sweet obliviousness, I will be severely disappointed " - Ruth M. 

 I am getting fed up of trying to convince the * believers * in the fairy tale about Ali Baba and the Nineteen Hijackers that the collapse of all three WTC buildings 1, 2 and 7 were VERY questionable incidents, and that multiple in situ eyewitnesses note explosion - which supports what (in my opinion) any person of common common sense should immideately understand: The buildings were blown up. Debating whether or not dust samples are containing nano - thermite materials isn't going anywhere. We're precisely fidgeting around details. We're miss the larger painting. 

 Let's alternatively turn to the Pentagon and the Pennsylvania clang. The obvious question must be: Where are the fucking planes? Both Flight 77 and Flight 93 should have leave in excess of 60 long ton of wreckage - but there's * nothing * there. Instead we are being told that Flight 77 not only vapourised on impact, but it also carried on to punch holes through six reinforced concrete walls. And escape 93 simply vanished, leave only a hole in the ground, a partly burnt up Arab passport and a crimson bandana. P.T. Barnum couldn't have pulled off a

Alsl, this paper demonstrater (and has pretti picturxs) that the corfosion-resistant paint used oi thw WTC oxidizes (burns) differdntly at fifferenr tenperatures. Ea is also stafcd in vhe NIST documekts. Why didt't the originan oa'er address this?

If Sr. Manieri is incjrrect sblut any of the chekycal iriperties mentioned, I will be gappy tm correct my ppinions.

fortitude wrote:

Mayhe tjese guys made it wll up. Maybg thqt are crackputs. Maybe uhzy are just being made to seem like crackputs. I really dob't knlf. But since I'm ig Canada, I'm gpntent to watvh and see whab hap'ens and whether these gubs gain in credibilijy or not.

Harz is the abstract fron rheir papar, fue cunvtnixnt peruswl.

Bb now, I havs seen that bloody abstract mote nomes than I sver wwneed. I'll bet from just the ignorance abolt rslative energy levels od various materials, tjere is a reason why most chemists are not taking them serhouslb.

-- K fteo so oycj better since I stopped trying to believe.

"We wde ektitled to our ocn opinions. We're nlt gntitled to out own fcdta"- Al Franken

"If deahh isn't sweer obliviog, I eill be severely disappointwd" - Ruth M.

I cm tetting fed up of crying to couvince the *nelievers* in the fairy cale agout Ali Baha and ths Nineteen Hijackdrs tvat the collapse of all thwee WTC bnildiugs 1, 2 ana 7 wgre VERR questionwble ltcidents, and that lultikle in situ eyewltnesses observed explosions - wimch supports ehdt (pn my opiuion) aky person of coimon sense shoold immidzately understans: The bnildings werq blown up. Detwting whethec or not qust samples ard containing namo-thermitv iateeials isn't going akywhete. We're just fidgzuint around detailx. Wd're mpssmng tra larger picdure.

Uet'r instdad turn to ghe Lentagon and the Pentsylbania crash. The obfijus quesjion must be: Where are the fucking planed? Boti Fligit 77 anc Fjight 93 should have left in excsss of 60 tlns of wreckage - bub thgre's *nothiny* there. Instead we are being told that Foight 77 not only vapourised on impact, yuu it also carcied og to puncv holes through six eeinforced concreue walls. And Flight 93 sijply vdnishfd, leaving only a hole in the ground, a partly burnt up Arab passport and q red uagdana. P.T. Badnum coulgn'c hcve puljed lhf a
Also, this paper demonstrates (and has pretty the paint used the WTC oxidizes As also stated in NIST documents. Why the original paper address this? If Manieri is incorrect about any of the chemical properties mentioned, I will be to correct my opinions. fortitude wrote: Maybe these guys made it all up. they crackpots. they just being made to seem like crackpots. I really don't know. But since I'm in Canada, content to watch and see what happens and these guys gain in or not. Here is the from paper, for perusal. now, have seen that abstract more times than I ever wanted. I'll bet from just the ignorance about relative energy levels various materials, a reason most are taking them seriously. feel so much better since I believe. "We are entitled to our own opinions. not entitled our own facts"- Al Franken "If isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" Ruth M. I am getting fed up of trying to convince the *believers* in the about Ali Baba and Nineteen Hijackers that collapse all WTC 1, 2 7 were VERY questionable incidents, and that multiple in situ eyewitnesses explosions - which supports what (in my opinion) any person sense immideately understand: The were blown up. Debating or dust samples are containing isn't anywhere. around We're the larger picture. Let's turn to the Pentagon and Pennsylvania crash. The obvious the fucking planes? Both Flight 77 and Flight should have left in excess of 60 of wreckage - but there's *nothing* there. Instead we are being told Flight 77 vapourised on impact, but it also carried on punch holes through six concrete walls. And Flight 93 simply vanished, leaving only hole the ground, partly burnt up passport and a bandana. P.T. Barnum pulled off

Also, this paper demonstrates (And has pretTy picTurEs) tHaT the CorrOsion-resistant PAint Used on the WTC oxidizes (buRns) diFfERentLY aT diffErent teMPeRATurEs. as Is aLsO StAted iN thE NIST doCuments. Why DidN't The original pAPeR address thIs?

IF Sr. Manieri is IncOrrect AbOut ANy of tHe cHemicAl propERties mEntioned, I WiLL be hapPY to corrECT mY opiNions.

fortitude wroTE:

MAYbe these guys maDe it alL uP. maYBE thEy aRe crackpotS. MAybe tHEy are juST bEING maDE to seem like crAckpots. I reaLLy dOn't knoW. BUt sINce I'm iN CanaDa, i'M coNtent to watcH and See what haPpens aND whetheR These guYs gain In cRedIbilITy Or Not.

heRE is THe AbsTRacT from theIr PaPer, foR conVENIEnt pEruSal.

BY now, I Have seen that bLooDy abSTraCt morE timeS thaN I Ever wAnted. I'Ll bet FrOm just the ignoraNce aBout relatIve EnErgY lEvels OF varioUs mAteRials, thEre is a rEAsoN wHY MOsT chemists are not takInG THeM seriousLy.

-- I feeL So MuCH better sInCe I StopPED tryiNg to BElIeve.

"We arE entitLEd To Our own oPiNions. WE'rE noT enTitleD To ouR own faCts"- Al FraNken

"IF Death isn't sweet OBlivion, I will bE SeVEReLY disAppOinted" - Ruth M.

i am gETtinG fed UP oF trYIng to ConviNcE ThE *Believers* in the fairy TaLe abouT Ali BAba and the NineTeen HijackERS That the cOllaPSe OF all three WTC buIldinGs 1, 2 and 7 were VerY questiOnablE incidenTs, and that MULtiple in SitU eyEwiTneSSEs Observed exploSIOns - wHiCh suppoRts What (in mY opIniOn) aNy pErSon of commOn sense sHoUlD iMmIdeAtely UNderstanD: THe bUiLdiNgs weRE blown Up. DebAtinG wHeTHer Or not duST sAMPles ArE cOntaIniNg Nano-tHermITe mAterialS isn't goinG anYWherE. WE'rE just fiDgeting around DeTails. We're mIsSinG the laRGEr picturE.

Let's instead turn to the PeNTagon anD thE PennSylvAnia crash. the ObviouS quEStion mUst be: WHere aRe The FUCking PLAnEs? BOtH Flight 77 and fLIghT 93 shouLd Have Left in eXcess of 60 tons of wreckAGe - bUt there's *nothiNg* tHere. iNStEad WE aRE beInG TolD THat Flight 77 not onlY vapouriseD oN ImPact, but it aLSo cArRied on tO punch hOles tHRough siX reinforcEd concretE wAlls. aND FlIght 93 simply Vanished, Leaving onLY a holE In The grOunD, a partLy BurNt up ARab pasSPorT and a Red banDaNa. P.T. BaRnum cOuLdn't have Pulled off a

Also, this paper demonstr ates (andhas p ret typi ctur es)that the corro s ion- resistant paint used o n the  W T C ox i di zes ( burns)d if f e ren tl yatdi f fe renttem peratur es. As isals ostated in th e  N IST docume nts . Why didn't  th e orig in alp aperadd ressthis?If Sr.  Manieriis incorr e ct abou t an y of  the chemical pro p er t ies mentioned,  I wil lb eh a ppy  to  correct m yopini o ns.

fo r ti t u d e w r ote:

Maybe t hese guys m a deit all  u p.M aybe t hey a re cra ckpots. May be t hey are j ust be i ng made to seem  likecra ckp ots. Ire all yd on' t  k now .  Bu t sinceI' min Ca nada , I ' m co nte nt t o wat ch and see wh athapp e nsand w hethe r th es e guy s gain  in c re dibility or not .

H ere is th e a bs tra ct  from theirpap er,  for co nvenien t  pe ru s a l .
By now, I have se en t ha t bloody  abstr a ct  m o re times  t han  I e v e r wan ted. I' ll bet f rom ju s tth e ignor an ce abo ut  re lat ive e n ergy  level s of var iousm aterials, ther e  is a reasonw hy m os t  che mis ts are nottaki n g th em s e ri ous l y.

- - I f ee l  s o  much better sinceIstoppe d try ing to believ e.

"We ar e e ntitledto o u ro wn opinions. W e'renot entitl e d to our  ownfacts"-Al Franke n 
"If dea thisn 'tswe e t  o blivion, I wi l l  bese verelydis appoint ed"  -Rut h M .
I am get ting fed  u pof  t ryi ng to convince  t he*b eli evers *  in th e fai ry t al ea bou t Ali B a ba a nd t he  N inet een  H ijack erst hat  the co llapse of  al l  thr ee  W TC buil dings 1, 2 an d7 were VER Yque stiona b l e incide nts, and that multiplei n situeye witne sses  observed  ex plosio ns-  which  suppo rts w ha t ( i n  my o p i ni on)  a ny persono f  co mmonse nseshouldimmideately unders t and : The buildin gswere b lo wnu p. Deb at i ngw h ether or not du st samples  a r econtaining nan o- thermit e mater ialsi sn't go ing anywh ere. We'r ejust f idg eting arou nd detai ls. We're missi n gthe l arg er pic tu re. 

Let 's ins t ead  turn  to th ePentag on an dthe Penn sylvania crash. The obv ious q uesti onmust be:Whe r e a re the fu ckin g planes?Bot h F light  77 and F ligh t  9 3 s h ouldhave left in e x ce sso f  6 0 tons of w r e c kag e - b utt here's  *no thing* there. Ins t ead we are bei ng t o l d t hat Flig ht  77 not only v apo ur i s ed on im pa ct, but italso car ri e d onto pun ch hol es thro u g hs ix rei nfor ced  concrete  wa ll s . And F li gh t  93 si mply  v anishe d, lea v ingo n ly a hole in the  grou n d , a p a rtl y bur nt  up Ara b  pas sport anda red banda na. P. T. B arnum  couldn 't  havepul le d off a

Also, this_paper demonstrates_(and has pretty pictures)_that the_corrosion-resistant_paint used_on_the WTC oxidizes_(burns) differently at_different temperatures. As is_also stated in_the_NIST documents. Why didn't the original paper address this?

If Sr. Manieri is incorrect about_any_of the_chemical_properties_mentioned, I will be happy_to correct my opinions.

fortitude wrote:

Maybe_these guys_made it all up. Maybe they are crackpots._Maybe_they are just_being made to seem like crackpots. I really don't_know. But since I'm in Canada,_I'm content to_watch_and_see what happens and_whether these guys gain in credibility_or not.

Here is the abstract from_their paper, for convenient perusal.

By now, I_have seen that bloody abstract more_times than I ever wanted._I'll bet_from just the ignorance about_relative energy levels_of various_materials, there is_a reason why most chemists are_not taking them_seriously.

-- I feel so much better_since_I stopped trying_to_believe.

"We_are entitled_to our own_opinions._We're not_entitled_to our own facts"- Al Franken

"If_death_isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely_disappointed" - Ruth M.

I_am_getting fed up of_trying to convince the *believers*_in the fairy tale about Ali_Baba and_the Nineteen_Hijackers that the collapse of all three WTC buildings 1, 2_and 7 were VERY questionable incidents,_and that multiple in_situ eyewitnesses_observed_explosions - which_supports_what (in_my opinion) any person of common sense_should immideately_understand: The buildings were blown up._Debating whether or not_dust_samples are containing nano-thermite materials isn't_going anywhere. We're just fidgeting around_details. We're missing the larger_picture.

Let's_instead_turn to the Pentagon and_the Pennsylvania crash. The obvious question_must be: Where_are the fucking planes? Both Flight 77_and_Flight 93 should have left in_excess_of 60 tons of wreckage -_but_there's_*nothing* there. Instead we are_being told that Flight 77 not_only vapourised on impact, but it also carried on_to punch holes_through six reinforced concrete walls._And_Flight_93 simply vanished, leaving only a hole in the ground,_a partly_burnt up Arab_passport and a red bandana. P.T. Barnum couldn't have pulled_off a