So, according to you, I donít have a clue? I was not going to bother to reply but ........... although this exchange is not related to the original post, I claim the right to reply to your insulting response.
I obviously took more trouble to ensure I got the whole picture regarding demolition and the use of explosives, you were more concerned with expounding your own self opinionated view than taking the trouble to ensure you considered the whole picture. So for your information ........... your expressed opinion was wrong because you failed to take into account all the required information to come to a reasoned conclusion!
Thermite and NanoThermite are cutting agents not high pressure wave explosives. (So congratulations you managed to get that right but it is a pity you did not continue your research!)
In demolition cutting agents must be used in conjunction with explosives. The cutting agents partially sever the steel which weakens the load bearers and brings the structural integrity to the lower end of the design spec. The explosives are used to break the remaining attached steel and move the cut sections away from each other. If contact cutting agents produced a high pressure shock wave, the wave would disrupt the cutting action.
NanoThermiteís action is inherently unpredictable due to many factors that determine its cutting time, any prediction of time is not sufficiently accurate and therefore it cannot be used as the final initiator of a controlled demolition sequence. Like a sentence in the written word, the process requires a Ďfull stopí hence the need for an explosive charge. This is standard controlled demolition practice and is also simple common sense to anyone with a practical engineering background.
If the official 911 theory were to be proven false and explosives were determined as the greater probability, this would explain the high level of sulphur found around the WTC site as well as the unburned remnants and residue of NanoThermite. To control any demolition you use a cutting charge (or an oxyacetylene cutter when you have the time) and an explosive, (which invariably contains a substantial percentage of sulphur), to initiate a predictable sequence of failure in structural members, thus allowing the mass of the structure under the force of gravity to complete the demolition.
Explosives/cutting charges do not bring down buildings, they are simply initiators to ensure a predictable sequence of structural failure and thus a controlled demolition ................. gravity does the rest!
an explosive, (which invariably contains a substantial percentage of sulphur),
Just to show you know little about what you pretend to know, the only common explosive containing sulfur is black powder, which is a low explosive. High explosives are used today in demolition, often plastic explosives, such as C-4 or Semtex. Even old explosives like dynamite contains no sulfur.
Even black powder, when burnt, has sufficient oxidant (potassium nitrate) to ensure complete oxidation of the sulfur, even in the usual stoichiometric mixtures, to form gaseous sulfur dioxide, so that little sulfur would be found in the residues.
For me it's a toss up 'tween John Terry & Sam Harris. John Terry could carry on the voice & ways of the old pope ,where as Sam Harris being a non believer anti religionist [if that is a word] would really shake up the Vatican with some radical thinking. For some good examples just google him on you tube he realy is a breath of fresh air, & talks logical & common sense. So for me vote Sam Harris.
[Only joking or am I ]
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
All times are GMT
Page 2 of 2Goto page Previous1, 2