• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

List of incorrect information being passed around regarding 9/11...

20.

Steven Jones was quotes as saying that the thermite samples they had didn't ignite at 1700F which was his explanation as to why the fires didn't ignite it.
AE911Truth ? Architects & Engineers Investigating the destruction of all three World Trade Center skyscrapers on September 11 - FAQ #2: What about the planes that slammed into the Twin Towers? Wouldn?t they have disturbed the demolition devices?

Second, a demolition using advanced nano-thermite material (which has been identified in the World Trade Center dust) may help to explain why the fires started by the planes did not set off explosive devices. As explained by Dr. Steven Jones:
“It is important to note that initiating the thermite reaction requires temperatures well above those achieved by burning jet fuel or office materials — which is an advantage of using thermite charges over conventional monomolecular explosives such as TNT, RDX and PETN. Below is a photograph of an experiment performed by the author and colleagues at BYU in which a sample of thermite was heated to orange-hot temperature (about 1700ºF). We demonstrated that the thermite reaction would not ignite at this high temperature. Later, the thermite reaction was triggered by burning a magnesium strip in contact with the thermite. An electrical super-thermite 'match' could have been used and remotely triggered via radio signal.”
Click to expand...

Uhoh!

Niels Harrit, in his paper, says that the thermtie samples ignited at 413C-435C (779F-815F). Wow! That's a huge difference from what Stevens states. I wonder who is lying?
https://benthamopen.com/contents/pdf/TOCPJ/TOCPJ-2-7.pdf
3. Thermal Analysis using Differential Scanning
Calorimetry
Red/gray chips were subjected to heating using a differential
scanning calorimeter (DSC). The data shown in Fig.
(19) demonstrate that the red/gray chips from different WTC
samples all ignited in the range 415-435 ˚C.
Click to expand...
 
gamolon said:
20.

Steven Jones was quotes as saying that the thermite samples they had didn't ignite at 1700F which was his explanation as to why the fires didn't ignite it.
AE911Truth ? Architects & Engineers Investigating the destruction of all three World Trade Center skyscrapers on September 11 - FAQ #2: What about the planes that slammed into the Twin Towers? Wouldn?t they have disturbed the demolition devices?



Uhoh!

Niels Harrit, in his paper, says that the thermtie samples ignited at 413C-435C (779F-815F). Wow! That's a huge difference from what Stevens states. I wonder who is lying?
https://benthamopen.com/contents/pdf/TOCPJ/TOCPJ-2-7.pdf
Click to expand...


cam walked away from that point. He has not explanation.
 
21.
camlok said:
Still no evidence/proof from the anti-truthers, the science deniers the supporters of the incredibly wacky US government conspiracy theory? Cell phone calls from 39,000 feet, such drivel and the lame brained absorb it all.
Click to expand...

The above is just another example of truthers basing their beliefs on wrong information. Which can be refuted with facts if they just looked hard enough as shown below.

Let's look at flight 93's calls.
Woody Box: List of United 93 Airfone calls

Only two calls were made from cell phones at about 9:58 am EST. What was the plane's approximate altitude at this time? Around 5,000 feet?
https://www.ntsb.gov/about/Documents/Flight_Path_Study_UA93.pdf

The majority of the calls were made by Airfones which were installed in the seat backs, not cell phones. You just keep getting called out on your lies camlok.
 
gamolon said:
1.

This is not correct. Matt Tartaglia never specified "nuclear" or "radiation" as the type of decontamination used at ground zero. Below is a link and quote from where this information possibly came from. The article was written by someone named The Anonymous Physicist.
World Trade Center Demolition: More Evidence & Testimony Indicating Nuclear Blasts, Nuclear Radiation, & China Syndrome at the WTC


Another quote from Matt comes from an interview with Alex Jones back in 2005. Link and quote below. Again, no mention of "nuclear" or "radiation" decontamination from Matt.
https://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/march2005/300305newrevelations.htm


Then there is this paper that discusses normak decontamination that firefighters go through after fighting fires. It is a procedure that they use to remove cancer causing substances that are encountered in fires. Link below.
http://firefighterclosecalls.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/DG16-04.pdf

2.

This is not correct. Shirley never "SAW" anything. She was relating stories she heard from the victims she was treating them. Link and quote below.
https://edwardmd.wordpress.com/2013/05/21/update-witnesses-saw-people-vaporized-on-9-11/


3.

William as embellished his story over time It was not the "massive explosion" as he later makes it out to be. It was a "RUMBLE", like someone moving furniture. No mention of being lisfted off the ground, falling plaster, or massive explosion. Below is a quote and link from his first interview the day of 9/11 at around noon.
William Rodriguez
Click to expand...

I know Matthew Tartaglia personally and he is a good man. He thinks there were underground nukes there. He is sick from the toxins at the WTC. I asked him why he thought there were nukes employed. He said the place looked like Hiroshima and they wouldn't let him use his radiation detector.
 
muttkat said:
I know Matthew Tartaglia personally and he is a good man. He thinks there were underground nukes there. He is sick from the toxins at the WTC. I asked him why he thought there were nukes employed. He said the place looked like Hiroshima and they wouldn't let him use his radiation detector.
Click to expand...

A mushroom cloud and very high temperatures and a large part of New York destroyed? Like Hiroshima?
 
muttkat said:
I know Matthew Tartaglia personally and he is a good man.
Click to expand...
I never said he wasn't a good man. Not sure what this has to do with nukes, radiation, and proof they were present.

muttkat said:
He thinks there were underground nukes there.
Click to expand...
Ok?

muttkat said:
He is sick from the toxins at the WTC.
Click to expand...
And that really sucks. Toxins occur at many building sites that had fire. That's why firefighters constantly decontaminate themselves after.

muttkat said:
I asked him why he thought there were nukes employed.
Click to expand...
You may or may not know him personally. Just because you say so doesn't make it true.

muttkat said:
He said the place looked like Hiroshima and they wouldn't let him use his radiation detector.
Click to expand...
Those aren't indicators of nukes.
 
muttkat said:
I know Matthew Tartaglia personally and he is a good man. He thinks there were underground nukes there. He is sick from the toxins at the WTC. I asked him why he thought there were nukes employed. He said the place looked like Hiroshima and they wouldn't let him use his radiation detector.
Click to expand...

I thought Tartaglia died?
 
gamolon said:
These picture that Pin is passing around are incorrect. The try and make it seem like the tower was structurally more than they really were. The perimeter facade at the level of the impacts were NOT 2 feet thick as the pciture claims. The facade was composed of about 14" x 14" box columns constructed of 1/4" steel plate on the four sides. Link below showing the cross section of the perimeter columns (bottom picture, center column).
9-11 Research: The Perimeter Walls
Click to expand...
(my emphasis)
For Tower A around floor 96 on the North face, the panels were from the 300 series, made from columns of mainly types 122 and 123. "Plate 1" as per the diagram below for these (panels) *columns* would have been 3/8" or 7/16" respectively, not 1/4". Plates 2 and 3 would have been 1/4" though.
col types 100 series crop.jpg
 
Last edited:
I miss the glory days of the 9/11 tin foil hat age, when it was science fiction. Those magic spheres took some imagination. From there it all went down hill. Probably about the time that idiot started making money off of the CT, that all the video from 9/11 was fake. Once people started exploiting 9/11 gone were the cool spheres then we get pseudoscience and bad lies that most people can plainly see is a bunch of BS. It is quite sad to see a cottage industry exploiting people with mental disorders. I mean these are the type of people that might hurt other people over such things (see pizzagate).
 
gamolon said:
These picture that Pin is passing around are incorrect. The try and make it seem like the tower was structurally more than they really were. The perimeter facade at the level of the impacts were NOT 2 feet thick as the pciture claims. The facade was composed of about 14" x 14" box columns constructed of 1/4" steel plate on the four sides. Link below showing the cross section of the perimeter columns (bottom picture, center column).
9-11 Research: The Perimeter Walls
Click to expand...

(my emphasis)

For Tower B at impact height on the South face, the "plate 1" as per the diagram would have been 5/8", 11/16" or 3/4" rather than the 1/4" you guessed.

col types 100 series crop.jpg
 
FreedomFromAll said:
I miss the glory days of the 9/11 tin foil hat age, when it was science fiction. Those magic spheres took some imagination. From there it all went down hill. Probably about the time that idiot started making money off of the CT, that all the video from 9/11 was fake. Once people started exploiting 9/11 gone were the cool spheres then we get pseudoscience and bad lies that most people can plainly see is a bunch of BS. It is quite sad to see a cottage industry exploiting people with mental disorders. I mean these are the type of people that might hurt other people over such things (see pizzagate).
Click to expand...

The US Attorney in Manhattan, Mr. Berman, might be able to return us to the glory days. He has recently accepted the petition offered by the Lawyer's Committee for 911 which includes all sorts of evidence contradicting the official story. Stay tuned. Though Berman seems to be a good man interested in the rule of law and seeking the truth, his superiors in Washington DC will likely think otherwise.
 
Thoreau72 said:
The US Attorney in Manhattan, Mr. Berman, might be able to return us to the glory days. He has recently accepted the petition offered by the Lawyer's Committee for 911 which includes all sorts of evidence contradicting the official story. Stay tuned. Though Berman seems to be a good man interested in the rule of law and seeking the truth, his superiors in Washington DC will likely think otherwise.
Click to expand...

There is no evidenced for the crazy 911 Cts that people peddle to the ignorant for $$$$$
 
Thoreau72 said:
The US Attorney in Manhattan, Mr. Berman, might be able to return us to the glory days. He has recently accepted the petition offered by the Lawyer's Committee for 911 which includes all sorts of evidence contradicting the official story. Stay tuned. Though Berman seems to be a good man interested in the rule of law and seeking the truth, his superiors in Washington DC will likely think otherwise.
Click to expand...

I fail to see any science fiction in a US Attorney following the law. I suspect that you already know that the petition will fail, hence alluding to DC. How long until Berman is part of the conspiracy? You know that is where you will end up. lol
 
Quag said:
There is no evidenced for the crazy 911 Cts that people peddle to the ignorant for $$$$$
Click to expand...

And the best bit? The best bit is that the Twin Towers are still standing and they can't accept that fact.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
And the best bit? The best bit is that the Twin Towers are still standing and they can't accept that fact.
Click to expand...
That is the key fact I assert when I occasionally respond to those stupid truther global claims. The ones that say "The Official Story is totally wrong" or equivalent. If "The official story is totally wrong" the Twin Towers MUST still be standing ...because the OS says the Twin Towers collapsed...so if the OS is totally wrong... logic obvious to most except truthers.
 
FreedomFromAll said:
I fail to see any science fiction in a US Attorney following the law. I suspect that you already know that the petition will fail, hence alluding to DC. How long until Berman is part of the conspiracy? You know that is where you will end up. lol
Click to expand...

Having officially accepted it and stating that he will comply with the law, at this point Berman is acting in a responsible and professional manner, thus he is not guilty of playing along with the government conspiracy of silence and deception.

Yes that could change, and IMO likely will.

The USA following the law is not science fiction (?), but it often is a very rare event as to this particular issue.
 
Thoreau72 said:
Having officially accepted it and stating that he will comply with the law, at this point Berman is acting in a responsible and professional manner, thus he is not guilty of playing along with the government conspiracy of silence and deception.

Yes that could change, and IMO likely will.

The USA following the law is not science fiction (?), but it often is a very rare event as to this particular issue.
Click to expand...

Still not a shred of evidence to back up put multiple mutually exclusive CT claims about 911
 
Thoreau72 said:
Having officially accepted it and stating that he will comply with the law, at this point Berman is acting in a responsible and professional manner, thus he is not guilty of playing along with the government conspiracy of silence and deception.

Yes that could change, and IMO likely will.

The USA following the law is not science fiction (?), but it often is a very rare event as to this particular issue.
Click to expand...

Conspiracy crap answer....
 
FreedomFromAll said:
When I say conspiracy crap I'm referring to made up crap.
Click to expand...

Made up crap is an excellent description of the official story of a number of public events, ESPECIALLY the events of 11 September.
 
Thoreau72 said:
Made up crap is an excellent description of the official story of a number of public events, ESPECIALLY the events of 11 September.
Click to expand...
Truthers love made up stuff
Still waiting for you to explain how ground effect makes it hard to pilot a plane at high speed near the ground
Come on you are after all a "flight instructor" and "test pilot" You should be able to explain this
 
Thoreau72 said:
Made up crap is an excellent description of the official story of a number of public events, ESPECIALLY the events of 11 September.
Click to expand...

Just like the editor of Veterans Today who admitted and put in writing that most of what VT publishes is made up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom