2 thoughts on “WTC Controlled Demolition – Niels Harrit on Russia Today Part1

  1. Niels Harrit. Are you kidding me?

    You haven’t approved my other comments. Are you afraid?

    Maybe you’ll allow this one the light of day. It’s a great opportunity to show the world how stupid I am.

    Niels Harrit makes claims using samples that were given to him six years after 911, stored who knows where and how,but certainly in a non sterile enviroment, and handled my non scientists.

    There is no way to even prove the samples he used were from the WTC.

    But, even if they are, he’s still full of baloney.

    He admits that the samples may have been contaminated, and that this contamination could lead to false results.

    He says, in a tone voice that implies that it is something important, that red materiel has elemental aluminum and iron oxide.

    This leads me make a scientific observation of my own.

    DUH!

    There were tons of aluminum in the buildings, and in the plane. As to the iron oxide, (rust), any building with iron in it also has iron oxide in it.

    The material they found, that had been contaminated over six years, reminded them of nanothermite or regular thermite but probably nanothermite no really it’s almost definitely the nano kind. Or it might be just regular paint. Except that it also has rust and aluminum in it. Which may be a result of the contamination or it may just be because those two substances are present in just about every structure in the history of construction.

    One final thought. Thermite, in any form, is not an explosive. It is an incendiary. With some special equipment to help focus the burning energy, it can be made to act somewhat like an explosive, but won’t work as well as the explosive itself.

    I addition, the amount of thermite needed, and the devices that would make it act more like an explosive, would be far more than just smuggling in the explosive. Many times more. Even more people would have to “in on it”. The time frame would be magnified, creating more danger of discovery.

    Therefore, anyone who uses the word “thermite” in connection with 911 is a dope.

    That’s the way I see it.

    Neill

  2. GutterBall, I hope your wife had a nicer Friday night than you did.Aluminum melts at 1200 F, which is about the hottest that oifcfe fires can get. To heat it up to 1800 F would require a crucible, not to mention combustion of hydrocarbon fuel under perfect conditions. I am not aware that the WTC was littered with crucibles, and of course the jet fuel burned off in less than ten minutes. Your 1800 F aluminum is an absurd idea.Ian, the theory that smoldering carpets polluted the molten metal is NIST’s not mine. Yes, “we” need scientific reports on these important matters that “we” can believe. Democracy demands it. The culture of willful stupidity that you are helping to create is profoundly anti-democratic.RGT, obviously you do not believe that the NYT believes the Unabomber’s identity is still a mystery–and the reason you do not believe this is because the results of investigations on the identitity of the Unabomber have been made public. No followup investigations of the “Deep Mystery” of the sulfidated WTC steel samples have been made public. Now surely you would not find it acceptable for Bill to say “it’s OK, there’s no need to worry about the Unabomber any more. We’ve figured out it was Ted Kaczynski.”Obviously for the Unabomber we needed an official investigation and a public trial. It is no different with respect to the “Deep Mystery” steel. The hand-waving claims of a dishonest and incompetent researcher like Bill are not sufficient. We need solid scientific answers.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *