Scientific proof: Nano-thermite in 911 WTC dust !

[jilliem]

Danish Scientist Niels Harrit on danish TV2 News :
(English subtitles )

Proof : Nano-thermites found in the 911 WTC Dust.

A danish scientist Niels Harrit, on nano-thermite in the WTC dust ( english subtitles ) - YouTube

Here you can find and download the Scientific report that Niels Harriet is refering to: ( before it eventually and mystically disapears)

http://www.bentham.org/open/tocpj/openaccess2.htm

[drhemp]

I went to a talk in Amsterdam last year given by Prof Harrit at the first ever European-wide 9/11 Truth Gathering and I must say he was very convincing. I remember someone asked him about the research of Judy Woods which he dismissed as bad science; it does make sense to me that the PTB would put elaborate conspiracies to throw people off the track if they were getting close to the truth.

Seems also a bit fishy that another famous proponent of Judy Wood's theories on 9/11 is ex-spook and mind control victim, David Shayler, who now claims he is Jesus Christ.

[tabea_blumenschein]

For the umpteenth time.

It wasn't nano-thermite those idiots found.

It was paint.

I have a thread devoted to this subject (http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=62309) on the 9/11 subforum where I offer reasons to believe the material was paint and not some sort of thermite material.

[4879]

Paint?

so these scientists examined the dust for over two years and can not difference between nanothermite and paint? These fucking idiots...

[kingmonkey]

Paint?

so these scientists examined the dust for over two years and can not difference between nanothermite and paint? These fucking idiots...


Exactly, and the fact that they can't shows how shit they are at thier job. They didn't find nano-thermite, they found elements of/found in nano thermite, that's not even close to being the same thing. The Harrit guy can't get anyone to take his work seriously because it's bad.

[redkop]

For the umpteenth time.

It wasn't nano-thermite those idiots found.

It was paint.

I have a thread devoted to this subject (http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=62309) on the 9/11 subforum where I offer reasons to believe the material was paint and not some sort of thermite material.
yes and others think your opinion is rubbish on that thread too.

[yozhik]

Right.
So let me see if I have this right.
A scientist claims to have found nano-thermite in the dust of the WTC ruins.
Someone claims that it isn't nano-thermite; its paint.

The nano-thermite theory is a conclusion offered after scientific analysis in laboratory conditions? Is that correct?

The paint theory is a conclusion offered after ... (fill in the gap) ... in ... (fill in gap) conditions?

I just need to comprehend the claims and rebuttals here... you know ... comparing apples with apples ...

[blueyonder2012]

A danish scientist Niels Harrit, on nano-thermite in the WTC dust ( english subtitles ) - YouTube


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_tf25lx_3o


;)

[tabea_blumenschein]

The energy densities for the samples were determined to be anywhere from 1.2 kilojoules per gram all the way up to 7.2 kilojoules per gram. That sort of variation is okay if the samples are a mixture of paint and rust. It isn't okay for an incendiary or explosive material, because the energy density for that material would be fairly uniform from one sample to the next.

If the samples were thermite, you'd expect the energy densities to cluster around 4 kilojoules per gram, not for two to be far lower and two others to be far higher than that value. Just like you'd expect measured energy densities for samples of gasoline to cluster around 43 kilojoules per gram, or measured energy densities for TNT to cluster around 4.2 kilojoules per gram.

The fact that the energy densities are all over the map kills the whole "nano-thermite" hypothesis outright. Never mind the chain-of-custody problems, and the fact that a 10-micron thick coating of the stuff on a steel column won't heat that column up very much, much less cause it to fail.

[andrewjohnson]

Seems also a bit fishy that another famous proponent of Judy Wood's theories on 9/11 is ex-spook and mind control victim, David Shayler, who now claims he is Jesus Christ.

Where does David Shayler talk about her "theories"?

And of course, what we are REALLY talking about is evidence. I corresponded with Neils Harrit last summer and he was unable to explain

1) Inverted Cars near the WTC
2) Exploding oxygen tanks on fire trucks before the tower came down.
3) Levitated witnesses
4) Extreme lack of building

In fact, Harrit can't explain much at all. All he says is that "Thermitic Compounds" were discovered in WTC. Ummm, well - what's thermite? Aluminium and Iron Oxide powder. What was the tower's exterior made of? Yes - um- aluminium? What else was in the tower - um - lots of metal - and some it was quite similar to Iron - i.e. Steel. And some of that will have been oxidised (i.e. Iron Oxide). So what does his study prove?

Oh dear - looks like people have been fooled by another scam!

Even that Bentham Journal is suspect!

http://www.nature.com/news/2009/090615/full/news.2009.571.html

http://www.rushmessageboard.com/cpmb/index.php?showtopic=30089&view=findpost&p=1325301

So let's talk about evidence, not personality. Looking at the Evidence, Harrit can't acutally explain anything much of meaning - he can't explain the steel turning to dust, he can't explain inverted cars etc etc and the journal in which his paper was publsihed is suspect.

Further, if Harrit Jones et al are so convinced their evidence is valid, why don't they submit it in a legal framework?

http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=224&Itemid=60

Oh dear, looks like there's another cover up in progress!!

[reptileslayer]

For the umpteenth time.

It wasn't nano-thermite those idiots found.

It was paint.

I have a thread devoted to this subject (http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=62309) on the 9/11 subforum where I offer reasons to believe the material was paint and not some sort of thermite material.
Ridiculous, So you know better than physics professors and experts then? I suggest
you take this ridiculous idea up with professor steven jones. (let me know what he says to you)

[christophera]

Ridiculous, So you know better than physics professors and experts then? I suggest
you take this ridiculous idea up with professor steven jones. (let me know what he says to you)

Consider i called S. Jones in his laboratory in 2005. Consider I explained to him that I was certain that thermite was used in mass at the 1st floor and basement levels to sever the huge perimert columns trees and the interior box columns that surrounded the concrete core. (http://algoxy.com/psych/images/wtc1.core.wall.base.annot4.jpg). He was silent.
I explained to him memories I had of the 1990 PBS documentary, "the Engineering and Construction of the Twin Towers." relating to what could have very well been optimized, engineered cutting charges incorporated into the floors.

http://algoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html#anchor1233383

I would indicate to you that this (http://mouv4x8.club.fr/11Sept01/A0069b_3_towerexplo1_explosion_below.jpg) where it shows very dark particulate plumes exhausting vertically from the top. Note the vertical striations in the dark particulate cloud.

Jones never commented on the concrete core at the scholars web site, gage never commented on the concrete core on ae9-11, and to this day neither has a detailed, feasible explanation for the pulverized concrete or anything else and will not justify their suport for the official story of the structure design.

There are no performance characteristics for nano therm and a demo of this scale would have to use a every well developed with a known performance.

I can show how exactly, RDX or C4 can be properly placed to create maximum breakage and total pulverization as was seen, however, the placement must be done at construction. Concrete will seal and encapsulate the explosive preventing oxidization and evaporation of vital solvents carrying oxidizers.

nanotherm is subject to exactly the same need for placement AND those presenting this explosive which has no performance characteristics accompanying its "silver bullet" presentation have not defined how the suppose nano therm was placed and distributed.

No, paint won't do. Containment is absolutely needed for pressures to develop and damp the shark crack of escaping gasses. Here's a Linear shaped charge (http://youtube.com/watch?v=tZRAbUcUkIc).

Here's a tower coming down. (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5860825099435530591&q=5860825099435530591&total=1&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0) Compare them, realize that all of the explosion bring the tower down are very well contained.

[christophera]

delete

[stannrodd]

Consider i called S. Jones in his laboratory in 2005. Consider I explained to him that I was certain that thermite was used in mass at the 1st floor and basement levels to sever the huge perimert columns trees and the http://alpoxy.com/psych/images/wtc1.core.wall.base.annot4.jpg]. He was silent.
I explained to him memories I had of the 1990 PBS documentary, "the Engineering and Construction of the Twin Towers." relating to what could have very well been optimized, engineered cutting charges incorporated into the floors.

http://alpoxy.com/psych/9-11scenario.html#anchor1233383

I would indicate to you that this (http://mouv4x8.club.fr/11Sept01/A0069b_3_towerexplo1_explosion_below.jpg) where it shows very dark particulate plumes exhausting vertically from the top. Note the vertical striations in the dark particulate cloud.

Jones never commented on the concrete core at the scholars web site, gage never commented on the concrete core on ae9-11, and to this day neither has a detailed, feasible explanation for the pulverized concrete or anything else and will not justify their suport for the official story of the structure design.

There are no performance characteristics for nano therm and a demo of this scale would have to use a every well developed with a known performance.

I can show how exactly, RDX or C4 can be properly placed to create maximum breakage and total pulverization as was seen, however, the placement must be done at construction. Concrete will seal and encapsulate the explosive preventing oxidization and evaporation of vital solvents carrying oxidizers.

nanotherm is subject to exactly the same need for placement AND those presenting this explosive which has no performance characteristics accompanying its "silver bullet" presentation have not defined how the suppose nano therm was placed and distributed.

No, paint won't do. Containment is absolutely needed for pressures to develop and damp the shark crack of escaping gasses. Here's a Linear shaped charge (http://youtube.com/watch?v=tZRAbUcUkIc).

Here's a tower coming down. (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5860825099435530591&q=5860825099435530591&total=1&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0) Compare them, realize that all of the explosion bring the tower down are very well contained.

Chris, Concrete core evidence if any .. can also be placed in the new archive thread for such evidence, and can then be studied for validity and referenced locally.

Stann

[tabea_blumenschein]

Ridiculous, So you know better than physics professors and experts then? I suggest
you take this ridiculous idea up with professor steven jones. (let me know what he says to you)

This may be news to you, but physics professers and experts don't mind when someone offers a valid criticism of their theories or data.

And the last I heard was that Jonesy currently thinks that thermite/thermate/whatever was only used as a fuse to ignite conventional explosives.

I think in his heart of hearts even Jonesy knows how stupid the whole nano-thermite hypothesis is.

[stannrodd]

Consider i called S. Jones in his laboratory in 2005. Consider I explained to him that I was certain that thermite was used in mass at the 1st floor and basement levels to sever the huge perimert columns trees and the interior box columns that surrounded the concrete core.. He was silent.

Silence in the face of an illogical and unfounded theory is highly likely.. but then you could just be making all this up .. which is more than likely considering your posting history .. and it's verifiability.

I explained to him memories I had of the 1990 PBS documentary, "the Engineering and Construction of the Twin Towers." relating to what could have very well been optimized, engineered cutting charges incorporated into the floors.

Consider how the professor is feeling after being approached by a twit with "delusional memories " .. which to date you have been unable to verify or even show that the video ever existed.

Feel free to use the archive thread for all your evidence Chris. Click here ..

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=71511

We all await with trepidation.

Stann

[andrewjohnson]

Gosh - Stanrodd and Christophera - both neatly sidestepping all the points I raised. How cool is that?

[gribz]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_tf25lx_3o


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8_tf25lx_3o


;)

Thats a great interview, thanks for posting that. I urge everyone to download that before it gets wiped.

This was live on Danish news channel yet it wouldnt get a sniff in the UK or US. Its scary that some of the sheeple in the Uk and US still would brush this off simply because it wasnt on the BBC, Sky, Fox etc.

[stannrodd]

Gosh - Stanrodd and Christophera - both neatly sidestepping all the points I raised. How cool is that?

My apologies andrewjohnson I was responding to the obvious spamming by Christophera to push his theory about some delusional fantasy he has been having for some years and pointing him to a thread where he can spread his disinfo with total freedom.

He has a habit of screwing up other folks threads.

Now where were we AJ ? Perhaps you can restart your motion thanks.

Stann

[andrewjohnson]

Thats a great interview, thanks for posting that. I urge everyone to download that before it gets wiped.

This was live on Danish news channel yet it wouldnt get a sniff in the UK or US. Its scary that some of the sheeple in the Uk and US still would brush this off simply because it wasnt on the BBC, Sky, Fox etc.

How can it be a "great interview" when he is knowingly putting out a false story? Doesn't it concern you that with 245,000 views, a new false story of 9/11 is being cemented? It definitely concerns me.

[christophera]

Gosh - Stanrodd and Christophera - both neatly sidestepping all the points I raised. How cool is that?

If you have any useful information for finding more truth, I'm very interested in such. Can you post it and the uses you reasonably think it might have to gain more truth here.

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=68544

BTW, I like your strong stance against this "nanotherm" notion of "mystery explosive", silver bullet marginalizing force on legitimate truth seeking.

[andrewjohnson]

If you have any useful information for finding more truth, I'm very interested in such. Can you post it and the uses you reasonably think it might have to gain more truth here.

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=68544

BTW, I like your strong stance against this "nanotherm" notion of "mystery explosive", silver bullet marginalizing force on legitimate truth seeking.

Thanks for the compliment! Anyway, I posted the links already Christopher A Brown. If you can't find your way to the legal documents, for example, then here they are again for you:

http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/NIST/Qui_Tam_Wood.shtml

This has the evidence submitted to court. Where's your court case, Mr Brown? You have all the evidence marshalled, don't you? Why not submit it then?

Post the link to your court documents on this thread when you have done it! Come on! You've got an opportunity to beat the Jones crew to this! They haven't put their evidence in a legal challenge! Come on ! Be the 2nd!!

Sorry, I know it's more fashionable to

a) endlessly debate on message boards and
b) ask someone else to do an enquiry into 9/11.

But I never counted myself as a follower of fashion, you see.

[stannrodd]

But I never counted myself as a follower of fashion, you see.

Okey dokey Do it Chrissy !!

Strannded ?

[shoust]

Niels Harrit - The London Interview (part 1) - YouTube


Niels Harrit - The London Interview (part 2) - YouTube
parts 1 and 2 of a recent Niels Harrit interview