Conventional explosives and thermite and nanothermite and many, many, many tons of speculation.
(0:10-0:27) Neils Harrit states,"Well in there we find remains of what we characterize as thermitic [thermite-like] material...which can be used for either melting iron or...as an explosive."
[Thermite can be used to melt small amounts of steel over a long periods of time (see videos above). But as evident by the background image of this page, the towers did not melt; they were turned to dust. So, it appears it was not thermite that was found, but some of the ingredients of thermite, like iron and aluminum, which were some of the main ingredients of the buildings. The building turned into nano dust, so it is expected that nano-sized particles of aluminum and iron would be found in the dust, in abundance.]
(0:34-1:00) Neils Harritt states, "Acually, within the group, the authors behind this paper which we published in April, there are diverting opinions about what this nanothermite was used for. And in my opinion, we should not speculate...for the demolition. There's no doubt that the three towers were demolished on 9/11.
[So why is there no doubt? What is it based on? Why not present us with the evidence used to make this conclusion?]
(1:00-1:26) Beyond that there is solid evidence for some [type of] thermite to have been used...We do not know if the thermite we found is the same thermite....It's very-very possible a different variety was used."
[Then what is the solid evidence and why aren't you talking about it?]
(1:26-1:32) "And I personally am certain that conventional explosives were used, too, in abundance."
[But he does not state how he knows this with certainty.]
(1:32-1:40) Asked, "How much?" Neils Harrit answers, "Tons, a hundred tons, many, many, many tons." (1:46-1:50) "But we have not found remains of [traces] of conventional explosives."
[So how can Neils Harrit know there were many, many, many tons of explosives used?]
On March 16, 2007 NIST logged the receipt of a Request for Correction (RFC) to their WTC reports by Dr. Judy Wood. This RFC sets out the evidence that some type of Directed Energy Weapons system was used to destroy most or all of the WTC Complex. Dr. Wood subsequently filed a federal qui tam case in April 2007, to hold the contractors for the NIST report accountable for science fraud.
On April 12 2007, NIST logged the receipt of a Request for Correction (RFC) to their WTC reports by Dr. Dr Steven Jones, Kevin Ryan, and Richard Gage. This video shows how you can search their documents for the word "Thermite" and "Molten" and you will find their original RFC does not mention Thermite or Molten Metal.
Their RFC appeal *does* mention Thermite, but NOT in the context of their research" and only as an arbitrary example of a hypothetical analogy.
There seems to be a global effort to convince people that thermite* played a significant role in the destruction of the WTC. If this was true, then why is this not stated, with evidence, in the RFC submitted they submitted to NIST? The answer seems to be that the thermite is an "alternative conspiracy theory" which has no real evidence to support it, only significant evidence that contradicts it. The proponents probably did not put their research in the RFC because this in itself would have been fraud.
*(thermite, thermate, superthermite, spray-on thermite, spray-on-thermate, thermite analog, nano-enhanced thermite, nano-thermite, spray-on nano-thermite, nano-thermitic material...as it has morphed over time)
We are looking at documents which are over 4 years old, which shows how successful the operation to promote thermite has been.
You can access the documents on this page from these links:
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the articles posted on this webpage are distributed for their included information without profit for research and/or educational purposes only. This webpage has no affiliation whatsoever with the original sources of the articles nor are we sponsored or endorsed by any of the original sources.