911 WAS an inside job ..........

Thanks con, I passed ! Neither of us are scientists or totally qualified in the scientific debate surrounding 911. As a result of the anomalies surrounding the wtc its sparked heavy debate online in forums such as these and spawned debunkers websites such as 911myths.com and debunking911.com I would be very skeptical of their science , ironically the truther's have far more qualified scientists who have specialised in chemistry engineering etc. Yet debunking911.com and 911 myths are written by scientists ? I don't know they won't say who writes there pages some probably nerds in some basement or something like this video shows http://www.youtube.com... This is why AE911truth.org don't bother arguing with them, they can't argue with every nut out there on the internet who seems hell bent on proving 911 wasn't an inside job. You don't see Popular mechanics or NIST or some 'respectable' source of debunkers using their information either. This is why there needs to be more open debate with scientists engineers etc a new investigation or independent investigation for example instead of us squabbling over whether its possible for paint to create iron spheres etc. Gypsum was the source for sulphur? Some government officials have attempted to explain the issue away by alleging that the sulfur came from normal building materials like gypsum wallboard. But gypsum wallboard has been used for a hundred years to protect steel structural members and has never "attacked" it before. Heres an experiment which shows it couldn't . Video number 1. This is expected as sulphur in gypsum is already bonded to the oxygen and calcium with strong covalent bonds , If the sulphur was in elemental form it would be a lot more plausible. Regarding composition of the spheres , It is important and its not random. You cannot just get office materials burn them together and hope to get a sphere of mixed metals like you say. The metals present in the wtc were not in elemental form but were already oxidised. Because the spheres formed due to surface tension we know they were caused from molten chemicals at the SAME TIME in the SAME chemical reaction, how do you get random background metals to form into the same sphere without a thermitic reaction? Sorry for not giving a source of the thermite reaction before, Here is a good video which explains thermite, and the reactions and also the finding of nanothermite in the towers. Debunkers say its paint and that an independent scientist (Dr Millete)who they paid to debunk the nanothermite didn't find elemental aluminium or that the material when heated caused a thermitic reaction. Clearly in the video at the end you can see when its heated it DOES actually react forming a thermitic reaction. -The reason why Millete didn't get the thermite to react is because he only heated it to 400c and not 430c in which it reacts. Why he did this I don't know but it does seem quite deliberate ! -The reason why he didn't find elemental aluminium is because Millette also claims there is no elemental aluminium in the red-gray chips, but in the Harrit et al paper they stated that the silicon(Si) and aluminium (Al) are not chemically bound, meaning that the aluminium really is in elemental form. According to Harrit et al, the Si and Al appeared to be separate after a chip swell when soaked in methyl ethyl ketone (MEK).- Harrit et al paper, The Open Chemical Physics Journal, 2009, Volume 2, page 18. Millette claims, because there apparently is epoxy resins present in the red-gray chips, that this tells us that the chips are paint, although even he states that it does not match the reddish primer paint used on WTC steel columns. Epoxy resins (polymers) are also used as binders in aerogel/sol-gel (nanothermite) composites, so even if there is epoxy present in the WTC-chips, it still could meant the chips really are thermite-composite chips. Niels Harrit talks about polymers or "plastic" being present in the matrix of the red-gray composite chips. http://www.youtube.com... In order to cut horizontally they must have had some classified technology which is possible heres a video showing a small horizontal thermitic cutter http://www.youtube.com... Regarding more testing, whenever a building has a fire such as WTC 7 , The law dictates that you should test for thermitic materials , this wasn't done by NIST so they are complicit in the conspiracy. The witnesses witnessed molten metals of orange /yellow colour, once again blackbody radiation would suggest that its mostly likely molten steel. Just like the video , Its not aluminium it can't be. I won't make the case for why its not aluminium ill leave it up to this metal foundry expert who actually melts aluminium for a living. The problem with concluding that the liquid flowing from the tower"s 82nd floor could have been aluminum is that the liquid in the tower was not confined in a container so that more heat could be applied to raise the temperature of the liquid above its melting point. Instead, as soon as the metal liquefied it flowed away from the heat source under the force of gravity. Therefore, the color of the liquid flowing from the 82nd floor was at approximately the melting point of the metal. And therefore, it was molten iron. NIST knows this as I already pointed out ""Pure liquid aluminum would be expected to appear silvery"" NIST. There explanation is organic materials mixed in giving it a golden colour.This was disproven by experiments. http://skepticdenialism.blogspot.com.au... I looked at the photos , the material stayed yellow it didn't turn silver. In conclusion both of us are not so well qualified to debate these aspects of the science and neither is 911 myths or debunking 911 .com . The truth movement has well qualified scientists who probably could answer the questions if iron spheres could be produced I have to concede that point for now but I can email some scientists etc and get an answer but it might take some time. What we need is independent tests and investigations , unfortunately we can't test the steel directly because they sold it to china very suspicious. We have proof of a coverup , no mention of WTC7 in the 911 commission report , no testing for bombs/explosives or incendiaries , destruction of crucial evidence and selling of steel to china, media coverup etc. My uncle head a large Engineering firm in NZ I asked him about WTC 7 , he hadn't even heard of it, why is there a coverup of the worst structural failure in the history of mankind ? Isn't this something Engineers should know ? I don't know about you but I feel these things are highly suspicious , all the evidence points towards a controlled demolition. The videos I posted before you probably couldn't see the explosions and flashes as the video was quite small, but blow them up on a projector screen or any big detailed screen and you can clearly see these flashes and squibs and explosions going off all across the building . . . . Debunkers would say its something else like air being pushed out of the building, jezz you can come up with an alternative theory for everything but the point is that ALL these factors are most easily explained by explosives. It explains where the building went , why it turned to dust, why it literally blew up in front of our eyes. It explains the molten metal,the spheres everything the free fall collapse of wtc 7 . Look at this explosion for example , I don't know about you but If i see explosions i think explosives are a likely explanation and not a crazy one unless a your brainwashed american that is http://femr2.ucoz.com...