Suppose - just for discussion - she wasn't anywhere near the point of impact at the moment of impact. Suppose she was three or four floors - or more - higher, and was looking for a way out? The impact prevented her going any lower*, but she found an open area that was not burning then. But it had been burning.

Look at the pic again. Do you see the black marks on the exterior members? They indicate fire damage.

Nope, it doesn't work that way. You made the claim that the sulfur was the residue of a thermite ignition; you provide the reference that says that's plausible.

Then explain why sulfur was found in only one Tower. Also, show where it was found. If it was from thermite, it should have been confined to the basement. If it was found on/in steel from the upper floors, thermite wasn't the source.

* There was at least one cell phone call from an individual who had been above the impact and tried to go down, but was unable to get past the damaged section. It happened.

__________________
Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by ignorance or stupidity.
Isaac Asimov

The fireball went into and through the tower. And it probably consumed no more than 10% of the fuel. (Air/fuel mixtures give a lot of bang for the buck. Try researching vapor cloud explosions, LEL, UEL.)

__________________
Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by ignorance or stupidity.
Isaac Asimov

...can you provide chimical expertise about what kind of chemical is left AFTER the use of thermite/thermate...or the use of thermite/thermate charges.

Not sulfur. Sulfur is alleged to have been the binder for thermite, based on one recipe in the Anarchist's Cookbook. However thermite is most commonly made with modern, safe binders like polyurethane. The sulfur-based recipe (diasite) is intended for people making homemade thermite unlawfully, in small quantities. And the Cookbook makes special reference to the very pronounced side-effects of binding with sulfur, which are promised to hamper fire-fighting efforts.

In fact, you don't even need a chemical binder for thermite. It's just cheaper and safer to make in quantity that way. If you sinter it -- heat it gently while pressing it under tremendous force such as in a hydraulic press -- it will work just as well. Even better, it won't leave any chemical residue. You'd never know it had been used.

You're claiming that the stupidest possible formulation of thermite was used: the one that manufacturers are not set up to employ in quantity, and the one guaranteed to leave a tell-tale residue behind. If your conspirators wanted to use thermite and didn't want it generally known about, why didn't they use any of the relatively sneaky forms?

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Turbonium, I haven't forgotten your post #1446. Thanks for your continued patience.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Well,
That is interesting than you point out about thermite made with modern safe binders like polyurethane which left no trace of chimical after their utilisation.

Thanks for that info.

So that is the demonstration than thermite can be utilised without living a chimical traces.

Well, That is interesting than you point out about thermite made with modern safe binders like polyurethane which left no trace of chimical after their utilisation.

Not exactly. Urethane-bound thermite will leave residues of the combustion of the urethane resins. They can be detected, but only chemical analysis. Diasite residue, especially in large quantities, can be detected with the naked nose.

The sintered formulations leave no traces that would be out of place in a building wreckage; they are the pure reactants: iron oxide and aluminum.

So that is the demonstration than thermite can be utilised without living a chimical traces.

Invisible elves with torches leave no traces either. You're missing why your argument falls apart.

The only evidence for the use of thermite was the sulfur residue. That's why the conspiracy theorists cite the Anarchist's Cookbook in their arguments. If you argue that the alleged thermite is what left the sulfur residue, you have to answer why they used the most detectable form of thermite. If you argue that the alleged thermite had nothing to do with the sulfure and thus left no traces, then you're stuck with no evidence at all for the claim and you might as well pin your hopes to invisible elves.

The thermite theory has either no evidence or implausible evidence for it. There's no good evidence. That's why we reject the theory.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Wondering why there was no fire at the entry point in the short time after impact seems kind of strange. There was a lot of momentum involved, obviously. I imagine the impact would've carried a good bit of any possible fuel further into the building, not to mention the plane itself.

Also, the jet fuel didn't ignite immediately upon impact with the tower, therefore anything ignited by the explosion would've been deeper in the building, then spread around.

I find ChaByu's implication that, just because there was no fire in the immediate vicinity of the woman, there never was any fire in that spot, to be extremely illogical. We know for a fact, through numerous pictures and videos of the towers, that the fires in the tower intensified over time.

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evid...wp_wtc29_s.jpg
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evid...aa/aawtc12.jpg
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evid...s/burning2.jpg
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evid...C_on_fire3.jpg
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/t...c_survivor.jpg

To say that the fires weren't that bad implies a level of willful ignorance beyond description...

Well, no. As I mentioned, Thermite will produce an almost pure iron. With the quantites of thermite that's been claimed to have been used, multiple large piles of iron would have been noticed.

Here's a video of some thermite action in action. (Note: the video can take a short while to load. Please be patient.)

Of course, the video does show a nice molten glowing piece of iron, which doesn't really help our case
Nontheless, look at the size of the iron produced by that reaction. If the main supports were filled with thermite, there would have been piles of it in plane view.

__________________
"The universe is driven by the complex interaction between three ingredients: matter, energy, and enlightened self-interest." - G'Kar

Lets see we have two situation.
1-If the modern formula is utilised..... ie thermite made with modern safe binders like polyurethane which left -nearly- no trace of chimical after their utilisation.
Its like saying "Invisible elves with torches leave no traces either"
2-
They found inexplicable trace of sulfur mentioned in Sarongsong link.

But it is stupid to pretend this came from the use of thermite because one should ask about the utility of choosing the old formula for making thermite/thermate which actually would left trace of sulfur.

edited to add -nearly-

Jay are you trying making your point using negative?

Well just to say than you are in total contradiction with Jay.-Jay dont say Thermite will produce an almost pure iron.-that is why I asked for reference about that-

IE the old formula left trace of sulfur
The modern formula of
"..... Urethane-bound thermite will leave residues of the combustion of the urethane resins. They can be detected, but only chemical analysis. Diasite residue, especially in large quantities, can be detected with the naked nose."

Edited bold text in quote plus precision -.....-

Old formula or new, you're still going to end up with a pile of iron. Watch the video I posted. You're looking for trace elements of a binder when you should be looking for the end result of the chemical reaction, which happens to be iron, and lots of it.

__________________
"The universe is driven by the complex interaction between three ingredients: matter, energy, and enlightened self-interest." - G'Kar

Oh I see.The molten iron which have cooled right?

That would be correct.

__________________
"The universe is driven by the complex interaction between three ingredients: matter, energy, and enlightened self-interest." - G'Kar

Jay are you trying making your point using negative?

No. Pointing out that you don't have any evidence for your claim is not "using a negative."

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Well just to say than you are in total contradiction with Jay.

No, you're back to your old tricks again. Not going down that road with you again.

In order to be scrupulously honest, I pointed out that urethane-bound thermite -- contrary to your misinterpretation of my earlier remark -- would leave traces of residue from the binder, and it would take lab analysis to find it. You heard "almost pure iron" and assumed that precluded traces of urethane residue. Almost pure doesn't mean uncontaminated. And so in your mad rush, you declared that I and someone else were in "total contradiction" when in fact both our statements are true.

If you were not so anxious to stir up mud, maybe people would listen to you.

__________________
"Facts are stubborn things." --John Adams
Clavius Moon Base

Lower right page option, under "Interactive":
Flash: The Sights and Sounds of 9/11 (Flash)
In Chapter 4 (~15 second runtime), a radio transmission begins with..."Tower 2 has had a major explosion and what appears to be a complete collapse surrounding the entire area..."

I am not stirring up mod.
You have clarified than there was no contradiction where I have assumed incorrectly there was one.

Originally Posted by ChaByu
Oh I see.The molten iron which have cooled right?
When they said pools of molten iron where found at the base of the central core columns .What do you think of that?

I'd want to see the quote because I've never heard of any eyewitness testimony saying that. I'd also find it curious that the pictures I've seen of the bases of the core columns had no pools of iron or any signs of ever having moletn iron poured on them. I'll find the pics and link them here soon.

http://www.americanfreepress.net/09_..._seismic_.html
Also this page
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evid...ltensteel.html
And
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evid...bblefires.html

Probably more detailed
http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html

Hang it up Cha. I'm waiting for you to get to the sub-atomic level next. What I find amusing (relatively speaking) is the effort you put into minutiae in an attempt to prop up a very lame woo woo concept. This can go another 100 pages as long as you don't have to explain the big picture. We saw planes, used as missiles, fly into buildings on 9/11. If, as you try to infer, explosives were used on top of that .. then I have ask the oft-repeated question, why the planes then? You're so into minutiae you fail to see why your 'idea' doesn't make any sense. Add to that the fact you constantly link to sympathetic stuff on the one hand and imply cover-ups/conspiracy on the other. Not much of a coverup, eh? What seems obvious is that you don't realize cherry-picking internet sites is insufficient to make your case.

What you need to do to debunk the "official" story surrounding 9/11 is to come up with a better one. I haven't seen that from you (or anyone else waving the CT banner). That would entail refuting OBL/AQ and to do that you would have to do more than tell me we supported his kind during the Cold War in Afghanistan in the late '70s-early '80s or how the CIA alleged played footsie with him after that. You would have to explain how his "declaration of war" on the U.S., the subsequent attacks on the U.S.S. Cole, in Kenya, Bali (twice), Madrid, London - to name a few - was one thing, the WTC another. That's for just for starters ..

Steel does not equal iron, and the presence of steel is irrelevant. What this reaction would leave is massive amounts of iron, as well as trace amounts of a binder (if used) and aluminum oxide.

Haven't we discussed "pools of molten steel" ad nauseum? Oh, yeah, we have.
http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc_molten_steel.html

__________________
Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by ignorance or stupidity.
Isaac Asimov

Oh, they heard a loud noise and therefore it must have been a bomb. Of course. In the world of conspiracy theorists the first impression is never mistaken when it agrees with their point of view. Loud noises could have been a number of things. Falling debris for example. The firefighters quoted in that story and who were there were deeply offended by how conspiracy theorists are playing with the tragedy of 9-11. You ignored that completely.

__________________
I believe in karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long, and assume they deserve it.

That's a great link Jim.

It remains a mystery to me how, when some people cobble togeather a number of coincidences, half-truths, mis-statements and outright lies to come up with a "conspiracy", other, otherwise reasonably bright people, will actually accept the conspiracy as true.

__________________
All civilizations become either spacefaring or extinct.~ Carl Sagan ~

Humanity must rise above the Earth, to the top of the atmosphere and beyond, for only then will we fully understand the world in which we live.~Socrates, 500 B.C. ~

Let every man judge according to his own standards, by what he has himself read, not by what others tell him. ~Albert Einstein~

Also, as we have two, almost identical threads going on this subject, I am cloosing this thread. Any further comments should be directed to this thread : A Canadian take on 9/11/Strange Lie?

__________________
All civilizations become either spacefaring or extinct.~ Carl Sagan ~

Humanity must rise above the Earth, to the top of the atmosphere and beyond, for only then will we fully understand the world in which we live.~Socrates, 500 B.C. ~

Let every man judge according to his own standards, by what he has himself read, not by what others tell him. ~Albert Einstein~