Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bush-The Mastermind behind 9/11? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Orcastraiter who wrote (13316)	8/14/2006 12:05:02 AM
From: TigerPaw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20039

You can read the rest of the professor's hypothesis here The main problem I have with the professor's hypothesis is that the various anomolies he emphasises do not add up to any coherent plan. I've read a bunch over the years, and they always have a slightly different emphasis. A year ago it was seismic data that proved it was a bombing, now it is melted metals. In a random debris pile of insulating dust and combustable garbage it would be difficult not to have hot spots that acted as smelters. If molten metal was really from thermite it would be found in specific structural strongpoints and not in random areas around the debris pile. TP

To: Orcastraiter who wrote (13316)	8/14/2006 1:40:38 AM
From: Don Earl	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 20039

RE: "One explanation for the free fall speed is that the columns were cut by thermite reactions. These reactions could have been triggered by smaller "explosions" which would have acted as a "thermite match"." It's a mystery to me why anyone is still quoting Professor Muttonhead on anything related to demolitions. Please, please, please, take 5 minutes to google "thermite". There are hundreds of sites with credible information on thermite and Professor Muttonhead isn't one of them. Think of thermite as something like your Fourth of July sparkler, except a lot hotter, and you'll have a pretty good idea what the stuff can and can't do. If you were going to send a soup can into orbit, would you use a sparkler or a firecracker?