Obvious in what way?

Do you parents approve of this?

:rolleyes:

Actually some good questions on the skeptics forum for a change.

Question 1
Actually it is impossible to answer this. We were denied access to the crime scene and they spirited away most (but not all) of the evidence and so we have to make a guess. However my guess (and this is personal and not necessarily the definitive answer) is that the Thermate (correctly identified by Prof Jones and now undeniable that traces were found in the twin towers and WTC7) was probably only used on the upper sections of the tower in order to ensure a symetrical collapse. A much larger charge was used to take away the centre core from the bedrock as evidence by the single seismic signature recorded at the Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory in Palisades, New York, 21 miles north of the WTC.



Notice how tiny the aircraft impact is compared to the 2.3 and 2.1 explosions prior to collapse.

Question 2
This is easy. They had many drills prior to the attacks (many witnesses to this)which meant that the towers would be evacuated. There could also have been Thermate actually on the aircraft.

Question 3
By the bomb squads during the drills.

Question 4
Not very long, hence the emerging story that WTC7 had long term explosive devices fitted because it contained the CIA, NSA etc is complete nonsense.

don't know if i understand you correctly, so can you elaborate.

if we are talking only about thermite, since the exact derivative form of thermite used is unknown, its chemical stability is unknown, although it would make sense to use a derivative with high stabilty as a property, if that was required.

if we're talking about how it could degrade or prematurely ignite in a building fire:
thermite ignition temperature would not be reached in an ordinary building fire, it is very difficult to ignite.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermite#Ignition

"Ignition temperature 1,200°C, flame temperature 2,500 °C. Yellowish flame, squirts molten iron and slag"
http://users.tkk.fi/~andres/m44/m44bombs.htm

building fires do not reach ignition temperature of thermite.

do you know what "igniters" were used?
can you show this is an impossible problem for the perpetrators to have solved?

Roscoe, who are you demanding pe a part of this "independent enquiry"?

And who would be financing it?

I created a thread for you to answer this, as requested

Nope, I just know that ignitors are not fireproof, and the info I've seen from explosive experts says that "the ignitors would have gone off once the temperature reached 350 C"

We are people who demand an independent enquiry and are not persons appointed by the very people who did the crime in the first place. The fact that originally they were going to appoint Henry Kissinger to chair the enquiry until the protests became too much speaks volumes. But what we ended up with was a collection of Oil barons and sycophants.

The whole crime scene was administered by FEMA who is an emergency organistion and who had no jurisdiction once the immediate emergency was over.

2) It would cause the upper floors to collapse and this would be for visual effect rather than any controlled demolition then the rest would be blown by planted demolition charges plus a very large device that took the central column away from the bedrock.

3) No it was the security firm owned by Marvin Bush that did these exercises.

4) It isn't me that's saying that, this is the latest myth the denialists are coming up with to try to desperately explain the quite obvious controlled demolition of building 7.

Gladly we'll do this on the new enquiry as there's enough doubt here to warrant holding another enquiry. You have a problem with this?

Now YOU produce evidence that Arabs terrorists were on those planes.

Fuzzy pictures, impossible cell phone calls and documents of dubious origin does not answer this question.

The planes have never been positively identified certainly to the degree that warrants the invasion of two sovereign nations and the deaths of now 1 million people.

1) Ordinary people do not have access to crime scenes.

2) Since this did not happen, why argue the theory? Kinda stupid since you have nothing to support what did happen.

3) The security firm for which Marvin Board was a member of the board (not the owner which is either stupidty or a lie by you) was not the firm that conducted those tests. His firm was gone for over a year by the time of the attacks.

4) This is a truther myth - and its full of shit.

I just lurve the way you sidestepped the awkward bit about the identity of the planes.

Hey lets have an enquiry then all your questions will be answered.

Got a problem with this have you?