ASBESTOS can kill you. So Kevin Rudd wants it banned. It was the lead story on radio this morning with journalist Tony Eastley introducing AM with comment:
“Australia’s Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd has called for a global ban on asbestos, and he succeeded on the weekend in having the Labor party agree that Australia lead the push to shut the industry down.”
Shut the industry down! That simple? But who might be disadvantaged? I’ve a problem with the ever-increasing number of popular campaigns that promoting the banning of things without first some consideration of the benefits of the product.
Quoting from John Berlau:
“IN the nineteeth and twentieth centuries, Americans were building the new republic. Although they were busy tending to their farms and their jobs, they were also constantly innovating, building a better life for their children. And they were literally building the better life through the structures they built. Steamboas and then other types of ships made travelling easier than ever before. Big new theaters would open up, making plays and musical revues no longer the privilege of the wealthy few. Education also was no longer the privilege of rich children with private tutors, as parents and communities banned together to build schools.
“What all these structures had in common was that they would house large groups of people gathering together. But with these new opportunities for betterment came danger – the specific danger of fire. Not only were there crowds of people, the methods of powering the activities in the structures presented unknown risks. We were just learning about the properties of steam, kerosene, and electricity. Several large-scale tragedies ensued.
“But several more were prevented because of the use of asbestos. New ways of refining this old material meant that fire protection, too, was no longer just the privilege of the elite.”
According to Berlau because asbestos is not incorporated into modern warships they are that much more vulnerable to fire.
“The number of casualties caused by burns in the Royal Navy warships during the Falkland war and on the USS Stark when the latter was hit by an Exocet missile in the Persian Gulf, was appreciably greater than expected because of the exclusion of asbestos insulation from these ships.”
What are other important uses of asbestos? Can’t the product be used in ways that give advantage, while safeguarding the health of workers?
*******
Eco-Freaks: Environmentalism is Hazardous to Your Health by John Berlau, Nelson Current, 2006
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
It saved a lot more than it ever killed but during the good times it’s all about the gravy:
http://www.asbestosclaims.org/asbestos-on-aircraft-carriers–3-1.html
At least the ban on asbestos wasn’t for the sake of the environment, only people.
http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/markbaisley/2011/12/04/obamas_decisons_are_killing_me_really
That last remark was somewhat TIC [tongue in cheek]. Greenies of course don’t consider people as part of the environment.
Obama is today bemoaning the plight of his fellow Americans being so much out of work.
Whatta guy!!!
The top floors of the Twin Towers were insulated with an alternative product that did not stick as well to the steel and did not insulate as well. It is almost certain the the towers would have lasted longer if they had asbestos to the top. Lasting longer means most of the people along with the emergency personnel would have made it out from below the impact zones.
Hi Jennifer,
From a common sense point of view, yep. Trouble with asbestos is no common sense. It was
mined, refined and aligned, by corporations who did not care and had no regulation.
It would need a serious oversight, if ever used again.
In the sometimes very corrupt ,Australian building landscape , would we feel safe ?
Then allow the kind of people who are happy with Indonesia to send it there —- etc , etc.
It’s always fascinated me how the extensive use of asbestos as a safety measure in the building and other industries [which it most definitely was] was mandated by various levels of government yet when it all turned pearshaped it was James Hardie who got lumbered with the bill for indemnity and compensation.
They supplied it but they didn’t force anyone to use it. And it was govt mandated demand that created a much greater supply.
I can remember, when coming down Conrod straight Bathurst at over 170 Miles/Hour being very happy at having asbestos in the brake pads.
In those days my formula 2 Brabham did 2 complete seasons of racing without changing anything in the brakes, including the asbestos disc pads.
Today, without asbestos, the whole system may last a race meeting, if you are lucky.
“I’ve a problem with the ever-increasing number of popular campaigns that promote the banning of things without first some consideration of the benefits of the product. ”
Well said Jen,
Me too!
I cannot see the value in banning asbestos altogether.
We now understand the health risks in the mining and production of asbestos and that can and should be properly managed.
Asbestos has undoubtedly been instrumental in saving lives when used correctly.
wow, asbestos is bad for you?
Next they’ll be saying that smoking kills.
Hey Hasbeen,
Remember those 330 Ferraris? IIRC you drove Keith Williams’ at the first Surfers Paradise 12 hour around 1966. Well I restored one years later and they had the early disc brakes which were bad enough with asbestos pads but when they went to substitute material in later years my ol’ 330 would not pull up at all so I had to make my own pads with asbestos.
Ian Thomson.Asbestos at the top would not have saved the Twin Towers.It was nano thermite that brought down the 911 towers and WTC 7. http://ae911truth.org/ I’ve met Prof Neils Harritt Prof Steven Jones ,Richard Gage and Dr Frank Legge the Australian who was on the international team of scientists proving the existance of nano thermite.
They have the undeniable scientific proof that highly sophistocated explosives were used in 911.Planes did not cause 3 buildings to fall at near freefall speeds.In fact no plane hit WTC 7.
Because leading the world in the mitigation of Climate Change seems to be turning into an ‘Epic Fail’, they need another cause.
Asbestos sounds like it will do the trick.
Heaven help us.
Ross is a truther.
My father, captain of a minesweeper by the end of his active naval career, served from ’39 to ’47. His health was not destroyed by asbestos, but by the misuse of asbestos. A friend who worked as a nurse with daily exposure to asbestos died last month from asbestos-related disease. The asbestos was not responsible, the improper use of the material was responsible. If it is proven that companies or other responsible authorities deliberately concealed the risks or cut corners, sue them or jail them. Then let’s see what good uses we can still find for asbestos. (By the way, since 100% of people have known for centuries that smoking is lethal, nobody gets a cracker from Big Tobacco.)
We’ve recently been treated to the spectacle of Steven Conroy crying over some milk that may have been affected by a minor nuclear mishap before he was even born. I wonder if the sight of millions of third world children disfigured by kerosene and other flame accidents would have a similar effect on this tender gentleman.
Electrify the world. Now.
“If it is proven that companies or other responsible authorities deliberately concealed the risks or cut corners, sue them or jail them.”
I understand, Robert, that govt authorities knew full well the problems with asbestos but in those non-litigious days it was normal proceedure to do a cost/benefits tradeoff, particularly in wartime. Hardies somehow got left holding the baby.
“wow, asbestos is bad for you?
Next they’ll be saying that smoking kills.”
jack, any idea what the death rate is? From smoking? asbestos? or just breathing?
Ross,
just to make conversation, did you or those people you rely on for information ever calculate how much thermite would have to have been used? Did they explain how it was all snuck in and fused. Especially did they tell you how a controlled demolition on such a large scale was pulled off in the middle of thousands of gallons of burning jet fuel and how the ignition was not only perfect but managed to not be affected by the huge impact and structural damage caused by the aircraft and burning fuel in not one but TWO buildings??
I want those engineers working for me!!! Funny how quickly forgot the Bin Laden video where he stated they weren’t expecting so much damage!
Y’all might want to go through this site until you understand what they are talking about:
http://www.911myths.com/indexold.html
What gives me a chuckle is how they treat the asbestos they remove. They practically put it in a vault. I have an idea … put it back into the same mine you took it out of! Old asbestos mines would make perfect asbestos disposal site … but I guess it’s too toxic to put back where they got it from!
Somewhat in the Castrol theme
http://www.chrysotile.com/data/newsletter/nl006_en.pdf
And I seem to recall that atmospheric asbestos levels in San Francisco (from its geology) don’t pass government requirements.
George do yourself a favour and download Blueprint for Truth http://www.ae911truth.org/ Bush’s brother marvin Bush was in charge of Securcom the company that had the contract for security of the WTC. They were doing elevator renovations for many weeks prior 911.This gave them access.Prof Niels Harritt says up to 100 tonnes of explosives were needed.
Consider the following;
1/Nearly freefall acceleration through path of greatest resistance.
2/Improbable symmetry of debris distribution.
3/Extermemly rapid onset of destruction
4/Over one hundred first responders reported explosions
5/Multi tonne steel sections ejected laterally for 200 m at 80 kph
6/Mid air pulverisation of 90,000 tonnes of concrete and metal decking
7/Massive volume of pyroclastic like clouds as seen in volcanoes
8/400m diameter debris.No pancaked floors as seen during the Christchurch earthquake
9/Isolated explosive ejections 20-40 stories below the demolition front.These are known as squibs in controlled demos or mis-timed explosions
10/Total building destruction.Dismsmberment of steel frame.
11/Several tonnes of molten steel found under all 3 high rises
12/Evidence of thermite incendaries found in the steel and dust samples
13/FEMA steel analysis; sulfidation,oxidation and intergranular melting.Aviation fuel burns to half the temp of molten steel under optimum conditions
14/No precedent for steel framed high rise collapse due to fire
15/Human bone fragments found atop buildings 200 m away.Very few bodies found in tack.
16/In ordinate no of put options on United Airways
17/Larry Silverstein just weeks before 911 buys the leases for the Towers and insures each against terrorism making $ billions.He already owned the lease on WTC7. On that fateful day,Larry and his daughter did not go to work in their office at the Towers.It would have cost $ billion to remove the asbestos.It was just Larry’s luck,as he put it.
Ross
All your points have been debunked.
Debunking 911: http://www.debunking911.com/
Popular Mechanics: http://www.popularmechanics.com/
911 Towers engineering research Sydney University Civil Engineering (includes WTC 7): http://sydney.edu.au/engineering/civil/wtc.shtml
Kae,try doing it in your own words.If you can disprove the science here http://www.ae911truth.org/ I’ll pay you $10,000 tax free .Recently I finally got an intellectual/business person, with degrees in marine biology,computer science and business to view Blue Print for Truth.He was dumbfounded and had no reply to the contrary.If they lied to you about climate change,what else are they lying to you about?
Along similar lines, Jennifer, is the controversy about the root cause of NASA’s Columbia disaster. I make no assertion either way because I haven’t sufficiently investigated the details, but several reports indicate that fatal damage to the shuttle’s reentry tiles owed to political rather than engineering decisions. Here’s an excerpt from one article; other reports say much the same.
“Back on Feb. 2, the day after the disintegration of the shuttle – even before there was any certainty about the cause of the disaster – I reported in WorldNetDaily that this problem with the foam insulation had been well-known by NASA for the last six years. Further, I reported, with the help of internal NASA documents, that the new foam insulation used for the last six years on shuttle missions was chosen because it was ‘environmentally friendly.’
In other words, human lives and millions of dollars in technology were put at risk because of the environmental fad.” http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.printable&pageId=19752
See also http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,77832,00.html and http://bama.ua.edu/~sprentic/672%20Ferraris%20&%20Carveth.pdf
Et cetera.
The problem with the shuttle foam was due to a change in formulation required in order to eliminate CFCs. The fact is that on a global scale, the amount of CFCs that would be released into the atmosphere during the manufacture of that foam would be so tiny as to be impossible to measure. We are in a position where we must follow regulations blindly without weighing where a certain regulation may not make sense. People have no idea of sense of scale.
If a single ship sinks today it is on the television non-stop as if it is some global environmental tragedy yet in the second world war the US alone lost 1554 merchant ships sunk, 507 of them in a single year (1942) many were tankers full of oil and fuel, and that counts only US merchant ships. That is a rate of greater than two per day for a year. Only the top 25 US submarines in only the Pacific sunk 451 enemy ships, merchant and naval, in the same period. We survived it.
And the entire reason we banned CFCs were to mitigate an “ozone hole” that we saw the first time we looked and has been there every year since and is not shrinking in size. Come to find out it is likely a very natural phenomenon and it also turns out that the impact of CFCs reactivity with ozone many have been overstated by two orders of magnitude.
Asbestos is harmful if it becomes pulverized into small particles that are inhaled. Properly treated, it’s perfectly harmless. You are not going to get any asbestos in your lungs if the stuff isn’t in the air to begin with. The ONLY time it would get into the air would be as a result of an explosion or possibly when it is worked on for replacement, etc. Now, I would sooner risk breathing a little asbestos than burning to death.
We have allowed the scaremongers to rule us. If you want a link worth reading, read this about how “socially responsible” operations create an atmosphere of fear in order to make millions:
http://junksciencecom.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/fear_profiteers.pdf
You might recognize some of the names in that as they are active today in the carbon scare. Fenton Communications is the PR agency behind WWF, NRDC, Real Climate, and others. They even have entire groups who are devoted to behavioral manipulation of both the people and the policy makers:
http://www.garrisoninstitute.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=244&Itemid=1071
A look at the attendee list of their 2010 symposium is a who’s who of green cash:
http://www.garrisoninstitute.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_view&gid=148&Itemid=1324
There are other groups such a “Groundswell” that are on the same track. People for the most part have no idea the extent to which they are being manipulated. There is often a reason why an article appears in your local media pushing the anti-carbon agenda. It was likely written by a PR agency and handed to a “friendly” journalist along with a “press kit” detailing more of their message.
“We have allowed the scaremongers to rule us.”
George, that is so true! Witness the last couple of days in SEQ where it has been raining the most gentle, soaking, essential rain yet our ABC has been doing its best to whip up terror at this “terrible” weather.
It’s NORMAL, it’s NECESSARY, for God’s sake!
Why won’t they be honest and come out and say that this weather is entirely expected and we would be in trouble if we didn’t get it?
For the last 35 years SEQ has not experienced a cyclone whereas prior to that they got up to half a dozen a year.
When that sort of weather returns, no one here will be able to cope.
And apparently Fenton Communications has set up shop now in Australia with offices in Melbourne and Sydney.
http://www.fenton.com.au/
You need to stamp these people out. What they will do is go around and create dozens of “grass roots” organizations rather than one single group. That way they can issue a press release from each one in different days and it looks like its coming from separate groups when it is all originating from the same source.
Ross,
I see you are a typical crusader. You don’t bother reading other input, just continue spewing your garbage. Why am I surprised?? Err, I am not!! Snicker.
“Recently I finally got an intellectual/business person, with degrees in marine biology,computer science and business to view Blue Print for Truth.He was dumbfounded and had no reply to the contrary.”
No demolition experts? No engineers? No wonder you believe that stuff. Absolutely no evidence of thermite and y’all believe any way. Read the site I linked which IS written by engineers among others. Telling us to disprove your science is the same as telling us to disprove the physics of Radiative Transfer to disprove Goreball Warming. It isn’t the same thing bud!! Of course a BELIEVER can come up with several plausible excuses. They are still excuses with no direct evidence.
Kuhnkat, If it is garbage as you say,start explaining how a gravitational collapse reaches very close to absolute freefall speeds of 9.8m per sec.You see ,even a house of cards in a vacuum with very little structural integrity,will not come down as fast as the Twin Towers or WTC 7.Prof David Chandler carefully graphed the descent of WTC7 and for 2.7 sec it was virtually in freefall.This meant that all this steel and concrete had absolutely no resistance to gravity.This alone defies the laws of physics.
BTW, there is lots of scientific direct evidence.Prof Niels Harritt whom I shared a beer with just last yr in Sydney, has a peer reviewed paper on nano thermite found at the WTC which was produced by a team of 9 international scientists that has not been debunked, let alone looked at by our Govts.
If you don’t have the intellect to understand the science , look at this site.Some very high profile people are calling for a new investigation. http://patriotsquestion911.com/
Ross,
“If it is garbage as you say,start explaining how a gravitational collapse reaches very close to absolute freefall speeds of 9.8m per sec.You see ,even a house of cards in a vacuum with very little structural integrity,will not come down as fast as the Twin Towers or WTC 7.Prof David Chandler carefully graphed the descent of WTC7 and for 2.7 sec it was virtually in freefall.”
That is why you need to pay attention to real world engineers. VIRTUAL freefall is possible. Freefall isn’t without extra force. I don’t need to explain it as it is natural for that much weight to APPROACH freefall. It isn’t like there is a huge parachute to slow it!! I suppose that y’all don’t see any connection between the speed of collapse and the dust clouds blowing out as each floor collapses either??
Look, the basic idea is that the amount of resistance is negligble after the collapse of the first few floors. The momentum in those upper floors after they accelerate is NOT going to be slowed by breaking loose the structure that is designed for STATIC loads. The initial collapse spread out the outer shell compromising its load bearing so that it had little resistance to continued collapse. The central column didn’t even need to collapse as it would just act as a guide for the floors falling and be broken off after the mass had accelerated. The sheer forces are so immense the fall is to be expected. Your claim is that something will prevent this enormous mass from approaching free fall speeds for a significant period of time. I have to ask you and the people peddling this to clearly calculate the loadings to show that there is enough strength in the structure to PREVENT it from reaching virtual free fall speeds!!! I can tell you they cannot. The structure is fine with static loadings and with expected earthquakes and tornado winds and aircraft impacts up to a 727. It was never designed to slow the descent of a gigaton piledriver appreciably and was stressed by the larger and fully fueled aircraft that did strike!!! Just to clarify, WTC 1 & 2 had a central column and outside shell and no other supports. The floors were supported in the center and around the edges with stringers supporting the contcrete floor structures. Initially the engineers though the stringers had failed, but, later analysis showed that they expanded disrupting the outer shell and then started cooling at which time the connections to the outer shell failed leaving the floor that failed first to collapse taking the rest with it. This was not perfect as seen by assymetric folding of the building skin during initial failure. There is simply no hard evidence of any demolition.
Paper on the WTC falling:
http://www.debunking911.com/paper.htm
Apparently you believe some mythology of a demolition that is so finely timed that the demolition charges for the lower floors are sequentially detonated in less than a second. That is what would be required to support the video of the air expulsion from the windows. Again, who is able to haul in tons of material and wire it so that TWO buildings are taken down flawlessly?!?!?! They only WISH they were that good.
Nano thermite??
You really have no idea what drivel these people are peddling do you. I had never heard of nano thermite before the Truther movement. Doesn’t mean it didn’t exist. Doesn’t mean it can do what is claimed by them either!! The military started researching this in about 1990. You are saying that 11 years later they can use a propellant/explosive/pyrotechnic to sequentially demolish these buildings faster than any ever done before. Of course, there is NO EVIDENCE of this other than the silly paper you refer to.
Since you didn’t read the site I linked, here is their page on thermite and nano-thermite. It is rather straightforward and doesn’t need math to understand:
http://www.debunking911.com/thermite.htm
Good science requires that you look at all possibilities to explain your results. How many other possibilities could have created the byproducts these guys claim for nano? How much of this byproduct should be seen for the amounts required for demolition of these buildings even if it was an appropriate tool?? Let me ask you, has anyone analyzed the video of the buildings for anomalous Ultra-Violet radiation? Oh yeah, they probably claim that there are confinements that would block the UV and concentrate the charges that can cut through those huge beams. How large and how many of those magical containments were built around the charges on the columns on every floor??? As I said, what they claim would require TONS of material carried in and installed on every floor!!!
My favorite MORON Rosie McDonald made a facetious claim of steel burning. Did you know that in ships transporting iron they have sprinkler systems to put out the FIRES that spontaneously happen?? That’s right, normal oxydation of the iron will increase its temperature and slowly raise it until you get a real fire which can eventually melt the steel. The steel in the pile would have spontaneously heated without being hot from the fires before the collapse!! No pyro needed!! That is why it took so long to cool the piles NOT because there were tons of extremely fast burning nano-thermite heating it. Oh wait. remember one of the desired properties of nano-thermite?? It is FAST!!! if it is all gone in a minute how was it still heating the steel for weeks after the collapse?!?!?!
I am not an engineer and can’t do the calcs either, BUT, it really is clear enough for you to understand if you will just read the site!! I KNOW you WANT to believe Bush or some group in the US did it, but, just start with WTC7 since it is the Smoking Gun according to the conspiracy theorists and Bush haters:
http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm
kuhnakat,You have failed dismally to refute even one of my 17 facts in ref to 911.If you cannot put it in your own words,then you have no grasp of the science,nor the ability to explain these anomolies.Virtual freefall means just a 1% deviation from absolute freefall.
Covering up the truth will not set you free.Israel is preparing to attack Iran.They’ve been warned by China/Russia to behave.WW3 is at our doorstep.
kuhnkat
I would be surprised if Ross didn’t have a sandwich board with the words,
“The end is nigh, repent, repent!” for those lazy Saturday mornings at the Shopping mall.
This is all too crazy and if someone believes in it, there is no way you can convince them otherwise.
Cheers
Ross,
Please please please tell me your last name. I am hoping and praying you are not the author a certain book.
Jennifer,
Please please please get this truther’s crap off of your blog.
kae,
Don’t feed truther twits.
Truthers are pigs who love to wallow in their filth and mud, and to drag others in with them.
Notice the truther did not dispute his bullshit has been refuted effectively long ago. He instead pretends that the test is for you to explain the long articles showing he is a liar in your own words.
The truthers and their idiocratic beliefs are worse than AGW true believers and their climate apocalypse crap, but fortunately there only about as many truthers as there are UFOols and abductee believers.
When my detractor’s only attack is ad hominem and attempted character assassination,this means I’ve won.Not one of the 17 points on 911 I’ve listed,have been refuted. You have no answers.
It is just like the attacks on climate change skeptics. AGW is now being proven to be a monumental hoax to finance a World Govt that Bob Brown agrees with.Gillard has already dedicated 10% of CO2 taxes to the UN.
The USA basically controls the UN. The banking system that creates all the money for growth + inflation as debt,controls the US Govt + all Western countries and its war mongering escapades of imperialism. This time the lunatics are on our side.
It wasn’t long ago that climate skeptics were labelled fruit loops and wackos.Now they are becoming the majority.
Here is one of a number of papers on a Simian Virus that has shown up in conjunction with mesothelioma. Unfortunately current medical science isn’t quite as all knowing as many like to think. Asbestos is certainly not the only risk factor and may not be as important as thought:
http://thorax.bmj.com/content/52/suppl_3/52.full.pdf
Interestingly I have been trying to post a link to a page on Medicineworld. Every time I try it simploy won’t post. If you would like to see more medical information on asbestos, Simian Virus, and mesothelioma do a search on “how does asbestos cause cancer” and look for the link to Medicineworld.
Ross,
“kuhnakat,You have failed dismally to refute even one of my 17 facts in ref to 911.”
Soundbites are all you have given and all I will give you. Read the site. If you are too ignorant to understand it you can link the pages and ask for an explanation. Otherwise I can imagine you at your computer with your fingers in your ears, your eyes closed, shrieking LALALALALLALALALALALALALLA!!
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA
Kuhnakat let’s go to your site http://www.debunking911.com/ Their display picture is very revealing.NIST has said that the top of the building ( here it is the South Tower) acted as a pile driver crushing the floors below.You will see in that picture the top of the South Tower pitch at 22 deg.The laws of physics say that the top should have continued on that vector and fallen over.
If you view video footage of this collapse , the top if the building does continue in that vector but is rips itelf apart in an instant.It should have remained in tact and hit the ground in the form we viewed.
1/ How does it act a pile driver crushing the lower floors when it is moving in the wrong direction? When a hammer hits a nail at an angle,the nail bends.It is not driven home.
2/How did it manage to self destruct in mid air as it continued on that vector? What force pulverises metal decking and concrete in mid air?
3/Now NIST’s theory of the pile driver is eliminated, how were then the lower floors pulverised into dust? How did all this happen at near freefall speeds?
Try explaining it in your own words this time rather than references to sites that shoot themselves in both feet.
kuhnkat,
Starving 911 twits is the only cure.
Whatever ross is, it is not worth engaging it. Think of trying to have a serious conversation with Charlie Sheen: obviously pointless. Cut Sheen’s intelligence by half, and you have a typical truther like this one.
Let it starve.
hunter,
I would love to have a, well, I hesitate to call it a conservation, but, yes, I would talk to that twit just as I tried to communicate with the Truther. Doesn’t do any good, but, sometimes I learn something I missed!!
This time it was just the same tired garbage from people who couldn’t build a kiddy bridge with an erector set.
kuhnkat,
You are right: Conversation is good. I have even had civil discourse with Luke on occasion.
The twit here is not conversing. Certain concepts seem to infect the vulnerable mind. AGW, UFOology, new age, protocols of the elders of Zion, the Bilderbergers, etc. are all on that list.
When they are far gone they self-discipline to protect their particular obsession.
As we saw here.
Ross,
I read all the garbage you are trying to foist off on the good people here years ago. That is why I found the site I urge you to read. The truther stuff is typical conspiracy theory like most of the stuff from Jones. It sounds plausible until it is rigorously tested by actual physics, chemistry, and reality.
I KNOW you still haven’t read the site because you still BELIEVE that nano-thermite was used based on plausible sounding pablum. Read the site for actual pictures and physical reality that your sources couldn’t bother to include in their edited sources. Did I say edited sources?? Yes, the site has the same media used on many truther claims and sites except they are LONGER!!!!
Oh, by the way, once all the outer supports break free why would the tower upper section continue to rotate when it has the massive central column to break off? You putting retro rockets on it?? You KNOW it was rotating because the the break away was not symmetric. What?? Those nano-thermite charges werent’t synchronized very well?? That was the easy part, yet, the lower section was magnitudes more difficult to cause a controlled demolition and appeared to be relatively perfect on both buildings!! It was relatively perfect because that mass was coming STRAIGHT DOWN no matter what happened outside of a nuclear blast!!! There were no firemen with cables PULLING the buildings in a particular directing to prevent them from landing on something and wouldn’t have done any good anyway.
Buildings go off to the side because the structure is still strong enough on one side to cause it to rotate. Again, physics and engineering will tell the expert that there is not enough lateral strength in the structure of the twin towers to cause a continued rotation with such a large section involved.
kuhnkat,
Your excellent over view of the engineering issues aside, the most telling facts that show the 911 kook delusion about pre-set explosives (forgetting the impossibility of placement in the real world) are those pesky airplanes hitting the buildings. But even set that pesky problem aside for a moment.
Having witnessed a real building implosion, and having studied the topic a bit, it is amazing how delicately and carefully demo charges have to be placed. And then how vulnerable they are. And then how demo charges are not thermite. And then of course how nano thermite is in a research phase, and is not widely used, much less available for sneaking into the WTC towers. So demo charges would require intact control systems, proper placement throughout the structure (in the range of several thousand charges) and would have to remain functional after the planes hit, secure from the fire, to work.
Of course the weak minded truthers the lack of evidence for any of this is proof of a grand conspiracy. Sort of like AGW believers claiming that a climate crisis is happening now, despite the lack of evidence, and that a grand ‘fossil fuel industry conspiracy’ is suppressing their great truth.
At the time of 911, I worked for an engineering company. When the senior engineers saw the planes crash in on TV, the first thing they said was that the buildings would fall due to fire damage. They predicted the one struck second would fall first because the strike site was lower on the tower. This is exactly what happened, of course.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_for_the_day_of_the_September_11_attacks
It takes true idiocrats to confabulate and then stick to crap like 911 truther stories.
It is as non-rational as people who think the climate of the past ~150 years is somehow more dangerous, changing unusually, doing things it has not done in 1000 years/ 10,000 years/ even millions of years.
It takes willfully ignoring reality and believing complex narratives in their place: a perversion of religion, as it were.
So good luck, kuhnkat.
Note that I’ve not called anything Kuhnkat has written “Garbage” .All I’ve requested is an explanation to the contrary which consistantly is not forth coming.This is AGW theory all over again.
Richard Gage,who founded Architects and Engineers for 911 truth is an honourable and decent human being.In 2009 he walked the streets of Sydney with us handing out information about the science of 911.Dr Frank Legge is the Australian who was part of Niels Harrits team that proved the existance of nano thermite.Prof Steven Jones also attended.He is quietly spoken but very courageous.These are the true heros who face derision and possible death in the face of tyranny.Enough said.
Ross
He is quietly spoken but very courageous.These are the true heros who face derision and possible death in the face of tyranny.
Death Ross?
Please get grip!
“Enough said.”
True
MarkA would not have a clue.Lot’s of 911 whistleblowers have mysteriously died or disappeared.I’ve had 2 visits from the AFP for my activities on revealing the truth of 911.So don’t give me any more BS. We are witnessing the rise of fascism.
Mark A,
It is clear the truther twit is yet another tragic example of the breakdown in public mental health.
Truthers, UFOols,Bilderbergers, Bermuda triangle, Area 51, Mayan calendars & 2012, artifacts on the moon, AGW apocalypse believers, and on and on and on, all members of that great fraternity of Keepers Of Odd Knowledge: KOOKS.
Mostly harmless, unless they get access to the public purse like the AGW believers.
I cannot believe we have so many of you supporting asbestos use. However, given the website, perhaps this is to be expected, you are as bad as radical leftists in your endless repetitive propaganda gleaned from equally biased sites off the net. the Do you have any idea how hard it is to enforce ANY sort of rules in societies like India or hell, even here.
I’ve known people use unventilated circular saws in their back gardens on windy days using no dust masks or other precautions to cut white asbestos board as recently as the early 2000s . A guy at work has had to be hospitalised frequently because his lungs are stuffed after inhaling the dust when he was renovating his house .
Canada is happy to export its boards to India where its being cut up ,installed and removed in far worse ways than we can probably think of http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-06-07/-slow-poison-chokes-indian-workers-feeding-7-slum-roof-demand.html
India has mines which are right next to villages which are full of dust and which children constantly play in .
GET REAL, you cannot adequately police the use of this stuff, its dangerous, it can kill you and given that humans are anything but careful at least some of the time, if you use crap like this, it will be MIS used by some people for their own short term gain and damn the health concerns.
Ross,
where is your blog with videos of those visitations?? Don’t all you truthers have them??
Or are you illegally harassing people and little children?
By the way Ross, when you will not read and accept actual physics, chemistry, engineering, and video, you are pretty much a lost cause. Sorry to hear about your mental health.
Now Kunacrap, start explaining what I previously requested from your elustrious site http://debunking911.com/ how NIST’s pile driver, the part of the the South Tower falling over, how it collapsed the towers whilst falling at 22 deg off the vertical.Do we have to suffer more on your mornic ramblings?
Spangled Drongo -your question about toxicity
Smoking (heavy) raises chances of dying in any one year by 10 times.
Asbestos raises chances of dying in any one year by 30 times.
Smoking and breathing asbestos raises chances of dying in any one year by 90 times.
However, there are many different types of asbestos, indeed experts disagree, some saying only 14, others have over 50. Somewhere around 34-37 is usual compromise. Blue, brown and white forms are considered hazardous. The first legislation restricting asbestos came in 1922 in the UK. Considering the attitude of most upper class politicians and public servants to the “working class” at that time, you can see that the evidence of toxicity was overwhelming.
The problem was the complete absence of any enforcement. The behaviour of some mining company executives (especially in South Africa in 50’s & 60’s) amounted to IMO deliberate murder.
Since then, the pendulum has swung so far the other way that it is absurd. The easiest way to remove of asbestos cement sheet (which is pretty safe anyway) is to completely seal it with polymer (basically a clear paint) before removal. Instead we have licensed removers, exclusion zones and enormous fees for removal and disposal. Rudd is technical ignoramus.