Kevin Ryan used to work for Underwriters Laboratory, and has discovered some new facts about human tissue at Ground Zero. https://digwithin.net/
When the debate has been lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. Shinebox is not the only poster to demonstrate that simple truth.
I think the US government has done a fine job of indoctrinating er I mean edjookating you. No one is going to change your mindset. Sorry I didn't count them all, it seems like thousands though. Everywhere you turn there's an impossible anomaly that doesn't quite fit the official narrative, you know, like a square peg in a round hole. Would you feel better if I said hundreds? I'm sure that would make a huge difference for you.
Thermite is the (only, thus far) plausible explanation for the presence of the CNTs. If you have an alternate explanation, this would be a great place for it.
no one is going to change your mindset Bob ... you're just a paranoid bitter person ... I have responded to many of your posts affirming I do not trust the government ... why do you never address those anomalies and continue to insult me? ... you're the biggest hypocrite on these forums ... anomaly seems to be your favorite noun lately ... why is that Bob? ...
The source is detailed in the article provided in the link posted with the OP. I have done some research on CNTs, but Im no expert. Presuming you are refuting the findings provided with the OP, will you provide your source, research or at least some reason? Thus far you've only provided derision, which isn't an argument.
Insofar as science and common sense you are correct. I am a firm believer in reality. As far as changing my mind, for example if science can prove that planes, damage, fire or a combination can have the exact same result as a perfectly planned and executed controlled demolition then I would say that it might be a toss up as to the cause of the demise of ONE of those WTC towers. However common sense and the laws of probability dictate that the probability that the cause of the demise of ALL 3 buildings being destroyed by these factors and not by controlled demolition is so astronomical as to be virtually impossible. (garbage skipped) Your posts contradict your empty affirmations. You’re not only a believer of government 9/11 fairy tales but you defend them religiously. This particular one CNTs is addressed by the article and it speaks for itself. Read it if you’re truly interested rather than dismiss it because it doesn’t fit the OCT. I have literally addressed dozens if not hundreds of other anomalies throughout this section of the forum.
the source in the OP is a blog naming Neils Harrits as the source and then claiming that more research would need to be done by experts to determine the source of the nanotubes ... nowhere does is say that thermitic materials could be the only source ... so why do you claim that? ...
No, it just said thermite is the only source that would make any sense. I mean, sure, maybe someone had file cabinets full of CNTs... its not impossible, its just more ludicrous than suggesting maybe someone had a motive to level the buildings with thermite. Where do you think the CNTs came from?
Aren't you embarrassed (or are you even aware) that your "sources" are known liars like Bush, Cheney, Powell, Rumsfeld and others?
I'm not an expert on nanotubes ... are you? ... https://www.nanowerk.com/nanotechnology/introduction/introduction_to_nanotechnology_22.php perhaps you could step away from troofer blogs and do a little independent research ...
Perhaps you could try to articulate the relevance of what you're posting to the topic at hand- where might the CNTs in the WTC debris have originated if not from nanothermite? From your link, the only one of the three processes by which CNTs are known to be produced (the CVD method) that is likely to be naturally replicated in the 'burning building struck by a plane' still requires metal nanoparticles for the CNTs to 'grow' from. So where do you think the metal nanoparticles came from, if not from nanothermite (which is entirely composed of metal nanoparticles, and is the entire basis for the theory of the OP)? I am not very knowledgeable in the field of CNTs, but I do know quite a bit about metal nanoparticles, as I'm familiar with industrial metallurgy and metalworking, and metal nanoparticles are created in electrochemical processes that would not have been replicated in any quantity in a 'burning building stuck by plane' scenario. What this means is that the CVD CNT production method could have been naturally replicated in the 'buring building struck by plane' scenario if metal nanoparticles where already present. However, given the uses for metal nanoparticles prior to 2001, there isn't any reason for metal nanoparticles to have been present in any quantity in the WTC. Unless there was a large amount of nanothermite present.
for the thermite theory to work, charges would have had to have been placed at least every 3-4 floors for the pancaking effect to have taken place ... why not just place a lot fewer at the bottom of the structure? ...
you might have noticed where I specified they be present in any quantity. Of course they were present- they're all over in minute quantities. The quantities found, however, are much higher than are normal.
The relevance is an excuse for him to pull the idiotic “troofer” card. In other words, it doesn’t fit the OCT so nothing to see here, no investigation required even though this is totally unprecedented.
Not really. All thats being proposed by the OP link is that nanothermite was present. It wouldn't have even needed to be set off to produce the CNTs (although setting it off would likely produce more CNTs than not). If it were determined, for example, the metal nanoparticles were used in the buildings paint or insulation or stored at the WTC for some purpose, that would also explain the CNTs. The problem is that no one is providing such, but rather just attacking the only existing theory as 'conspiracy hoax' in deliberate ignorance of the forensic evidence.