The Angle Cut at Ground Zero: Clean up or evidence ofa CD?

Blues63

New Member
This is my first post so I don't know if this the correct procedure. I've looked through many of the threads but I can't seem to find where the following is addressed. If there is a thread, I apologise for wasting time.

Anyway, I often 'debunk' 9/11 canards on various sites, often at an amateur level, but this one surfaced recently and I'm at a loss to explain it sufficiently.

A follower of 9/11 truth believes the following pic is a 'smoking gun' for a controlled demolition:

962dcc7d51a56ad49b2284f21a871e05.jpg

The individual claims that the areas circled in yellow were left uncut in order to 'prep' and facilitate the execution of the collapse.

The columns were supposedly pre-cut to weaken them for when the explosives were deployed.

Are these areas uncut and fractured. Does anyone know about the provenance of the pic? I once read it was the product of a thermic lance, but I can't confirm that notion.
 

Blues63

New Member
Feel free to delete this thread if you so desire, Mick, and thanks for the clarification despite the fact that it was obvious.

D'oh!

As econ41 might point out, I missed the forest because of the trees.
 

mrfintoil

Senior Member.
There are no "stupid" questions when it comes to debunking. I think this thread contains a simple and straight forward question, and an equally simple and straight forward answer. Sometimes simple threads are the most effective because outsiders don't have to wade through tons of posts just to find the answer.

Welcome to the board @Blues63 ;)
 

anacoluthon

New Member
Another point is that the sintered material which you see dripping down the edges of the column which is far more brittle than the column it came from. Had these cuts been made before the building fell it would be highly unlikely they would remain attached to their source. The balance of probability alone suggests that they were created after the fall.
 

Blues63

New Member
Thanks for the welcome. I've been lurking for a little while now, and I often bookmark resources on the subject.

Predictably, my opponent responded with the usual invectives while offering some specious response that I'll interpret when I've translated it. ;)
 

tadaaa

Senior Member
yes, no stupid questions, especially in de-bunking

I too suffer from the "ah yes off course that's obvious" when having things explained to me that I don't immediately understand - (I categorically do not suffer from the Dunning–Kruger effect)

one recently was "how come the Antarctic Sea Ice sheets are growing" on the face of it, it seems a powerful counter argument to the Global Warming narrative

well one factor is warmer air generally means more precipitation which means more snow - so perfectly consistent with Climate science, and makes sense even to me

and welcome
 

mrfintoil

Senior Member.
well one factor is warmer air generally means more precipitation which means more snow

That is more true for land ice though, even though the Antarctic suffers net loss in land ice. Sea ice behaves differently, and the increase is mostly due to melted (fresh) water causing stratification near the sea surface level, causing the surface to become cooler than the warming deeper layers. I also read that it has something to do the way ice is being filled in into cracks between ice floes as land ice is pushed into the ocean.
 

Hevach

Senior Member.
the Antarctic suffers net loss in land ice
Which would also be a factor in an ice sheet increase. Unlike the Arctic sheets, the Antarctic ones are fed by land ice. When land ice starts to melt, it moves faster lubricated by water, potentially feeding more ice into the sea. It's a larger scale version of what's been seen with many alpine glaciers - before receding, many had a period of several years where they seemed to be getting larger because they were flowing faster. After a period, the source depletion and melt catches up and the glacier recedes, but in reality the loss of mass had already begun during the lengthening.
 

Oystein

Senior Member
Another way to tackle the question of angled cuts:
AE911Truth has a public dropbox with all sorts of material (full DVDs, PR material, letters...):
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/o3hrpfopzp5qm6r/khO8FQjY-Z
(I am posting the root folder, for all you curious noses out there :p)

Go to the FEMA PICS AEFF folder, it has high resolution originals (often with EXIF-data, which I like, although the camera's clock seems to be off by a number of hours) of photos FEMA took on ground zero between September 12 and October 27. Lots and lots of steel members, but nowhere do I see an angled cut.

I don't know when and where the photos with the cuts were snapped, but I'd guess that must have been later in the clean-up process, increasing the likelihood that they were made by the clean-up workers.
 

Cube Radio

Member
http://911blogger.com/news/2008-10-11/angled-cut-column-explained

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Blues63

New Member
http://911blogger.com/news/2008-10-11/angled-cut-column-explained



Yes Cube Radio, I actually used this video in my early counter arguments but it received the usual hand wave dismissal. I will view the videos supplied, thanks.

Thank you, Oystein, I will bookmark that source.
 

Tomi

Member
A follower of 9/11 truth believes the following pic is a 'smoking gun' for a controlled demolition:

View attachment 15062

Gage still uses this photo in his presentations of truth. I like Oystein's idea of finding earlier photos of the same column to prove to even the most diehard ae911truther that the column was not cut until the demolition. Can anyone see where this is?

However you don't need to do so to convince most normal people. Thermite would need to be contained to cut a column. It turns to a superhot liquid and melts the steel. This is an internal core column 30x16in, so the column scales has a wall thickness of 3in plate.

So even if someone removed the containment device which ae911truther suggest then there would not be drip surfaces on every surface. Its not possible. Can any truther try and explain how these columns could be cut by thermite and leave a surface like this. Its preposterous.!
 
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
Mick West Debunked: The WTC 9/11 Angle Cut Column. [Not Thermite, Cut Later] 9/11 137
Mick West Contrail Angle with the Horizon - A Useful Distance Rule of Thumb? Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 8
Franckly Debunked: MH17 Air to air missile Assumption ? [Unrelated 35° angle] Flight MH17 25
Mick West Crazy Contrails from LAX Ground Stop Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 1
DasKleineTeilchen 2,400 "new" unseen 9/11 photos found at estate sale, june 2019 9/11 12
Mick West The Quantity of Iron Microsphere at WTC Ground Zero after 9/11 9/11 19
benthamitemetric Did Arson and Explosives Investigators Have Access to Ground Zero? 9/11 3
Mick West How to Prove Satellite Images are Real - Ground Truth Flat Earth 16
V Flight 93 Crash Physics - Fragmented Plane Buried in the Ground 9/11 10
Mick West Ground Truth: Verifying Stellarium's Model of The Solar System Flat Earth 2
Mick West Why "Chemtrail" Tests on the Ground Find Metals That Don't Occur Naturally Contrails and Chemtrails 14
cmnit Foamy "clouds" on the ground in Doukkala, Morocco General Discussion 4
WeedWhacker Build your own ADS-B Ground Station! For free premium FlightAware or FlightRadar service General Discussion 12
MikeC Ground level contrails in freezing US/Canada? Contrails and Chemtrails 4
Lobster Johnson Is Fracking contaminating ground water? Making it flammable? General Discussion 64
Mick West Debunked: Aerosol Chemcloud dropping towards the ground Contrails and Chemtrails 0
Gundersen Eco-Cooler - world’s first zero-electricity air cooler made from plastic bottles Science and Pseudoscience 8
Boston That recent conversation about Zero Point energy Science and Pseudoscience 4

Election 2020

Related Articles

Top