by Andrés Amaya
Introduction:
Throughout the years the 911 eleven attack has become one of the most transcendental events of modern history that has shaped our views and understandings of terrorism and has opened the gate for a different gaze upon national and international security everywhere. Being as important as it were it has been subdued to maximum scrutiny and the cause for several speculations that have gave birth to several conspiracy theories. Said conspiracy theories are mutual in their nature that they differ from the conclusions drawn by the NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) from their respective investigation about the aforementioned attacks.
In this this essay we will be discussing one conspiracy theory in particular: the “World Trade Center controlled demolition conspiracy theory,” or thermite reaction theory. We shall be thereby explaining the concepts behind this theory, the evidence to back it up, and the arguments that refute it, drawing a partial conclusion towards the end.
What does the theory propose?
In simple terms, what the theory proposes is that the plane crash couldn’t have been sufficient to cause the buildings to completely collapse as they did or at the speed at which they did, for that matter. It sustains, therefore, that there must have been external factors affecting the collapse of the buildings, and that one said factor might have been the use of thermite reactions to debilitate the columns of the buildings and cause them to subdue.
What is a thermite? What is a nano-thermite reaction? What is the difference?
A thermite reaction is a pyrotechnic, exothermic, redox reaction involving a metal oxide (typically iron (III) oxide) and a metal powder (typically aluminum) in which the powdered metal has a lower reduction potential than the metal in the metal oxide complex. Since the powdered metal is more prompt to get oxidized and the metal in the metal oxide complex is more prompt to be reduced (E0 of Al = -1.662 and E0 of Fe (III) = -0.04), the oxygen atoms in the metal oxide complex are transferred to powdered metal atoms, resulting in a new metal and a new metal oxide. Below you can see the typical example:
Like most reactions, the thermite reaction is affected by the surface area of its reactants. A nano-thermite reaction plays with just that characteristic. A nano-thermite reaction, also known as super-thermite, is just a thermite reaction in which the reactants have been placed nano-meters apart, which makes the reaction faster, more volatile, release more energy, more efficient and easier to ignite. We only make a special mention of this because in many pamphlets and essays they will describe the theory as the use of thermite or nano-thermite composites to debilitate the structural soundness of the beams and columns sustaining the buildings without particularly clarifying the difference.
Thermite reactions are used for a diverse number of things, including welding (i.e. railroad tracks) and pyrotechnics (fireworks).
Some characteristics of the thermite reaction make it perfect as explosive mechanism to debilitate the beams. They are extremely exothermic, achieving temperatures that can even wield steel (the material with which the Twin Tower’s beams were made); they have their own oxygen supply system, which means that they don’t find need for an external oxygen supply (i.e. the room) to support themselves; and they are extremely hard to control or/and smother, since the high temperatures make it difficult for external compounds to actually reach the reaction (water evaporates before actually reaching the reactants) and their self sufficient supply of oxygen make it almost impossible to smother. These are the reasons for which thermite reactions are actually used to weld things underwater.
They are however very hard to ignite/initiate, since they don’t blow off like regular detonators (which would have led a signal, making them identifiable by the NIST, and therefore not used), they require a lot more effort and precision. Their ignition is, regardless, not impossible. Thermite reactions are, however, very hard to channel sideways, as it would be required to weaken/ “cut through” the buildings’ beams. Thermite reactions tend to disperse themselves vertically, making said reaction unlikely, if not useless.
Evidence supporting and rebutting the theory:
1) Traces of thermitic materials in the WTC’s dust
One of the cornerstones of the controlled demolition theory is that studies have found that in debris of the WTC, particles of thermitic materials were found. Gray/red chips were found at the site in question by the use of photomicrographs. The grey/red layered chips would be consistent with pieces of thermite (iron (III) oxide is red and aluminum is a shiny gray) that were unable to engage in the thermite reaction.
Below we can see the results from pictures taken by a photomicrograph in four different sites at the WTC (a, b, c and d).
Fig 1 & 2: Gray/red chips found in the debris/dust of the WTC
Further studies have proven the chemical composition of each of the particles found to determine whether or not the chips found were actually from thermitic, unreacted materials. The results as shown below indicate high levels of iron, oxygen and aluminum, which is consistent with the hypothesis.
Fig 3: Mass spectrometer results from the grey/red chips
Traces of reacted thermitic materials were also found, all of which seems to point towards the fact that thermite reactions did, in fact, take place in the WTC. However, there are many counterarguments.
The NIST insists that the gray/red chips were not actually forms of unreacted thermite, but actually, epoxy resin, which explains the high contents of carbon, but doesn’t explain the high contents of aluminum and iron. Upon this point, the NIST objects that even though some contents of unreacted thermite might have been present, this could easily be accounted to the fact that airplanes have iron oxide and great quantities of aluminum, and said materials might have come from the crash. They also highlight the absence of the by-products of thermite reactions, such as barium nitrate. They also point out that, usually, high amounts of aluminum and iron oxide in the presence of small amounts of aluminum oxide and iron are an indicator that a thermite reaction has not taken place, since the reaction is so volatile (burning molten iron splashes out of the reaction, spreading it around).
The NIST is also hasty to highlight their main point, which proves that, even if you could overlook all the previous rebuttals, the amounts of actually reacted thermite (amount of the thermite reaction products) serve as an indication that there were simply not sufficient amounts of reacted thermite to debilitate the beams and cause the building’s collapse.
For the thermite to have actually caused the collapse of the building would have required immense amounts of thermite in order to reach the temperatures necessary to melt away the steel of the beams. This logistically speaking would be very unlikely, as it would have required countless materials to have been smuggled into the buildings, placed in the beams, go unnoticed until the collision and the ignited, again without anyone noticing, when we already know that igniting a thermite reaction is hard.
1) Consistencies between the footage of the buildings’ collapse and thermite reaction indicators
The footage of the Twin Towers’ collapse shows sporadic bursts and explosions which occur after the plane has crushed onto them, but before the collapse had actually started. This is consistent with the hypothesis if we consider that the individual flares are caused by thermite reactions in the beams.
Fig 4: Individual flares/explosions taking place at the buildings before their collapse
Not only this, but we can also streaks of flames which fall down the sides of buildings from this explosions. Now, these streaks have certain characteristics that lead to the belief that they are falling burning molten iron. Firstly, they do not release smoke; this would prove that the burning material is not releasing carbon dioxide or carbon monoxide, our first indicator that these burning materials are not regular debris. Secondly, they are releasing white ash. Aluminum oxide is a white, ash-like material, so this is consistent with the presence of a thermite reaction. Lastly, the color of the flames is yellow. If it had been molten aluminum from the plane, it wouldn’t have reached the temperatures required for the flame to be yellow. Iron, on the other hand, melts at temperatures higher than those from aluminum, achieving that characteristic yellow color from thermite reactions.
Fig 5: Table of melting points of some metals and the colors of their combustions
Fig 6 & 7: Footage of streaks of flames falling form the Twin Towers
Fig 8: The color of a regular thermite reaction
Lastly, one final piece of evidence is that from the pieces of debris recovered from the WTC sites we can see chunks of wires and concrete stuck together in irregular shapes by a grey/red substance. This is consistent with the fact that the falling substance was iron, since it would have caused said irregular shapes when solidified, and formed red colored patches when oxidized/rusted.
Fig 9: Chunks of debris stuck together by iron
1) Noise and sulfurization of steel
Thermite reactions are characterized by being extremely loud. However, the Twin Towers’ collapse is generally viewed upon as a quiet one, which is inconsistent with the theory. Some eyewitnesses do provide recollections of sudden, sporadic loud noises, which would support the theory, but is still inimical.
Some have theorized that if the materials were placed inside the columns, this would reduce the sound produced by the reaction. The logistics of the maneuver makes this unlikely. Nevertheless, this theory does explain another unexplained phenomenon by the NIST, the sulfurization of the steel found in the beams.
A thermite reaction would explain this, since sulfur is present in thermitic materials, and is even a key ingredient in thermate reactions, which are thermite reactions perfected by the military for explosive/pyrotechnic purposes and for the destruction of military equipment in case of imminent danger of being captured by enemy forces (it is not regularly used, though, because it is hard to perform and because the necessary equipment is required to perform it). The high temperatures caused by the thermite reaction, in combination for the sulfur present in the thermitic materials could cause the steel in the beams to get sulfurized.
2) The symmetrical collapse
Footage from the Twin Towers’ collapse shows that they subdued at an almost symmetrical fashion. We can see this because they didn’t fall unevenly, causing one part of the building to fall but not another, or causing one part of the building to collapse before another. The entire structure of the building fell at an almost equal pace.
If we take a look at the beams which broke off, causing the buildings to crumble, we see that they were not evenly spaced out.
Fig 10: Beams which were structurally damaged and which caused the entire building’s structure to subside
This means that if these columns had disintegrated at different times, the building would not have fallen evenly, quite the opposite actually, they would have tumbled forward, not downward.
For them to have fallen symmetrically, all the columns must have subdued at the same time, and unless some sort of explosive was used to blow them up simultaneously, this seems unlikely, which further cements the idea of, maybe not specifically the use of thermite to cause the explosion, but yes some sort of simultaneous explosive device.
Conclusions:
In conclusion, I believe there is enough evidence supporting the theory, as well as enough disregarded and mismanaged evidence by the hands of the NIST as to believe that the controlled demolition theory is correct. However, as the title suggests, this is just a theory, and the “official story” indicates that this is not so, and there is definitely enough evidence refuting the theory to leave the matter open to speculation. What do you think? Do you agree or disagree with this theory? Please leave in the comments below!
Bibliography:
1. Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report - The World Trade Center. (2018, September 10). Retrieved September 28, 2018, from https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a6384/debunking-911-myths-world-trade-center/
2. World Trade Center controlled demolition conspiracy theories. (2018, September 11). Retrieved September 28, 2018, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Center_controlled_demolition_conspiracy_theories
3. Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report - The World Trade Center. (2018, September 10). Retrieved September 28, 2018, from https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a6384/debunking-911-myths-world-trade-center/
4. Thermite. (2018, September 09). Retrieved September 28, 2018, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermite
5. Nano-thermite. (2018, August 02). Retrieved September 28, 2018, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nano-thermite
6. Journal of 911 studies. Retrieved September 28, 2018, from http://www.journalof911studies.com/volume/200609/WhyIndeedDidtheWorldTradeCenterBuildingsCompletelyCollapse.pdf
7. 911 research. Retrieved September 28, 2018 from http://www.911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/bentham_open/ActiveThermitic_Harrit_Bentham2009.pdf
8. September 11 attacks. (2018, September 25). Retrieved September 28, 2018, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks
Comments