pumpitoutRadio - WTC Destruction with David Chandler

pumpitoutRadio - WTC Destruction with David Chandler
Saturday, March 5, 2011


David Chandler speaks about the science and evidence concerning the destruction of the World Trade Center complex towers and WTC 7 on the morning of [9/11] Tuesday, September 11, 2001.

David's research can be found at his website -



Mp3 audio download link -


Well Done David

I especially liked your analogy illustrating the problem with the “pancake collapse” theory
and the remaining core columns by comparing it to the spindle
after the records drop. (But some of the younger generation may not be too familiar with a record player spindle and those stacks of old 45’s.)

And yes, as you mentioned, everyone should read the “Nanothermite paper”.

Well done.

Very thorough interview

pump it out

Show "Good broadcast" by TruthMakesPeace

ad hominem

Quoting Wikipedia: An ad hominem ... is an attempt to link the validity of a premise to a characteristic or belief of the opponent advocating the premise.

If I had said the work they were doing is worthless because they are too young, or they look Irish, or Jewish, or Arab, etc., now that would be ad hominem argumentation.

What I actually did was express a negative opinion about a group based on their actions. You might not like the fact that I was making waves, but I did not engage in the logical fallacy of substituting a personal attack for a logical argument. I spelled out in detail what they did that invalidated their results and expressed the opinion that what they were doing was unscientific, damaging, and possibly even fraudulent.

You can accuse me of being outspoken, but ad hominem arguments are a dishonest form of argumentation. I try to avoid that.

Nanothermite Paper

So Jeff ... Tell us what you thought of the paper, Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe

Was it as readable for the non-scientist as I suggested it is? Did you find it illuminating? Was it interesting reading? Would you recommend it to others outside the scientific wing of the 9/11 Truth Movement?

--David Chandler

Paper downloaded...

I have downloaded the paper and will read it tonight. After I read it I will comment on how much I was able to understand ;)

this link works better


and I consider reading the paper to be my homework !


Sorry for the delay... reading the paper today ;)


Finally read the paper...

I didn't completely understand the graphs or “formulas”, but in general terms I can understand what it saying… There is something peculiar about the red/grey chips which were highly reactive after a certain temperature is reached.

pg21: "highly energetic reactions occurring at approximately 430 degrees C"

pg27: “they resist friction, impact, heat, and static discharge”…

"open air burning temperatures 287.5 °C (549.5 °F)"

If I understand correctly, the jet fuel was not hot enough to start the reaction of the chips???

I also read through this which helped -



I've just started my homework

Noticed this:

"When ignited in a DSC device the chips exhibit large but narrow exotherms occurring at approximately 430 ˚C, far below the normal ignition temperature for conventional thermite."

Does that explain how jet fuel/ office fires were able to cause some nanothermite to go off (bottom right of pic.) ? :


Molten metal in the corner

See http://911blogger.com/news/2010-12-30/911-analysis-david-chandler-now-av...

If the red/gray chips are what we think they are, then.... If the fire ever reached 430 °C, it would be the gas temperature of the fire, then it has to heat its surroundings, including this material, in order for it to ignite. That raises the question if this material could be a time bomb with the clock started by impact. There are many possibilities.

Remember though; gas temperature ≠ steel temperature.

I'm about

halfway through the paper, David


Excellent and the info on solgel is interesting

Using the Active Thermitic Material paper

I think perhaps the most readily used piece of information in the paper is the story behind the calorimeter experiment. Here you start with a red chip which contains iron oxide but no iron, some aluminium and some other things. After heating to 430 deg C something happens, giving off heat. Afterwards the sample is found to contain some iron, and the iron is semi spherical, showing that it had been molten. The calorimeter was never heated hotter than 700 deg C so cannot have melted the iron. The thing which happened just has to be the thermite reaction, known to produce molten iron at about 2500 Deg C, from iron oxide and aluminium.