Merged So there was melted steel

[jaydeehess]

Originally Posted by Travis
Yes in this thread I won't even contend there was no molten steel. I will do this so that I can finally get some answers as to how the presence of it means anything malicious.

As such I would like to know:
Is this supposed to mean thermite was used? If so how much thermite (a self oxidizing agent) is needed to still be reacting six weeks after initiation? Why are other avenues of steel melting (such as in a rare natural furnace effect) dismissed? Since liquids follow the path of least resistance they will pool at the bottom of the bathtub. How was the steel that solidified there removed and where did it go?

Getting back to the topic of the OP.
OK MichJava, as in the OP .................

Now...Above I hilited the questions Travis asked.
Apparently the first question is answered <snip>

Second question: <snip>

Third question is one of my favs. <snip>

Last question: never answered by anyone.<snip>?

No one is asking for "capitulation" in this thread. Read the OP (I copied it in my previous post above) Just answer the questions, pretty please.

I see no takers as yet.

 

[HotRodDeluxe]

MicahJava if you really want a greater understanding peruse this and other threads in depth.

If you want to be popular here I suggest you totally capitulate to the lies and bigoted views of those who are currently mocking your sincere efforts at greater understanding.

Are you here just to lob insults? That's all I ever read from you.

 

[Criteria]

Are you here just to lob insults? That's all I ever read from you.

They say we see what which we wish to see.

 

[HotRodDeluxe]

They say we see what which we wish to see.

My comprehension is just fine, and 'they' say much of little merit.

 

[DGM]

They say we see what which we wish to see.

Do you have factual evidence that you see more clearly than the rest of the rationally world?

That is the argument you present is it not?

 

[Travis]

It's apparently made of Iron with trace amounts of Aluminum, Manganese, Sulfur, and Fluorine, which can all be ingredients of thermitic materials. If it's previously molten iron, then that especially interesting because modern buildings don't use regular iron anymore.

Those can also all be ingredients of very tall office buildings with 30,000 people in them.

Is it your contention that this block proves that thermite was used? If so then how does this relate to my other questions?

 

[TJM]

Interesting stuff, and thanks for posting it. Now, is there any evidence that any British incendiaries used thermite? We now know that it was used as a starter in German incendiaries, but I suspect very few of the bombs that fell on Dresden in 1945 were German.

Dave

Posts like this are the only reason why I bother reading this subforum anymore.

Damn you Dave Rogers. Net rules have you owing me innumerable monitors and / or keyboards which I shall never recover.

 

[jaydeehess]

They say we see what which we wish to see.

Do they also mention that you did not see the OP?
To whit:

Yes in this thread I won't even contend there was no molten steel. I will do this so that I can finally get some answers as to how the presence of it means anything malicious.

As such I would like to know:

Is this supposed to mean thermite was used?

If so how much thermite (a self oxidizing agent) is needed to still be reacting six weeks after initiation?

Why are other avenues of steel melting (such as in a rare natural furnace effect) dismissed?

Since liquids follow the path of least resistance they will pool at the bottom of the bathtub. How was the steel that solidified there removed and where did it go?

 

[1stClassAlan]

I'm joining this arguement rather late and forgive me but I've no intention of reading every post in 92 pages to see if what I have to say has already been covered but here goes!

I would be amazed if there was absolutely no melted steel in a disaster zone the size of Ground Zero; however; this does not mean that I subscribe to any of the exaggerated explanations for its presence.

None of "my" melted steel had anything to do with the collapses but would be the result of a furnace effect within the debris piles that burned for months - I've had personal experience of melted steel objects in demolition fires (I'm old enough to remember times when such fires were permited!).

A large fire amply supplied with a mix of combustibles coccooned within a demolition heap containing pulverised gypsum wallboards will often reach metal melting points and with a forced draught - remember, there were two railway tunnels and seven sub street level floors under WTC.

This kind of thing would, to me, be quite normal and not require anything like a "thermitic" reaction viewers of YouTube will be familiar with - it's slower and less showy but would certainly account for the fused lumps of stuff recovered from the lower levels.

As for proprietary Thermite or any such nonsense - forget it.

 

[beachnut]

...
As for proprietary Thermite or any such nonsense - forget it.

Thread is a, "So what"? What if there was melted steel.

I have not seen any melted steel evidence yet.

Steel fails before it melts. I can't think of anything in the fire that would melt steel. Other metals mel in fires. Where is the pile, the pool of melted steel.

You are exactly what the OP is about, so what, what if there is melted steel in a WTC pile of rubble... it is not evidence for thermite, or explosives used on 911.

The OP is trying to get thermite cult members to say what melted steel means, if... trying to get the inside job cult to explain.

The only evidence I have seen 911 truth present for melted steel is corroded steel. Appendix C from FEMA,,, or dumber claims for the mass of floors stuck together in big "meteorite" has melted steel, which has paper in between the "melted" steel. Really?

 

[HotRodDeluxe]

There's jumping to conclusions and then there's falsifying data and lying. Considering that Steven Jones has no personal website, no Youtube channel, and everything he ever wrote about 9/11 is free on the internet, he would seem like the worst hoaxer in the world. Do you have any evidence that he is a full-on hoaxer?

Yeah, his report on the existence of thermite is evidence enough for most that he is a hoaxer, or deluded. It doesn't matter either way, as the thermite tale is ridiculous.

 

[beachnut]

... falsifying data and lying. Considering that Steven Jones has no personal website, no Youtube channel, and everything he ever wrote about 9/11 is free on the internet, he would seem like the worst hoaxer in the world. Do you have any evidence that he is a full-on hoaxer?

Steven Jones? Jones said thermite was used on 911, but failed to produce evidence. Then Jones and his cronies faked a conclusion for their "nano" BS thermite paper. Unable to get a reputable science journal to publish his delusional claim thermite was found in the dust paper, Jones paid to publish; a vanity journal was used to fool the science illiterate 911 truth cult believers.

With no steel damaged by thermite. The fantasy died on 911, before Jones made up the claim four years later. Jones formed the claim of thermite based on his fantasy opinion, not evidence.

Do you have evidence for thermite in the dust, or damaged WTC steel? No. Guess what, Jones has the same evidence you do; zero.

Why can't you provide or find evidence for thermite? No.

Can you provide evidence Jones is not a full-on hoaxer? No.

 

[ozeco41]

There's jumping to conclusions and then there's falsifying data and lying. Considering that Steven Jones has no personal website, no Youtube channel, and everything he ever wrote about 9/11 is free on the internet, he would seem like the worst hoaxer in the world. Do you have any evidence that he is a full-on hoaxer?

Yeah, his report on the existence of thermite is evidence enough for most that he is a hoaxer, or deluded. It doesn't matter either way, as the thermite tale is ridiculous.

The history is well documented.

Jones was a high profile truther who was losing "market image" to other truthers who were becoming more prominent.

So he launched the thermite scam as a "new brand" to raise his prominence in the truther market. Stock standard marketing ploy - if the customers are forgetting about you launch a new product or re-brand an old one. Or simple change the packaging. It's not limited to 9/11 truth movement - we see it all the time. And - for Jones - the "new product/new brand" had the expected result - the "new brand on the market" gave him raised prominence for a few months.

And that process of "increased prominence" has ZERO relationship to the truth or otherwise of his claims. (And it is otherwise. Whether or not there was thermite residue on ground zero it was not used for CD because there was no CD. Simple logic. And typical "arse about truther logic" to claim otherwise.)

So from the outset it was a "marketing ploy" - Jones in effect saying "Hey don't forget me.....please..."

But the effect quickly dies away. So he tried again - re-branding it as "Nano-thermXte"

That "re-launch" had less impact than the first and did very little for Jones starved ego. Sure there is still a lot of thermXte related discussion but Jones doesn't feature in many.

There has been a lot of extended discussion about the applied science. All irrelevant to WTC 9/11 collapses because there was no CD.

And currently the situation re Jones ego is "Who was Jones???"

 

[Crazy Chainsaw]

They say we see what which we wish to see.

I see thermite welded rebar, in concrete as has been done for decades, don't know what you people see in this BS.

Nothing here move along.

 

[Travis]

I'm joining this arguement rather late and forgive me but I've no intention of reading every post in 92 pages to see if what I have to say has already been covered but here goes!

I would be amazed if there was absolutely no melted steel in a disaster zone the size of Ground Zero; however; this does not mean that I subscribe to any of the exaggerated explanations for its presence.

None of "my" melted steel had anything to do with the collapses but would be the result of a furnace effect within the debris piles that burned for months - I've had personal experience of melted steel objects in demolition fires (I'm old enough to remember times when such fires were permited!).

A large fire amply supplied with a mix of combustibles coccooned within a demolition heap containing pulverised gypsum wallboards will often reach metal melting points and with a forced draught - remember, there were two railway tunnels and seven sub street level floors under WTC.

This kind of thing would, to me, be quite normal and not require anything like a "thermitic" reaction viewers of YouTube will be familiar with - it's slower and less showy but would certainly account for the fused lumps of stuff recovered from the lower levels.

As for proprietary Thermite or any such nonsense - forget it.

These were all my thoughts too. I just never saw melted steel as meaning anything. None of the supposed nefarious causes for it really stacked up to reality. So, for me, arguing about melted steel was just a huge waste of time. If it was there then it meant nothing one way or the other.

 

[HotRodDeluxe]

The history is well documented.

Jones was a high profile truther who was losing "market image" to other truthers who were becoming more prominent.

So he launched the thermite scam as a "new brand" to raise his prominence in the truther market. Stock standard marketing ploy - if the customers are forgetting about you launch a new product or re-brand an old one. Or simple change the packaging. It's not limited to 9/11 truth movement - we see it all the time. And - for Jones - the "new product/new brand" had the expected result - the "new brand on the market" gave him raised prominence for a few months.

And that process of "increased prominence" has ZERO relationship to the truth or otherwise of his claims. (And it is otherwise. Whether or not there was thermite residue on ground zero it was not used for CD because there was no CD. Simple logic. And typical "arse about truther logic" to claim otherwise.)

So from the outset it was a "marketing ploy" - Jones in effect saying "Hey don't forget me.....please..."

But the effect quickly dies away. So he tried again - re-branding it as "Nano-thermXte"

That "re-launch" had less impact than the first and did very little for Jones starved ego. Sure there is still a lot of thermXte related discussion but Jones doesn't feature in many.

There has been a lot of extended discussion about the applied science. All irrelevant to WTC 9/11 collapses because there was no CD.

And currently the situation re Jones ego is "Who was Jones???"

 

[jaydeehess]

I would be amazed if there was absolutely no melted steel in a disaster zone the size of Ground Zero; however; this does not mean that I subscribe to any of the exaggerated explanations for its presence.

None of "my" melted steel had anything to do with the collapses but would be the result of a furnace effect within the debris piles that burned for months - I've had personal experience of melted steel objects in demolition fires (I'm old enough to remember times when such fires were permited!).

A large fire amply supplied with a mix of combustibles coccooned within a demolition heap containing pulverised gypsum wallboards will often reach metal melting points and with a forced draught - remember, there were two railway tunnels and seven sub street level floors under WTC.

.

Thank you for that.
I have often noted that there are reports of melted metal or steel in other non-9/11/01 fires. Those reports are either true, you report on one that is,
OR,
they are not true.
Nevertheless such reports are not uncommon. Keeping in mind that witness testimony is really all that 9/11 truth has to go on in this respect(the 'meteorite' with paper sticking out of it was obviously never at molten steel temps)>>>>>

If it is true that other fires have reached temps that melted steel then it can be expected that the WTC rubble fires did as well , and thus the existence of such is unremarkable.

If it is untrue that other fires have had molten steel temperatures it remains that the reports of melted steel are not uncommon, and thus reports of molten steel in the WTC rubble are no more valid than the reports of other fires having produced molten steel.

IMHO, this all applies to Travis' third and fourth questions.

However, haven't seen, or at least don't recall, MichJava or Criteria addressing the OP 4 questions.

 

[AClark]

If it is true that other fires have reached temps that melted steel then it can be expected that the WTC rubble fires did as well , and thus the existence of such is unremarkable.

If it is true, why was it categorically denied?

Hell, I would be happy to accept "There was steel that was red hot (it only takes 1000 degrees or so for colour to start changing), but the metal dripping off it was molten aluminium, reflecting the colour of the hot, but not molten steel.

I could have said "That's fair enough, sounds plausible", but to say "no, definitely not, you are all fruit cakes if you think there was", is just down right stupid. It invites confrontation.

 

[beachnut]

If it is true, why was it categorically denied?

Hell, I would be happy to accept "There was steel that was red hot (it only takes 1000 degrees or so for colour to start changing), but the metal dripping off it was molten aluminium, reflecting the colour of the hot, but not molten steel.

I could have said "That's fair enough, sounds plausible", but to say "no, definitely not, you are all fruit cakes if you think there was", is just down right stupid. It invites confrontation.

Gee whiz, where is the pile of melted steel? The frozen river of melted steel, a frozen pool of melted steel.

What melted the steel in the fantasy version which had NanoThermate? Who planted the thermite stuff?

No steel damaged by thermite and you can't produce any steel melted. Thus office fires which burn up to 1100 C, don't melt steel on 911.

The BS about thermite burning for weeks is debunked by science. But go ahead, play the NanoThermate card...

When Al is melted and the temperature is like 1000 C, it glows until it cools down... oops... it was funny as heck to see truther melt Al and it was glowing until it poured a short distance, and then they deny they can see the glow I saw on their video of glowing Al. Funny stuff, as 911 truth is a totally self-debunking failed movement.

Jones made up the thermite BS, and now has moved on to OverUnity circuits. The chief of thermite is nuts on 911, and left... If he had evidence, he would have a newspaper team with Jones research and earn the biggest Pulitzer since Watergate. LOL, 14 years of failed thermite BS.

The thread is saying, "so what". If there was melted steel what does it mean? (next, the Gish Gallop moves to iron micro-spheres... )

 

[jaydeehess]

If it is true, why was it categorically denied?

.

Irrelevant to both my post and the OP.

WRT my post, it is but one of only two possibilities. My post makes no claim of which is true but one or the other is. Yet both choices are shown to demonstrate that the reports of molten steel at the WTC rubble fires is meaningless.

WRT the OP, it is the actual assumption described as the topic of the thread.

Yet true to the way truthers have responded to this and other similar threads, you choose to still fight the fight that declares molten steel having been true.

The OP asks questions assuming it IS true. There is no need to go on and on in this thread about why its true.