-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Merged So there was melted steel
- Thread starter Travis
- Start date
Assuming there was molten metals found under the pile after several days... how does one correlate this as a process which caused the collapse or... go back in time..
or how does one explain it from the conditions it was found in at that time?
If one comes upon a burning car wreck... How can you tell if the fire caused the accident or the fire was cause BY the accident?
or how does one explain it from the conditions it was found in at that time?
If one comes upon a burning car wreck... How can you tell if the fire caused the accident or the fire was cause BY the accident?
One doesn't, one lets the fire department specialist go over the evidence. One does not send the car to China and say their was no accident.
Crazy Chainsaw
Philosopher
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2006
- Messages
- 8,339
The specialist were on scene digging though the rubble with the fire fighters and steel workers.
I see you have bought into the thermite, thermate lies of Dr. Jones.
Yet again the information you need here is freely available. GZ was utterly unsuitable for the inspection of the evidence, so two other places (iirc, maybe three) became 'designated scenes of crime' and the evidence was transported and examined there. Right down to the level of individual coins and the like.
Please stop talking guff until you've made an effort to look into the subject. If you feel obliged to talk guff right up front then at least be willing to be corrected.
How do you make this massive leap?
Last edited:
THIS
AND THIS
How about you two get your story straight before going any further. It looks like you are debunking each other, but you guys never seem to address each others inconsistencies, why is that? Tell the new guy lots of conflicting **** and then blame him for not seeing the truth and answers we have presented to him, and then attack his questions.
AND THIS
Crazy Chainsaw said:
How about you two get your story straight before going any further. It looks like you are debunking each other, but you guys never seem to address each others inconsistencies, why is that? Tell the new guy lots of conflicting **** and then blame him for not seeing the truth and answers we have presented to him, and then attack his questions.
Get real... as soon as possible the search for survivors took place... And the searchers had their eyes open.... obviously. This search for survivors turned quickly to one of recovery of bodies... again these searchers HAD to be observant. They were not looking for forensic evidence. Their accounts of the conditions were anecdotal.
Engineers had to come on to assist in the recovery. They had some technical knowledge in removing heavy debris and not destroying bodies... their sole objective.
At some point investigators were allowed in ti determine how these steel frames came apart... bending, shearing, bolt tear out, weld fracture and so on. At the time there was no need for a coherent explanation of the collapse...they came down by a gravity.. the materials like concrete and glass and GWB were shattered and pulverized by the 400,000 tons of falling colliding debris including 100,000+ tons of steel.
The collapse mechanisms has been explained. There remains fog about all the processes at work and the so called straw that broke the camel's back when the FOS dropped below 1 LOCALLY beginning a cascading progressive and what became a global failure.
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through
But in fact they aren't. Yes, experts were on site digging through the rubble early on, and selecting samples of steelwork for later analysis which was used in NIST's investigation; yes, the site was quite unsuitable for detailed examination of the evidence, so it was subsequently removed to a more suitable site, which is something law enforcement agencies do every day - for example, taking material to a laboratory for analysis. Everything removed from Ground Zero was subjected to a fingertip search for any relevant evidence by over 1,000 workers. The truther belief that all the steel was immediately transported to China is about as well substantiated as the truther belief about molten steel; a few anecdotes, unsupported by any better evidence and contradicted by the majority of it.
And how about you stop demanding to be told what the mythical "official story" is so you can nitpick it, and actually make a little effort to study the source material, understand it, and reach your own conclusions?
Dave
Last edited:
Mea culpa for posting in haste and leaving that little chink for you to pry at. But 'mutual debunking'? No. All you did was report a failed Trutherism uncritically, got slightly different responses and chose to exploit that rather than examine the facts.
If you want to be spoon-fed then you need to stop hopping around like a flea on speed and show some signs of starting to take things in.
Another BS 911 truth set of BS cards...
What is your analogy of an accident refer to? Sorry, but the fantasy NanoThermate was not found in WTC debris.
And the Gish Gallop moves to the next 911 truth BS talking point. How 8 months of clean up are shipping away the steel fast before studied... how does it go AClark.
Now presenting the steel was shipped away and not studied BS...
One does send experts to study the steel, and experts want to study. What was your claim?
911 was not an accident 19 terrorists did 911, and were responsible for all the damage done on 911.
No one sent anything anywhere and said there was no accident.
Bloody hell, that steel looks partially melted.
kookbreaker
Evil Fokker
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2001
- Messages
- 16,490
What are you looking at because I see twisted and burnt, not melted.
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
No, it isn't. You need to review what an ad hominem comment is. I was illustrating that you were nitpicking, focusing on an irrelevant detail.
Now you got it. Do I take it that you will now go and seek evidence for your claims? You claim the large chunks of previously molten steel went somewhere. Your claim, your burden of proof, not mine.
<<More chuckles>>
As opposed to your argumentum ad ignorantiam. ie. : "No one knows, therefore any claim I make is valid."
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
Not to me. It looks like its been subjected to fire and also bent and bashed about.
jaydeehess
Penultimate Amazing
AClark? If reports of molten steel at other non-9/11/01 fires are true, does this demonstrate that existence of molten steel at the WTC rubble fire is not automatically indicative of a malicious act?
Last edited:
Aww, where's your sense of humour.
last hope for nanothermate
LOL, it is corrosion... lol, that is 911 truth in action; oh it looks melted. Never seen corrosion before?
I asked you to produce evidence for melted steel, and you now identified corroded steel as melted. Does this mean the battery box in our cars melted, and it was not corrosion, but melted?
the photo was during clean up, someone studied the steel you said was shipped off "too quick"? What was your point... what is the accident analogy, and as we Gish Gallop... China stuff, etc... you implied there was no study allowed... 'Did you get that BS from 911 truth.
Last edited:
Aren't we wandering away from the OP again?
There is no automatic anything. Evidence of molten steel is only evidence of molten steel, and evidence of errors or omissions by those who claimed there was none.
When you have John Gross saying no molten steel, and multiple others saying yes molten steel, which answer wins?
Not to me... it looks severely corroded... chemically... oxidized... or eaten by acid or similar. You can see the same corrosive look in steel sheets driven in to the ground at the water's edge used as bulk heads foe example.
https://ixquick-proxy.com/do/spg/sh..._line.jpg&sp=a9e1fbd1915ffeb0fa5e956eef63f88d
https://ixquick-proxy.com/do/spg/sh...ion_2.jpg&sp=8aa56f13236eae83a7add3c732776d81
look https://ixquick-proxy.com/do/spg/sh...ilure.jpg&sp=8e0db40fdd8ab96289bd21f64b75deaf