WTC Discussion: Core Column Temperature & Failure.

[28th Kingdom]

Hey guys,

I'm not getting off topic here (we're still discussing the therma/ite) but I found this site while looking up stuff about therma/ite and it echoes some points I made earlier about how NIST's real-life experiments contradicted their conclusions.

"The NIST investigation of the WTC building failures was extensive, but NIST did not substantiate its conclusions experimentally. On the contrary, many of NIST’s tests contradicted its conclusions.

Furthermore, there are several examples in which NIST chose to manipulate input data, and then certify its findings based upon the inevitable conclusions that derive from the manipulated input. One finds little acknowledgement on the part of NIST that uncertainties in its simulations translate into uncertainties in its findings."

"The NIST WTC investigation suffered from a paucity of physical testing. Effectively, all of NIST’s conclusions are derived from computer simulation."

http://www.nistreview.org/_media/documents/MISC/NCSTAR1-REVIEW-DOUGLAS.pdf

 

[Mercutio]

Hey guys,

I'm not getting off topic here...

No, of course you aren't. You were just about to answer our questions...

 

[babazaroni]

Ditto

Please return to the current discussion.

Unresolved:

Source of energy keeping those molten pools sustained.
Why the outer columns did not need cutting.
Video, photograph color calibration issues.
Magnesium thermite and Magnesium ignition problems.

 

[kookbreaker]

"The NIST investigation of the WTC building failures was extensive, but NIST did not substantiate its conclusions experimentally. On the contrary, many of NIST’s tests contradicted its conclusions.

This is only true if you deliberately minsuderstand the purpose of the tests, which is what CTers do consistantly.

Furthermore, there are several examples in which NIST chose to manipulate input data, and then certify its findings based upon the inevitable conclusions that derive from the manipulated input. One finds little acknowledgement on the part of NIST that uncertainties in its simulations translate into uncertainties in its findings."

This is a comment from someone unclear on the concept of modelling and detemined to find something wrong with it, even if this is not the case.

"The NIST WTC investigation suffered from a paucity of physical testing. Effectively, all of NIST’s conclusions are derived from computer simulation."

This comment is a disservice to those who sue computer simulation to design hundreds of things that interact with your daily life. It is a direct insult to make it seem as if simulations are somehow improper investigative tools.

Now get back on topic.

 

[rwguinn]

This is only true if you deliberately minsuderstand the purpose of the tests, which is what CTers do consistantly.



This is a comment from someone unclear on the concept of modelling and detemined to find something wrong with it, even if this is not the case.



This comment is a disservice to those who sue computer simulation to design hundreds of things that interact with your daily life. It is a direct insult to make it seem as if simulations are somehow improper investigative tools.

Now get back on topic.

I guess I was mistaken last Friday. I thought I saw a brand-new airplane fire up the engines, roll down the runway, and take off.
But since it had never been tested until after the computer simulations showed it would work, I reckon it was just one of them hologram thingies by the NWO.
I wan't notified that it was a false flag, guys. What have I done to be out of the NWO loop?

 

[kookbreaker]

I guess I was mistaken last Friday. I thought I saw a brand-new airplane fire up the engines, roll down the runway, and take off.
But since it had never been tested until after the computer simulations showed it would work, I reckon it was just one of them hologram thingies by the NWO.
I wan't notified that it was a false flag, guys. What have I done to be out of the NWO loop?

Uhh, my fault. I left the hologram projector on.

 

[TellyKNeasuss]

"The NIST WTC investigation suffered from a paucity of physical testing. Effectively, all of NIST’s conclusions are derived from computer simulation."

You mean they didn't build a 110 story building and fly a plane into it to see what would happen? Shocking!!!

 

[28th Kingdom]

Source of energy keeping those molten pools sustained.

I never said when that pic was taken. It is dated 9/11/2001 at the bottom.

Why the outer columns did not need cutting.

I never said that...don't even know where you got it from.

Video, photograph color calibration issues.

How many photos, videos do you want to provide conclusive evidence as to the color of the molten material?

Magnesium thermite and Magnesium ignition problems.

I'll be honest...I'm trying to engage in a left-brain debate with you all...and so I need breaks...I'm extremely right-brained, and when you force me to break things down into such small detail in a linear fashion...it really enervates me. I'm still looking up info on therma/ite and different ignition temps and such. But, I was right in that the word, 'ignites' on Wikipedia was talking about the ignition of the therma/ite reaction. Therma/ite can be heated and even glowing red, and the reaction will not take place. The reaction is the pyrotechnic display you see in those videos I linked to.

Therma/ite when heated produces it's only heat through a chemical reaction. I am still researching...and trying to find more info on all of this. Stand by.

 

[Mr. Skinny]

I guess I was mistaken last Friday. I thought I saw a brand-new airplane fire up the engines, roll down the runway, and take off.

The "Joint Strike Fighter" you saw was a hologram, so, yes, you were mistaken.

Aren't we crafty?

If you made the staff meetings on time, you'd know these things.

 

[Mercutio]

How many photos, videos do you want to provide conclusive evidence as to the color of the molten material?

All it takes is one, if it is the right one. Do you have one that satisfies the requirements of a spectral analysis? One with known calibration and sufficient data available?

(Before you cry "foul", know that an appropriate video can be identified independently of what we might conclude from it. That is, this is most certainly not a case of waiting for a video that supports one view over the other. It is a case of waiting (in vain, I fear) for a video that does not distort the original incident.)

 

[GlennB]

I......
Therma/ite when heated produces it's only heat through a chemical reaction. I am still researching...and trying to find more info on all of this. Stand by.

Nice of you to do this after making a bunch of unsubstantiated assertions.

 

[Gravy]

Furthermore, there are several examples in which NIST chose to manipulate input data, and then certify its findings based upon the inevitable conclusions that derive from the manipulated input. One finds little acknowledgement on the part of NIST that uncertainties in its simulations translate into uncertainties in its findings.

Yoo-hoo! Conspiracists always neglect to mention all the examples of NIST adjusting their assumptions (inputs) in the direction of less severe fires and damage, to have their models more closely reflect the observed conditions. How do I know NIST did that?

I read the report!

 

[Horatius]

There are countless pics and video showing the molten material pouring from WTC 2, and at ground zero after the collapses.

http://img243.imageshack.us/img243/3550/thermiteic0.jpg

If there are "countless pics and videos", why does he keep showing the same two?

 

[Horatius]

Yoo-hoo! Conspiracists always neglect to mention all the examples of NIST adjusting their assumptions (inputs) in the direction of less severe fires and damage, to have their models more closely reflect the observed conditions. How do I know NIST did that?

I read the report!

Cheater!

 

[Alt+F4]

Since I’m not a scientist my knowledge of thermite is miniscule. Could someone answer my questions in lay-woman’s terms?

I know this YouTube video of a British television show demonstrating the use of thermite has been posted before. So here’s my questions:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrCWLpRc1yM

1. The thermite in the video burns itself out quite quickly. So what’s the validity of the argument that the WTC fires that burned for weeks after 9/11 were somehow thermite related?
2. Since thermite seems to melt steel why was there so many tons of steel recovered from ground zero? Shouldn’t most of it melted away if thermite was being used?
3. The thermite reaction in the video was very, very quick. If it was used in the WTC wouldn’t the buildings have come down quicker than they did?
4. Why would the conspirators call off the bomb-sniffing dogs at the WTC before 9/11 when they know those dogs can’t detect thermite anyway?
5. Thermite seems to burn in a hap-hazard manner. How could the conspirators be sure it would bring down WTC 1 & 2?
6. In the video it seems to take about a pound of thermite to burn through the engine block of the car. Wouldn't that mean it would take thousands of tons of thermite to bring down WTC 1 & 2?
7. How would thermite in WTC 1 & 2 have been ignited? If the answer is the fire from the crashes would ignite it, then wouldn't thermite "bombs" have to be planted in every floor of both towers because the conspiractors couldn't be sure which floors the planes would crash into?
8. And lastly, has thermite ever been used in a controlled demolition of a building? If not, why don’t demolition experts use it?

Thanks in advance!

 

[8den]

You have to realize that the US government has access to technologies that are 20-30 years ahead of what the public knows about, so is it really that hard to believe they could make a therma/ite device that can cut through a vertical steel column?

Tell you what from now on this is pretty much what I am going to do when I cannot be arsed googling the response I'm just going to take a leaf out of your book and to Quote Lucy Lawless in her Simpsons episode

"Uh, yeah, well, whenever you notice something like that... a wizard did it."

Thats pretty much what you are doing. Any evidence the gubiment have technology 30 years ahead of the rest of us? And what super sekrit nwo group has this technology and doesn't share?

MiB and MiB2 weren't documentaries y'know?

 

[28th Kingdom]

Left-brained people are so unbelievably naive. If they only knew what the world really looks like.

 

[solidslade]

http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Flashbang

http://www.wapipedia.org/wikipedia/mobiletopic.aspx?cur_title=Grenade

You know thermate is used in grenades. I think everyone is confusing the word ignites. Ignites means the pyrotechnic reaction we see once the therma/ite reaches a certain temperature.

/draws out ACTUAL Military Experience.


Grenades eh?

Do you know which type?

There's fragmentation and explosives and there's incendiary.

Frags are used as conventional weapons.
Those are the ones that go BOOM.

Incendiaries are used to burn metal, destroy enemy weapons and the like.
These DO NOT GO BOOM.

All grenades "ignite", or should you say "trigger". So?
Pyrotechnics do not equal SkyScraper Destructive capability, simply a property.

Example : simple fireworks : Its a pyrotechnic, but not necessarily a conventional explosive used in warfare.

You however, are confused on a subject you have no experience nor expertise.

Left-brained people are so unbelievably naive. If they only knew what the world really looks like.

Correction : this forum happens to be Full Brained People.

so, with your implication, you're a "RIGHT BRAINED" person?

That means, you either :
A. Dont have the other half.
B. REFUSE to utilize the other half.

I'd rather be called naive than be called a Half Brainer.

 

[Bell]

Left-brained people are so unbelievably naive. If they only knew what the world really looks like.

Follow the white rabbit.

 

[defaultdotxbe]

Since I’m not a scientist my knowledge of thermite is miniscule. Could someone answer my questions in lay-woman’s terms?

I know this YouTube video of a British television show demonstrating the use of thermite has been posted before. So here’s my questions:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrCWLpRc1yM

1. The thermite in the video burns itself out quite quickly. So what’s the validity of the argument that the WTC fires that burned for weeks after 9/11 were somehow thermite related?
2. Since thermite seems to melt steel why was there so many tons of steel recovered from ground zero? Shouldn’t most of it melted away if thermite was being used?
3. The thermite reaction in the video was very, very quick. If it was used in the WTC wouldn’t the buildings have come down quicker than they did?
4. Why would the conspirators call off the bomb-sniffing dogs at the WTC before 9/11 when they know those dogs can’t detect thermite anyway?
5. Thermite seems to burn in a hap-hazard manner. How could the conspirators be sure it would bring down WTC 1 & 2?
6. In the video it seems to take about a pound of thermite to burn through the engine block of the car. Wouldn't that mean it would take thousands of tons of thermite to bring down WTC 1 & 2?
7. How would thermite in WTC 1 & 2 have been ignited? If the answer is the fire from the crashes would ignite it, then wouldn't thermite "bombs" have to be planted in every floor of both towers because the conspiractors couldn't be sure which floors the planes would crash into?
8. And lastly, has thermite ever been used in a controlled demolition of a building? If not, why don’t demolition experts use it?

Thanks in advance!

1: ive been given various reasons, the top 2 seem to be the thermite they used was a long-burning variety (which makes no sense sicne theres no need for it to burn a long time) and that the debris created a super-perfect insulator which prevented heat from escaping the the steel from cooling even weeks and months after the thermite had burned out (and yet my coffee gets cold in an hour)

2: to melt all the steel in the WTC would require more thermite than even CTers are postulating, the CTers envision just enough to make precision cuts in the columns

3: timed fuses/detonators is the stock reply

4: only answer ive ever gotten to this one was that they used both bombs and thermite

5: your guess is as good as anyone elses

6: yes

7: see #3, which somehow manage to survive the plane impacts and raging fires (i suspect it was this troublesome little question that made no-planers necessary)

8: no, see #5 and #6

hope thats what you were looking for