10 story hole in WTC 7

[GlennB]

FEMA did report in appendix C:
Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting . . . . . . The eutectic temperature for this mixture strongly suggests that the temperatures in this region of the steel beam approached 1,000 °C (1,800 °F)

The only known explanation for these results is Thermate.

Given that you freely agree with adoucette's points about the sulphidated steel sample, are you now dropping the thermate claim?

If not, all I can see for you to believe is that the thermate had this effect on the steel in the debris pile. That is, it ignited after collapse. This would require the detonation system to survive the collapse and somehow be triggered while in a huge burning debris pile.

Then we can move on to the fact that there's no known mechanism for applying large quantities of therm?te in a horizontal manner.
You then counter with diagrams from that thermite cutter patent.
We point out that the containing vessel in that patent is much bulkier than the volume of thermite and that gangs of such cutters would be impossibly large, even when ignoring problems of scale.
An actual physicist then steps in with real calculations for melting a given box column to collapse point, and deduces that it would take devices the size of several small refrigerators to bring down even a single column (and that's without the attachment mechanism).
You then change the subject.

There ... that saved a lot of time didn't it?

 

[DC]

about steel sample 1 and 2 from Fema.

2 theorys try to explain it.

"Acid theory"
and
"Thermite Theory"

and i think the thermite theory is as good as the acid theory.

 

[DC]

Given that you freely agree with adoucette's points about the sulphidated steel sample, are you now dropping the thermate claim?

If not, all I can see for you to believe is that the thermate had this effect on the steel in the debris pile. That is, it ignited after collapse. This would require the detonation system to survive the collapse and somehow be triggered while in a huge burning debris pile.

Then we can move on to the fact that there's no known mechanism for applying large quantities of therm?te in a horizontal manner.
You then counter with diagrams from that thermite cutter patent.
We point out that the containing vessel in that patent is much bulkier than the volume of thermite and that gangs of such cutters would be impossibly large, even when ignoring problems of scale.
An actual physicist then steps in with real calculations for melting a given box column to collapse point, and deduces that it would take devices the size of several small refrigerators to bring down even a single column (and that's without the attachment mechanism).
You then change the subject.

There ... that saved a lot of time didn't it?

thats wrong, there are patents showing exactly this.

 

[beachnut]

thats wrong, there are patents showing exactly this.

Source? Demo showing it can do the large columns of the towers please.
Why were these device not found at the WTC? You just proved thermite was not used. Good job.

Not a single thermite device used to cut steel in the horizontal was found at the WTC. And since the devices holds the thermite, and is not affected by the high temperature, the hundreds/thousands of device needed were not found. They would stick out like a sore thumb. But you have had thermo, and you say you know physics, if so, then you know impacts and fire alone were responsible for the WTC falling.

You have logically proven, in your single post, no thermite was used. Plus it is pure stupid to say there was molten metal in the basements due to thermite being planted. If you were good at research, you would have found Jones made up thermite out of the blue 4 years after 9/11. Jones has no clue, and as of this moment, 9/11 truth has failed to back up a single claim with evidence.

So what do you have for the damage done to WTC7 by the towers falling?

 

[DC]

Source? Demo showing it can do the large columns of the towers please.
Why were these device not found at the WTC? You just proved thermite was not used. Good job.

Not a single thermite device used to cut steel in the horizontal was found at the WTC. And since the devices holds the thermite, and is not affected by the high temperature, the hundreds/thousands of device needed were not found. They would stick out like a sore thumb. But you have had thermo, and you say you know physics, if so, then you know impacts and fire alone were responsible for the WTC falling.

You have logically proven, in your single post, no thermite was used. Plus it is pure stupid to say there was molten metal in the basements due to thermite being planted. If you were good at research, you would have found Jones made up thermite out of the blue 4 years after 9/11. Jones has no clue, and as of this moment, 9/11 truth has failed to back up a single claim with evidence.

So what do you have for the damage done to WTC7 by the towers falling?

did they look for those devices? did they know how they look like? or did they just asap remove all the rubble to maybe save some lives?

and did they find the blackboxes and was they still readable after collapse?
those balckboxes are designed to survie some of the worst things we can imagen. where are the reports about those 4 blackboxes?

 

[DC]

and btw, im not a jones fan. for someone that says he has found not only the smoking gun, but also the gun itself now, it is very silent from his side. would i have that stuff in my hands, and belive what he belives, i would run all over the world and try to present my evidence. my first adress would prolly be den haag.
but steven jones seems not to do anything atm.
but the same is on the acid side of the theory, FEMA clearly says, more research needed into it, and who is doing it ? noone, just some theorys what might explain those fema samples.......

 

[beachnut]

did they look for those devices? did they know how they look like? or did they just asap remove all the rubble to maybe save some lives?

and did they find the blackboxes and was they still readable after collapse?
those balckboxes are designed to survie some of the worst things we can imagen. where are the reports about those 4 blackboxes?

There were no black boxes at WTC7, you must be having problems keeping 9/11 facts straight.

 

[DC]

There were no black boxes at WTC7, you must be having problems keeping 9/11 facts straight.

you exactly know what i ment, nice dodging.

 

[GlennB]

Then we can move on to the fact that there's no known mechanism for applying large quantities of therm?te in a horizontal manner.
You then counter with diagrams from that thermite cutter patent.
We point out that the containing vessel in that patent is much bulkier than the volume of thermite and that gangs of such cutters would be impossibly large, even when ignoring problems of scale.
An actual physicist then steps in with real calculations for melting a given box column to collapse point, and deduces that it would take devices the size of several small refrigerators to bring down even a single column (and that's without the attachment mechanism).
You then change the subject.

There ... that saved a lot of time didn't it?

thats wrong, there are patents showing exactly this.

<groan>
If only you'd read a little more carefully and also on a little.
It's only a patent, DC. And the device is very large for the amount of thermite it claims to deliver. Then when scaled up, it doesn't necessarily work even if the device shown in the patente would work.

 

[DC]

<groan>
If only you'd read a little more carefully and also on a little.
It's only a patent, DC. And the device is very large for the amount of thermite it claims to deliver. Then when scaled up, it doesn't necessarily work even if the device shown in the patente would work.

[qimg]http://i250.photobucket.com/albums/gg274/sap-guy/thermitecutter.jpg[/qimg]

i never called it something else than a patent.
and how big exactly would it have to be to cut a steel column on a higher floor? and how sure are you it would not work?

 

[funk de fino]

Your proof please.

Try watching videos of the perimeter columns bowing and then reading the reports from the chopper pilots saying there was glowing hot structure inside the structure. Where did the "flowing" substance seen coning from the tower appear from and what temp do you think it was?

What report? Please post the URL.

NIST report C7, I should not have to show it to you.

Here's a report on the forensic identification of 911 victims.
http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=525937&page=1

And? Does this prove what type of examination was done on the steel at the staging area.

Rather than asking me to prove a negative, please provide a source for your claim that the steel had been forensically examined for cutting charges.

I never made that claim you dishonest person. But here is a link to a witness to the chain of custody of the metal and the tests done on it.

http://www.jod911.com/WTC%20COLLAPSE%20STUDY%20BBlanchard%208-8-06.pdf

You can't make a claim without evidence to back it up.

Care to disagree with Brent Blanchard and his team or have you proof of what type of forensic tests were done?

If you cannot prove tests were not done for explosives or signs of demolition you should retract your claim.

 

[Christopher7]

Given that you freely agree with adoucette's points about the sulphidated steel sample, are you now dropping the thermate claim?

No

If not, all I can see for you to believe is that the thermate had this effect on the steel in the debris pile.

Yes

I don't know how the Thermate was used or how it came to effect the beam in question.

What i do know is this:
FEMA 403 apC pg 5
C.3 Summary for sample 1
The thinning of the steel occurred by a high-temperature corrosion due to a combination of oxidation and sulfidation.
Heating of the steel into a hot corrosive environment approaching 1,000 °C (1,800 °F) results in the formation a eutectic mixture of iron, oxygen and sulfur that liquefied the steel.

[FONT=&quot]Fires smolder when they were starved for oxygen.
There is little oxygen in a debris pile because there is no ventilation.
Oxygen starved fires don't burn as hot as ventilated fires. [/FONT][FONT=&quot][far below 1,000 °C]

Sulfur is added to Thermite making it Thermate. The sulfur causes steel to liquefy at a lower temperature than it's normal melting point.[[/FONT]around 1370 °C - 2500°F]
[FONT=&quot] This is what the chemical analysis shows.
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]The only known explanation for the temperatures that caused the corrosion attack is Thermate. [unless you know of another explanation]

When you eliminate all other possibilities, what you have left is the answer.
[/FONT]

 

[Open Blinded]

and did they find the blackboxes and was they still readable after collapse?
those balckboxes are designed to survie some of the worst things we can imagen.

Are you referring to black boxes from each of the 4 planes on 9/11 or just the twin towers? If you mean voice and data from each plane at the WTC site which equals 4 then no, they did not find them. They did find them at the other sites however.

Black boxes are not indestructible, no matter how many times Jesse Ventura repeats it. There are many crashes where they are too damaged to recover any information. For example, here is a pic of the CVR recovered from the Pentagon site.

where are the reports about those 4 blackboxes?

Spend less time asking questions and more time doing just a little research.

 

[GlennB]

No

Yes

I don't know how the Thermate was used or how it came to effect the beam in question.

What i do know is this:
FEMA 403 apC pg 5
C.3 Summary for sample 1
The thinning of the steel occurred by a high-temperature corrosion due to a combination of oxidation and sulfidation.
Heating of the steel into a hot corrosive environment approaching 1,000 °C (1,800 °F) results in the formation a eutectic mixture of iron, oxygen and sulfur that liquefied the steel.

[FONT=&quot]Fires smolder when they were starved for oxygen. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]There is little oxygen in a debris pile because there is no ventilation.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]Oxygen starved fires don't burn as hot as ventilated fires. [/FONT][FONT=&quot][far below 1,000 °C][/FONT]

My previous answer to this:
Except, perhaps, when there's a subway system just underneath feeding air up through the debris pile? Is that possible?

 

[Dave Rogers]

[FONT=&quot]Oxygen starved fires don't burn as hot as ventilated fires. [/FONT][FONT=&quot][far below 1,000 °C]

[/FONT]

Evidence? What is the maximum temperature attainable by an oxygen-starved fire in an environment providing good thermal insulation from the surroundings? Some references or calculations would be useful. Your entire line of argument here is based on an unsupported assertion that a specific phenomenon is impossible. If that assertion is not defensible, there's no argument left.

[FONT=&quot]Dave[/FONT]

 

[Christopher7]

My previous answer to this:
Except, perhaps, when there's a subway system just underneath feeding air up through the debris pile? Is that possible?

The concrete was reduced to dust and would have blocked any air from coming up thru several stories of debris.

Everything was reduced to small pieces [except for the steel] and spread throughout the debris pile. There were probably no concentrations of combustible material.

 

[Christopher7]

Evidence? What is the maximum temperature attainable by an oxygen-starved fire in an environment providing good thermal insulation from the surroundings? Some references or calculations would be useful. Your entire line of argument here is based on an unsupported assertion that a specific phenomenon is impossible. If that assertion is not defensible, there's no argument left.

[FONT=&quot]Dave[/FONT]

Here's the closest thing i could find:
Introduction to wildland fire: pg 23
Smoldering ground fires . . . can raise mineral soil temperatures above 300 °C (570 °F) for several hours with peak temperatures near 600 °C (1100 °F)
Although these are considerably lower than temperatures associated with flaming combustion which generally range from 800 to 1200 °C (1500 to 2000 °F) the duration of the heat at a point is much longer.
[FONT=&quot]http://books.google.com/books?id=yT...ig=MCCTn7cFB2JkIuMKgD8nuZ0mjVM&hl=en#PPA23,M1[/FONT]

 

[Horatius]

i never called it something else than a patent.
and how big exactly would it have to be to cut a steel column on a higher floor? and how sure are you it would not work?

You know, there are times I feel bad because I went and found those patents for you guys. I knew you'd latch onto them like a drowning man with a life preserver.


But then I realize, questions such as this one serve to show that, even when a document might support your position, you guys still don't read the darn things. How do I know this? Because if you'd actually read any of these documents, as opposed to just looking at the pretty pictures, you'd know that they give some guidelines for how large the devices must be to cut certain dimensions of metal.

And I'm not going to point you to where they say that. I want you to either go and actually read it for yourself, or continue to display your unwillingness to do even that little thing to prove your point, so that all and sundry here can see exactly how much of an intellectual fraud a twoofer really is.

 

[DC]

Are you referring to black boxes from each of the 4 planes on 9/11 or just the twin towers? If you mean voice and data from each plane at the WTC site which equals 4 then no, they did not find them. They did find them at the other sites however.

Black boxes are not indestructible, no matter how many times Jesse Ventura repeats it. There are many crashes where they are too damaged to recover any information. For example, here is a pic of the CVR recovered from the Pentagon site.
[qimg]http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/5611/734/1600/cvr.jpg[/qimg]


Spend less time asking questions and more time doing just a little research.

i talk only about the 4 blackboxes from the Twintowers.
i know the NTSB reports about AA77 and UA93.
but didnt find the other reports.
i did do my research
and i never claimed they are undestructable. and i really dont care what this Ventura guy says.

 

[DGM]

This is one of my favorite articles about what may have been going on it the piles.
http://www.debunking911.com/ironburns.htm