Split Thread The Towers should not hve collapsed (split from Gravysites)

[Dabljuh]

Does it follow that where there is Barium Nitrate there is a thermite reaction?

If no, what else produces Barium Nitrate?

Barium nitrate isn't a product of a thermite reaction at all. That this very guy argues I wouldn't understand chemistry is flabbergasting with contrast to such a statement. Barium nitrate is, just like other nitrates, (per)chlorates, permanganates an oxidizer. I.e. it is essentially solidified oxygen that can accelerate an incendiary reaction by introducing oxygen into the system provided the oxidizer is heated to the point where the oxygen atoms fall off the oxidizing ion group. Certain thermate BRANDS may use barium nitrates, others may use other oxidizers, or even no oxidizers at all - the thermite reaction itself being a reaction where the oxygen in the oxidized iron transfer to the aluminium, oxidizing it, the difference in enthalpy being released as thermic energy.

But even if specifically, barium nitrates are used as an oxidizer, in a specific brand of thermate, there would simply not be much to anything left of it, as these oxidizers are consumed by the strong thermic reaction. If anything, barium oxide could be found.

As for your question regarding "what produces barium nitrate" - As with most nitrates, they can be manufactured by mixing nitric acid with the ion of choice (in this case barium) but as I mentioned, in any sort of extreme environment (fire, explosions) nitrates tend to be consumed rather than produced.

Oh and, thanks for pointing it out to me again that this guy actually wrote I wouldn't understand chemistry. This level of stupid goes right to my ignore list. I got to be in demolitions in the army for the sole reason that I had straight As in chemistry in school. (Truth be told, the army training turned out to be more carpentry than chemistry)

With this settled, I'll respond to something that caught my eye previously, but didn't really feel like responding to it right then.

I don't want to contradict posters debating truthers here, but unfortunately, the information was wrong.

I'm afraid it's too late for excuses now. The 43rd JREF ignorance batallion is preparing to take your house right now.

 

[gumboot]

A 100 tons of ammunition being blown up with high explosives? The only thing I noticed is your ignorance.

Here's an actual 100t HE detonation

Sweet, sweet irony. The only ignorance on display is yours.

When EODs refer to tonnage they're referring to the tonnage of HE contained in the ordnance being destroyed. Ordnance is not destroyed by attaching high explosives to it, they conduct a controlled detonation of the explosives already in the weapons.

The point being that's something in the vicinity of the amount of explosives that was being talked about for a WTC demolition.

 

[A W Smith]

you're talking about the pre-collapse video showing a yellow-white glowing liquid flowing from out of the windows, right? How is it impossible for this to be steel or iron?

because it would melt the spandrel plate its pouring over. and another thing. if thats molten steel from the core how did it make its way 60 feet across a concrete floor without cooling? The wreckage would have caused the floor to deflect and your molten steel would have to climb uphill across the slab. Clearly this can only be metal from the plane wreckage which ended up in that corner.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

no need to get petty

they wouldn't have

As Jonnyclueless said, I'm not being petty. You keep emphasizing that they collapsed a 'certain way' that makes them suspicious. I am asking you to define what 'way' they should have collapsed by your standard.

Clearly you have a preconceived notion that buildings are invincible and the design of the towers should have prevented collapse (the design actually did prevent immediate collapse). I don't think you're familiar in any way beyond the cosmetics with how buildings function. Instead you fall back on ae911truth for your 'experts' who falsely claim for example that the collapses had a 'rapid onset'. If you want to argue that the towers cannot have collapsed I suggest you begin studying architecture or engineering and start practicing the math or study in the field to get a basic understanding which you clearly lack at the moment

yet you cannot test this straightforward process or find an exmaple in the natural world when approx 1/10th (12 floor) of a structure/object crushes the remainder (92 floor)

How do you want this tested? How do you expect this to be tested? Card board box models don't cut it, Gage made a huge blunder when he tried that. Making a scale model has numerous problems. For starters you can't build a 1/2 scale model because you would need a facility 50 stories high, there's no faility large enough. Scaling the towers down to a workable size presents new problems, because gravity forces don't change, and using the same materials to simulate the towers introduces new problems with loading capacities. Using simulated materials ruins the representation. A card board box weighing less than a pound can support 2/3 of my weight, and I'm 200 pounds... doesn't tell me jack about how the towers should have performed.

In other words because it's never happened before you don't think it's possible. If your assertion were true then precedents would be rendered moot, designs are generally built on such precedents accordingly. 'Never happened before' doesn't cut it.

sorry i couldnt address it sooner. are you refering to the video with the NIST representative disagreeing with the premise i.e. that there was molten steel in the rubble pile?

Yes, if you are going to point to a source of information that is attempting to corroborate proof of a lie the information the video needs to be reasonably reliable. I'm not calling the NIST representative statement false, I am informing you that the added content the video uploader provided is largely questionable for the reasons I gave in that post. It is a credibility killer

 

[CptColumbo]

Does it follow that where there is Barium Nitrate there is a thermite reaction?

If no, what else produces Barium Nitrate?

Does anyone who knows something about chemistry able to answer this question?

eta: Its been 10 years since I got a B in college introduction to chemistry.

 

[e^n]

The rest of your post didn't make me flinch, if you'd stop using strawmans for a second you could actually contribute something here. But I watched that video. It's bad.

I didn't straw man your position, I gave an example. You failed to address the rest of my post and while your chemistry arguments are pretty much correct they are irrelevant to your theory.

What happened to the towers in your opinion, how, where were devices planted and what were they made out of?

 

[Dabljuh]

What happened to the towers in your opinion, how, where were devices planted and what were they made out of?

Caseless, castable thermate with a large sulfur component and a permanganate component. It would simply be cast, around junctions especially, the task of figuring out what exactly the best locations, (junctions, lateral connections etc) that you need to destroy in such a fashion, would be more suitable for a structural engineer or architect to answer. The number of charges could be relatively low, maybe in the order of 40-120, relying on the kinetic force of the impacting top of the tower to destroy the weakened bottom, rather than a 'clean' controlled demolition. The more appropriate term would be 'assisted collapse' instead of 'controlled demolition' - This is prep work for a relatively simple, uncontrolled collapse that can be accomplished with a small group of people in a few days worth of time and access to the elevator shafts, in addition to a few unoccupied floors. Complicity of the security in the building can be assumed.

The collapse would look precisely like the one assumed by the officials - a "natural" looking failure of the columns due to heat, and failure of the bottom to resist the impact energy of the top, with the exception being that the heat's source was aluminothermic in nature, and not simple office fires.

The charges would be ignited via remote control, not requiring any cabling. Due to the castable nature of the thermate, the RC/priming mechanism could be hidden inside or merely sticking out of the charge and would dissolve/evaporate almost entirely once the irreversible thermate reaction is ignited.

While therm(i|a)te itself wouldn't ignite due to an office fire, the primer could, explaining a few instances of thermite charges going off apparently prematurely. "Explosions" reported by witnesses may have other explanations. In the case of the much cleaner, much more controlled demolition of WTC7, a significantly higher prep time can be assumed, even though thermate would have been the source of the destruction as well. Also, a case of arson in addition to the thermate is a likely scenario, to ensure that there is a fire to take the blame for the collapse.

Did I miss anything? The planes? Sorry, I don't know much about the planes, I only know that without complicity of top DOD officials and especially NORAD, they couldn't realistically have reached the towers (or the pentagon) in the first place.

 

[Dabljuh]

because it would melt the spandrel plate its pouring over. and another thing. if thats molten steel from the core how did it make its way 60 feet across a concrete floor without cooling? The wreckage would have caused the floor to deflect and your molten steel would have to climb uphill across the slab. Clearly this can only be metal from the plane wreckage which ended up in that corner.

Wait, wait - Molten iron would have cooled off on the way to the window, but molten aluminium (which does not glow in daylight conditions) would stay yellow-white-hot? Also, you're completely ignoring the fact that an office fire doesn't burn hot enough to heat anything to the point of yellow-white hotness. At the very best, an office fire with favorable conditions could achieve orange to orange-yellow hotness, but never yellow-white.

Furthermore, I've heard the rather ignorant theory of the aluminium itself burning to produce a molten yellow-hot stream of aluminium oxide. This is however impossible for the following reasons: First of all, aluminium doesn't burn unless it is finely powdered, i.e. there is oxygen indispersed with atomic aluminium. If aluminium is in bulk, in the earth's oxygen-rich atmosphere it almost immediately forms a very thin layer of aluminium oxide, which actually prevents further corrosion - The same thing even happens when aluminium is liquified by heat, it simply can't burn because the chemical reaction is not sustainable. Now lets assume for a second the aluminium for some reason did indeed get atomized. Now atomized aluminium is an extremely dangerous thing, it ignites, nay, explodes very easily in contact with air. Plus oxidizing aluminium gets very hot. 4000° plus, that's even hotter than the thermite reaction! Now here's the problem, what do you guess, happens with 4000°C hot aluminium? It evaporates! It flies away as a gas, cools off, and forms an aerosol that cannot possibly flow as a liquid anywhere but at best, coats everything in its path. The white smoke you see flying from a regular old thermite reaction, that's also vaporized (and condensing) aluminium with an initial temperature over 3000°C that cools off and forms an aerosol as aluminium oxide.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

So let's get this straight. We already know for sure that the building would have come down from the plane and fire alone. Yet for some reason thermite was planted to get the building to simply fall faster because letting the building fall at normal speed would...would...well, maybe Dab can explain that one to us.

And the tell tale signs that it was a CD are how it looked, which was the debris exploding outward. Yet thermite does not create and explosion. And in order to pull this off they planted thermite in an area of the building that was struck by a commercial jet and burned for an hour. We know this because the collapse initiated at the impacts. Or perhaps Dab wants us to beleive that the thermite was planted and cut into the building in the hour between the impact and the collapse, in the middle of fires and collapsing building and in front of witnesses.

Maybe Dab an explain the unavoidable results of his implications that he has no actual evidence of to begin with.

 

[Jonnyclueless]

Wait, wait - Molten iron would have cooled off on the way to the window, but molten aluminium (which does not glow in daylight conditions) would stay yellow-white-hot? Also, you're completely ignoring the fact that an office fire doesn't burn hot enough to heat anything to the point of yellow-white hotness. At the very best, an office fire with favorable conditions could achieve orange to orange-yellow hotness, but never yellow-white.

It doesn't help that your claim about aluminum is not true and that it also doesn't account for it being mixed with other materials and that it was not an ordinary office fire. And in fact members of this forum have actually performed such experiments with aluminum just to show it in fact glowing yellow-white.

You guys find these little anomalies and then look for specific and exact conditions and pretend that they represent any and everything. Please understand that this is why the scientific community doesn't take you guys seriously. But yet you kids would rather run around pretending the entire scientific community is just stupid and doesn't know any better.

 

[A W Smith]

Why troofersl cant read

Originally Posted by A W Smith
because it would melt the spandrel plate its pouring over. and another thing. if thats molten steel from the core how did it make its way 60 feet across a concrete floor without cooling? The wreckage would have caused the floor to deflect and your molten steel would have to climb uphill across the slab. Clearly this can only be metal from the plane wreckage which ended up in that corner.

Wait, wait - Molten iron would have cooled off on the way to the window, but molten aluminium (which does not glow in daylight conditions) would stay yellow-white-hot? Also, you're completely ignoring the fact that an office fire doesn't burn hot enough to heat anything to the point of yellow-white hotness. At the very best, an office fire with favorable conditions could achieve orange to orange-yellow hotness, but never yellow-white.

Furthermore, I've heard the rather ignorant theory of the aluminium itself burning to produce a molten yellow-hot stream of aluminium oxide. This is however impossible for the following reasons: First of all, aluminium doesn't burn unless it is finely powdered, i.e. there is oxygen indispersed with atomic aluminium. If aluminium is in bulk, in the earth's oxygen-rich atmosphere it almost immediately forms a very thin layer of aluminium oxide, which actually prevents further corrosion - The same thing even happens when aluminium is liquified by heat, it simply can't burn because the chemical reaction is not sustainable. Now lets assume for a second the aluminium for some reason did indeed get atomized. Now atomized aluminium is an extremely dangerous thing, it ignites, nay, explodes very easily in contact with air. Plus oxidizing aluminium gets very hot. 4000° plus, that's even hotter than the thermite reaction! Now here's the problem, what do you guess, happens with 4000°C hot aluminium? It evaporates! It flies away as a gas, cools off, and forms an aerosol that cannot possibly flow as a liquid anywhere but at best, coats everything in its path. The white smoke you see flying from a regular old thermite reaction, that's also vaporized (and condensing) aluminium with an initial temperature over 3000°C that cools off and forms an aerosol as aluminium oxide.

 

[1337m4n]

So, Dabljuh, was it explosives or was it thermite?

One is not the other. Take your pick.

 

[1337m4n]

So, Dabljuh, was it explosives or was it thermite?

One is not the other. Take your pick.

Oops, it seems the pompous Dabljuh is putting me on Ignore. Someone else should ask him this question, then, as it is a crucial question for ANY Truther who just spouts out "anomalies" without putting together a coherent theory.

I also apologize for jumping to conclusions, for what little it's worth.

 

[Dabljuh]

Originally Posted by A W Smith [qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/helloworld2/buttons/viewpost.gif[/qimg]
because it would melt the spandrel plate its pouring over. and another thing. if thats molten steel from the core how did it make its way 60 feet across a concrete floor without cooling? The wreckage would have caused the floor to deflect and your molten steel would have to climb uphill across the slab. Clearly this can only be metal from the plane wreckage which ended up in that corner.

So you expect me to believe that wreckage from the plane magically becomes 1500°C+ hot, magically flows uphills, has a ridiculously high specific heat coefficient preventing it from cooling due to the ice-cold concrete floor, and then magically does not damage the spandrel made of butter apparently

Yeah, that sounds like a perfectly viable alternative to an eutectic thermite product (iron, mostly) flowing downhill as the floor's creating a channel due to the peripherial column being damaged there, out of the window, producing the signature sparks of oxidizing iron

Why troofersl cant read

I simply ignore raging ********, I'm still waiting for a real alternative there. So far, my theory is far superior to yours.

 

[gumboot]

So you expect me to believe that wreckage from the plane magically becomes 1500°C+ hot, magically flows uphills, has a ridiculously high specific heat coefficient preventing it from cooling due to the ice-cold concrete floor, and then magically does not damage the spandrel made of butter apparently

No. The wreckage was already in that corner before it heated up, on account of having slammed into the building at 500MPH.

Yeah, that sounds like a perfectly viable alternative to eutectic thermite flowing downhill as the floor's creating a channel due to the peripherial column being damaged there, out of the window, producing the signature sparks of oxidizing iron

I'm sorry but you cannot possibly resolve "signature sparks of oxidizing iron" from such poor quality video. It could be any number of things, of any number of sizes. Actual sparks would not show up on video at that distance.

 

[Alferd_Packer]

So, Dabljuh, was it explosives or was it thermite?

One is not the other. Take your pick.

It was "hushaboom."

 

[Dabljuh]

No. The wreckage was already in that corner before it heated up, on account of having slammed into the building at 500MPH.

Heated up by magic, no less.

I'm sorry but you cannot possibly resolve "signature sparks of oxidizing iron" from such poor quality video. It could be any number of things, of any number of sizes. Actual sparks would not show up on video at that distance.

The original video has a much higher resolution than the youtube crap you're looking at. Even on zoomed in youtube vids, what little is visible from the sparks can be interpreted as iron sparks. But they really just look like the ones from molten steel/iron would, except maybe with a lower frequency which can be indeed explained with low resolution of the video material and the lower temperature of the eutectic in its liquid state. Of course, alternative explanations for these sparks are possible.

It may be wreckage from the planes that magically heated itself up to above 1500°C, far hotter than any amount of hydrocarbon fire would. But this scenario is simply not as likely as the alternative I offer. If you have a better alternative than both these, I'm readily willing to review it. But for now, the thermite scenario is a better explanation for this observation than the hydrocarbon fire.

 

[e^n]

The collapse would look precisely like the one assumed by the officials - a "natural" looking failure of the columns due to heat, and failure of the bottom to resist the impact energy of the top, with the exception being that the heat's source was aluminothermic in nature, and not simple office fires.

The charges would be ignited via remote control, not requiring any cabling. Due to the castable nature of the thermate, the RC/priming mechanism could be hidden inside or merely sticking out of the charge and would dissolve/evaporate almost entirely once the irreversible thermate reaction is ignited.

I'd like to introduce you to another forum member, Max Photon. You will get along well with him.

The only issue I have with this theory is that remote control thermite ignition does not seem particularly plausible. You plan to embed an RF antenna inside a large ferrous object. I don't expect reception to be astounding

Regardless, this theory is very similar to Max's theory, and as such the only thing it is missing is any evidence. Can you make some predictions with your theory which we can test?

 

[Newtons Bit]

I'd like to introduce you to another forum member, Max Photon. You will get along well with him.

The only issue I have with this theory is that remote control thermite ignition does not seem particularly plausible. You plan to embed an RF antenna inside a large ferrous object. I don't expect reception to be astounding

Regardless, this theory is very similar to Max's theory, and as such the only thing it is missing is any evidence. Can you make some predictions with your theory which we can test?

One of the problems the NYFD had on the 1993 WTC bombing is that their radios didn't work in the stairwells.

 

[Dabljuh]

I'd like to introduce you to another forum member, Max Photon. You will get along well with him.

The only issue I have with this theory is that remote control thermite ignition does not seem particularly plausible. You plan to embed an RF antenna inside a large ferrous object. I don't expect reception to be astounding

Regardless, this theory is very similar to Max's theory, and as such the only thing it is missing is any evidence. Can you make some predictions with your theory which we can test?

Repeat the investigation of Prof. Jones regarding the composition, structure and origin of the metallic microspheres in the dust and from a range of samples on the actual steel in the debris.