• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Molten Steel

Status
Not open for further replies.
Second time, thewholesoul. Let's see how sincere you are. You've made your arguments here. What people with the power to actually do something about it are you going to present your case to now?
 
OP uses LIE for support. Why? Who cares if there was molten steel? F-

Hearsay
thewholesoul said:
TESTIMONY of MOLTEN STEEL

1. Leslie Robertson, one of the structural engineers responsible for the design of the WTC, “21 days after the attacks, the fires were still burning and molten steel was still running” ...
Click to expand...

Hearsay" NO?

OOPS It is a lie, you posted a lie to support your delusion of nothing to do with nothing.
Debate with Jones where Robertson refutes all of 911Truth -
ROBERTSON: We had many engineers on the site of the project following their failure. We and other engineering firms, and yes, there was a red-hot metal, seen by engineers. But molten, molten means flowing. I’ve never run across anyone who said they had in fact seen molten metal, or by the way if they had seen it, that they had performed some sort of analysis to determine what that metal was.
Click to expand...
You posted a lie to support your delusion that supports what? Why is your research so shallow, just lift junk from the lies of 911Truth. Hearsay, lies and fantasy and you post it unknowingly?


As an engineer I find your effort is abysmal and all your work is based on failed ideas from 911Truth ...
 
Last edited:
Gravy said:
Wrong again. This is what comes of putting your trust in utter incompetents and liars. You should read my site some time. You could keep from making gross errors in every post. From my Steven Jones section:

Jones is the same guy who . . . .

Jones is the same guy who . . .

Yep, you hitched your wagon to a real intellectual star, thewholesoul.
Click to expand...
Absolutely. We should ignore a PhD with 20 years experience as a professor at a major [very conservative] University and put our trust in an ill-mannered tour guide who slanders anyone and everyone who questions the Official Conspiracy Theory.
Clearly, this is a wise choice. :cool:
 
Christopher7 said:
Absolutely. We should ignore a PhD with 20 years experience as a professor at a major [very conservative] University and put our trust in an ill-mannered tour guide who slanders anyone and everyone who questions the Official Conspiracy Theory.
Clearly, this is a wise choice. :cool:
Click to expand...

Of course Chris, as we should ignore every single institute of professional engineers from every single profession, across the globe,that have spoken out and disagreed with NIST, right?

Can you name one?
 
Last edited:
Christopher7 said:
Absolutely. We should ignore a PhD with 20 years experience as a professor at a major [very conservative] University and put our trust in an ill-mannered tour guide who slanders anyone and everyone who questions the Official Conspiracy Theory.
Clearly, this is a wise choice. :cool:
Click to expand...
Well, all his colleagues at BYU didn't ignore him, they thought his 911 stance was highly unreliable and Jones resigned in shame.
 
thewholesoul's continued evasions.

thewholesoul said:
OMG

i'm really sorry but this is my last post to you on this semantical subject
Click to expand...

In other words, (OMG!) you know you painted yourself in a corner with no way out.

"aparantly" (sic) is a subjective term, meaning it appears to be.
Click to expand...
Just what I said. Did you miss it intentionally? To Steven Jones, by visual analysis alone, it "appears" that molten metal can solidify around steel rebar and paper without melting the rebar and burning the paper to unrecognizable ashes. You cannot drum up the courage to admit to all of us the absurdity of Steven Jones's statement, TWS? Or even defend how he can "apparently" see any such thing when Jones has had the opportunity to address those very questions or CORRECT his own paper after three full years?

Why do you continue to give Steven Jones a free pass, TWS?

Of course, you will run away from honest admission of the facts, TWS. It's the nature of 9/11 Truthers caught in their own contradictions and unable to admit they're wrong.

It is because he did not test the meteorite that he MUST USE the word "apparently". please try to get over this.
Click to expand...
No, it isn't. It is because Steven Jones and you cannot admit to us what you know is true: Steven Jones has not demonstrated how molten metal can solidify around steel rebar without melting the rebar or how paper embedded in once-molten metal can survive not being burned to ashes. In particular, because Jones and you refuse to demonstrate how it is possible - even after three full years since Jones made the claim.

Therefore your claim that the meteroite suffered extreme temperatures, that "Thermite was responsible for the molten iron photographed at ground zero and tested by steven jones but that would have solidified shortly after the reaction," including YOUR claim about the so-called "meteorite" that Steven Jones refers to, is a claim both absurd and completely unsupported that you think you can get away with.

It is easy to show what an intellectually dishonest person 9/11 Truthers like you are when you decide to defend absurd notions and give frauds and charlatans like Steven Jones exemptions from both the criteria you impose on NON-Truthers, and to the criteria of scientific method you refuse to adhere to. We see it here repeatedly, you keep getting called on it.

You have an opportunity to come clean and finally admit that neither Jones nor you have any basis for supporting Jones's claim.

Will you continue to demonstrate your intellectual dishonesty to the entire forum by claiming Jones's claims are just "semantics", that Jones gets a free pass for the claims he makes, or will you address Jones's claims - and yours - directly, that it is possible to believe molten metal can solidify around steel rebar without melting the rebar and not burn the paper imbedded in the "meteorite?"

So what will it be for you, TMS? Continued evasion or honest discussion?
 
TexasJack said:
Well, all his colleagues at BYU didn't ignore him, they thought his 911 stance was highly unreliable and Jones resigned in shame.
Click to expand...
Steven Jones was asked to retire because BYU is a very conservative University and their benefactors don't want controversy.

The first casualty of the War on Terror was our right to question the War on Terror without fear of loosing our jobs.

Steven Jones is a patriot who has put it all on the line for his country. If this cause were not essential, he would have just gone on with his life, his job and his research.

Here's a few words from a Conspiracy Theorist:

[FONT=&quot]John F. Kennedy - Speech on secrecy[/FONT]
 [FONT=&quot]"For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence, on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of election, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night rather than armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations. Its preparations are concealed not published. Its mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned. No rumor is printed. No secret is revealed." [/FONT]
 [FONT=&quot]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xhZk8ronces[/FONT]

 This is not something new, political conspiracies have been part of human history since the beginning.

BTW: You believe in a conspiracy theory too.
People with glass stones shouldn't throw houses.
 
Last edited:
Senenmut said:
im not following. if u set a slower shutter speed, it would collect more light and overexpose the film. im seeing the opposite with your pic, that is, it looks underexposed. but what we see in both pics is a yellow object that would have a corresponding temp of at least 1260-1370C.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exposure_(photography)
Overexposure and underexposure
A photograph may be described as overexposed when it has a loss of highlight detail, that is, the when the bright parts of an image are effectively all white, known as "blown out highlights" (or "clipped whites"). A photograph may be described as underexposed when it has a loss of shadow detail, that is, the dark areas indistinguishable from black, known as "blocked up shadows" (or sometimes "crushed shadows," "crushed blacks," or "clipped blacks," especially in video).
Click to expand...
There's no need for the wikipedia link, if you had reread my post after using the template I originally posted you will see that I took notice of my error and corrected it several minutes prior to you posting. I appreciate the clarification, but I corrected it already. As far as the return to the temperature measurements, without knowing the exposure rates of the cameras I'm hesitant to place any estimates, because the likelihood for error is great. That said, the overall collapse wasn't characteristic of anything "controlled" and as the streaming material from the south tower was only observed there, and no where else, I find any basis for incendiaries from it to be extremely weak.


Christopher7 said:
Absolutely. We should ignore a PhD with 20 years experience as a professor at a major [very conservative] University
Click to expand...
Is the titled position more important than the demonstration of incompetence he sets forth? This is the guy who dropped a cynder block from 12 feet to prove that an 8-inch thick acre-sized slab of concrete weighing much more couldn't be crushed... or the guy who claims that a compressed section of several floors is a massive chunk of molten steel. Or the man who thinks upper corner damage to WTC 7 are squibs... Personally I could honestly care less about the positions you hold, but the people you and TWS support, and the very people you all draw your supporting arguments from have had years to correct fundamental mistakes and have made clear they have no such intention of doing so... I've tried to put myself in the shoes of a 911 truther, or whatever name you prefer such a position should be called... impossible for me to drink that kind of beer without getting a massive hangover

Christopher7 said:
ill-mannered tour guide who slanders anyone and everyone who questions the Official Conspiracy Theory.
Click to expand...
I'm studying architecture, but for all I care I may go into film. Tell me, if I studied architecture and become a professional actor instead, does that render everything I've studied on architectural subjects irrelevant because I'm not an architect? These ad hominems are rather annoying, so try to come up with an answer avoiding them please...

Christopher7 said:
The first casualty of the War on Terror was our right to question the War on Terror without fear of loosing our jobs.
Click to expand...
Apparently during my internship at the architecture firm in my home city this wasn't a qualifier as to whether you got hired or fired... speaking from personal experience, that's quite an outlandish assumption
 
Last edited:
Grizzly Bear said:
Is the titled position of your hero more important than the demonstration of incompetence he sets forth?
Click to expand...
You-all trash anyone and everyone who questions the Official Conspiracy Theory. Your criticisms are therefore meaningless.

So no matter how much relevant study an individual does on a subject, if it is outside of their profession when they speak on the subject they know absolutely nothing because they don't hold the professional title?
Click to expand...
Gravy is a lot of hot air. I have read his so called debunking site. The first 40 or 50 pages are personal attacks on members of the truth movement. I have watched his videos. He misstates positions of the truth movement and rails on about them. He calls everyone a liar because he sees in other people what he is himself. He puts up straw men and knocks them down. By example he encourages his followers to attack the messenger when they cant logically dispute the evidence. The snotty condescending remarks and personal attacks so prevalent here are a product of his leadership. He is the denier in chief. You can follow this man if you like.

I respect Steven Jones but he is not my hero. I don't follow him or anyone else for that matter.

Seeing the implosion of WTC 7 and recognizing that it was a CD and all that implied set me on the course I am on. I will see it thru as you will stay your course.
 
Last edited:
TexasJack said:
Wrong. Jones chose to retire before his review. Sounds like a coward to me, if he really believed his bogus research, don't you think he should have fought it? He is a coward who did not stick up to his convictions.
Click to expand...
Thank you for making my point. All you know is name calling. You never stop. If Jesus were to join the truth movement, you would trash him too.

Do you actually think anybody cares what you say about them?
The name calling is so constant it has become meaningless.

Have a nice day. :)
 
Christopher7 said:
You-all trash anyone and everyone who questions the Official Conspiracy Theory. Your criticisms are therefore meaningless.

Gravy is a lot of hot air. I have read his so called debunking site. The first 40 or 50 pages are personal attacks on members of the truth movement. I have watched his videos. He misstates positions of the truth movement and rails on about them. He calls everyone a liar because he sees in other people what he is himself. He puts up straw men and knocks them down. By example he encourages his followers to attack the messenger when they cant logically dispute the evidence. The snotty condescending remarks and personal attacks so prevalent here are a product of his leadership. He is the denier in chief. You can follow this man if you like.

I respect Steven Jones but he is not my hero. I don't follow him or anyone else for that matter.

Seeing the implosion of WTC 7 and recognizing that it was a CD and all that implied set me on the course I am on. I will see it thru as you will stay your course.
Click to expand...


This is your own distorted perception. I don't think anyone here sees Gravy as a leader. He'd be the first one to hear about it if he stepped outside his area of expertise and made any unfounded claims.

He has compiled and studied more to do with 9/11 than anyone I know. He has demonstrated a sound understanding of science, but remains modest when pressed. I don't think I've ever seen him make claims as an authority. He's probably the furthest thing from "hot air".

I don't know about personal attacks really, but he seems to get more than his fair share.

I suspect the same applies to Gravy; I respect him but he's not my hero. The irony is if you are going to follow someone, who better than a tour guide? :)
 
3bodyproblem said:
This is your own distorted perception. I don't think anyone here sees Gravy as a leader. He'd be the first one to hear about it if he stepped outside his area of expertise and made any unfounded claims.
Click to expand...
That's all he does.

He has compiled and studied more to do with 9/11 than anyone I know. He has demonstrated a sound understanding of science, but remains modest when pressed. I don't think I've ever seen him make claims as an authority. He's probably the furthest thing from "hot air".
Click to expand...
Modest?
Edited by Gaspode: 
Removed personal attack.


I don't know about personal attacks really, but he seems to get more than his fair share.
Click to expand...
What goes around.

I suspect the same applies to Gravy; I respect him but he's not my hero. The irony is if you are going to follow someone, who better than a tour guide? :)
Click to expand...
Good point. ;)

Do not use personal attacks to argue your point.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Gaspode
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Christopher7 said:
Thank you for making my point. All you know is name calling. You never stop. If Jesus were to join the truth movement, you would trash him too.

Do you actually think anybody cares what you say about them?
The name calling is so constant it has become meaningless.

Have a nice day. :)
Click to expand...

Name calling? He's a coward, that's what he demonstrated. I suppose you would take the same actions as him and quit without a fight.
 
TexasJack said:
Name calling? He's a coward, that's what he demonstrated. I suppose you would take the same actions as him and quit without a fight.
Click to expand...
Forum decorum forbids me to answer you properly.

We just had it in a good place but you just couldn't leave it there. :(
 
bje said:
Steven Jones has not demonstrated how molten metal can solidify around steel rebar without melting the rebar or how paper embedded in once-molten metal can survive not being burned to ashes.
Click to expand...
Of course molten steel can solidify around rebar. [Steel does not melt immediately]. . . . . . Paper, not so much.

The guy in the video about the "meteorite" says something about "molten". Steven was probably quoting him.

What difference does it make anyway?

It's just a lame-assed excuse to slam somebody.

What part of "Attack the argument, not the arguer." don't you guys get?
 
Christopher7 said:
Of course molten steel can solidify around rebar. [Steel does not melt immediately]. . . . . . Paper, not so much.

The guy in the video about the "meteorite" says something about "molten". Steven was probably quoting him.

What difference does it make anyway?

It's just a lame-assed excuse to slam somebody.

What part of "Attack the argument, not the arguer." don't you guys get?
Click to expand...

Chris...Steven Jones once said that Thermite can cause a continuing reaction in molten steel that allows it to stay molten longer. Did you ever hear about that ?
 
bill smith said:
Chris...Steven Jones once said that Thermite can cause a continuing reaction in molten steel that allows it to stay molten longer. Did you ever hear about that ?
Click to expand...
No, that's very interesting. I have heard that there is a form of thermite that you can spray on like insulation but I haven't seen the data. My molten metal expertise is limited to the eroded beam from WTC 7, the witness accounts and the 2 photos.

moltenmetalpp1.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom