Molten Steel

[beachnut]

You are describing yourself.

I am also engaged in other activities to spread the truth about 9/11.

What are you doing here?

You are spreading delusions about 911 with your OP filled with lies, hearsay, and false statements.

 

[kookbreaker]

Lame excuse for denial.

Not at all. Second hand accounts are very, very poor evidence.

Do you think Mark Loizeaux is lying? Do you think he is an idiot?

Look up 'false dichotomy' sometime, m'kay sunshine?

OK, you think he is a liar.

Nope.

There are no photos or videos of molten steel being scooped up because that just cant be.

If you had any such photos or videos I think you would have posted them by now. Your lack of video or photo evidence for eight years after 9/11 and at least 6 since the hysterical nutjobs started crying 'MOLTEN STEEL!!!!' says you basically have nothing. This is why you lash out at anyone who points out what a house of straw you have built. Its all you can do.

You know this because you are certain no one would risk destroying a bucket by scooping up molten steel.

Q.E.D. I know that anyone who tried would destroy the equipment they were using. Its like trying to scoop up boiling water with an ice spoon. Why is this so hard for you to understand?

 

[Christopher7]

The thing I don't understand is this: What criteria have you developed to determine their qualifications in identifying materials?

What makes you think they are not qualified to recognize molten steel?

Could it be that you assume every witness is somehow unusually well qualified in identifying a particular type of metal among many other types mixed in the rubble just by looking at it?

Yes, this is an easy call. Steel was the only metal in concentration throughout the debris pile. It is especially easy to determine that molten metal dripping from a steel beam is steel. It doesn't require any expertise and was not necessary to do a chemical analysis to determine the obvious.

Deniers chant the mantra:
"I can't figure out how the steel could have stayed molten, therefore it could not happen."

A valid contention is it not?

It is not!

After all you seem quite comfortable with calling thermite a culprit of whatever molten material was observed days, weeks, or even months after the collapse.

Quite simply, there is no other explanation.

Mr. Voorsanger said there was molten steel in the meteorite.

Have you bothered contacting him to get clarification on what he made of this object? There must be some reason he has not taken at issue such a ground breaking phenomenon. Why don't contact him and inquire as to why he has not stepped up to the plate to conclude what you have gotten from his words?

That is not necessary. The "meteorite" was fused together by the extreme heat. There is no reason to doubt that there was molten steel in the "meteorite".

This is just another sarcastic question from "Gravy's subject shift list".

 

[Sunstealer]

C7 has lost it - he's now just resorting to mud slinging rather than responding to actual questions. If we show evidence against him then we are "deniers". If we ask for evidence from people with second hand stories we are supposedly calling them liars. C7 is way too far down the rabbit whole to actually read what anyone says and think critically about it.

"Molten steel was caused by thermite" - that's all he says. He can't provide any evidence for liquid steel. He doesn't know how much liquid steel was present. He cannot show how thermite can be an explanation, but he knows it was the cause! He cites Jones as if that's proof, yet when Jones has been shown to be wrong time and time again he still believes Jones. You can see why it's so easy for many people to get conned in the real world let alone online, where the desire to be proved right on any subject can so easily be found without any critical analysis.

He no doubt is engaged in many other internet boards spreading the truth rubbish rather than getting off his chair and entering the real world.

C7- Have you contacted KSM's lawyers with all your evidence yet cyber-warrior?

Poor lad, he hasn't got a leg to stand on and doesn't know why and what's more he never will. He clings to his thermite and molten steel and no evidence will convince him otherwise. After 44 pages of evidence to the contrary he still clings to it - he can't change his mind. I wonder why it's so important to him? I'm just here to laugh and poke him occasionally now. Until he takes some high school classes in Maths, Chemistry, Physics etc and then goes on to get some higher qualifications and actually learn something he'll stay what he is now and that's a joke.

 

[funk de fino]

It's really quite simple. Thermite is the only known explanation for the molten steel. There is plenty of evidence including thermite chips in the WTC dust.

You can call Jones and Loizeaux liars if you want to but you won't get much support outside your small circle of deniers.

I'm gonna repeat this as you dodged it

Rubbish, why has it taken him so long to produce anything more about them after apparently sending them to independant people for analysis.

Because they are not what he says they are. He is a proven fraud. And claws cannot scoop up molten metal, buckets technically could, but your pic is a claw so it is evidence of nothing. Claws do not dip liquids.

 

[Christopher7]

Not at all. Second hand accounts are very, very poor evidence.

In a court of law perhaps, but we are not in a court of law. All evidence can and should be considered.

Do you think Mark Loizeaux is lying? Do you think he is an idiot?

Look up 'false dichotomy'

You did not answer the question.

OK, you think he is a liar.

Nope.

Then you believe him when he says there are photos and videos of molten steel, right?

If you had any such photos or videos I think you would have posted them by now.

The government has 7,000 photos and 7,000 video clips. You know that.

Q.E.D. I know that anyone who tried would destroy the equipment they were using. Its like trying to scoop up boiling water with an ice spoon.

Not so. The steel buckets are very thick and heavy. It takes a while for steel to heat up. The bucket could be cooled after each dip with a fire hose. The biggest problem would probably be metal solidifying on the bucket.

 

[Christopher7]

why has it taken him [Prof. Jones] so long to produce anything more about them after apparently sending them to independant people for analysis.

He has already produced a body of evidence and continues to do so.

And claws cannot scoop up molten metal, buckets technically could, but your pic is a claw . . . . Claws do not dip liquids.

Brilliant observation Watson!

so it is evidence of nothing

Wrong.
As a detective, you leave a great deal to be desired.

 

[Christopher7]

If we show evidence against him then we are "deniers".

No.
When you deny evidence you are deniers.

If we ask for evidence from people with second hand stories we are supposedly calling them liars.

Either you believe them or you don't.

"Molten steel was caused by thermite" - that's all he says. He can't provide any evidence for liquid steel.

The physical evidence was destroyed. There is plenty of witness testimony. You just insist on denying it.

He doesn't know how much liquid steel was present.

Correct

He cannot show how thermite can be an explanation,

Dude! Thermite melts steel.

He cites Jones as if that's proof

I site the witnesses as the primary evidence, the one photo that survived the government purge as further evidence and Prof. Jones as providing scientific evidence to back it up.

 

[funk de fino]

The government has 7,000 photos and 7,000 video clips. You know that.

No, they dont. You're exagerrating again

Not so. The steel buckets are very thick and heavy. It takes a while for steel to heat up. The bucket could be cooled after each dip with a fire hose. The biggest problem would probably be metal solidifying on the bucket.

You have not worked withn excavators have you. The hydraulic hoses would melt. You are speculating all over again.

 

[funk de fino]

He has already produced a body of evidence and continues to do so.

He has gone quiet on the thermite chips. Why is that? It would take no time at all to show what they really were. Why has he gone silent on this?

Because they are paint, thats why.

Brilliant observation Watson!

So the claw photograph does not back up Mr Loizeaux claims like you have said.

Wrong.
As a detective, you leave a great deal to be desired.

See above. As a logical and rational thinker you leave more than a lot to be desired.

 

[funk de fino]

Dude! Thermite melts steel.

You cannot show how it can cut horizontally through steel though can you?

 

[Christopher7]

No, they dont. You're exagerrating again

No, i was rounding off.

You have not worked withn excavators have you. The hydraulic hoses would melt. You are speculating all over again.

My dear Watson, please observe:
[the closest hoses are at the elbow, another 6-10 feet away]

 

[Christopher7]

You cannot show how it can cut horizontally through steel though can you?

That is not necessary. It is only necessary to prove the existence of molten steel and the existence of thermite. This has been done to my satisfaction if not yours.

You ask for speculation on how it was done in an attempt to subject shift away from the evidence you must deny in order to maintain the Official Collapse Theory.

 

[Christopher7]

He has gone quiet on the thermite chips. Why is that? It would take no time at all to show what they really were.

I believe he has released a video where he ignites some of these chips.

Why has he gone silent on this?

Patience lad, he's working on it.

So the claw photograph does not back up Mr Loizeaux claims like you have said.

Although it is a different piece of equipment it is consistent with what Mark Loizeaux said about molten steel. The steel he was talking about was fully liquid and had to be scooped out with a bucket. This glob is semi solid so they used a crab claw to pick it up. Note the fire hose going in the forground and all the steam from around the glob. This is molten steel, just like the witnesses said.

 

[funk de fino]

No, i was rounding off.

You rounded up from 7,000 to 14,000. I wonder why?

My dear Watson, please observe:
[the closest hoses are at the elbow, another 6-10 feet away]

[qimg]http://img301.imageshack.us/img301/4254/crabclawwithpistonsealajk6.png[/qimg]

My dear Sherlock. That is not a bucket I assume. I cant see images from sites like that here. Please link from your JREF album.

 

[funk de fino]

That is not necessary. It is only necessary to prove the existence of molten steel and the existence of thermite. This has been done to my satisfaction if not yours.

You ask for speculation on how it was done in an attempt to subject shift away from the evidence you must deny in order to maintain the Official Collapse Theory.

All you have is speculation. There is not thermite and you cannot say how it would be used to cut horizontally anyway. Its never been done before therefore it cannot have happened if I use truther logic.

 

[funk de fino]

I believe he has released a video where he ignites some of these chips.

So what? How long does it take to get them analysed? He has had them for months. I have operated chroms before, it takes minutes. Where is the reoport from the independant labs he was sending then to?

I can ignite lots of things in videos, it proves nothing. Paint is flammable too

Patience lad, he's working on it.

See above

Although it is a different piece of equipment it is consistent with what Mark Loizeaux said about molten steel. The steel he was talking about was fully liquid and had to be scooped out with a bucket. This glob is semi solid so they used a crab claw to pick it up. Note the fire hose going in the forground and all the steam from around the glob. This is molten steel, just like the witnesses said.

No. its not. The bucket is not a claw and the bucket is what he was talking about. Molten metal not solid. [C7 mode on]The picture is not in sunlight therefore you canot use it to determine anything.[/C7 mode off]

What is the orange pipe in the claw photo?

 

[GlennB]

Not so. The steel buckets are very thick and heavy. It takes a while for steel to heat up. The bucket could be cooled after each dip with a fire hose. The biggest problem would probably be metal solidifying on the bucket.

The biggest problem would be that it would require a new bucket for each "dip" . If the bucket doesn't melt the steel will solidify while being moved. No contractor would be stupid enough to try to collect molten steel with an excavator.

"Coming through guys ... clear the way ... bucket of molten steel here ..."

"Where ya gonna put it??"

"Ah .... er .... good question"

 

[Christopher7]

All you have is speculation.

No, there are numerous qualified witnesses, a photo and evidence of thermite in the WTC dust.

 

[Christopher7]

The biggest problem would be that it would require a new bucket for each "dip" . If the bucket doesn't melt the steel will solidify while being moved.

It doesn't happen that fast.

"Where ya gonna put it??""Ah .... er .... good question"

Dump some dirt or sand in the bed of a truck and hollow out a place for it.

You are hand waving Mark Loizeaux statement. He doesn't have a problem with admitting there was molten steel, why do you?