Molten Steel

Status
Not open for further replies.
Christopher7 said:
Not a good comparison.

You cannot understand [or will not admit] the physical reality that all the weight of the top section cannot be applied to the floor below so you go on a rant.

The NIST FAQ explanation is a simplistic farce.
Click to expand...

Um, you don't even understand design... let alone the principals behind it... You've demonstrated this quite clearly despite myself providing you source material so you wouldn't be confused and material from others who been exposed to the professional practice for 15 or more years who have much higher qualifications than myself. Clearly you're not interested or other wise you'd be aware of the implications of that claim and how absurdly stupid it is
 
Last edited:
Sunstealer said:
Yep, I'd say that without a shadow of a doubt. It is almost impossible to tell unless you have huge amounts of experience and work daily with various metals at high temperature. These people are professionals and experts in their field, but that does not mean they have a magic ability to know what liquid steel looks like as opposed to any other liquid metal at high temperature.
Click to expand...
There's nothing magic about it. When someone sees a steel beam dripping molten metal they know that it's steel.

Mark Loizeaux is confident that it was molten steel. It's an easy call.

You just can't accept reality.

I'm a qualified metallurgist FFS and I've already stated that I would find it hard to do. Infact there was a thread with pictures of different metals at different temperatures and I couldn't get them all. Most people, and that includes engineers, never see liquid steel or any other liquid metal whilst doing their jobs.

How do you know something is steel by looking at it without experience? You can't (unless you have further information).
Click to expand...
Like molten metal and melted beams. You assume all these people only saw molten metal.

This is why I'd defer to someone like WhiteLion who does have the knowledge, because they work with liquid metals on a daily basis.
Click to expand...
He wasn't there. He hasn't got a clue what the witnesses saw.

Molten is a word that people use to describe very hot or an intense orange colour.
Click to expand...
Fires in a debris pile cannot heat any metal to orange hot, much less yellow hot.

People will say molten lava, molten glass, molten metal, molten plastic to describe what they see, but they don't always mean liquid. It's not hard to see and I've provided examples. Why can't you see this?
Click to expand...
The only reason you doubt that it was steel is because you cannot deal with the consequences.

Why don't you look critically at what you are proposing? Why don't you look as critically at Jones' work as you criticise people here?
Click to expand...
I'm quoting the numerous credible witnesses, not Prof.Jones.
 
Grizzly Bear said:
Um, you don't even understand design... let alone the principals behind it... You've demonstrated this more times than I can count... and I even provided you source material so you wouldn't be confused. Clearly you're not interested

Stick with the molten steel... you're better at your dodges when you stick to the OP...
Click to expand...
Stick with your denial if it makes you feel good.

I read the page at your link. The drawing shows the exterior walls applying their weight to the exterior walls and the floor applying its weight to the floor. You seem to have overlooked that little detail.

The NIST FAQ hypothesis has all the weight being applied to the floor. That's impossible.

The NIST FAQ hypothesis is a simplistic joke.

A dynamic load will certainly crush the section below but not the way NIST posits. Floor supports are designed to hold a floor up, not down. The floor above will fail before the floor below and the top section will be destroyed in short order.

All the theories so far have the top section staying intact. That is absurd.
 
Christopher7 said:
All the theories so far have the top section staying intact. That is absurd.
Click to expand...

Your statement is not correct; You are not qualified to make such a statement in the first place. Deal with it.

Get a paper published. In a REAL journal. Otherwise you're just another arrogant crackpot blowing smoke. But you know that already.
 
Last edited:
are you guys going to continue with this troll for 55 pages? when is enough is enough? realistice anyone?
 
Arus808 said:
are you guys going to continue with this troll for 55 pages? when is enough is enough? realistice anyone?
Click to expand...
"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."

Folks here insist that all the witnesses who saw melted beams and molten steel didn't really see molten steel because they know that it is impossible for fires in a debris pile to melt steel.
 
Christopher7 said:
"When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."

Folks here insist that all the witnesses who saw melted beams and molten steel didn't really see molten steel because they know that it is impossible for fires in a debris pile to melt steel.
Click to expand...

That is the dumbest statement in the world.

You just used a quote from a fictional character to base your delusions on. Not cool.

Go to bed, it is 01:18, you need to get your thyroid checked if you can’t sleep.

Your molten steel is the biggest dead-end in 911Truth delusionVille. \\

Most of the quotes you support in the OP are lies or hearsay. One person had his eyes closed and was imagining it.


Then the big clue bird, melted steel months after 911 prove thermite was not used. Do you understand Jones made up thermite and he has fooled you into a real dumb idea?


Fictional quotes for fictional ideas; 911Truth (there is an idiot who used that quote form SH in 911Truth, not you but some dolt and he is super nuts)_

You have got to get skeptical about 911Truth who are liars, frauds, and hearsay experts.
 
C7 said:
There is no other explanation for the molten steel in the debris piles. There were no other metals in concentration under all three buildings.
Click to expand...
T.A.M. said:
So there was no copper, or aluminum in any significant amounts?
Click to expand...
The copper plumbing and wiring was probably about 1 or 2% of the mass and was mixed in with the concrete, drywall, insulation, carpets, furniture and steel.

So the aluminum siding? Not much?
Click to expand...
Not at all. The aluminum cladding was blown up to 600 feet in all directions.

The Copper plumbing and wiring? Not much? So the only metal of any significant amount in the WTC1/2/7 debris was Steel?
Click to expand...
The only metal in any concentration in the debris piles was steel.

The melting point of copper is 1083 [FONT=&quot]°[/FONT]C. This is hotter than a well ventilated fire [1000[FONT=&quot]°[/FONT]C*]. The debris piles were primairly dust so there was no ventilation and WTC 7 had no basement. Fires in a debris pile would be no where near hot enough to melt copper even if there were concentrations which there were not.
*NISTIR 7213 pg 43


TAM

Edit: oh and in case someone wants to, sorry, I already nominated the above for a March Stundie.
Click to expand...
Let me know if I win. I've always wanted one of those. :cool:
 
Last edited:
Christopher7 said:
Not a good comparison.
Click to expand...

How about when I worked in a sawmill? Different woods?

C7 said:
You cannot understand [or will not admit] the physical reality that all the weight of the top section cannot be applied to the floor below so you go on a rant.
Click to expand...

I cannot understand anyone making all those false and stupid claims telling anyone else they are stupid.

C7 said:
The NIST FAQ explanation is a simplistic farce.
Click to expand...

That even simpletons whould be able to understand. It seems not.

You missed this out you dishonest person.

There was plenty aluminium alloys
 
Christopher7 said:
The copper plumbing and wiring was probably about 1 or 2% of the mass and was mixed in with the concrete, drywall, insulation, carpets, furniture and steel.
Click to expand...

How much of the total mass molten metal? 1% or less?

C7 said:
Not at all. The aluminum cladding was blown up to 600 feet in all directions.
Click to expand...

Not all of it and so was a lot of the steel apparently. There are many pictures of the cladding falling down the side of the building.

C7 said:
The only metal in any concentration in the debris piles was steel.
Click to expand...

Now thats another lie.
 
C7:

So ALL of the aluminum siding, from 110 floors of two buildings, all of it, was ejected 600 feet horizontally? Wrong, you are wrong, and I won't bother to ask you for proof or a source, as I know your sorry ass can't provide one for that. Your statement has got to be one of the dumbest ****ing statements I have ever heard from any truther, at any time. Congratulations.

TAM:)
 
Last edited:
Christopher7 said:
Not at all. The aluminum cladding was blown up to 600 feet in all directions.
Click to expand...


What "blew" all that cladding? Thermite didn't. Thermite doesn't "blow' anything.

You are wrong, as shown by all the video we have of the collapse.
 
Last edited:
Christopher7 said:
I read the page at your link. The drawing shows the exterior walls applying their weight to the exterior walls and the floor applying its weight to the floor. You seem to have overlooked that little detail.
Click to expand...

The diagram assumes a static load if you bothered to read, which described the tower's pre-collapse condition, not the collapse progression once columns in the impact floors failed allowing for the downward acceleration of the upper section. The columns are still working as a system to support the overall load well below the collapse wave, but those immediately experiencing the impact loads are another story.


Christopher7 said:
The NIST FAQ hypothesis has all the weight being applied to the floor. That's impossible.

The NIST FAQ hypothesis is a simplistic joke.

A dynamic load will certainly crush the section below but not the way NIST posits. Floor supports are designed to hold a floor up, not down. The floor above will fail before the floor below and the top section will be destroyed in short order.
Click to expand...
Good God did you just go on full Heiwa mode just now? Now I know you're completely unqualified to comment on the engineering aspects of the collapse. End of story... the denial accusations... well carry on calling me a denier if you want, if it raises your self-esteem... but this discussion is over both for being severely off topic and given your inability to understand a subject you're jumping into with nothing short of ignorance. Why I wasted the last 6 months trying to get you to understand these areas... is quite beyond even myself. I'll be more than happy to continue wasting time with this discussion in a different thread but this is far outside the scope in which this thread was intended.


Arus808 said:
are you guys going to continue with this troll for 55 pages? when is enough is enough? realistice anyone?
Click to expand...

I suppose I had an unrealistic hope Christopher would understand the material presented to him, but if this has been going on for more than a year before my involvement here, and he's still ignorant of subjects he's clearly unqualified to comment on then you're right...
 
90% of this sub forum is people not qualified telling people who are they don't know what they are talking about. That's why truthers don't venture too far from the internet and aren't found in courtrooms, respected journals, and law enforcement investigations; in real life, professionals frown on that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom