Molten Steel

Status
Not open for further replies.
Perhaps we can all [myself included] refrain from personal attacks an insults. This is a very gut wrenching topic and emotions are high on both sides.

I would like to return to the point I was making which is:

In the NIST L report it states that there were 2 elevator cars in the hallway north of the elevator shafts.

The Final report does not mention much less explain how they got there.

The only possible explanation is explosives IMO.

Does anyone have another explanation? If not, then you must accept and deal with the reality that there was a large explosion that ejected the elevator cars out of their shafts and into the hallway.
 
Christopher7 said:
Perhaps we can all [myself included] refrain from personal attacks an insults. This is a very gut wrenching topic and emotions are high on both sides.

I would like to return to the point I was making which is:

In the NIST L report it states that there were 2 elevator cars in the hallway north of the elevator shafts.

The Final report does not mention much less explain how they got there.

The only possible explanation is explosives IMO.

Does anyone have another explanation? If not, then you must accept and deal with the reality that there was a large explosion that ejected the elevator cars out of their shafts and into the hallway.
Click to expand...

This thread is not about explosions in elevators, it is about molten metal, it is dedicated solely to the discussion about molten metal which you claim was formed by thermite.If you are now suggesting that explosions in elevators in anyway contributed to the formation of molten metal prior to or after the collapse of the towers please say how, exactly.

Otherwise can we stick to the topic in hand and stop trying to diverse into other aspects of this event. I take it you are a man of your word and will do so.

So back to the topic in hand, you know my question Chris, please answer it.
 
Last edited:
stateofgrace said:
This thread is not about explosions in elevators, it is about molten metal, it is dedicated solely to the discussion about molten metal which you claim was formed by thermite.If you are now suggesting that explosions in elevators in anyway contributed to the formation of molten metal prior to or after the collapse of the towers please say how, exactly.

Otherwise can we stick to the topic in hand and stop trying to diverse into other aspects of this event. I take it you are a man of your word and will do so.

So back to the topic in hand, you know my question Chris, please answer it.
Click to expand...
Please restate your question.
 
Christopher7 said:
3 buildings - yes.
Click to expand...

No, four buildings, molten metal was also reported under building six. This as been pointed out to you. You have said the only explanation for molten metal is thermite.

To summarise, you believe that people in your own country, your fellow countrymen, planned an operation that involved planes slamming into buildings that were packed full with thermite. You believe that the same people went into FOUR fully occupied buildings in the centre of New York and planted god knows how much thermite and hoped they would go totally unnoticed.

You seriously believe this Chris? This is your alternative theory?
 
Last edited:
Christopher7 said:
ETA: The towers were not fully occupied.
Click to expand...

That is not true. The buildings were as occupied as they could be. The late 1990's had seen a push to fill the towers to make them as attractive as possible to any buyer or leaser. AND THEY HAD ACCOMPLISHED THIS. The towers were doing so well financially that the Port Authority decided to lease them out instead of sell them.
 
stateofgrace said:
No, four buildings, molten metal was also reported under building six. This as been pointed out to you. You have said the only explanation for molten metal is thermite.
Click to expand...
Maybe so but I know nothing about building 6 and I have no comment about
it.

To summarise, you believe that people in your own country, your fellow countrymen, planned an operation that involved planes slamming into buildings that were packed full with thermite. You believe that the same people went into FOUR fully occupied buildings in the centre of New York and planted god knows how much thermite and hoped they would go totally unnoticed.
You seriously believe this Chris? This is your alternative theory?
Click to expand...
I know that our government took us to war in Viet Nam based on a lie. 58,000 American soldiers and over one million Vietnamese died in that war.

Bush the elder could easily have prevented the Gulf war by simply stating publicly that we would go to war if Saddam invaded Kuwait.

The Bush administration took us to war in Iraq based on a pack of lies. 5,000 American soldiers and hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis are dead.

If you do not know that these wars are for the benefit of the military industrial complex and not for democracy then you are not paying attention.
Click to expand...
 
Christopher7 said:
Maybe so but I know nothing about building 6 and I have no comment about
it.

I know that our government took us to war in Viet Nam based on a lie. 58,000 American soldiers and over one million Vietnamese died in that war.

Bush the elder could easily have prevented the Gulf war by simply stating publicly that we would go to war if Saddam invaded Kuwait.

The Bush administration took us to war in Iraq based on a pack of lies. 5,000 American soldiers and hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis are dead.

If you do not know that these wars are for the benefit of the military industrial complex and not for democracy then you are not paying attention.
Click to expand...

No Chris you are not paying attention, your political opinions are completely irrelevant to the questions I asked and the answer you gave.

You believe and have stated that your fellow countrymen went into four fully occupied buildings in the centre of New York and planted so much thermite that once ignited it not only brought the towers down but kept metal molten, by the ton, for weeks afterwards. This operation ,unlike what you have now posted went totally unnoticed.

So, Chris, again, is this what you really believe? Is this your reality ?
 
Last edited:
Toke said:
It´s two guys sharing a payphone next to wtc7, interrupted by loud bang and two firemen. T-shirt say police us ins.
Click to expand...

Based on the info on the youtube videos, it's as much as 1,000 ft uptown from WTC7.
 
stateofgrace said:
No Chris you are not paying attention, your political opinions are completely irrelevant to the questions I asked and the answer you gave.
Click to expand...
Not at all. You are asking about "my fellow countrymen". These ****** psychopaths have NO respect for our country or the lives of their fellow countrymen. Your inability to accept and understand the basic underlying problem is the basis for your inability to accept any evidence that our government would murder 3,000 of its own citizens.


You believe and have stated that your fellow countrymen went into four fully occupied buildings in the centre of New York and planted so much thermite that once ignited it not only brought the towers down but kept metal molten, by the ton, for weeks afterwards. This operation ,unlike what you have now posted went totally unnoticed. You keep putting things in that statement that I do not agree with. I will state what I believe, you will not.

Long story made short:

Like you, I believed the OCT until I saw the collapse of WTC 7.
Realizing that it was a CD, I took another look at the towers.

The presence of molten metal under all three buildings can only be the result of thermite.

Therefore, thermite in combination with explosives were used in the demolition of the towers.
 
Last edited:
Christopher7 said:
Bush the elder could easily have prevented the Gulf war by simply stating publicly that we would go to war if Saddam invaded Kuwait.
Click to expand...

And Saddam could have avoided it by getting out when he was told. Your political claptrap is blinding your logic.

I like how you tried to report me for saying someonewho is not even a member is a liar.

If you say something like "Office furniture is made of steel not aluminium" then you are shown to be incorrect after being told this, it makes you a liar. It is not against the membership agreement to point that out.

Politics has nothing to do with science.
 
Christopher7 said:
Like you, I believed the OCT until I saw the collapse of WTC 7.
Realizing that it was a CD, I took another look at the towers.
Click to expand...

Were you within eyesight distance of WTC7 at on the afternoon of 9/11?

I don't think so. You have an interesting definition of "I saw".

Nobody that was there was the slighted bit surprised when it collapsed because the advance notice had been all over the police and fire radios and reported on the local TV news.

I knew that WTC7 was going to collapse before it did. The TV news reported the building was on fire and beginning to collapse at about 2PM.

Nobody that was an eyewitness to the collapse thinks that man-made demolition was involved.
 
Christopher7 said:
Not at all. You are asking about "my fellow countrymen". These ****** psychopaths have NO respect for our country or the lives of their fellow countrymen. Your inability to accept and understand the basic underlying problem is the basis for your inability to accept any evidence that our government would murder 3,000 of its own citizens.
Click to expand...

Assuming your theory was true about Bush and company, they would not have been the ones to have actually carried out the planting of thermite and silent explosives. So, who are these psycopaths who did the actual work? How much time did it take? How did they do it?
 
funk de fino said:
If you say something like "Office furniture is made of steel not aluminium" then you are shown to be incorrect after being told this, it makes you a liar. It is not against the membership agreement to point that out.
Click to expand...
Continued disregard for rule 12 noted.

Mod acquiescence also noted.

You deliberately misinterpreted what I said and called me a liar again. Nearly all office furniture is made of steel. Some management and executives may have some fancy aluminum furnishings.

Since the subject is there were no concentrations of aluminum, the amount of aluminum furniture is not significant. Calling me a liar again is just another unjustified personal attack.

There were NO concentrations of aluminum in the debris pile.

Steel was the only metal in concentration in the debris piles.
 
Christopher7 said:
Continued disregard for rule 12 noted.

Mod acquiescence also noted.

You deliberately misinterpreted what I said and called me a liar again. Nearly all office furniture is made of steel. Some management and executives may have some fancy aluminum furnishings.

Since the subject is there were no concentrations of aluminum, the amount of aluminum furniture is not significant. Calling me a liar again is just another unjustified personal attack.

There were NO concentrations of aluminum in the debris pile.

Steel was the only metal in concentration in the debris piles.
Click to expand...
Actually, C7, calling someone a liar when they are demonstrated to have lied is no violation. You have lied, both with your own words and with the words of others. You have lied repeatedly; you have lied knowingly; you have lied maliciously. You are a liar.

You have lied about what your witnesses saw, and what they believe.
You have lied about the metals available. You have lied about virtually everything you have said in this thread. The evidence is here to support calling you a liar, and so the "mod acquiescence" is merely evidence that they are able to read and comprehend English.

Is it "misinterpreting what [you] said" to put your verbal gymnastics back into the context of reality? I suggest that it is "deciphering" what you have said. As a general rule, the one thing we can be certain of is that what you said bears little relation to what your witnesses, the evidence, or the physical laws of the universe suggest actually happened.

And there is a word that describes that relationship between your claims and those of your witnesses, the evidence, and the physical laws of the universe. We call it "lying", C7. And we call you a liar. Because it is, and because you are.
 
I'm concerned as to how C7 can declare "There were NO concentrations of aluminum in the debris pile" as if his word is the word of Jesus Christ Himself. We're not idiots, chris.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom