Thermite is as ludicrous as mini nukes which are only slightly less ludicrous than space lasers.
Liquid steel present at ground zero after 6 weeks is a myth. Truthers use that myth to start off their fantasies, thermite being one of the more stupid ones. Thermite just doesn't fit the facts.
1. It requires huge quantities to cut through steel - see mythbusters and 1000lb.
2. It can't cut horizontally and no-one has ever come up with a device to do this.
3. Liquid Iron and liquid steel from the reaction cools very quickly so wouldn't remain liquid 6 weeks later.
4. The actual collapse would have a huge affect on the remaining thermite dispersing it and making it useless for anything else.
5. Any substance with a melting point below that of liquid steel would also become a liquid.
6. It's notoriously difficult to distinguish between liquid metals even with experience.
7. Very few of the witnesses actually state liquid instead they use the word molten which is ambiguous.
8. If thermite did melt beams then this metal would cool quickly - if as claimed by truthers, fire pre and post collapse isn't hot enough to melt steel then what could possibly keep temperatures that high? Thermite cannot do this - remember it's all been dispersed in the collapse and thermite doesn't burn long enough or with sufficient enough energy.
9. There is no possible link between supposedly seen liquid steel in the rubble pile and thermite because of 9 and 3.
I could go on but I suspect it's pointless.
Claiming thermite (of whatever flavour) for an explanation to liquid steel being seen 6 weeks later is about as ignorant and stupid as you can get. It's impossible to make the link.
Secondly there is zero evidence, not a single piece of previously liquid steel to be found anywhere let alone huge pieces that would have been found if rivers of liquid steel were present. These items would be extremely difficult to remove let alone hide. Dozens of workers would be needed to remove such a humongous and heavy item. There are no pictures or videos of liquid material or of the solids removal.
Claiming that fires plus insulation were enough to keep tons (at least 2 digger bucket fulls) liquid for 6 weeks is crazy. You can see the pile venting all over the place. Steel will cool reasonably quickly and form a shell (see continuous casting) and you'd have to break this shell to get at the liquid but who the hell orders a digger to do that or try to remove liquid at 1500°C+ which is extremely hazardous.
The grab photo also doesn't hold weight with C7's argument. If as he claims you require the fires plus insulation to keep the steel liquid then how can a grab machine actually access something that is buried with so much insulation? If the item is able to be gotten at by the grab machine then the item is very close to the surface which is going to cool the steel below it's liquidus. The problem for liquid steel believers is the high temperature to attain such a material, whereas glass for example has a much lower temperature for it to appear a yellowy orange (and translucent).
Even if we presume that liquid steel was present 6 weeks after then there is absolutely no link to thermite. The rubble pile would have to be hot enough to keep the steel liquid and if it was that hot it would be capable of melting steel all by itself (aswell as aluminium, lead/ tin, glass, plastics and a whole lot of other material witha a melting point below that of steel).
C7 - you have absolutely nothing else to contribute - we've looked at your claims and the evidence, which includes metallurgical, physics and chemistry peer reviewed knowledge doesn't support them.
We've had to put up with lying, deceit, wilful ignorance, refusal to answer questions, refusal to acknowledge corrections and ridiculous notions of "paid disinfo agents"(which I find hilarious), claims of denial tactics to legitimate questions, a lack of will to ask those that you quote for clarification of their statements, etc, etc.
Unless you have a clear, concise, coherent and consistent narrative about your theory then you can't expect anyone to understand what you are saying. God knows we've tried.
Unless you provide clarification of witness statements then you have no material to claim liquid steel.
Unless you propose a mechanism that could keep 2 digger bucket fulls (that's the max I've seen C7 claim) of liquid steel liquid for 6 weeks then you have no evidence to back your claims.
Unless you can provide physical evidence in the form of a report or photograph that comprehensively shows liquid steel was present then you have no evidence to back your claims.
You are making the claim so it is up to you to provide answers to legitimate questions
So far we have seen none of this, yet have tried to educate you with regards to the science that covers this topic. You have not listened to a single piece. You have not acknowledged scientific papers that disprove your individual claims yet you continue to make spurious claims and you continue to be shown wrong.
71 pages and your fallacious arguments continue. Your claims of liquid steel are ambiguous and your claim of thermite thoroughly debunked.
Unless you can come up with some proper evidence rather than using hearsay and a poor grasp of metallurgy, physics, chemistry, thermodynamics etc then you have nothing and therefore it's time to close the thread.
