Merged Has this structural engineer been debunked? / Astaneh-Asl "melting of girders"

vinniem said:
Now, that is desperation. He is describing what he saw.

There is another film, whose name escapes me, that is all about the steel workers at ground zero. They describe seeing similar things.

Could someone remember the name?
Click to expand...

1. Why couldnt it be other metals? These people arent experts in metallurgy.

2. So what caused the molten steel, in your opinion? Thermite cant do it, just so ya know.
 
Edx said:
1. Why couldnt it be other metals? These people arent experts in metallurgy.

2. So what caused the molten steel, in your opinion? Thermite cant do it, just so ya know.
Click to expand...

Are you saying thermite can't melt steel? You really want to go with that?
 
Edx said:
Are you suggesting that thermite can keep steel molten for weeks? You really wanna go with that?
Click to expand...

No I am not. I thought you were referring to what melted it.

I thought the debunker train of thought was that the piles "cooked" and were insulated. Could this not keep metal molten?
 
vinniem said:
No I am not. I thought you were referring to what melted it.
Click to expand...

I'm refering to the truthers claiming that there was molten steel in the debris for weeks, they claim its thermite, they claim its suspicious. Thats why you are talking about it at all.

I thought the debunker train of thought was that the piles "cooked" and were insulated. Could this not keep metal molten?
Click to expand...

As far as I understand it there is a chance oxidation could account for some molten steel, yes. Cleanup crew cutting steel with thermal lances would also create lots molten steel pools.

But the point is that thermite cant do what Jones and co. think it can do.
 
Edx said:
I'm refering to the truthers claiming that there was molten steel in the debris for weeks, they claim its thermite, they claim its suspicious. Thats why you are talking about it at all.



There is a chance that process could account for some molten steel, yes. Cleanup crew cutting steel with thermal lances would also create lots molten steel pools.
But the point is that thermite cant do what Jones and co. think it can do.
Click to expand...

If the bolded bit is true then why is the molten steel so vehemently denied, even in this thread?

Are we agreed that the firefighter I posted a video of earlier may well have seen molten steel?
 
vinniem said:
If the bolded bit is true then why is the molten steel so vehemently denied, even in this thread?
Click to expand...

Probably because its more likely to be molten aluminium, a metal which was abundant in the WTC and because truthers pretend that molten metal proves thermite.

See, assuming the firefighter saw molten steel and assuming the steel wasn't slag from thermal lances or oxidisation then this wouldn't mean thermite caused it, it would mean... WTF, how did that happen? Because no kind of thermite has the energy potential to do what truthers claim it can do.

Are we agreed that the firefighter I posted a video of earlier may well have seen molten steel?
Click to expand...

I think its possible if he saw it created in the way I suggested, but we have to consider that its far more likely he witness'd other metals.

The point is molten metal in the debris pile is not an indicator of thermite.
 
Last edited:
vinniem said:
I thought the debunker train of thought was that the piles "cooked" and were insulated. Could this not keep metal molten?
Click to expand...


I don't understand... Are you accepting this as a possibility, or are you going to dismiss it and continue arguing that something far more suspicious was constantly inputting energy into that system for an extended period of time in order to keep large amounts of steel in a liquid state?
 
Last edited:
Edx said:
Probably because its more likely to be molten aluminium, a metal which was abundant in the WTC and because truthers pretend that molten metal proves thermite.

See, assuming the firefighter saw molten steel and assuming the steel wasn't slag from thermal lances or oxidisation then this wouldn't mean thermite caused it, it would mean... WTF, how did that happen? Because no kind of thermite has the energy potential to do what truthers claim it can do.



I think its possible if he saw it created in the way I suggested, but we have to consider that its far more likely he witness'd other metals.

The point is molten metal in the debris pile is not an indicator of thermite.
Click to expand...

You said that thermal lances would create pools of steel so how do you explain your bolded remark.
 
vinniem said:
You said that thermal lances would create pools of steel so how do you explain your bolded remark.
Click to expand...

I'm trying to give you other reasons why you might find some reports of witness' that did indeed see actual molten steel rather than other molten metals.

Theres really no way to tell either way but since thermal lances do create slag and depending on how much steel they are cutting could create enough to form a "pool". Assuming someone saw that pool and didnt realise it was made by a torch they might not specify and just recall seeing "molten steel in the debris pile".

The point I'm making which you still are not addressing is that none of this proves thermite or indicates anything suspicious at all.

Jones' original claim was that there was molten steel in the debris pile and therefore because steel melts at such high temperatures ("fire cant melt steel") this proved that thermite must have caused it.

But thermite cant keep steel molten for that long, so obviously most of the reports either aren't molten steel or some of them come from oxidisation and clean up work. Either way "thermite" as an explanation makes absolutely no sense at all.
 
Last edited:
Edx said:
I'm trying to give you other reasons why you might find some reports of witness' that did indeed see actual molten steel rather than other molten metals.

Theres really no way to tell either way but since thermal lances do create slag and depending on how much steel they are cutting could create enough to form a "pool". Assuming someone saw that pool and didnt realise it was made by a torch they might not specify and just recall seeing "molten steel in the debris pile".

The point I'm making which you still are not addressing is that none of this proves thermite or indicates anything suspicious at all.

Jones' original claim was that there was molten steel in the debris pile and therefore because steel melts at such high temperatures ("fire cant melt steel") this proved that thermite must have caused it.

But thermite cant keep steel molten for that long, so obviously most of the reports either aren't molten steel or some of them come from oxidisation and clean up work. Either way "thermite" as an explanation makes absolutely no sense at all.
Click to expand...

Why was it reported as an anomoly? Steel workers themselves talked about it as if it were strange, but surely they would know if thermal lances were at work.
 
vinniem said:
Why was it reported as an anomoly? Steel workers themselves talked about it as if it were strange, but surely they would know if thermal lances were at work.
Click to expand...


Your vision is amazingly narrow. You seem to focus on only one of multiple possibilities presented to you. Do you remember what the other one was? No? Pity...

That it wasn't actually steel they were seeing. It may be anomalous to see that much molten steel... unless, of course, it was actually molten aluminum.
 
Last edited:
vinniem said:
Why was it reported as an anomoly? Steel workers themselves talked about it as if it were strange, but surely they would know if thermal lances were at work.
Click to expand...

It was a tallest building in the word (and if Im wrong it was at least in the top several). It was also uniquely constructed with all that steel in a tube in a tube design with all that sulphur dry wall rather than concrete and all that aluminum cladding.

Firefighters arent used to dealing with those kinds of conditions, ie a huge debris pile with fires deep inside it. Of course they were surprised by lots of things that day, that doesn't mean any of them think thermitedidit.

Now please stop JAQing and make a soild point.

Why should we be suspicious of the molten metal and what do you think caused it?

Just answer the questions asked.
 
Last edited:
This post is pathetic. What's going on here?

Really, what's the question? Is this about the composition of the metal that was seen liquified following 911? Is this about how metal stayed liquified for a long time? Is this about the opinions of workers on the site? What is thermite and what can it do to metal? I can't tell. Pick a question. Answer it.

Answer the questions I listed one at a time. Do not go on to another question before the first question is answered. I think you'll find the answers, if done in the way I suggest, lead to all these points to a very clear conclusion.

Try it. This is probably how you think about things in your job and with the things in your life that are important. I think 911 is important. I think if you think about the questions of 911 the same way you think about other important things, you'll find clear, consistent, and reliable answers. Try it. Just try it.
 
Last edited:
wonder why vinnie wont contact the man himself and CLARIFY it with him. his contact information has been posted to this thread


Guys, do not engage him until he goes to the source. The man who made the claims.
 
Arus808 said:
wonder why vinnie wont contact the man himself and CLARIFY it with him. his contact information has been posted to this thread
.
Click to expand...

You'd think truthers would try contacting ALL the people they love to quote.

All the firemen in their videos about molten steel and "boom boom boom" guys describing the collapse, or the other firemen they quote talking of explosions and find out what they actually think.

Nah, they'd rather just assume these people are on their side.
 
The Truther history of contacting sources directly is spoty. There are links to very long interviews with NWO deep cover agents Lloyd England and his wife. Strangely, our Truther friends at CIT appear to have no interest in contacting any of the what must be thousands of soldiers and civillians involved in the Pentagon clean-up. I suspect they don't know anyone whose names didn't make it on to the Internet. It's like Ace Baker who claims to be unable to find people that saw a plane crash into the WTC.

That's why the case of our friend Truther Vinnie is so mysterious. Vinnie does know the name of, not a witness, but an expert. He also knows how to contact him. But Truther Vinnie does not. Why, why Vinnie don't you do you this? Don't be afraid of the answer.
 
vinniem said:
Are we agreed that the firefighter I posted a video of earlier may well have seen molten steel?
Click to expand...

No, we are not agreed. Based on the word content of the video (and that's all we have) there is no reason to believe that the fireman was an eyewitness to anything. Because the first word is a conditional verb, we can best believe he was retelling something he heard and possibly didn't believe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom