• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Debunk Alert: Experiment to Test for Eutectic Reaction

Christopher7 said:
Office fires can burn at a maximum of 1,800 - 2,000 Degrees F but only for a short time. Not anywhere near long enough to melt steel as has been demonstrated in many fires. Debris pile fires burn at much lower temperatures.

Thermate is the only known explanation for the melted beam.
Click to expand...

What was witnessed was not "melting" in the normal sense of a mass phase change from solid to liquid. You've had this presented to you dozens of times, Christopher7, and in great depth. Why are you repeating the same worn-out claptrap?
 
There is some really ridiculous truthers on the comment section, just check it out.

I cant argue on such a such a difficult to use comment section anymore.
 
triforcharity said:
Maximum of 2,000 degrees? How about car fires? You do know that there were cars in the pile right?

Also, this "office fire" that you suggest can only burn for a "short time", please tell me more about this office? Is it just one office, or is it 110 floors of offices, kitchens, maintenence floors, huge HVAC systems, massive electrical substations, etc etc etc. X's 2?

Show me where thermite can burn for days. I can show you one reason the pile burned for days.
http://firechief.com/mag/firefighting_waterjet_technology_cuts/

In fact, they even invented a tool for firefighters to help in a simmilar situation.
Click to expand...
You might want to search christopher7 post history before you spend much time responding to him.

Just saying. :rolleyes:
 
Dave Rogers said:
It's relatively easy to carry out a poorly-constructed experiment that bears very little resemblance to the conditions it's supposed to be modelling and is virtually guaranteed to give no useful results at all because no attempt is made at analysing the final state of the system. What isn't so easy is conducting experiments that give useful and rigorous conclusions, but the truth movement has yet to find this out because they haven't tried it.

Dave
Click to expand...

You didn't watch the video, did you? No one said the experiment was perfect, but debunkers are always whining why Twoofies don't do their own experiments. Now you can be specific if you'd like. Here's a productive discussion of the experiment on your favorite forum.

http://the911forum.freeforums.org/sulfidation-experiment-on-i-beam-doesn-t-support-nist-t391.html

ETA: I didn't see some of the earlier posts and Metamars' link.
 
Last edited:
Dave Rogers said:
Oh, and RedIbis, since you're now claiming that you always admitted there was such a thing as thermal expansion and that it happens in all building fires, would you like to join me in pointing out that "a new phenomenon called thermal expansion due to an office fire" is an extraordinarily ignorant description, and quite simply wrong?
Click to expand...

Maybe Cole was referring to Sunder, who said, scientists "identified thermal expansion as a new phenomenon that can cause structural collapse."

Are you calling Sunder's similar comment, "extraordinarily ignorant"?
 
Christopher7 said:
An office fire or a smoldering debris pile fire do not burn hot enough to melt steel.
Sample #1, from WTC 7 was melted by:
"A liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur [molten iron] formed during this hot sulfur attack on the steel. This sulfur rich liquid penetrated preferentially down the grain boundaries of the steel severely weakening the beam and making it susceptible to erosion. The eutectic temperature for this mixture strongly suggests that the temperatures in this region of the steel beam approached 1,000°C (1,800°F) which is substantially lower than would be expected foe melting this steel .
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apc.pdf

Office fires can burn at a maximum of 1,800 - 2,000 Degrees F but only for a short time. Not anywhere near long enough to melt steel as has been demonstrated in many fires. Debris pile fires burn at much lower temperatures.


Thermate is the only known explanation for the melted beam.
Click to expand...

You didn't think that post through did you?
 
RedIbis said:
No one said the experiment was perfect [...]
Click to expand...


The interesting thing about your weak attempt at deflecting criticism is that "not perfect" encompasses everything from "steaming pile of ****" to "off by a few hundredths on a single value".

Dave simply pointed out that the "experiment" in your video falls on the very low end of the "not perfect" scale.

What value do you see in it?
 
Last edited:
Cl1mh4224rd said:
The interesting thing about your weak attempt at deflecting criticism is that "not perfect" encompasses everything from "steaming pile of ****" to "off by a few hundredths on a single value".

Dave simply pointed out that the "experiment" in your video falls on the very low end of the "not perfect" scale.

What value do you see in it?
Click to expand...

You'd think he'd be embarrassed by posting such garbage.

Hey Red, why don't you find a video that is not filled with lies?
 
RedIbis said:
Maybe Cole was referring to Sunder, who said, scientists "identified thermal expansion as a new phenomenon that can cause structural collapse."

Are you calling Sunder's similar comment, "extraordinarily ignorant"?
Click to expand...

Cherrypick much?
 
RedIbis said:
And if these experiments are relatively easy to conduct, why didn't NIST do any for their final report?
Click to expand...
Why was this NIST's responsibility? What does it have to do with the collapse? Has anybody positiviely confirmed that this reaction occured pre-collapse?

I love the twoofer fallacy that NIST investigates crimes instead of investigating collapses and failures to recommend changes to prevent them from happening in the future.
 
triforcharity said:
Maximum of 2,000 degrees? How about car fires? You do know that there were cars in the pile right?

Also, this "office fire" that you suggest can only burn for a "short time", please tell me more about this office? Is it just one office, or is it 110 floors of offices, kitchens, maintenence floors, huge HVAC systems, massive electrical substations, etc etc etc. X's 2?
Click to expand...
I 'm talking about the melted beam from WTC 7.
NCSTAR 1A [FONT=&quot]Pg 47 [pdf pg 89]
Fires . . . . on Floors 11 to 13 – persisted in any given location for approximately 20 min to 30 min.

[/FONT]Thermate is the only known explanation for the melted beam.
 
GlennB said:
What was witnessed was not "melting" in the normal sense of a mass phase change from solid to liquid.
Click to expand...
It was a limited change from a solid to a liquid. You can play with semantics all you like but office fires or debris pile fires do not burn anywhere near hot enough to melt steel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom