Invitation for Java Man to discuss his 9/11 theory

Java Man said:
Yes, but you can still see what type of metal it is by the color. For example I showed aluminium and silver. I also showed molten glass, which isn't a metal (that was bright white). Both aluminium and silver were not red, but silvery when molten. So is lead (http://tommcmahon.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/07/16/cast2.jpg)when melted.

It was claimed here (not sure it was this thread though) that the pouring red hot stuff was "aluminium alloy". But molten aluminium is not red when molten and burned aircrafts burn up rather than melt. Lead from "the UPSs" also melts into a silvery liquid and is not red. What then is that red incandescent stuff seen pouring from the building?
Click to expand...

My claim remains...you have not disproven it, because you cannot. The only way that you can tell the metal from the color is when it is at or near its melting point, and even then you may not. The color, beyond the metals original color, only indicates the temperature of the metal, not which metal it is...sorry.

Show me aluminum at 1700F Show me glass at 1700F

http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/wtc/analysis/fires/metcolor.htm

TAM:)
 
Java Man said:
Yes, but you can still see what type of metal it is by the color. For example I showed aluminium and silver. I also showed molten glass, which isn't a metal (that was bright white). Both aluminium and silver were not red, but silvery when molten. So is lead (http://tommcmahon.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/07/16/cast2.jpg)when melted.

It was claimed here (not sure it was this thread though) that the pouring red hot stuff was "aluminium alloy". But molten aluminium is not red when molten and burned aircrafts burn up rather than melt. Lead from "the UPSs" also melts into a silvery liquid and is not red. What then is that red incandescent stuff seen pouring from the building?
Click to expand...

Colors are meaningful only for pure metals uncontaminated by non-metallic crap.

Whatever it was seen coming out of the towers, pure and uncontaminated doesn't describe it.
 
guys...please do not respond to JAVA MAN until he has posted his complete theory supported by facts. This is just piece meal rehtoric. You're falling into this trap
 
Java Man said:
It's more than just th 40 bucks. It's the availability of such information for the general public.
Click to expand...

I have it, and purchased it. This is not uncommon. That is how the journals make their money. To post it, in it's entirety, is stealing money from the journal. Sorry, I am not a thief.

Why would the general public need information about acid attacks that occur in large rubble fires?

Java Man said:
If this is such a common thing and could happen to any other building (you know gypsum being so common and all) why isn't it addressed in the NIST report?
Click to expand...

Nobody said it was common. Also, why would the NIST address it, as it was not part of the collapse, it was an effect of the 99 day fire that burned in the pile.

Java Man said:
Why isn't it addressed in the construction plans of the WTC itself.
Click to expand...

Because again, it was an effect of the 99 day fire that burned in the rubble pile. It would not need to be accounted for in the construction plans. It would be stupid to address this in the blueprints.

Java Man said:
You're portraying this as if both towers were two giant thermite matches just waiting to go off.
Click to expand...

Not really, considering thermite doesn't produce this type of acid attack.


How's that theory coming along? You plan on posting it anytime soon?
 
T.A.M. said:
My claim remains...you have not disproven it, because you cannot. The only way that you can tell the metal from the color is when it is at or near its melting point, and even then you may not. The color, beyond the metals original color, only indicates the temperature of the metal, not which metal it is...sorry.

Show me aluminum at 1700F Show me glass at 1700F

http://911research.wtc7.net/cache/wtc/analysis/fires/metcolor.htm

TAM:)
Click to expand...

If I see a liquid metal at room temperature I can pretty much guess it is mercury. If I see molten metal that isn't bright red I can guess it is lead, silver or aluminium. I can also assure it is NOT steel. Thus my case stands. Even if you can't make a fine grained estimation of the type of metal by eye examination you can certainly rule out the ludicrous from the credible.
 
Java Man said:
If I see a liquid metal at room temperature I can pretty much guess it is mercury. If I see molten metal that isn't bright red I can guess it is lead, silver or aluminium. I can also assure it is NOT steel. Thus my case stands. Even if you can't make a fine grained estimation of the type of metal by eye examination you can certainly rule out the ludicrous from the credible.
Click to expand...

you are talking room temperature. Are we not talking about the molten dripping orange metal from high up in the tower prior to collapse?

That metal is hardly at room temperature.

TAM:)
 
Java Man said:
If I see a liquid metal at room temperature I can pretty much guess it is mercury. If I see molten metal that isn't bright red I can guess it is lead, silver or aluminium. I can also assure it is NOT steel. Thus my case stands. Even if you can't make a fine grained estimation of the type of metal by eye examination you can certainly rule out the ludicrous from the credible.
Click to expand...

Identify the pictures from Oy then.

Then, after you have done that, please post your complete theory here.

Thanks!
 
Java Man said:
Yes, so? What temperature is it at?
Click to expand...

My point is this.

At these temps we are talking about (1200 to 2700), you cannot tell what the metal is, only the temperature of it. Pure metals are Orange at approximately 1650-2750F. That means aluminum, steel, iron, copper etc....

My point was, the orange dripping "metal" coming out of the tower prior to collapse cannot be identified based only by the color...that tells you only the temperature of the metal. I would guess, if those pictures I showed you are of PURE ALUMINUM, then their temp is about 1700F.

TAM:)
 
T.A.M. said:
My point is this.

At these temps we are talking about (1200 to 2700), you cannot tell what the metal is, only the temperature of it. Pure metals are Orange at approximately 1650-2750F. That means aluminum, steel, iron, copper etc....

TAM:)
Click to expand...

I know, but the WTC was not a steel mill. What made the temperatures rise so high? And why didn't the molten aluminium and lead flow away hundreds of degrees lower when it was just molten? Yes I understand the temperature issue, but please place it in the context of the towers, not a controlled environment.

Once again what metal was that if not aluminium or lead that would have flowed away at a much lower temperature and thus not have been red hot.
 
Arus808 said:
guys...please do not respond to JAVA MAN until he has posted his complete theory supported by facts. This is just piece meal rehtoric. You're falling into this trap
Click to expand...

This, again! Why do you guys let him continue to pull you into the minutia? Let him address the OP and stop letting him off the hook.
 
Java Man said:
I know, but the WTC was not a steel mill. What made the temperatures rise so high? And why didn't the molten aluminium and lead flow away hundreds of degrees lower when it was just molten? Yes I understand the temperature issue, but please place it in the context of the towers, not a controlled environment.

Once again what metal was that if not aluminium or lead that would have flowed away at a much lower temperature and thus not have been red hot.
Click to expand...

why didn't it flow away at 1200F versus 1700F? Well you are making the false assumption that the metal was pure. If it was an aluminum alloy, or aluminum with impurities (organic, other metals, etc...) then the color for a given temperature would be different, hence making the scale inaccurate.

Secondly, we do not know if the aluminum was being held back partially, or fully by an obstruction in the debris it was near, until something gave way, allowing it to flow.

There are too many "what ifs" for anyone to make an accurate assessment of what the metal was.

TAM:)
 
triforcharity said:
Identify the pictures from Oy then.
...
Click to expand...

Wrong thread.

You allow Java Man to circumvent the topic of this thread, which is:

Java Man, please tell us you complete, most solid theory! Who did what, how and when on 9/11 to destroy all parts of the WTC, 4 planes, the Pentagon and punch a hole in Pennsylvania?
 
T.A.M. said:
why didn't it flow away at 1200F versus 1700F? ...
Click to expand...

This kind of question about nitty-gritty detail and speculation won't ever get us an inch closer to Java Man's complete and most solid 9/11 theory - which is the topic of this thread. T.A.M., do you want to discuss Java Man's 9/11 theory? Then I suggest that you, too, ask him to state comprehensively what his complete and most solid 9/11 theory is. Thanks.
 
Oystein said:
This kind of question about nitty-gritty detail and speculation won't ever get us an inch closer to Java Man's complete and most solid 9/11 theory - which is the topic of this thread. T.A.M., do you want to discuss Java Man's 9/11 theory? Then I suggest that you, too, ask him to state comprehensively what his complete and most solid 9/11 theory is. Thanks.
Click to expand...

yah, sorry, I'm done until he answers your question....Pardon le derail.

TAM:)
 
Arus808 said:
guys...please do not respond to JAVA MAN until he has posted his complete theory supported by facts. This is just piece meal rehtoric. You're falling into this trap
Click to expand...

Let us stop responding to the derails and wait with bated breath for Java Man's theory.Pretty please?
 
Java Man said:
Once again what metal was that if not aluminium or lead that would have flowed away at a much lower temperature and thus not have been red hot.
Click to expand...

You are assuming that it was not contained somewhere before it started flowing. The floor or floors on which it melted were being subjected to uneven heating and falling apart. The flow started when a floor slab buckled or sagged to release it.

There is no reason to think that it would flow away from the heat source.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom