Gravity defying buildings? :D

[Java Man]

I am posting this in response to Javaman's comments regarding aluminum dripping from the side of the WTC.


1. The WTC was covered with Aluminum.

Really? Where at? Was it aluminium or lead? Was the WTC covered in UPSes? They were all located strategically so when an airplane hit and racketed everything they made a nice smelting pot and liquefied to a red hot state until just before the collapse where they conveniently poured out of the building. I guess the pot was deep inside the building were it was truly red hot and a nice convenient concrete canal was formed from the core of the building to the outer wall.

Your level of imagination is quickly surpassing that of truthers.

 

[Java Man]

Really? Show me something in those photos that we can examine closely in ANY of those pictures, that would fit in a briefcase.

We'll wait.......

For starters the lack of a pool of solidified molten aluminium.

 

[T.A.M.]

Really? Where at? Was it aluminium or lead? Was the WTC covered in UPSes? They were all located strategically so when an airplane hit and racketed everything they made a nice smelting pot and liquefied to a red hot state until just before the collapse where they conveniently poured out of the building. I guess the pot was deep inside the building were it was truly red hot and a nice convenient concrete canal was formed from the core of the building to the outer wall.

Your level of imagination is quickly surpassing that of truthers.

you are not serious? you are questioning whether or not the WTC was covered in aluminum? The entire facade of the buildings was aluminum...jhc.

No one said anything about a smelting pot. However, the one and only sighting of falling orange metal/glass/substance might have been a small collected pool of molten aluminum (or glass, or some metallic alloy, etc...) that collected in the area until something gave way. You have no clue. You think only in the core of the building it was hot?

Much, MUCH more plausible then thermite/mate/nanoblahblah.

TAM

 

[T.A.M.]

For starters the lack of a pool of solidified molten aluminium.

a lack of solidified molten aluminum would fit in a brief case?

He didn't ask you to show him what you think wasn't there.

TAM

 

[Java Man]

you are not serious? you are questioning whether or not the WTC was covered in aluminum? The entire facade of the buildings was aluminum...jhc.

No one said anything about a smelting pot. However, the one and only sighting of falling orange metal/glass/substance might have been a small collected pool of molten aluminum (or glass, or some metallic alloy, etc...) that collected in the area until something gave way. You have no clue. You think only in the core of the building it was hot?

Much, MUCH more plausible then thermite/mate/nanoblahblah.

TAM

So the outer aluminium ended inside? and melted? Then reached temperatures not seen elsewhere. Metal melting temperatures.

 

[T.A.M.]

So the outer aluminium ended inside? and melted? Then reached temperatures not seen elsewhere. Metal melting temperatures.

Well for starters, the planes struck the outer, ALUMINUM CLAD facade, then moved through the building, possibly carrying such with it, and moved to the other side of the building, possibly close enough to the opposite wall (given that some plane parts passed through the building completely and were ejected on the other side).

Outside of that, it could have been the aluminum of the aircraft. It could have been another source of aluminum from within the building.

Sorry, any of the above is WAY more plausible then sekritly planted thermite.

TAM

 

[Grizzly Bear]

So the outer aluminium ended inside? and melted? Then reached temperatures not seen elsewhere. Metal melting temperatures.

Let me spell it out. The cladding was aluminum. It was exposed to fire both before and after the collapse. The temperatures of the fires sufficiently explains how it would render a viable report of molten "metal" in the debris pile.
No Word

required...

 

[T.A.M.]

Let me spell it out. The cladding was aluminum. It was exposed to fire both before and after the collapse. The temperatures of the fires sufficiently explains how it would render a viable report of molten "metal" in the debris pile.
No Word [qimg]http://img179.imageshack.us/img179/5694/saladetofufetakv0.jpg[/qimg]


required...

Thanks for that, but we are specifically referring to the video with the dripping orange yellow metal/glass/material...

TAM

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Yeah I'm lagging slightly behind on the discussion. I think it would still apply somewhat since the fires were emanating along the building exterior. It's not like anything special had to take place for that to start :|

 

[triforcharity]

Really? Where at? Was it aluminium or lead? Was the WTC covered in UPSes? They were all located strategically so when an airplane hit and racketed everything they made a nice smelting pot and liquefied to a red hot state until just before the collapse where they conveniently poured out of the building. I guess the pot was deep inside the building were it was truly red hot and a nice convenient concrete canal was formed from the core of the building to the outer wall.

Your level of imagination is quickly surpassing that of truthers.

WTC 1&2's entire facade was aluminum.

 

[triforcharity]

So the outer aluminium ended inside? and melted? Then reached temperatures not seen elsewhere. Metal melting temperatures.

Which SOUNDS inpressive, except for the fact that there are quite a few metals that belt BELOW 1,000 deg. F. Which, btw, is a low temp for a hydrocarbon fire.

1800 is about normal.

 

[Java Man]

Sorry, any of the above is WAY more plausible then sekritly planted thermite.

TAM

According to you, but I doubt many would believe all that would be required for such a thing to occur. The high temperatures, the melting pot that just breaks prior to the collapse. Just enough aluminium for that. Mhhh

How about people planted thermate in the building and made it deteriorate key elements so when the collapse initiated it would be guaranteed to go down as seen.

 

[Java Man]

Which SOUNDS inpressive, except for the fact that there are quite a few metals that belt BELOW 1,000 deg. F. Which, btw, is a low temp for a hydrocarbon fire.

1800 is about normal.

But is 1000ºF hot enough to put it red hot?

 

[T.A.M.]

According to you, but I doubt many would believe all that would be required for such a thing to occur. The high temperatures, the melting pot that just breaks prior to the collapse. Just enough aluminium for that. Mhhh

How about people planted thermate in the building and made it deteriorate key elements so when the collapse initiated it would be guaranteed to go down as seen.

I know, how about a thermite paint, and then an automatic applicator that sprays over a hundred layers of the stuff, but still manages to survive as the first 20 or so layers start to melt the steel, but not the applicator. These never designed, never seen applicators are selectively placed all over the columns of all 3 towers...

Forgive them Occam, they know not what they do.

TAM

 

[T.A.M.]

But is 1000ºF hot enough to put it red hot?

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

Faint red - 930F
Dark Red - 1075F

TAM

 

[Java Man]

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

Faint red - 930F
Dark Red - 1075F

TAM

And bright red and orange would be? 1400 to 1700 right?

 

[T.A.M.]

And bright red and orange would be? 1400 to 1700 right?

For pure metals, that sounds about right.

TAM

 

[Java Man]

For pure metals, that sounds about right.

TAM

Actually the brightness depends on temperature, not the underlying material.

But anyway getting back to the issue of the metal temperature. Wouldn't that color place the temperature way above what was expected inside the WTC?

 

[T.A.M.]

If you are referring to the recorded temps in the pile, then yes, however, i thought we weRe talking about the flowing metal from the building pre collapse. As well, i am pretty sure they were not monitoring the temps inthe entire pile 24/7 for all the days after 9/11. Do you have proof they were.

I am not an expert in materials sicence, so i will defer any further comment on temperature color and the effects of impurities to them (we have a couple of experts in this on the forum...not sure who).

TAM

 

[Java Man]

5. You are basing your comment of floating debris on S. Jones ridiculous experiments where he threw a few dozen wood chips into a cup of aluminum. Try dumping a bucket full of debris into the aluminum, and it will not all simply float and burn...sorry. As well, not all organics or impurities are woodchips...

Sorry to get back to you so late on point 5, I hadn't heard of this S Jones, but I guess I found the reference you speak about. Anyway I made my statement based on the periodic table. Being carbon element 6, oxygen element 8 and hydrogen element 1. They are all lighter than aluminium element 13. So I figured carbonized remains would not precipitate. If you test with a bit of burnt wood you'll see it even floats on water. Lead (Pb) is element 82 and its common usage in bullets indicates it would be less prone to have it float over carbonized remains.

Can you explain to us that claim of yours about the bucket of debris and them not floating? Are you dumping plutonium bits on it? What's your debris composition? APFSDU rounds?