• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

South Tower 81st floor filled with thermite?

Zep said:
What a load of rot.

UPS batteries of a decade ago were inevitably lead-acid. Lead has a fairly low melting point. When the acid in the batteries reacts due to heat it produces dense white-to-yellow smoke. So throw some lead-acid batteries in a fire and what do you think will happen?

-- They react heavily, producing smoke and heat.

-- The lead and plastic casing melts, causing shorts and even more smoke and heat, plus sparks.

-- The cases melt and split, releasing acid and molten lead on the metal cabinets and the floor. More shorting with sparks occurs. Things are well alight, including the plastic casings.

-- And thus! Hot molten metal, molten plastic, gases and smoke, all pour out of the tilting building through gaps and breaks in the walls and floors.

And not one bit of thermite in sight.


You should research U-boat and other submarine accidents with big lead-acid batteries shorting out and melting. Learn something you will!
Click to expand...

I read some time ago the official explanation of the molten metal pouring out from the 81st floor in the South Tower, and as I remember it, the official explanation was that it was not even metal! And I don't remember the official explanation talking about a lot of UPS units or batteries.
 
Justin39640 said:
I work with forklifts. 100% electric are my specialty. Everything you say is correct. This one, from my "wall of shame" collection, was from the cables shorting on the battery cover when it was closed. This happened in about 1 second with lots of white smoke (as reported by the operator).
http://img410.imageshack.us/img410/5817/batterymelt.jpg
Click to expand...
Yep! Good one. I work with UPS in the heavy computer environment. We see exactly the same sort of thing there.

Not to mention that with the mains power is switched off, the UPS inverters could easily still be on. So without a fire-system safety cutout, it will be cranking 240 volts AC out onto broken and bare power cables, causing more shorting, heat and sparks in the middle of a fire. Awesome.
 
Justin39640 said:
FYI the UPS is the entire system. Individual batteries make it up along with the control system. Obviously you know nothing/ have done no research about UPS systems. If you knew anything about thermite, you would know it has to be in contact with the metal you want to destroy. The UPS batteries are in the middle of a room on racks. If "thermite boxes" (lmao) were on the floors the plane hit you probably would have seen a lot of flowing metal withing seconds of the impacts.

Why I bother (or anyone) to you is beyond me. You have read nothing. You lie through your teeth. You have no intelligent arguments. Just stop.
Click to expand...

Ok, I can see that in a large UPS system there could be separate batteries, mounted in racks. But the article talks about the entire floor filled with 'battery-looking things'. Doesn't sound like the kind of UPS system you describe.
 
Anders Lindman said:
I don't believe the official story. So why not use planes in a kind of false flag attack? Because I believe one key part of the false flag attack was to have the towers collapse. Only then would the event be severe enough to not risk having the event brushed under the carpet. AND, if they needed to collapse the towers, they needed to make sure that the collapse would look like caused by airplane crashes. A real plane might NOT have been enough to cause enough weakness on the floors where the collapse must start in order for the staged event to look convincing. And therefore real planes could not be used.
Click to expand...
Only in your fevered imagination.

Anders Lindman said:
The thermite scenario I propose includes the theory that no real planes were used in the attacks on the World Trade Center.
Click to expand...
There is no logical connection whatsoever. For a start, termite does not explode or burn like jet-fuel. Your notion all goes horribly haywire and hell-bound after that.

Anders Lindman said:
I read some time ago the official explanation of the molten metal pouring out from the 81st floor in the South Tower, and as I remember it, the official explanation was that it was not even metal! And I don't remember the official explanation talking about a lot of UPS units or batteries.
Click to expand...
Given your poor performance of research and reading in this thread alone, I don't think you have read anything of the official report, and what you have read has been massively misunderstood. I suspect you have trouble reading stop signs, let alone anything more complex...
 
Last edited:
Anders Lindman said:
Ok, I can see that in a large UPS system there could be separate batteries, mounted in racks. But the article talks about the entire floor filled with 'battery-looking things'. Doesn't sound like the kind of UPS system you describe.
Click to expand...
Given you know nothing about this, for a major player like Fuji Bank, it certainly would be easy to fill the best part of a WTC floor with batteries, inverters, control units, air-conditioning plant, fire-control systems, etc.
 
Anders Lindman said:
Ok, I can see that in a large UPS system there could be separate batteries, mounted in racks. But the article talks about the entire floor filled with 'battery-looking things'. Doesn't sound like the kind of UPS system you describe.
Click to expand...

Yes UPS is made up of lots and lots of "battery looking things". You are describing what I described without the benefit of being able to visualize it. Just stop, you really look like a fool here. Even worse than most.
 
Another FYI

Industrial and UPS batteries look nothing like automotive batteries. So get that image out of your head. TY
 
Anders Lindman said:
If there was thermite used on floor 81, then the FBI may have investigated it, at least indirectly, and asked Fuji Bank about what they had on floor 81. And the bank managers may say that they indeed had just installed a huge UPS system on that floor, although I find that a bit suspicious. But probably the bank can show the invoices etc for the UPS system, so that the bank cannot be prosecuted legally if it would come to that.
Click to expand...



Okay, aside from all the above, I'm going to ask you: What do you plan to do with this information? If this is true, it's the smoking gun to support your particular 9/11 hypothesis, so what are you doing to try to confirm or deny this information?

For instance, you said, "the bank managers may say that they indeed had just installed a huge UPS system". You do realize that the bank managers weren't the one who did the actual installation, right? That's the sort of work that is often contracted out to specialized companies. Can you find the company who was hired to do this work?

Next, even a "company" doesn't do the actual work; people employed by that company do the actual work. There should be records somewhere of who it was who was physically present to do that work: Truck drivers who delivered the UPS systems, movers who got them into the building, tradesmen who did the interior refurbishing, electricians and technicians who hooked it all up, and probably others. All of those people could be tracked down, and interviewed to see if they noticed anything out of the ordinary.

So, have you, or anyone else, even made a start on this investigation, or are you content to simply sit here and speculate, and assume that all the above would support your hypothesis, were you to actually do any of it?
 
Anders Lindman said:
I haven't researched the thermite theory much at all, but recently I read an article where they talked about white smoke and thermite. Such as can be seen in this picture: http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSGe86l3cn11kIUcUJxwSLg3GtNnv1cUF-PVu_U23HMyC1JcGeJQA&t=1
Click to expand...

It HAS to be thermite, because NOTHING else produces white smoke when burning.......:rolleyes:

As an asside, I wonder in the building department would have had inspections done prior to 9/11, and if they are part of FOIA.

Anyone know?
 
Anders Lindman said:
My theory is, I have written about it in several other threads but could be worth repeating here, that they only needed to rig one floor in each tower with thermite in order to make sure that the collapse would start on those floors. The collapses of the entire towers were caused by large explosives under the basements of the towers. See for example this video called 911 Eyewitness from about 15:50: http://www.videonger.com/watch/1847/

The large amount of explosives under the basements emulated a strong enough earthquake to make the towers start to collapse. The towers were designed to collapse like they did straight down for safety reasons in the case of a severe earthquake. The alternative would have been to design them to risk falling sideways like dominoes into Manhattan. Not good.
Click to expand...

But yet, wasn't picked up by the many seismographs in the area.....Amazing stuff you're working with. Is it made with unobtanium?
 
triforcharity said:
But yet, wasn't picked up by the many seismographs in the area.....Amazing stuff you're working with. Is it made with unobtanium?
Click to expand...

Do you really need to reference one of the worst movies I've ever had the displeasure of sitting through?
 
I never thought I would come across a truther that made Jammo look well informed............but Anders has managed it.
 
Anders Lindman said:
I read some time ago the official explanation of the molten metal pouring out from the 81st floor in the South Tower, and as I remember it, the official explanation was that it was not even metal! And I don't remember the official explanation talking about a lot of UPS units or batteries.
Click to expand...

This is a classic example of one of the core truther fallacies: that all events have an "official explanation", and that if this "official explanation" is inaccurate then there is proof of deliberate deception. It's a fallacy because there is no requirement for even an "official explanation" to be entirely correct. Even if there is an "official explanation" of the flows seen from WTC2 (I presume this means that these flows were commented on in the NIST report), it's no more than the best explanation someone in an official position could come up with for an event that they themselves did not orchestrate. And it may be wrong. NIST may say that the most likely candidate is window glass with entrained burning debris, but if in fact the flows were molten lead from UPS units, what of it? Both are completely expected events resulting from the airliner impact and subsequent fires.

And if, as is often the case with truthers, the "official explanation" is something they read in Popular Mechanics, 911 Myths or the JREF forum, it's not even in any sense official.

Dave
 
Zep said:
There is no logical connection whatsoever. For a start, termite does not explode or burn like jet-fuel. Your notion all goes horribly haywire and hell-bound after that.
Click to expand...

The fireball explosions were created by kerosene and explosives planted on some floor(s).
 
Horatius said:
Okay, aside from all the above, I'm going to ask you: What do you plan to do with this information? If this is true, it's the smoking gun to support your particular 9/11 hypothesis, so what are you doing to try to confirm or deny this information?

For instance, you said, "the bank managers may say that they indeed had just installed a huge UPS system". You do realize that the bank managers weren't the one who did the actual installation, right? That's the sort of work that is often contracted out to specialized companies. Can you find the company who was hired to do this work?

Next, even a "company" doesn't do the actual work; people employed by that company do the actual work. There should be records somewhere of who it was who was physically present to do that work: Truck drivers who delivered the UPS systems, movers who got them into the building, tradesmen who did the interior refurbishing, electricians and technicians who hooked it all up, and probably others. All of those people could be tracked down, and interviewed to see if they noticed anything out of the ordinary.

So, have you, or anyone else, even made a start on this investigation, or are you content to simply sit here and speculate, and assume that all the above would support your hypothesis, were you to actually do any of it?
Click to expand...

I haven't researched if more has been done with this information. The article is from 2007 so there be many other investigations related to this. The problem is that most professional conspiracy researchers seem to be controlled opposition and only lead people astray with their detours. And amateur researchers are probably too lazy to do any extensive research. I myself am not even an armchair amateur researcher. I just post things that I think are interesting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom