Gage's next debate

Sunstealer said:
So what? Dripping steel beams seen days or weeks after the collapse is proof that thermite didn't cause that melting because thermite can't sustain the heat output over that period of time. It's that simple.
Click to expand...

maybe ya need to read the article again. he is talking about previoulsy molten steel. he did not see molten meltal.
 
Senenmut said:
maybe ya need to read the article again. he is talking about previoulsy molten steel. he did not see molten meltal.
Click to expand...

He's talking about steel he saw at the WTC - but WHEN?

When did he see it? Before the collapse? After the collapse? After the fires had been burning for 3 months?
 
Senenmut said:
he got there 8 days after the event.
Click to expand...
So what is the explanation for temperatures high enough to melt steel 8 days after the collapse?

Hint: Thermite is ruled out because thermite won't burn for 30 minutes let alone 8 days.
 
Oy... melting beams and Astaneh-Asl's commentary again. Well, this was addressed back in 2008, so all we have to do is repost:
R.Mackey said:
Earlier tonight, I asked you to answer where Dr. Astaneh-Asl got his steel from. I was going to lead you gradually to an understanding, but it's taking too long and you won't enjoy it anyway, so I'll just say it. He got his steel by setting up shop near the steel recyclers. At the end of the salvage process. There's advantages to doing this, but you need to keep in mind that any steel he got was damaged while standing, damaged as the Pile burned, and subjected to the full chaos of recovery operations. There's no way whatsoever for Dr. Astaneh-Asl to disambiguate between "melting" suffered while the building stood, and "melting" afterwards. He didn't get to see it in place.

But that's not where I wanted to lead you. The real question, the coup de grace, is this: "What happened to the steel after Dr. Astaneh-Asl handled it?" He's talking about all this "melted" and "vaporized" steel -- where is it? Can we see it?

Indeed we can. Class, please open your books to NCSTAR1-3.

The steel that you're talking about was turned over to NIST, where it was examined in detail, and reported on. With pictures. Now, Dr. Astaneh-Asl is a sharp guy, and we can learn a lot from him, but he's not a metallurgist, and he didn't examine the steel thoroughly.

What you're working from are his initial comments. NIST did more, and found that, well, what do you know, it didn't melt after all. Or vaporize. Snicker.

NIST instead does report on "melting," i.e. eutectic action, concluding it happened in the Pile fire and is not relevant in terms of understanding the collapses. Take a look for yourself. We already know this happens, because of Dr. Barnett and Dr. Biederman's work. No mysteries here except to the uneducated and misinformed. Your team.

The only way for your ideas to make sense is if Dr. Astaneh-Asl's steel was different from the NIST steel. It isn't so. He didn't smuggle it home in a suitcase. Nor did NIST decide, in its evil power, to hide some of it so it could spin some alternate story, daring Dr. Astaneh-Asl to call them on it. Why would they? The temperatures involved in melting are actually not implausible, nor incompatible with the core NIST hypothesis. Vaporizing, well yeah, that's a poser, but that doesn't work for anybody's theory, except the space-beamers and nuke-huggers...

Did this happen? Did NIST bury evidence? Why not ask him? Check this out, all you have to do is get Dr. Astaneh-Asl to say "those fiends! They stole the evidence! I had it in my hands!!" Ask him.

He won't. You know how I know? Because he's read NIST cover to cover, like me, and he's been very critical of it. But he's never said that. Dr. Greening presented some of Dr. Astaneh-Asl's objections, and they bear some examination. He believes, possibly, the NIST Report was structured to deemphasize design flaws in the original structure. This could be true.

"Melting" and vaporizing steel, not true.

If even a drunken man can follow this path of reasoning, you should have no trouble with it at all. Impress me.
Click to expand...
 
Senenmut said:
what about previously molten?

ABOLHASSAN ASTANEH: Here, it most likely reached about 1,000 to 1,500 degrees. And that is enough to collapse them, so they collapsed. So the word "melting" should not be used for girders, because there was no melting of girders. I saw melting of girders in World Trade Center.
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/science/jan-june07/overpass_05-10.html
Click to expand...
Prove it with a photo. We have corrosion photos, no melted steel photos.

The reason you have failed for over 9 years with chris7, is there was no melted steel to support your thermite delusion.

... funny you quote-mine someone who thinks your conspiracy stuff is delusional. Produce some proof instead of hearsay and opinion. The only possible source of melted steel could be from the oxygen generators burning which were on the jets; how hot would they burn, or help contents burn hotter? Instead of making up the lie of thermite, why not use things that were in the WTC.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6i_l_ux3R-4
Are oxygen generators burning hot enough to melt stuff? How many are on a jet? Why are they on jets? If anyone was close enough to see steel dripping their skin would start on fire, but why would you let facts stand in the way of your fantasy?

Is reality of 19 terrorists doing 911 too boring so you have to make up CD, melted steel from thermite, etc?
 
Christopher 7 said "The aluminum cladding was blown up to 600 feet in all directions." I assume this is to assert that the cladding blew away from the rest of the debris and didn't provide a source for melted aluminum for the hot debris pile.

Uh, I'm just a layperson, but if the south-facing cladding on the North Tower flew towards the South Tower and the north-facing cladding on the South Tower flew towards the North Tower, uh, maybe, wouldn't that leave lots of aluminum cladding right in the debris pile?

Then you tried to eliminate aluminum furniture, which I have in my hone office right here, and cars and trucks and ambulances and the planes where the aluminum vanishes because the planes busted up (?), and, uh, I don't know much about all that either but shucks it sure seems to me like you could find some aluminum somewhere in that debris. Oh, yeah, Tri already showed us a whole bunch of it!

And then hot steel girders in the fiery part of the debris touching the molten aluminum so the ends would drip aluminum when pulled out? Even if the fires are melting the aluminum and not the steel itself, the unmelted steel could bring up molten aluminum just by being there. Seems sensible to me, I don't know.
 
Sunstealer said:
So what is the explanation for temperatures high enough to melt steel 8 days after the collapse?

Hint: Thermite is ruled out because thermite won't burn for 30 minutes let alone 8 days.
Click to expand...

read the article again. he did not see molten metal. it was previously molten steel.
 
ElMondoHummus said:
Oy... melting beams and Astaneh-Asl's commentary again. Well, this was addressed back in 2008, so all we have to do is repost:

​
Click to expand...

nice try at blowing smoke and spinning the obvious. professor barnett saw steel members in the pile...remember...plural.
"A combination of an uncontrolled fire and the structural damage might have been able to bring the building down, some engineers said. But that would not explain steel members in the debris pile that appear to have been partly evaporated in extraordinarily high temperatures, Dr. Barnett said."

this is way after prof astaneh - asl saw his 15.9mm of a36 steel gone. he saw his only 8 days after the event.
 
What's your point Senenmut? The people you keep quoting don't think there is an issue so what's the problem?
 
Senenmut said:
nice try at blowing smoke and spinning the obvious. professor barnett saw steel members in the pile...remember...plural.
"A combination of an uncontrolled fire and the structural damage might have been able to bring the building down, some engineers said. But that would not explain steel members in the debris pile that appear to have been partly evaporated in extraordinarily high temperatures, Dr. Barnett said."

this is way after prof astaneh - asl saw his 15.9mm of a36 steel gone. he saw his only 8 days after the event.
Click to expand...
Evaporated is called corrosion in the paper about the piece of steel. Does Gage use this nonsense in his presentation?

What is your point? There was no thermite, that was made up by Jones and is an insane claim. What is your claim? What is your point? Why has 911 truth failed for over 9 years.
 
What the hell? Barnett was part of the Worcester research team that determined the erosion was a sulfidation attack. His name is on the "Initial Microstructural Analysis" paper. He's in the citations in the "Metal Removal Via Slag" paper.

What is this? Barnett's fully aware that the findings are corrosion due to sulfidation attack. He helped determine that.
 
Senenmut said:
nice try at blowing smoke and spinning the obvious. professor barnett saw steel members in the pile...remember...plural.
"A combination of an uncontrolled fire and the structural damage might have been able to bring the building down, some engineers said. But that would not explain steel members in the debris pile that appear to have been partly evaporated in extraordinarily high temperatures, Dr. Barnett said."

this is way after prof astaneh - asl saw his 15.9mm of a36 steel gone. he saw his only 8 days after the event.
Click to expand...

As I previously stated to you in the other thread, I have spoken to Barnett through e-mail. The pieces he mentioned are from the same two steel members that were within Barnett, Biederman, and Sisson reports.

None of these 3 authors believe thermite was a likely source.
E-mail them if you like. But don't get too crazy with them or I doubt you will get a reply.
 
Last edited:
triforcharity said:
Incorrect. There are plenty of aluminum parts on cars. Not to mention the many ambulances and fire trucks that were buried in the collapses. Guess what? LOTS and LOTS of aluminum in them.
Click to expand...

Found a report from the International Aluminium Institute.
http://www.alcoa.com/global/en/environment/pdf/GTS_paper_final.pdf
It states that on average cars have about 130kgs (approx 286lbs) of aluminum each. This figure is for 2006. 2000 was slightly lower but still in the 120kg range for N. America. 1990 was about a quarter less. Like you point out, cars were not the only vehicles in the pile. There were loading docks down there too. A truck can easily have a ton or more (PDF page 12). Most trailers use A LOT of aluminum. The tractor too. Those nice shiny semi tankers you see on the highway have over 11000kgs worth (43000L).
 
Last edited:
NoahFence said:
Tri -
Could the debris pile act as a sort of furnace?

I would think that these fires would move past the 'normal office fire' type stuff and get real hot, being in a confined space and burning over 3 months. That could account for melted steel, no?

I defer to the expert
Click to expand...

Sure it could. It wouldn't be a very INeffecient furnace though with all the holes and voids. The problem would be insulating the furnace to prevent heat loss. But sure, it could. However, I think the max it would be around 2200 deg. F. That's just speculation though. If you had a type of model, say a small drawing, I might be able to come up with a more accurate figure. But, it's still a moot point, as none of the steel found had melted sections missing.
 
chrismohr said:
Christopher 7 said "The aluminum cladding was blown up to 600 feet in all directions." I assume this is to assert that the cladding blew away from the rest of the debris and didn't provide a source for melted aluminum for the hot debris pile.

Uh, I'm just a layperson, but if the south-facing cladding on the North Tower flew towards the South Tower and the north-facing cladding on the South Tower flew towards the North Tower, uh, maybe, wouldn't that leave lots of aluminum cladding right in the debris pile?

Then you tried to eliminate aluminum furniture, which I have in my hone office right here, and cars and trucks and ambulances and the planes where the aluminum vanishes because the planes busted up (?), and, uh, I don't know much about all that either but shucks it sure seems to me like you could find some aluminum somewhere in that debris. Oh, yeah, Tri already showed us a whole bunch of it!

And then hot steel girders in the fiery part of the debris touching the molten aluminum so the ends would drip aluminum when pulled out? Even if the fires are melting the aluminum and not the steel itself, the unmelted steel could bring up molten aluminum just by being there. Seems sensible to me, I don't know.
Click to expand...

I haven't heard the magic disappearing aluminum claim before but the rest is old hat.
It's kind of silly to think that the aluminum from the lower floors would somehow fly out far far away from the debris pile and or that large sections couldn't be entangled within the collapse. I can't understand any of his "logic" of each piece of aluminum within the tower equally distributing and shredding themselves away from each other. Or that the pieces can't melt and form a larger pooled masses lower into the pile. The photos shown already refute that claim.

As for the photo, it's looks like a translucent piece of molten glass with unmelted steel rods in it. Its the closest match I've seen.

The photo was shown to Alan Pense professor emeritus of Metallurgical engineering at Lehigh University.

He stated: "The photos shown to support melted steel are, to me, either unconvincing...or show matericals that appear to be other than steel. One of these photos appears to me to be mostly glass with unmelted steel rods in it. Glass melts at much lower temps than steel."

As others have mentioned the photo was taken on 9/27/01. There's also another photo taken of glowing debris from the same date.
Steven Jones himself puts the temps at (approx. 1550 - 1900 F, 845 - 1040 C.). Your going to get a lot of different temp. estimates.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom