Merged Continuation - 9/11 CT subforum General Discussion Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Animal said:
Making a second lie to cover your first one only digs a deeper hole for yourself. Your first claim was 7.6, now it is "around" 6.5 claiming a more precise measure, yet you still have been unable to state what the exact floor to floor height of the building was. You are arguing from a logical fallacy, no amount of tap dancing on your part will change that fact. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

The floor height is not relevant for what you're talking about. Because you're talking about a ration between height and width of the building. But if you really need to know the floor height is 3.8m. (http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anexo:Rascacielos_de_la_Ciudad_de_México)
 
Java Man said:
The floor height is not relevant for what you're talking about. Because you're talking about a ration between height and width of the building. But if you really need to know the floor height is 3.8m. (http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anexo:Rascacielos_de_la_Ciudad_de_M%C3%A9xico)
Click to expand...
Is that a gravity collapse without fire? Can't happen, steel building for 911 truth can't fall down due to gravity. Was it an earthquake caused by the US, like Dr thermite Jones said US caused in Haiti? You know, the Jones who say thermite did 911? You are stuck with delusions on 911 and have to change the subject.
 
Last edited:
Animal said:
Just more proof you do not have a clue what you are talking about. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

A height to width ration can be calculated by looking at a picture or blue print. You can measure the lines in cm on the drawing without knowing the actual real world units. Because being a ration they'll cancel out!! Clearly you don't know what you're talking about. If I measure 10 cm by 30 cm on a piece of paper or 100 pixes by 300 pixels. The ration is still 3. Even if the diagrams scale is 1/72 and it's not even close to 30 cm in real life.
 
Java Man said:
A height to width ration can be calculated by looking at a picture or blue print. You can measure the lines in cm on the drawing without knowing the actual real world units. Because being a ration they'll cancel out!! Clearly you don't know what you're talking about. If I measure 10 cm by 30 cm on a piece of paper or 100 pixes by 300 pixels. The ration is still 3. Even if the diagrams scale is 1/72 and it's not even close to 30 cm in real life.
Click to expand...
Is this evidence for your claims on 911? Ration? Do you eat the Ration of 3, or what?
 
Molten aluminum is silvery in daylight and there were no other metals in the debris pile that could account for the molten metal. There is no alternative or reason to doubt that what all those people saw was indeed molten steel. To do so is just denial. The molten steel establishes temperatures far in excess of what carbon based fires can attain.

The RJ Lee report also confirms temperatures in excess of 2800oF.
"Various metals (most notably iron and lead) were melted during the WTC
event, producing spherical metallic particles. Exposure of phases to high
heat results in the formation of spherical particles due to surface tension.
Figure 21 and Figure 22 show a spherical iron particle resulting from the melting of iron (or steel)."

You would like to just move on without acknowledging this point but that is denial of the evidence.
Click to expand...
funk de fino said:
Do you admit the photo of the claw you posted was taken at night?
Click to expand...
Yes. I have stated that all metals [including aluminum] glow at about the same colors but because of its high reflectivity, aluminum is silvery in daylight. This would hold true for work lights.
TFC, Those photos were taken in a dark room so they are irrelevant.

I have also stated in post 571:
"Depending on which color/heat chart you use, the pale orange to yellow metal is in the 1000oC to 1400oC range. Aluminum would be liquid at those temperatures and would not be semi-solid like the glob being extracted."

ETA: Chris,
Tully, Loizeaux, Riggs and the others would notice if the molten metal they saw was silvery. They are not as stupid as you seem to think.
 
Last edited:
kookbreaker said:
The idea that molten steel could be "dipped" out by an excavator bucket is laughable.
Click to expand...
It's so ludicrous I actually lol'd. There's a reason why refractory linings are used in containers used in steel making. Others have alluded to why it's nonsense too.

I really dislike the word "molten" in the 9/11 context. Steel is either solid, solid plus liquid or liquid. "Molten" seems to cover all three. Truthers forget that steel will lose half it's yield strength at 600°C. Start pushing that temperature towards 1500°C and there's no way that you can grip the stuff in a claw.

If the steel was liquid then why on earth would you need/try to clear an area that is 1540°C plus? Once you've "dipped it out", what the hell are you going to do with it assuming the machinery is going to survive that temperature? Try and truck the stuff off? It would be an incredibly dangerous situation not to mention stupid.
 
Christopher7 said:
Put a layer of dirt in the dump truck, put the molten steel/iron on it, douse with water or just allow it to cool.
Click to expand...
I've been away for a few days enjoying the rare April sunshine, but this has made me go :jaw-dropp and then rofl. I'm not sure where to begin so I'll just say that what you are proposing is extremely dangerous.
 
Mr. Skinny said:
Yep. Our foundry had a fatality and several burn injuries when a furnace tender added a metal "pig" to the heat that had a small void of water in it. It blew all of the metal out of the furnace.

I was hired just after this happened. Took one guy over a year to return to work.
Click to expand...
That makes me grimace. I remember reading some of the books printed in the late 1800's, early 1900's containing steel making practices etc that my university had in their library, purely from an "oh wow! They've got stuff from 1895!!" perspective and reading about dangers associated with water. I guess they learnt the hard way.

People really don't understand just how dangerous liquid iron/steel really is.
 
The idea that molten steel could be "dipped" out by an excavator bucket is laughable.
Click to expand...
Sunstealer said:
It's so ludicrous I actually lol'd. There's a reason why refractory linings are used in containers used in steel making. Others have alluded to why it's nonsense too.
Click to expand...
Join the cult of anonymous arrogant adolescents who think Loizeaux is a nitwit and they know much better. :rolleyes:

You must first deny that the crab claw is picking up molten metal that is in the 1000-1400°C range.

I really dislike the word "molten" in the 9/11 context. Steel is either solid, solid plus liquid or liquid.
Click to expand...
Not so.
Steel does not go from solid to liquid [can be poured] instantly, it happens over a range of about 100 degrees F. First it starts to loose its shape, then it becomes like a glob and finally it becomes runny, much like lava. We can observe lava running very fast in lava tubes when it is very hot and very slow when it is almost solid again.

If the steel was liquid then why on earth would you need/try to clear an area that is 1540°C plus? Once you've "dipped it out", what the hell are you going to do with it assuming the machinery is going to survive that temperature? Try and truck the stuff off? It would be an incredibly dangerous situation not to mention stupid.
Click to expand...
This is the denier round robin. We have covered that. Please read the thread before asking what has already been covered. [see post 622]
 
Last edited:
Christopher7 said:
Yes. I have stated that all metals [including aluminum] glow at about the same colors but because of its high reflectivity, aluminum is silvery in daylight. This would hold true for work lights.
TFC, Those photos were taken in a dark room so they are irrelevant.

I have also stated in post 571:
"Depending on which color/heat chart you use, the pale orange to yellow metal is in the 1000oC to 1400oC range. Aluminum would be liquid at those temperatures and would not be semi-solid like the glob being extracted."

ETA: Chris,
Tully, Loizeaux, Riggs and the others would notice if the molten metal they saw was silvery. They are not as stupid as you seem to think.
Click to expand...
The dust was collected when? This is a good one! The Lee report was from dust collected when? Go ahead post the date.
 
TruthersLie said:
argument from ignorance and incredulity noted.

The number of pieces that you are talking about rendering (as a full scale model) and then having the computers crunch is astronomical. It is beyond difficult to the almost impossible category. Especially since if just one piece falls the "wrong" way, you will not be able to see a collapse that is "similar" to the events of the day. And that really is the issue. You want some sort of computer simulation which looks EXACTLY like the collapses of the day. Unfortunately in a chaotic situation, it will NEVER happen. You can almost NEVER get a computer simulation to match up with reality when you are talking about billions of individual components. And then after the computer runs several hundred of these simulations, the twoof woudl say, see the simulations don't match. Or worse. There is one that is REALLY close to what we saw on 9/11, they would then say "you manipulated the simulation to get this one to match."

you really should LOOK UP WHAT IT TAKES to do what you're asking for. It isn't anywhere as easy as you think it should be. We are talking tens of thousands of man hours, and a super computer to be able to handle the processes.
Click to expand...

I was a systems programmer for a few years. The fact that two buildings and then a third building destroyed themselves squashes your butterfly maneuver.
 
Animal said:
No it could not have been. Most people do not have a clue what it takes to get steel to a molten stage and keep it there. It takes a tremendous amount of energy. Far greater than what was available in the debris pile at the WTC
Click to expand...
Agreed.

One of my mates is an experienced blacksmith and we had a go at replicating one of the older, small charcoal furnace designs for iron smelting. Iirc around 1250°C is required. Getting enough oxygen into the damn thing (without resorting to modern equipment) was the most difficult part and even then we didn't achieve the temperature needed on the first 3 or 4 occasions. I "borrowed" a platinum/platinum-rhodium thermocouple-wire from work, which I calibrated, and used with a multimeter. We got to around 1050°C maximum for a few minutes the first time.

With a bit more trial and error we did manage to get consistent temperatures above 1250°C.

Liquid steel in the quantities truthers propose is bollocks.
 
Clayton Moore said:
I was a systems programmer for a few years. The fact that two buildings and then a third building destroyed themselves squashes your butterfly maneuver.
Click to expand...

Actually planes, fire and gravity were the culprits.
 
Christopher7 said:
Join the cult of anonymous arrogant adolescents who think Loizeaux is a nitwit and they know much better. :rolleyes:

You must first deny that the crab claw is picking up molten metal that is in the 1000-1400°C range.

Not so.
Steel does not go from solid to liquid [can be poured] instantly, it happens over a range of about 100 degrees F. First it starts to loose its shape, then it becomes like a glob and finally it becomes runny, much like lava. We can observe lava running very fast in lava tubes when it is very hot and very slow when it is almost solid again.

This is the denier round robin. We have covered that. Please read the thread before asking what has already been covered. [see post 622]
Click to expand...

The only denial going on is the denial of reality by troofers who belief a pincher claw could pick up molten steel
 
Justin39640 said:
Another good one (not mine):
Click to expand...

Justin,

I think that your videos are very interesting and show certain aspects of the WTC collapses. i wonder why no other truthers take exception to them.

I think that while they say that the tower should not have fallen in the way your blocks do that they do not have a clue on how to refute your videos.

I suppose you think your the man!
 
triforcharity said:
LOL!! Too funny!! Chris7 has YET to even take a stab at what those images are!!

[qimg]http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h131/triathlete247/mediaManager.jpg[/qimg]

Good luck Chris7!!
Click to expand...
I'm going to have a stab at it. I think it's some form of glass.

What do I base this on? Purely on the rod in the picture. I've probably failed, but there you go. :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom