Merged So there was melted steel

[newton3376]

What is the formula for slow burning, long lasting thermite? Does it match the Jones fake paper formula?

Simple.....you take regular thermite...or possibly "nano" thermite....

And add in sooper seekrit ingrediants also know as "wishful thinking", "imagination", "delusion", "distortions", and "fantasy" and you get sooper seekrit slow burning thermite.

Add in some "failed physics" and it turns into the "hush-a-boom" explosive variety sooper seekrit nano thermite.

Then if you add in some "denying physical evidence" with a pinch of "unwarranted conclusions" you get the "not-so-brite" variety.

Put it all together and you get...

Sooper seekrit slow-burning-hush-a-boom-not-so-brite-nano-super-highly- energetic-explosive-incendiary-thermate-thermite.

 

[Edx]

John Cole experiment going to be referenced in 3,2,1....

So before that happens...
1. His device caused a rapid effect.
2. There did not appear to be any molten material produced either

So as someone else asked, what kind of thermite could keep steel of other metals molten for weeks and weeks? Because we all know you have no examples, how about just a theory on how it would be possible to create this thermite.

 

[Oystein]

...
As such features (molten metal, wtc7's implosion, 100 day fires, pulverized concrete, etc) have never EVER been seen without the use of explosives and in controlled demolitions,, ...

Has molten metal EVER been observed as the result of the use of explosives and in controlled demolitions? Ever, atavism? Got at least one example of a CD with explosives that produced molten steel? Only one, atavism?

...
"Why is molten steel a sign for inside job?" Because it, along with a host of other well documented features, could not be present without the use additional energetic materials. ...

So you are saying there wasn't enough energy? How much energy was available without additional energetic materials, and how much energy was added by additional energetic materials, atavism? Ballpark figures will do - give us orders of magnitude, please!

 

[uke2se]

Are you twoofers being serious? 10 pages and still no reply to the questions in the OP? Got to be some kind of record.

 

[Oystein]

To be perfectly honest I have no idea what you are trying to say anymore. I don't even think you do. The general point is that the high temperatures would be coming from some agent that shouldn't have been there.

Which agent, when did that agent do it, and why did the agent survive the collapses?

 

[excaza]

Has molten metal EVER been observed as the result of the use of explosives and in controlled demolitions? Ever, atavism? Got at least one example of a CD with explosives that produced molten steel? Only one, atavism?

See, the problem with this is that they can just handwave it away by pointing out that the fires were caused by the aircraft impacts, and that CD was actually what brought the building down. That way they can still have their molten metal while avoiding admitting that the aircraft crashes could have brought down the towers.

It's really not a situation you can get out of, since truthers don't respond well to logic. Hence why their stupid 'theories' keep getting recycled week after week. At least we don't have any more "moon sized fields of debris couldn't bring down the WTC" posts.

 

[uke2se]

See, the problem with this is that they can just handwave it away by pointing out that the fires were caused by the aircraft impacts, and that CD was actually what brought the building down. That way they can still have their molten metal while avoiding admitting that the aircraft crashes could have brought down the towers.

It's really not a situation you can get out of, since truthers don't respond well to logic. Hence why their stupid 'theories' keep getting recycled week after week. At least we don't have any more "moon sized fields of debris couldn't bring down the WTC" posts.

Give ergo some time. I'm sure he'll be able to beat that some day.

 

[Sunstealer]

So now we have thermite reacting without being in contact with the steel.



Wow.

OMG, OMFG! I have MM on ignore but I realise that someone is going to quote his stundies.

I have to take him off ignore for 5 mins whilst I re-quote the stundie in all it's glory.

I believe the subject dealt with how molten metal, in this case how molten steel was achieved.

A thermitic reaction without nearby steel to heat and melt is not going to leave pools of molten metal.
MM

Except that the (classic) thermite reaction by *********** definition results in LIQUID iron.

Is (liquid) iron a molten metal?
(que arguments of whether molten means liquid )

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

I didn't say it..you did.

You are having an amazing amount of difficulty in grasping the point of this thread...

 

[Travis]

I never thought I'd see so much furnace denialism.

 

[alienentity]

OMG, OMFG! I have MM on ignore but I realise that someone is going to quote his stundies.

I have to take him off ignore for 5 mins whilst I re-quote the stundie in all it's glory.

Except that the (classic) thermite reaction by *********** definition results in LIQUID iron.

Is (liquid) iron a molten metal?
(que arguments of whether molten means liquid )

Please, would you consider having a little discussion with ThePeage on my channel? He ignores or handwaves everything I write.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EY3nj728WPY

 

[jaydeehess]

Why shouldn't a large fire create high temperatures in a furnace like environment? If primitive man can melt steel with no more than some charcoal and his lungs please explain why those conditions CANNOT exist in the debris pile. Plenty of voids to create chimney effect, lots of fuel, plenty of voids to allow air into the base. I'm not saying it did get hot enough to melt some steel but I sure as heck wouldn't bet against it.

One needs to consider HOW ancient man came to know of ways to increase the heat output and temperature of a fire.
Was it guess work?
Probably not. It was more likely observation of natural fires, blowing on it makes it hotter unless the wind is too strong. Covering the fire (i.e. a hollow tree on the ground) creates its own draft and a hotter fire,,, etc.

 

[jaydeehess]

I base my belief of extreme temperatures on the NASA photos showing 1341. Those two things you mention won't necessarily mean high temperatures. Of course it doesn't mean they weren't there either.

Witnesses reporting it wouldn't necessarily mean high temperatures, no. But if what they reported is indeed true, then yes high temperatures.

I'm simply asking for an example out of the thousands in history. If there are none this thread should end.

You still do not seem to grasp the concept referred to in this thread.

The thread is not here to debate whether or not the fires were hot enough though you do seem capable of continually derailling it that way.

It is here to ask you " specifically how is this pertinent to a conspiracy?"

If the high temps are not created by normal components in the towers then what caused it and how did it manage to do so for months?

My addition would be
If the heat is caused by thermitic or other energetic materials that were contained in the towers pre-collapse, and this material caused high temps for months, then why was none of this material observed on top of the rubble?

 

[jaydeehess]

I never thought I'd see so much furnace denialism.

Its a derail of the thraed anyway, is it not? You have allowed that there was molten steel and thus have allowed that the fires were hot enough to create it no matter what the cause.

tmd and the others however seem reluctant to the point of aversion to actually explaining how this means anything,,,,,,,,,,,,,,exactly.

 

[jaydeehess]

I believe the subject dealt with how molten metal, in this case how molten steel was achieved.

A thermitic reaction without nearby steel to heat and melt is not going to leave pools of molten metal.

MM

,,,,,,and electrons running through the element of my stove is not going to melt any ice on in my bucket on the bar.

However you claimed that steel/iron was a fuel for the termitic reaction.

Its been pointed out to you several times how utterly and spectacularily wrong such a statement is.

You can either say you were incorrect and move on or you can dig yourself in deeper. Your choice.

 

[Travis]

Well part of my original intent was to show that molten steel could be caused by means that did not imply anything nefarious. I've asked for someone to prove that molten steel had to mean an "inside job" and so far TMD has attempted to disprove that a furnace effect can be real because...........it just doesn't sound right to him.

I guess.

 

[Miragememories]

Nonsense. Thermite's main byproduct is molten metal. In fact, if you put thermite in contact with steel, the majority of the resulting molten metal will be the thermite leftovers. Thermite will melt much less than its own weight in the steel.

Well someone is actually starting to get my point. Though still missing most of it.

Oystein's questions were asking for speculation which I provided.

Significant amounts of molten steel, IMHO, could be created as a result of thermitic activity if the heat generated was sufficiently trapped and the surrounding temperature rose sufficiently to reach the melting point of any steel in close proximity.

Trapped heat seems like a possible explanation for molten steel.

Some of the firefighter molten metal observations appear to have occurred when they broke into debris pockets.

How much, and how long the thermitic activity continued after 9/11 is anyone's guess.

But I have yet to hear of a non-thermitic furnace-like scenario that has any credibility.

Looking into the Dresden bombing and subsequent firestorm, a direct result of thermitic incendiaries, the only reference to molten metal I've found was this;

http://www.archive.org/stream/Apocalypse1945TheDestructionOfDresden_44/Dresden_1995_djvu.txt
""When rescue teams finally cleared their way into the hermetically sealed bunkers and shelters after several weeks, the heat generated inside them had been so intense that nothing remained of their occupants...The uncommon temperatures in these bunkers were further testified to by the pools of molten metal [only reference] which had formerly been pots, pans, and cooking utensils taken into them."

Note that the bunkers were hermetically sealed.

MM

 

[Miragememories]

"Well part of my original intent was to show that molten steel could be caused by means that did not imply anything nefarious. I've asked for someone to prove that molten steel had to mean an "inside job" and so far TMD has attempted to disprove that a furnace effect can be real because...........it just doesn't sound right to him.

I guess."

Molten metal, fires that lasted for months in spite of constant firefighting and several heavy rains, combined with strong evidence of unspent thermitic material throughout the WTC dust, provides lots of reason to suspect a cause beyond aircraft crashes.

MM

 

[MIKILLINI]

To be perfectly honest I have no idea what you are trying to say anymore. I don't even think you do. The general point is that the high temperatures would be coming from some agent that shouldn't have been there.

Hey tmd2, how many different CD videos have you seen (I'm not including the WTC's collapse)? How many of them ended as a smouldering pile of debris?

 

[Oystein]

...
Significant amounts of molten steel, IMHO, could be created as a result of thermitic activity if the heat generated was sufficiently trapped and the surrounding temperature rose sufficiently to reach the melting point of any steel in close proximity.

Trapped heat seems like a possible explanation for molten steel.
...

You used the words "heat" and "temperature" correctly there. Perhaps unwittingly so, but nonetheless.

You don't realize that an amount of thermite produces much LESS heat than an equal amount of paper, plastics, carpets, wood or human bodies.
Thermite only reaches a very high temperature because it burns very fast and doesn't involve any gas to disperse the heat.
In other words: Even though there is little heat in thermite, it reached a high temperature when its reaction concentrated in space and time.
If you disperse thermite in spatially, or burn it slower, it won't produce the same high temperatures.

The obvious problem, which my questions sought to shed light on, is that any thermite that was concentrated as a charge somewhere in the WTC towers would be highly unlikely to survive
the collapses intact and still concentrated. It would get dispersed and mixed with everything else, in which case it could not melt bulk steel any longer, if it burns at all.
Trapping the heat of thermite won't elevate temperatures more than trapping the heat of any other burning combustibles, in fact it will elevate temperatures less so.