Merged So there was melted steel

[Dave Rogers]

Harrit is a no-planer. I think that's all that needs to be said about him, since to be a no-planer is to not only be a loon, but also to be complete blind ton forensics.

No, I disagree, even if it's true that he's a no-planer. It's quite possible for a person to be totally batcrap insane on one topic, and yet do valuable work in another subject area. Harrit's chemical analysis can be shown to be fatally flawed on its own merits alone; that's more than enough reason to discard that specific piece of work without turning to anything else he may or may not have said. If he makes any more claims, they should be evaluated on their own merits too.

Dave

 

[Grizzly Bear]

No, I disagree, even if it's true that he's a no-planer. It's quite possible for a person to be totally batcrap insane on one topic, and yet do valuable work in another subject area. Harrit's chemical analysis can be shown to be fatally flawed on its own merits alone; that's more than enough reason to discard that specific piece of work without turning to anything else he may or may not have said. If he makes any more claims, they should be evaluated on their own merits too.

Dave

Don't get me wrong, I don't disagree with you on that, however it's no small issue that most of the no-planer theories come from a negligence in forensic research, and for most people familiar with seeing truther claims across several issues, it's a trend seen across multiple fields of study.

While it may not be any help to people new to the whole 9/11 conspiracy scene, I've just become an impatient bastard

 

[Gaspode]

Discussion on AQ/OBL split to new thread.

Posted By: Gaspode

 

[Miragememories]

Don't get me wrong, I don't disagree with you on that, however it's no small issue that most of the no-planer theories come from a negligence in forensic research, and for most people familiar with seeing truther claims across several issues, it's a trend seen across multiple fields of study.

While it may not be any help to people new to the whole 9/11 conspiracy scene, I've just become an impatient bastard

Dr. Harrit is most definitely not a no-planer.

Make up stuff much?

MM

 

[beachnut]

Dr. Harrit is most definitely not a no-planer.

Make up stuff much?

MM

And your evidence he is not an insane no-planer is in Al Gore's lock-box?

Thanks for posting the video, if someone has 2 hours, 1 minute and 59 seconds to waste, you will see idiots who think 911 was an inside job, high treason, and they are doing nothing. Wait, they are scamming thousands of people by taking money and spreading lies only morons would believe.

"Please contribute generously to the International Hearings Project by making a donation to one of the following four donor categories:
■Friends of 9/11 Truth ($100 club – 1,000 members)
■Pillars of 9/11 Truth ($1,000 club – 200 members)
■International Cavalry for 9/11 Truth ($10,000 club – 50 members)
■Supporters of 9/11 Truth (all other donations)"
Does this mean the people who put on the Toronto Hearings have over 800,000 dollars in donations? What a small scam, no wonder no news agencies take the time to expose ignorance and lies.

You celebrate people spreading delusions, an anti-intellectual cult of nuts on 911. How many decades will you do nothing but post proof of failed people who believe in nuts spreading lies?

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Trying to double check on the wtc one to be sure, because I recall his name popping up when I used to be on youtube debating truthers, but I think there was also another big name that I may be confusing him with. If I figure out otherwise I'll clarify. But in my book, if you doubt a plane was involved at any of the three; pentagon, wtc, or shankesville, you're a no-planer... it deals with the same basic ignorance of evidence proving the contrary between all three... That gets further off-topic though and doesn't address his other write-ups on thermite which as Dave pointed out fail on other merits.

 

[jaydeehess]

As to the dumping sawdust on a fire;
It would be a very terrible idea (assuming fully dried, as opposed to fresh, sawdust)

It would possibly put the fire out if dumped as a large clump all at once. However if it was at all separated it would not only ignite but could be almost explosive.

As a child (1960's) I witnessed the destruction by fire of a flour mill. One would not expect that flour would be such a great fuel source but it filled the concrete structure's windows with bright and large flames. What happened was that construction work ignited a small fire, the flour dust in the air ignited, a flame front rushed throughout the structure creating a draft that stirred up more flour dust. Basically the building was undergoing a sustained low power explosion that lasted for 8 hours. The building collapsed in on itself during that time.

However are we to now assume that the dust settled out as a large mass and therefore none of the massive amounts of thermite in it ignited?
That's too stupid to even consider, IMO of course. We SAW vast clouds of dust rolling down the streets. As this fine particulate settled upon fires it did indeed squelch the oxygen supply and put some of the smaller fires out.

Odd indeed that as it settled out of the air onto these and larger fires, that its low ignition temp (well within the range of burning hydrocarbons) thermitic material did not itself ignite filling the viewfinders of cameras with flashes of bright white light.

 

[Miragememories]

As to the dumping sawdust on a fire;
It would be a very terrible idea (assuming fully dried, as opposed to fresh, sawdust)

It would possibly put the fire out if dumped as a large clump all at once. However if it was at all separated it would not only ignite but could be almost explosive.

As a child (1960's) I witnessed the destruction by fire of a flour mill. One would not expect that flour would be such a great fuel source but it filled the concrete structure's windows with bright and large flames. What happened was that construction work ignited a small fire, the flour dust in the air ignited, a flame front rushed throughout the structure creating a draft that stirred up more flour dust. Basically the building was undergoing a sustained low power explosion that lasted for 8 hours. The building collapsed in on itself during that time.

However are we to now assume that the dust settled out as a large mass and therefore none of the massive amounts of thermite in it ignited?
That's too stupid to even consider, IMO of course. We SAW vast clouds of dust rolling down the streets. As this fine particulate settled upon fires it did indeed squelch the oxygen supply and put some of the smaller fires out.

Odd indeed that as it settled out of the air onto these and larger fires, that its low ignition temp (well within the range of burning hydrocarbons) thermitic material did not itself ignite filling the viewfinders of cameras with flashes of bright white light.

I'm so happy you had an opportunity to reminisce about your childhood.

The sawdust illustration was meant to show that a combustible could smother rather than fuel a fire under the right circumstances.

No where was it suggested as a practical fire suppression method.

The rest of your post appears to be a hypothetical discussion with yourself going off on an unrelated tangent--posing your own questions and then imagining the answers.

Ah the 60's.

MM

 

[tmd2_1]

Generally speaking in this thread there have been theories offered as to why there would be molten steel, if something other then the official story took place. By in large it appears that molten steel given the official story is unexplainable. Other then it just had to be the result of the planes flying into the building. Complete blind faith, unbelievable really.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

More like understanding reality... accepting that people cannot identify specific metallic compounds by "eye-balling it"

The other metals with lower melting points existed and by every definition of reality can be explained as part of what people saw... especially when given that temperatures never reached the point of being enough to melt steel and all..

and the whole disconnect you have between things that happen and cause collapse and the things that otherwise happen but cannot possibly have been a player in the collapse when it'd have only happened after the fact...

tmd, even under the OP's premise you've shown a complete disconnect with reality... that's worse than the blind faith you accuse your peers of any day of the week.

 

[ozeco41]

Generally speaking in this thread there have been theories offered as to why there would be molten steel, if something other then the official story took place. By in large it appears that molten steel given the official story is unexplainable. Other then it just had to be the result of the planes flying into the building. Complete blind faith, unbelievable really.

No matter how confused you construct your sentences there remains one simple fact. There was no molten steel.

BUT the OP gave you "molten steel" and still you have not shown how it could mean CD. That bit also easy. There was no CD.

As you say "blind faith" but you seem to have the wrong parties guilty of that blind faith. Look in the mirror.

 

[tmd2_1]

More like understanding reality... accepting that people cannot identify specific metallic compounds by "eye-balling it"

The other metals with lower melting points existed and by every definition of reality can be explained as part of what people saw... especially when given that temperatures never reached the point of being enough to melt steel and all..

and the whole disconnect you have between things that happen and cause collapse and the things that otherwise happen but cannot possibly have been a player in the collapse when it'd have only happened after the fact...

tmd, even under the OP's premise you've shown a complete disconnect with reality... that's worse than the blind faith you accuse your peers of any day of the week.

Right the reality of this thread (and almost certainly the real reality) is that there was molten steel. The reality also is no one (given the official) story seems to have an explanation for it. Also did you see that ASSE document I referenced? Temperatures up to 2800F

 

[tmd2_1]

No matter how confused you construct your sentences there remains one simple fact. There was no molten steel.

BUT the OP gave you "molten steel" and still you have not shown how it could mean CD. That bit also easy. There was no CD.

As you say "blind faith" but you seem to have the wrong parties guilty of that blind faith. Look in the mirror.

Right of course there was no CD. I've told you before my concern is not with you, but with those who may be "raw" to this subject. It's clear nothing I say or what anyone says on this matter will not separate you from your dogma. So I would expect you to say nothing different.

 

[MIKILLINI]

Generally speaking in this thread there have been theories offered as to why there would be molten steel, if something other then the official story took place. By in large it appears that molten steel given the official story is unexplainable. Other then it just had to be the result of the planes flying into the building. Complete blind faith, unbelievable really.

Lets consider blind faith; You have taken the term "molten steel" purely out of blind faith because of one statement, although this statement hasn't been proven as to what stage of molten the material was or if the material was even steel at all.
What about you accepting un-ignited therm?te as a catalyst for the smoldering fire underneath the debris pile? With blind faith you accept this without understanding the manner in how therm?te reacts, or even comprehending the total amount of materials burning within the damaged area of each office building. In continuing with complete blind faith, you assume an inside jobby job because airliners crashing into buildings and the subsequent fires being the cause of collapse is not possible to you. The available evidence proves that you're the one who is operating in blind faith.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Right the reality of this thread (and almost certainly the real reality) is that there was molten steel. The reality also is no one (given the official) story seems to have an explanation for it.

The reality is you've repeatedly ignored hurdles which cast serious doubt upon your molten steel claims which in turn, make thermite less and less of a concern if not dead in the water. In the presence of more common metals that melt at more typical temperatures, we already have a workable explanation for why the testimony exists, and it requires no special substance to elaborate on. You, however, would rather avoid the issue.

Furthermore, when assuming that the OP's premise is true, as it postulates... there is no mechanism through which thermite could have resulted in the melted steel, let alone played any role in the collapse of the buildings. Indeed, when given the "freebie" you are still unable to establish a workable mechanism through which thermite could have been present or actively played into the series of events.

Also did you see that ASSE document I referenced? Temperatures up to 2800F

I saw it, and understand that it's not a technical article that explains the measurements in greater detail. It would be in your best interests to research the original data from which the ASSE makes mention, as well as the reliability of measurements read from the helicopters.

After searching your posting history it appears you're also a believer in the "WTC meteorites," which by the way are not solid hunks of solidified steel, but rather compressed concrete floors which cannot have have under any circumstances been exposed to the temperatures you attribute to thermite or other incendiaries, and I can very easily put to rest any "doubts" you likely have regarding the "meteorites" should you ever choose to bring them up again.

 

[beachnut]

Right the reality of this thread (and almost certainly the real reality) is that there was molten steel. The reality also is no one (given the official) story seems to have an explanation for it. Also did you see that ASSE document I referenced? Temperatures up to 2800F

ASSE document with 2800F, the 2800F is hearsay. Many 911 truth cult members don't know what hearsay means, 911 truth cult members will find out in grade school, or high school.

 

[ozeco41]

Right of course there was no CD....

Good oh! That looks like another "small step for man". Don't give up there is still some distance to travel.

...I've told you before my concern is not with you,...

...if you say so. your fear of reasoned discussion oozes from your posts

...but with those who may be "raw" to this subject...

...Don't worry about them too much. They have nothing to fear from you. Even those who, like me, know the topic well are hard pressed to interpret what you are babbling about. Those who are "raw" will simply ignore you.

It's clear nothing I say or what anyone says on this matter will not separate you from your dogma....

...word games again?

... I would expect you to say nothing different.

True. your resistance to reason and learning has been evident from your first posts. So no matter how many times I or others point you in the right direction your "Auto pilot" will send you scurrying back to truther nonsense. Your problem. None of us can help you if you are not prepared to learn.

 

[Oystein]

Miragememories,

you have not replied to my latest post?!?

 

[sheeplesnshills]

Right the reality of this thread (and almost certainly the real reality) is that there was molten steel. The reality also is no one (given the official) story seems to have an explanation for it. Also did you see that ASSE document I referenced? Temperatures up to 2800F

We have now entered the twilight zone.............

 

[sheeplesnshills]

I've told you before my concern is not with you, but with those who may be "raw" to this subject.

OK any uncooked lurkers out there....let us know if TMDs myth is making any sense to you..................anyone?.............no?.................chirp..........chirp.......


TMD, Reality is that people like you are fortunately quite rare. The welfare system could not afford the long term care.............