Merged So there was melted steel

[Oystein]

Oh?

I thought you had a major disbelief about the degree of pulverization that occurred?

My theory about the sustained high heat levels and the relationship to melted steel, requires a couple of things.

It requires a very dense, oxygen-depriving dust debris field, and it requires an abundance of the red chips.

MM

Can you give us ballpark figures for both?
- total amount of dust
- total amount of red chips
Both given as an absolute amount, a number with the unit "tons", please.

And then an indication whether the red chips were generally mixed with the other dust, or more generally seperate from all the other dust.

Well, all of this of course only if you don't feel this is off-topic here.

Thanks.

 

[twinstead]

Oh?

I thought you had a major disbelief about the degree of pulverization that occurred?

My theory about the sustained high heat levels and the relationship to melted steel, requires a couple of things.

It requires a very dense, oxygen-depriving dust debris field, and it requires an abundance of the red chips.

MM

Let's put it this way: in this forum and off, anybody I know who knows anything about the science involved thinks you're full of it. So, pardon me if I require a second opinion.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

And how does their belief, or lack of, in the use of explosives or thermite, have anything to do with the truth of their statements about what they actually saw and experienced regarding the state of the WTC debris?

MM

Why leave it out if you believe their opinions have no bearing?

 

[tfk]

As per conspiratorial method, Official Story supporters have no problem accepting crashing aircraft and fire.

I am left speechless at people who see two midsize jets fly at high speed into two spectacularly tall, narrow buildings, see the explosions, see the fires, and see both buildings, that have stood for a quarter century collapse soon thereafter …

and conclude …

"Coincidence or diversion. The crashes had nothing to do with the collapse."

And I presented an alternative explanation, nano thermite, and how it could account for molten steel.

I am left dumbfounded at the steaming pile of, uh, "words" that they subsequently dredge up to justify ignoring the investigation & conclusions of world respected engineers, in favor of basement dwelling internet kiddies.

No, MM, you did not "present an alternative explanation". You reached up DRG's keister & pulled out a giant handful of, uh, "words".

bolding is mine

So, we have an acceptance of 'steel-melting' temperatures in the World Trade Center Ground Zero debris pile.

I have proposed a theory as to how these prolonged temperatures might have been maintained.

If you wish to oppose my theory jaydeehess, I suggest you bring something more to the table than unsubstantiated bluster.

MM

"… words, words, words, …"

tk

PS. This is exactly analogous to me of a situation where somebody attacks some guy, beats him near senseless with a baseball bat, stabs him a half dozen time, shoots him, stomps him. And all of this is caught - clearly - on some security video tape. The guy leaves behind the bat, gun & knife with his fingerprints on them.

The bludgeoned guys survives long enough to get to the hospital. The docs try to save him but he dies.

The murderer gets away to some country that doesn't have extradition, where reporters ask him about it. And the murderer confesses.

But there are people back here who don't like (the murdered guy, the politics of the murdered guy, friends of the murdered guy, etc.).

So they claim that the ER doctors murdered him.

Because, uh, "words, words, words."

Some people's kids...

 

[tfk]

MM,

You have a theory …

GREAT news. Can't wait to hear it.

Please share.

No, really.

Please.

Share.

You might want to consider a few things about your theory.

It requires a very dense, oxygen-depriving dust debris field,

Care to speculate on what mechanism halts the diffusion of oxygen in air?

There are certain creatures on this planet that don't do very well in "oxygen deprive dust" (or air). Things like people & rescue dogs. Both of which were very common on, around & under the debris pile, continuously, from the day of the event thereafter.

See any problems for your theory?

and it requires an abundance of the red chips.
MM

Please explain what you think the red chips are, and what role they play in your theory.

A critical question: please lay out, in detail, any falsifiable features of your theory.

Thanks.

Can't wait.

 

[Edx]

Out of context??

Yes, out of context. People have SAID that their quotes have been taken out of context by you people and in plenty of others you can see they have been taken out of context by putting it back IN context. Maybe they are lying! There are spies everywhere you know MM, I'd check under the bed sometimes they hide microphones there.

100 years from now the absolute meaning of those statements would still be clear.

Even when many of them say they have been misrepresented by truthers, good one. For example, you remember Wally Miller? Hilarious how truthers pretended he said he found no human remains at all, which is totally different to what he actually said which can easily be seen simply by reading the rest of the article they took the quote from in the first place. Then there are people who said they heard a bomb, but truthers snip out the part where they said they said it was the sound of the tower collapsing. Thats taking things out of context. There is also the video of the firefighter saying theres a bomb in the building, proof there was bombs! Of course the fact is in context it was regarding the bomb threat at Stuyvesant high school on the day which turned out to be false. Just a few that come to mind...

And how does their belief, or lack of, in the use of explosives or thermite, have anything to do with the truth of their statements about what they actually saw and experienced regarding the state of the WTC debris?

MM

Its not just about being taken out of context, its not just that many people who's quotes truthers use have said they have been misrepresented and quoted out of context, its also that truthers simply dont read what is written. When people say that something sounded" like" an explosion or "like" a bomb, truthers will say they actually said they heard a bomb go off even though that is not what was said. People hearing explosions and people reporting hearing things sounding like bombs is common in other fires and even when there arent any fires, people even use the words explosion and sounding like bombs to refer to things they know arent bombs before they said it! Truthers will quote a variety of people that said they saw molten steel, ignoring the fact that none of them have said they believe that thermite was used or that the buildings were demolished and many have said that truthers are misrepresenting the facts again. Truthers will make a big deal about how people said they saw molten steel, as if this is abnormal in a fire and therefore must be thermite thats responsible, yet ignore the fact that people reporting that fire melted steel, melted beams and girders are COMMON and in one case was even described by a firefighter in 1984 as melting a steel beam "like butter". So yes, truthers take everything out of context. Not just quotes, but everything.

People hearing explosions on 911 = completely expected
People reporting seeing molten metal and steel = completely expected

However truthers dont really like the fact that no one sustained the most simple blast injuries from all these explosives that were going off, that were apparently so powerful they flung heavy steel around. Yet these huge explosives also weren't loud enough to be picked up on camera when all this steel flinging was meant to be occuring. My point is this.... if you heard something that sounded like an explosion in Afganistan, maybe you'd have a good reason to think it coulkd well be a bomb. But on 911 you really do have no good reasons whatsoever and the way truthers descibe how these explosives work is literally physically impossible and shows they have no understanding of sound waves at all.

 

[NoahFence]

Out of context??

100 years from now the absolute meaning of those statements would still be clear.

And how does their belief, or lack of, in the use of explosives or thermite, have anything to do with the truth of their statements about what they actually saw and experienced regarding the state of the WTC debris?

MM

 

[tsig]

Do you have difficulty understanding English?

Why would you ask such a stupid question after I just finished acknowledging that Official Story supporters accept crashing aircraft and fire as the sole explanation for the collapses?

MM

So then you agree with the official story. Good, that's progress.

 

[jaydeehess]

Do you have difficulty understanding English?

Why would you ask such a stupid question after I just finished acknowledging that Official Story supporters accept crashing aircraft and fire as the sole explanation for the collapses?

MM

Your post left open whether or not you, as a non-believer in the official story, accepted aircraft crashing into the towers as a part of the story.

You were asked to clear that up and chose to instead attack the questioner.

 

[jaydeehess]

Can you give us ballpark figures for both?
- total amount of dust
- total amount of red chips
Both given as an absolute amount, a number with the unit "tons", please.

And then an indication whether the red chips were generally mixed with the other dust, or more generally seperate from all the other dust.

Well, all of this of course only if you don't feel this is off-topic here.

Thanks.

MM is going to want his cake and eat it too it seems.

He requires a thick enough coating of mostly concrete dust to block oxygen from reaching underground hot spots, yet wants this dust to contain large percentagers of thermite so that when it falls into the hot volumes it will heat up and ignite thus keeping the region hot as more of this dust falls in.

Problems; The falling dust itself MUST be below ignition temp otherwise it would ignite on the surface. the volume of inert dust compared to the volume of thermite dust will be in the range of several orders of magnitude. The cool inert dust MUST also rise in temp to the ignition point of the thermite before the thermite can ignite. With the numbers given for the heat supplied by the thermite dust and its quantity there will not be enough heat released by this thermite to keep the concrete dust above the ignition point of this thermite , assuming orginal concrete dust temps being below the boiling point of water(vast clouds of steam did not rise when it was hit by water)

The dust would have to be several meters thick for this mechanism to continue to block normal oxidation fires from occuring (it wasn't)

The dust consisting mainly of inert materials would be filling the hot volumes and blocking more dust from entering OR at the very least brining this thermite ignition dust closer to the surface as time goes by. (no evcidence of this occuring.)

In MMs 'theory' the inert portion of the dust is cartoon dirt. As when Yosemite Sam is digging a tunnel, throws the dirt behind hinslef and the dirt simply disappears.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

I suppose you figure they are all liars like anyone who disagrees with you?

The implication of his statement is not that they may be lying; it's that he doesn't trust you to accurately represent these individuals.

 

[jaydeehess]

The implication of his statement is not that they may be lying; it's that he doesn't trust you to accurately represent these individuals.

Given that he is trying to ascribe consise technical detail to the descriptions given in a non-technical and emotionally charged situation.

 

[Oystein]

Your post left open whether or not you, as a non-believer in the official story, accepted aircraft crashing into the towers as a part of the story.

You were asked to clear that up and chose to instead attack the questioner.

Precisely.

Yet I am alleged to "have difficulty understanding English".
Oh the irony.

 

[Miragememories]

"Out of context??

100 years from now the absolute meaning of those statements would still be clear.

And how does their belief, or lack of, in the use of explosives or thermite, have anything to do with the truth of their statements about what they actually saw and experienced regarding the state of the WTC debris?"

"Why leave it out if you believe their opinions have no bearing?"

What is it that you feel I left out?

MM

 

[NoahFence]

What is it that you feel I left out?

MM

Common sense?
Functioning brain matter?

 

[Miragememories]

"As per conspiratorial method, Official Story supporters have no problem accepting crashing aircraft and fire.

And I presented an alternative explanation, nano thermite, and how it could account for molten steel."

"Urrr ... just for the record: Do you have doubts that there were crashing aircraft? Or do you doubt there was fire? "

"Do you have difficulty understanding English?

Why would you ask such a stupid question after I just finished acknowledging that Official Story supporters accept crashing aircraft and fire as the sole explanation for the collapses?"

"Your post left open whether or not you, as a non-believer in the official story, accepted aircraft crashing into the towers as a part of the story.

You were asked to clear that up and chose to instead attack the questioner."

I am not, and have never been, a 'no-planer'.

What I was addressing, and you seem confused about, is that I believe there was more to why the WTC Towers collapsed than just the aircraft crashes and subsequent fires.

MM

 

[NoahFence]

I am not, and have never been, a 'no-planer'.

What I was addressing, and you seem confused about, is that I believe there was more to why the WTC Towers collapsed than just the aircraft crashes and subsequent fires.

MM

Nope. You're wrong.** Airplane crashes can (and do) severely impact the area that they crash in. Should this area include steel support collums and such, those will be damaged and / or destroyed.

ALSO

Fire can do quite a number on steel.

Put them together and it doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure out what happened on 9/11.

Where was the thermite in the dust of the portion of the Pentagon that collapsed? Surely the perps saw to it that the Pentagon was loaded with this magical substance, too?


**Actually, you're technically right - Aircraft Impacts + Fire + Gravity = collapse. So yes, it was more than airplane and fire.

 

[jaydeehess]

I am not, and have never been, a 'no-planer'.

Well you see that is what most of us, at least speaking for myself, had understood about your position but the way you worded it in your post was exactly as it would have been worded by a no-planer. Glad it only took several posts to have you consisely clear that up.

 

[Miragememories]

"Oh?

I thought you had a major disbelief about the degree of pulverization that occurred?

My theory about the sustained high heat levels and the relationship to melted steel, requires a couple of things.

It requires a very dense, oxygen-depriving dust debris field, and..."

"Care to speculate on what mechanism halts the diffusion of oxygen in air?

There are certain creatures on this planet that don't do very well in "oxygen deprive dust" (or air). Things like people & rescue dogs. Both of which were very common on, around & under the debris pile, continuously, from the day of the event thereafter.

See any problems for your theory?"

Are you suggesting that fires cannot be smothered?

If you had bothered to follow this thread, you would not be wasting time on questions that have already been addressed. My theory primarily addressed the enduring hotspots well below the surface of the WTC Ground Zero debris pile.

You know, pockets well insulated by all that tightly packed pulverized dust I previously referred to.

Pockets that may have contained fires, but after running out of sufficient oxygen, were extinguished but retained combustion level temperatures.

Until the combustible materials in those pockets were exposed to a fresh source of oxygen, the only heat generating ignition, would be produced by substances which produced their own oxygen and were exposed to their required ignition temperature.

In the case of the thermitic red chips, 430 C would achieve this.

"... it requires an abundance of the red chips."

"Please explain what you think the red chips are, and what role they play in your theory.

A critical question: please lay out, in detail, any falsifiable features of your theory.

Thanks.

Can't wait."

No.

If you can't be bothered to read this thread where I have already covered your questions, than you are of no interest to me.

MM

 

[jaydeehess]

What I was addressing, and you seem confused about, is that I believe there was more to why the WTC Towers collapsed than just the aircraft crashes and subsequent fires.

MM

Let's clear up another vaguery in your selection of talking points lately.

You mention the total amount of dust not specifically to speak to the common meme among the non-believers in the 'official story' of there being too much pulverisation, but in order to bolster your contention that the layer of dust was what was most responsible for a lack of oxygen reaching the hot spots from the surface above them?

Correct?