Merged Has this structural engineer been debunked? / Astaneh-Asl "melting of girders"

[carlitos]

show what you wrote and we can decide about that.

You can't even source the fake quote in your own signature line. Discussing Professor Astaneh's true words and meaning with you is like discussing parenting tips with Michael Jackson.

 

[Gamolon]

show what you wrote and we can decide about that.

Tell you what. You post your email to Astaneh and his response back to about that article and I'll post mine.

Deal?

According to this post of yours below, you got SOME form of response from him right? So what exactly did he "state" to you?

ive emailed that article to astaneh and he has never stated that he didnt say that.

 

[Senenmut]

So you have no proof whatsoever that thermite can create "knife-like" edges and corrode steel like we see in the two photos provided by Astaneh and FEMA. You even admit that the Cole experiment damage results are different.

it showed that thermite can cut through steel and produce knife like edges. he shows you those edges in the vid.

Every piece of evidence and information provided points to the fact that thermite was NOT used, yet you still want to cling to the notion that it was. Even to the point that you claim that maybe some "special" type of thermite was used after you start to doubt that "normal" thermite was used.

have i ever said "normal" thermite? evidence points to the "corroded" steel sisson analyzed as having microstructure that points to NOT staying in an environment for days, weeks, a month at 940-1100C. just look at the sample they analyzed (fig 3) then see fig 4,5,6 and judge yourself. sisson could only get "little" metal to dissolve even after 24 hrs at 1100C bypassing how the office/debris fires even caused the eutectic. so why would he say it took days if he had nothing to back up his hypothesis.

evidence points to a "special" corrosion mechanism (red/gray chips perhaps). one that is fast,hot and does the damage seen in the fema sample and prof astanehs photo.

 

[Senenmut]

Tell you what. You post your email to Astaneh and his response back to about that article and I'll post mine.

Deal?

According to this post of yours below, you got SOME form of response from him right? So what exactly did he "state" to you?

i was trying to get the results of steel samples that he sent to another prof there. ive linked the articles in this thread. the article stated that prof astaneh even sent the samples fed ex so i was going to try and write an article about the samples if he gave us the results:
from my email
I asked Richard Gage if I could write an article for his monthly newsletter that goes out to 1500 architects and engineers about trying to get these results from you. He said sure. The 10 yr mark is approaching. The public and scienific community are still searching for answers. I'll leave you with one of your own observations concerning the wtc 7 steel. In the new york times article, it is interesting that you think the steel burned first (lost 15.9mm of A36 steel) then buckled. According to the article, you saw this only 8 days after the event! In another article you state that steel flanges had been reduced "from an inch to paper thin." You relate this to the floors engulfed in flames as being responsibe for that steel loss. Please think about this.

There is no reson to not give the results of those steel samples to the public/scientific community.
from the article:

One piece Dr. Astaneh-Asl saw was a charred horizontal I-beam from 7 World Trade Center, a 47-story skyscraper that collapsed from fire eight hours after the attacks. The beam, so named because its cross-section looks like a capital I, had clearly endured searing temperatures. Parts of the flat top of the I, once five-eighths of an inch thick, had vaporized.
Less clear was whether the beam had been charred after the collapse, as it lay in the pile of burning rubble, or whether it had been engulfed in the fire that led to the building's collapse, which would provide a more telling clue.
The answer lay in the beam's twisted shape. As weight pushed down, the center portion had buckled outward.
''This tells me it buckled while it was attached to the column,'' not as it fell, Dr. Astaneh-Asl said, adding, ''It had burned first, then buckled.''

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/02/s...clues-and-remedies.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm




then his response:
Your e-mail is totally incorrect about steel samples from WTC and Dr. Ostertag's involvement. Any steel that I had collected from the WTC was given to the NIST, when the National Construction Safety Team act passed congress and became the law designating NIST to study WTC. Dr. Ostertag, had no involvement in my WTC project and you definitely should not use her name in any context related to your conspiracy theories.


he never denied saying that to chang. he and chag were both at the site together. chang does not have his notes from that far back. he wrote about what they say.
　

 

[carlitos]

Did you study grammar and punctuation in the same place you studied chemistry?

 

[Dog Town]

then his response:
Your e-mail is totally incorrect about steel samples from WTC...
　

You should explain, what this says to YOU!

 

[Ape of Good Hope]

show what you wrote and we can decide about that.

Hey, one unresolved email exchange at a time, if you please!

We're still waiting for you to provide the text of your email to Kenneth Chang, and his response to you.



This kind of thing:

he never denied saying that to chang. he and chag were both at the site together. chang does not have his notes from that far back. he wrote about what they say.

...will not suffice.

 

[Gamolon]

it showed that thermite can cut through steel and produce knife like edges. he shows you those edges in the vid.

No it does not!

The cut leads right into the thickness of the web of the I beam. There is no evidence whatsoever of a gradual thickness degradation, from knife like edge to web thickness in this screen capture.

have i ever said "normal" thermite?

So what did you mean by "some other form of thermite" that was used by Cole? Wasn't Cole using the "normal" thermite formula?

evidence points to a "special" corrosion mechanism (red/gray chips perhaps). one that is fast,hot and does the damage seen in the fema sample and prof astanehs photo.

A corrosive mechanism? Can you point me in the direction of any study or experiment that shows a thermite cut to have produced a corrosive attack on steel to the extent shown in the FEMA and Astaneh photos? Something that shows thermite can create a cut where the edges closest to the actual cut are "knife-like" and then gradually return to the nominal thickness of the flange/web the farther away you move from the "knife-like" edge?

 

[Gamolon]

then his response:
Your e-mail is totally incorrect about steel samples from WTC and Dr. Ostertag's involvement.

See the word "and" that I bolded and enlarged? There are two things he is saying are incorrect in your email. Your claims about what he supposedly said about the steel samples AND Dr. Ostertag's involvement.

He basically tells you that your entire email regarding what you think he says about the WTC steel is TOTALLY incorrect.

What part about that don't you understand.

That followed up with my email below which specifically mentions the New York Times article.

Dear sir,

I am in discussion with someone in a forum who believes in conspiracy theories and the like.

This person is claiming that, based upon an article written in the New York Times on October 2, 2001 and other pieces of information, that you believe that the holes and knife-like appearance on some of the beams you observed happened in the fires, previous to the collapse.

I would like to shut this person up once and for all. If you would be so kind as to briefly state whether you think the holes and knife-like degradations you observed and that are shown in some pictures were created in the debris pile as the structural components “cooked” after the collapses or if you think those were created during the fires prior to collapse?

Thank you for your time.

To which he replied:

Dear xxxxx

Thank you for your e-mail and inquiry. In response to your inquiry, in my more than 10 years of studying WTC, I have not seen any shred of evidence that supports any conspiracy theory. My research findings have been distorted , changed, mus-interpreted by some in these conspiracy theory circles to serve their mis-guided purporposes. I have clarified the point several times to them in the past but they just simply do not want to give up interpreting our data in totally incorrect way to serve their totally mis-guided and false theories which have absolutely no scientific evidence for. The quotes that you are referring to are all false and should not be attributed to me. I presented my findings at the May 6, 2002 hearings of the Committee on Science of U.S. House of Representative on WTC a transcript of which is available on the Internet.


Best regards.

A. Astaneh, Professor
www.ce.berkeley.edu/~astaneh

 

[Sunstealer]

Did you study grammar and punctuation in the same place you studied chemistry?

It's astoundingly annoying isn't it?

He can't even manage to highlight text and press the little icon that looks like speech in order to put text in quotation.

I'm going to reproduce his post properly with all the errors highlighted, I don't have time to change the wording so that it scans properly, flows and makes sense though. Shows how little education he has, but considers himself an expert on dozens of scientific subjects. I'd never dream of sending an e-mail that wasn't spell checked.

I was trying to get the results of steel samples that he sent to another prof there. Iv'e linked the articles in this thread. The article stated that Prof. Astaneh even sent the samples (by) Fed Ex, so I was going to try and write an article about the samples, if he gave us the results:

From my email (Note how only produces a snippet and not the whole thing)

I asked Richard Gage if I could write an article for his monthly newsletter that goes out to 1500 architects and engineers about trying to get these results from you. He said sure. The 10 yr mark (anniversary) is approaching. The public and scientific community are still searching for answers. I'll leave you with one of your own observations concerning the WTC 7 steel. In the New York Times article, it is interesting that you think the steel burned first (lost 15.9mm of A36 steel) then buckled. According to the article, you saw this only 8 days after the event! In another article you state that steel flanges had been reduced "from an inch to paper thin." You relate this to the floors engulfed in flames as being responsible for that steel loss. Please think about this. (WOW!!)

There is no reason to not give the results of those steel samples to the public/scientific community.

From the article:

One piece Dr. Astaneh-Asl saw was a charred horizontal I-beam from 7 World Trade Center, a 47-story skyscraper that collapsed from fire eight hours after the attacks. The beam, so named because its cross-section looks like a capital I, had clearly endured searing temperatures. Parts of the flat top of the I, once five-eighths of an inch thick, had vaporized.
Less clear was whether the beam had been charred after the collapse, as it lay in the pile of burning rubble, or whether it had been engulfed in the fire that led to the building's collapse, which would provide a more telling clue.

The answer lay in the beam's twisted shape. As weight pushed down, the center portion had buckled outward.
''This tells me it buckled while it was attached to the column,'' not as it fell, Dr. Astaneh-Asl said, adding, ''It had burned first, then buckled.''

http://www.nytimes.com/2001/10/02/s...clues-and-remedies.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm

Then his response:

Your e-mail is totally incorrect about steel samples from WTC and Dr. Ostertag's involvement. Any steel that I had collected from the WTC was given to the NIST, when the National Construction Safety Team act passed congress and became the law designating NIST to study WTC. Dr. Ostertag, had no involvement in my WTC project and you definitely should not use her name in any context related to your conspiracy theories.

He never denied saying that to Chang. He and Chang were both at the site together. Chang does not have his notes from that far back. He wrote about what they say.

If the rest of the e-mail is littered with spelling errors, poor grammar and punctuation, poor wording, falsehoods and false accusations along with such atrocious tone, then it's no surprise that he gets such short thrift or people don't bother to reply.

Truthers just expect everyone to drop everything and reply to their illiterate ramblings.

 

[Senenmut]

No it does not!

The cut leads right into the thickness of the web of the I beam. There is no evidence whatsoever of a gradual thickness degradation, from knife like edge to web thickness in this screen capture.

[qimg]http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/ff290/gamolon/thermitecut_zps2994c590.png[/qimg]



So what did you mean by "some other form of thermite" that was used by Cole? Wasn't Cole using the "normal" thermite formula?

at 10:44, check out the carrot he scrapes on the cut steels edge.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5d5iIoCiI8g

A corrosive mechanism? Can you point me in the direction of any study or experiment that shows a thermite cut to have produced a corrosive attack on steel to the extent shown in the FEMA and Astaneh photos? Something that shows thermite can create a cut where the edges closest to the actual cut are "knife-like" and then gradually return to the nominal thickness of the flange/web the farther away you move from the "knife-like" edge?

from the link above. just watch the whole vid but pay close attention to mark 10:44.

 

[Senenmut]

Did you study grammar and punctuation in the same place you studied chemistry?

i have little kids running around the house. sometimes im rushed when i try and respond to others. im not writing a paper for school so im going to type like this. its hard to be a "truther" and mr. mom sometimes. i also work 12hr shifts so sometimes i cant respond for a few days.

 

[Senenmut]

It's astoundingly annoying isn't it?

He can't even manage to highlight text and press the little icon that looks like speech in order to put text in quotation.

I'm going to reproduce his post properly with all the errors highlighted, I don't have time to change the wording so that it scans properly, flows and makes sense though. Shows how little education he has, but considers himself an expert on dozens of scientific subjects. I'd never dream of sending an e-mail that wasn't spell checked.

If the rest of the e-mail is littered with spelling errors, poor grammar and punctuation, poor wording, falsehoods and false accusations along with such atrocious tone, then it's no surprise that he gets such short thrift or people don't bother to reply.

Truthers just expect everyone to drop everything and reply to their illiterate ramblings.

thank you prof sunstealer. i can always count on you to correct my grammar.

 

[tsig]

at 10:44, check out the carrot he scrapes on the cut steels edge.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5d5iIoCiI8g



from the link above. just watch the whole vid but pay close attention to mark 10:44.

OK

Mark 10:44 (New International Version)

44 and whoever wants to be first must be slave of all.

 

[Oystein]

Holy Schmoly! Senemut! Please! Throw the towel already! You are getting smacked and beaten and your face bruised and cut open like **** with every swing you take, and you have your defense woefully low! This is UGLY!

 

[Gamolon]

at 10:44, check out the carrot he scrapes on the cut steels edge.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5d5iIoCiI8g



from the link above. just watch the whole vid but pay close attention to mark 10:44.

You mean to tell me that you can't see the difference between the thermite cut you cite in the video and the corrosive attack shown in the two photos by FEMA and Atenah?



So what would be next then? How about do a microstructure analysis of the thermite cut steel and see if it is similar to the steel analyzed by Sisson.

 

[Senenmut]

See the word "and" that I bolded and enlarged? There are two things he is saying are incorrect in your email. Your claims about what he supposedly said about the steel samples AND Dr. Ostertag's involvement.

He basically tells you that your entire email regarding what you think he says about the WTC steel is TOTALLY incorrect.

What part about that don't you understand.

That followed up with my email below which specifically mentions the New York Times article.


To which he replied:

it still doesnt make a bit of difference to his observation. he thinks it burned first and then buckled as it was attached to the building, not as it lay in the debris pile. sisson cant prove that it occured in the debris pile.
and again from the article from the berkeleyan:

For example, valuable information could come from analysis of the blackened steel from the floors engulfed in flame after the airplane collisions. Steel flanges had been reduced from an inch thick to paper thin, Astaneh said. He and others suspect that the buildings collapsed because the intense heat of the jet-fuel-fed fire softened the steel to the point that the columns no longer could support the weight of the floors above. As the top 10 or so stories fell, they collapsed the floors below in a cascade of pancaking concrete floor slabs.
http://www.berkeley.edu/news/berkeleyan/2001/10/03_grou.html


its funny how astaneh was so impressed with the steel that showed extreme steel wastage days after 911. now he is like....those arent my quotes....those are false.

so why did astaneh bring up steel flanges that had been reduced from an inch to paper thin when speaking about the floors engulfed in flames?

 

[Senenmut]

You mean to tell me that you can't see the difference between the thermite cut you cite in the video and the corrosive attack shown in the two photos by FEMA and Atenah?



So what would be next then? How about do a microstructure analysis of the thermite cut steel and see if it is similar to the steel analyzed by Sisson.

you wanted an edge. i showed you and edge. i would like to see a microstructural analysis too.

 

[Senenmut]

Holy Schmoly! Senemut! Please! Throw the towel already! You are getting smacked and beaten and your face bruised and cut open like **** with every swing you take, and you have your defense woefully low! This is UGLY!

you still havent shown how the steel stayed in the debris pile for days,weeks, or even a month when the microstructure shows differently.

 

[Gamolon]

it still doesnt make a bit of difference to his observation. he thinks it burned first and then buckled

So you are making a judgement call as to what the meaning of "burned first" means???

In your email to him, you even try to force you interpretation of what you want "burned first" to mean!!!

Here is that section of your email:

In the new york times article, it is interesting that you think the steel burned first (lost 15.9mm of A36 steel) then buckled.

Why did you put that part in quotes? Just curious? Was it something he actually said are are you making assumptions?