• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

At Chodorov: Re. "Molten iron"

Oystein

Penultimate Amazing
Oystein
Joined
Dec 9, 2009
Messages
18,903
Chodorov created a thread this morning that was soon thrown to AAT. I had been writing a lengthy reply to one allegation made by Chodorov, and couldn't post it anymore. Since I had it saved to my clipboard, I am posting as a new thread.

There certainly are old threads dealing with the same subject. I am a little time constrained now, so I am not searching. If somebody wants to link or merge, that's fine.

just want to get Chodorov's opinion on an issue he raised.

Chodorov said:
...For example you would have a ready answer to the fact of molten iron in all three basements.
...
Click to expand...

We have discussed this matter in lengthy threads on this forum and asked truthers again and again and again and again and again to provide evidence that this assertion ("molten iron in all three basements") is even true. Fact is: No such evidence exists. Some of the photographic evidence was shown to be faked, and most of the witness statements shown to not actually support the claim. For the witness statements to prove molten steel in the basements, all of the following must be correct:
  1. The witness did in fact report seeing molten (liquid) metal
  2. The witness did in fact claim that that metal was iron
  3. The witness had in fact a valid method at his or her disposal that would
identify a material als molten iron, as opposed to molten other materials, or glowing but solid iron
- The witness did in fact apply that method

Not a single witness statement satisfied those demands. In fact, nearly all witness statements can be shown to either not describe molten metal, or not menntion iton (steel), or that what they observed did not conform with molten steel (for example: witness says "red hot" - red hot steel is very much cooler than melting point), and not a single witness described using a valid methid to determine the nature of what they saw.

Asked for physical evidence of molten steel, that is, specimen of previously liquid steel found in the rubble, truthers only come up with the two samples analyzed by WPI scientists on behalf of FEMA that showed evidence of eutectic melting. Truthers generally do not know what that means. It does NOT mean that there was "molten iron in the basement."

Conclusion:
  • The photographic evidence for molten iron is exactly zero
  • The witness evidence for molten steel is exactly zero.
  • The physical evidence for molten iron is exactly zero.

But it gets worse than that:
Even if tons upon tons of molten steel were found in all three basements during clean-up, would that mean any sort of clandestine intentional demolition took place? No! Not by a longshot! For this to be proven, truthers would have to show that...
  1. There exists a method to demolish buildings clandestinely
  2. this method produces, as a main or side effect, extreme amounts of heat at high enough temperatures to melt the alleged amounts of steel
  3. they have a theory on how to apply that methood to all three towers
  4. they can make precictions from this theory and test them
To satisfy the last point, I would for example, demand that truthers tell me how much molten steel was observed on what date and in precisely what location, and then compute, using thermodynamic formulas, how much energy would have to be dissipated by the secret methos to melt the steel in the first place, considering the fact that after the application of the method ceases, the metal would cool and re-solidify pretty quickly (for example: When rails are welded using thermite, workers produce some pounds of molten metal, but the thing cools so quickly that 45 minutes later, a train can run over the weld, causing no damage).

There exists no such theory that satisfies these demands. There exists, AFAIK, only one meak proposal going that direction, namely the use of thermite. However, for every ton of molten iron you find, any method using thermite (or variants thereof) would have required two tons of thermite. For every hour after the thermite event that has passed until someone witnessed a ton of molten steel, you'd have to multiply the thermite amount by some factor. So if someone witnessed 1 ton of molten steel, say, 8 weeks after 9/11, this would require that 10 or 100 or 1000 tons of thermite were used on 9/11.

Conclusion:
  • No theory exists that would connect molten steel seen weeks after the event with the collapse of the towers




Now you.
 
Good work. My guess is that his response will go something like this:
"The shadow government is fact. Molten iron in the basements has been proven, so lets move on."

Of course he will present no evidence of his own and completely ignore everything you just presented.
 
Quad4_72 said:
Good work. My guess is that his response will go something like this:
"The shadow government is fact. Molten iron in the basements has been proven, so lets move on."

Of course he will present no evidence of his own and completely ignore everything you just presented.
Click to expand...

How about we let him reply himself ;)
ETA: My work isn't that good. For starters, I do not source my claims about truthers not showing this or witnesses not saying that. However, I am setting a good (IMHO) framework for assessing the evidence. Since Chodorov in fact came out first to make that claim about molten iron, I'd expect him to go first with bringing on evidence, which I can then assess in that framework. I don't know yet how he arrived at his conviction. Need to hear that first.
 
Last edited:
I have tagged this thread.
Following the "molten steel" tag, you can find several threads that dealt with the molten-iron-argument. I like this one:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=114168
I did a similar test in another thread, and it took the truther that it was directed at several weeks (IIRC) and many many pages to finally admit that even a metallurgist couldn't identify a molten metal by sight alone, thus invalidating >90% of all witness accounts used by truthers to claim molten steel.
 
You are a better man than me. As soo n as I saw the reference to "all three basements" I kind of tuned him out.

Inside the "bathtub" was one big basement.

And part of the basement of WTC7 was a Con Ed substation.
 
16.5 said:
You are a better man than me. As soo n as I saw the reference to "all three basements" I kind of tuned him out.

Inside the "bathtub" was one big basement.

And part of the basement of WTC7 was a Con Ed substation.
Click to expand...
Did WTC7 actually sit inside the "bathtub"? I seem to recall it did not.

I could easily be wrong.
 
DGM said:
Did WTC7 actually sit inside the "bathtub"? I seem to recall it did not.

I could easily be wrong.
Click to expand...

It didn't. About half of the WTC complex sat in the "bathtub." WTC 7 was across the street and not in it.
 
I want to see evidence for molten iron or molten steel, in GZ.

if we recieve no evidence, I shall have no reason to believe either was there.
 
What he also doesn't realise is that if temperatures were hot enough to produce liquid steel/iron then every metal/alloy, plastic or other material with a melting point lower than that of 1535°C would also be present as a liquid. ;)
 
RedIbis said:
It didn't. About half of the WTC complex sat in the "bathtub." WTC 7 was across the street and not in it.
Click to expand...
Thanks. That's what I remembered. It's tough to go too far down when a city sits at (close) sea-level. We got that trouble in Boston with our "leaky" tunnels.
 
Oystein said:
[*]The photographic evidence for molten iron is exactly zero
[*]The witness evidence for molten steel is exactly zero.
[*]The physical evidence for molten iron is exactly zero.
[/LIST]
Click to expand...

Three lies. But lets just take the first one. You yourself have seen molten iron flowing from one of the buildings prior to that buildings collapse.
 
Thunder said:
I want to see evidence for molten iron or molten steel, in GZ.

if we recieve no evidence, I shall have no reason to believe either was there.
Click to expand...

You are not interested in the evidence or you would seek it out yourself. Go to the journal of 9/11 studies and try and track it down. Try youtube and do the same. The same internet that is before me is before you. The difference is that I wanted to see the evidence, and you didn't.

Now did you know that flight 175 never hit the World Trade Centre? Did you know that it was some sort of other plane and not flight 175?

Or does this come as news to you?
 
Chodorov said:
Three lies. But lets just take the first one. You yourself have seen molten iron flowing from one of the buildings prior to that buildings collapse.
Click to expand...

a) No, I have not. I have seen molten something flowing from one tower. It was glowing orange-yellow hot - indicating a temperature of about 500°C below the melting point of iron, which proves it was not iron
b) You claimed molten iron was found in the basements. These small amounts that we saw flowing from the tower solidified looooooooooong before the tower even collapsed (which was minutes later).
c) That flow would account for one building, not three

Why wasn't it obvious as the blue sky on a sunny day that this argument in no way supports your claim which I quoted in the OP?

Please provide evidence for
  1. molten
  2. iron
  3. in all three
  4. basements

Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Bolding mine....

Chodorov said:
The difference is that I wanted to see the evidence, and you didn't.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

Now that you have identified the source of your delusions....they should be treatable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom