DC: Why do you think WTC7 was a CD?

[stateofgrace]

stateofgrace i will answer your question but will you have the courtesy to answer mine? i suppose we shall find out.

Q: How does thermite/explosives produce molten metal weeks after it as gone off?

A: I dont know and i dont care. It is a simple fact that after the demolition of the towers we witnessed the longest structural fires in history. So i would imagine this would require a rather unique explanation. Whether that explanation involves thermite or not doesnt matter much in the grand scheme of things. A rather more interesting question is how the molten iron was produced in the first place? Not to mention those other anomolies.

This brings me to my question for you

Q: what is the max temperature of a smoldering fire?

peace and may you have a very very happy new year

And there it is, you have no idea, you don’t care. But you base your entire ideology on something you have no idea about nor care about.

You are promoting rubbish based on things you neither care about nor understand.

I personally could not care less about pools of molten metal but you have gone to great lengths to promote the idea it is important, it is significant, it is enough for you to start accusing your fellow countrymen of mass murder. Yet because you are unable to explain why or how explaoisves/thermite would produce molten metal weeks after it had gone off you no longer care.

When you do care, when you can fully explain why it is important, please post your explanation, in the mean time stop wasting my time or anybody else’s.

You are dismissed as unworthy of further "debate" with and yet another twoofer simply posting conspiracy garbage.

Let me know when you understand and do care.


Peace, man, peace.

 

[thewholesoul]

There are too many variables to just come up with one estimation on the max temperature of a smoldering fire, such as oxygen and fuel source. I know for a fact that a cigarette burns between 400 C - 600 C and as high as 750 C when being puffed, but thats because we can identify and measure the fuels burning. We could do the same with the WTC, we could collect a list of fuels available and research the energy release for each item, but once you have that finished, you still need to account for the thermal insulation that was created by the thousands of pounds of concrete that laid on top of this fire. Concrete doesn't conduct well, so the heat has no where to go, causing an oven like condition, where temperatures will be hotter.

so your answer is you dont know?

you dont know what the max temperature of a smoldering fire would be?

can you even estimate given your background as a volunteer? a ball park number?

peace

 

[thewholesoul]

And there it is, you have no idea, you don’t care. But you base your entire ideology on something you have no idea about nor care about.

You are promoting rubbish based on things you neither care about nor understand.

I personally could not care less about pools of molten metal but you have gone to great lengths to promote the idea it is important, it is significant, it is enough for you to start accusing your fellow countrymen of mass murder. Yet because you are unable to explain why or how explaoisves/thermite would produce molten metal weeks after it had gone off you no longer care.

When you do care, when you can fully explain why it is important, please post your explanation, in the mean time stop wasting my time or anybody else’s.

You are dismissed as unworthy of further "debate" with and yet another twoofer simply posting conspiracy garbage.

Let me know when you understand and do care.


Peace, man, peace.

as predicted you neither have the courtesy or the descency to answer my question.

i answered your question and answered it in response to other individuals in this thread. your repetitiveness bores me.

the truth is i would love to know the explanation behind the longest ever structural fire in history. the truth is i dont know the answer but i iagine it will have a unique explanation. a more interesting question is where the temperature to create molten metal, various sphericules and evaporation came from.

you are some piece of work. you accuse me of dodging the same question i answered every time...and still you avoid answering ANY of mine.

i tell you what stateofdisgrace this is my last post to you, period

have a nice day

 

[stateofgrace]

as predicted you neither have the courtesy or the descency to answer my question.

i answered your question and answered it in response to other individuals in this thread. your repetitiveness bores me.

the truth is i would love to know the explanation behind the longest ever structural fire in history. the truth is i dont know the answer but i iagine it will have a unique explanation. a more interesting question is where the temperature to create molten metal, various sphericules and evaporation came from.

you are some piece of work. you accuse me of dodging the same question i answered every time...and still you avoid answering ANY of mine.

i tell you what stateofdisgrace this is my last post to you, period

have a nice day

Oh dear God stop acting like the poor self righteous victim, it is pathetic.

You are telling me that pools of molten metal are only explainable by a controlled demolition. Then go on,explain it. Do so in your next post.

Stop whinging because somebody fires into you, somebody calls you out. Simply explain fully how molten metal found week’s afterwards adds to your explosisive/thermite demolition theory.

I do not have to explain a single thing to you; I am Joe Public, asking you to fully explain your theories.

So, start caring, start explaining your theories.

When you are ready.

 

[A W Smith]

so your answer is you dont know?

you dont know what the max temperature of a smoldering fire would be?

can you even estimate given your background as a volunteer? a ball park number?

peace

In the entire world? a fire with limited to no souirce of oxygen?
6,650 degrees Fahrenheit

 

[thewholesoul]

Bechtel SH&E reports that they measured temperatures at the Ground Zero debris pile "ranging from 400F to more than 2,800F". Source is Professional Safety, May 2002, "SH&E At Ground Zero".

2800 F = 1537 C

It is still unknown to date exactly how the fires reached such high temperatures. In any case the above temperatures quoted cannot explain the molybdenum sphericules (2623 C), the vapourized lead (1740 C), and the vapourized aluminosilicates (2760 C) that were discovered from wtc samples.

Consequently it is true and accurate to say that there is no official explantion for these anomolies presumably because it is simply not possible that such an underground fire could produce temperatures of 1740 C and above. That said, such anamolies can be explained by explosive chemical reactions
http://www.journalof911studies.com/articles/WTCHighTemp2.pdf

Given that these temperatures were not recorded or reached by the underground fire post collapse, exactly when were these temperatures produced? If these temperatures were produced before and during the buildings collapse then this further undermines the official position for the simple reason that an office fire feed by jet fuel cannot possibly generate such temperatures. The fact that such unexplained anomolies exist only serves to enhance the controlled demolition hypothesis.

peace

 

[NYCEMT86]

so your answer is you dont know?

you dont know what the max temperature of a smoldering fire would be?

can you even estimate given your background as a volunteer? a ball park number?

peace

Its a variable, different materials release different amounts of energy. Given the models that the NFPA has provided in 921, its very possible that the temperature could have reached 1000 C or even 1500 C.


Here is a nice paper you should read, http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/fire02/PDF/f02074.pdf

2800 F = 1537 C

<Snip>

Consequently it is true and accurate to say that there is no official explantion for these anomolies presumably because it is simply not possible that such an underground fire could produce temperatures of 1740 C and above. That said, such anamolies can be explained by explosive chemical reactions
http://www.journalof911studies.com/articles/WTCHighTemp2.pdf

Given that these temperatures were not recorded or reached by the underground fire post collapse, exactly when were these temperatures produced? If these temperatures were produced before and during the buildings collapse then this further undermines the official position for the simple reason that an office fire feed by jet fuel cannot possibly generate such temperatures. The fact that such unexplained anomolies exist only serves to enhance the controlled demolition hypothesis.

peace

So, after all this tap and dance, it boils down to that age old truth movement statement of "The fires didnt burn hot enough"


An office fire feed by jet fuel cannot possibly generate a temperature of 1,300 F and above? Are you serious? Especially with all that paper and synthetics? A base design fire will release nearly 5.3 MW of energy, which is including carpets, wood, plastics, and other fuel sources. Did you happen to read the finds of a research project the FDNY, NFPA, LAFD, and CFD carried out in an old abandoned projects building on Staten Island? Heres a link to the thread I started about that http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=107395


I would love for you to sit in a flashover simulator, just dont look up because that 1000 F rated SCBA mask will melt right to your face.

 

[DGM]

great, being a volunteer you have vastly more experience on this subject than I do. so maybe you can tell us all what the max temperature of a smoldering fire is?

peace

It doesn't matter!

A little tid-bit as to why:

Rapid deterioration of the steel was a result of heating with oxidation in combination with intergranular melting due to the presence of sulfur. The formation of the eutectic mixture of iron oxide and iron sulfide lowers the temperature at which liquid can form in this steel. This strongly suggests that the temperatures in this region of the steel beam approached ~1,000ºC, forming the eutectic liquid by a process similar to making a “blacksmith’s weld” in a hand forge.

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Biederman/Biederman-0112.html

 

[thewholesoul]

Its a variable, different materials release different amounts of energy. Given the models that the NFPA has provided in 921, its very possible that the temperature could have reached 1000 C or even 1500 C.

so you can give estimations after all. now all you have to do is explain how those temperatures can produce the various anomolies found in the wtc dust and rubble that require much greater temperatures

But if I understand you correctly, what your really saying is that a phenomenon never before observed in building fires: eutectic reactions, which caused "intergranular melting capable of turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese." A phenomenon that baffled engineers and other experts like Dr. Barnett and Mr. Baker of the American Society of Civil Engineers and the New York Times described as "perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation."

You, NYCEMT86 have solved.

it was a SMOLDERING FIRE that explains everythng!!! the longest ever structural fires in history, the first ever eutectic reactons observed in a building fire. anything else you want to peg onto that smoldering fire? what about the formation of molybdenum sphericules requiring 2623 C, the vapourization of lead requiring 1740 C, and the vapourization of aluminosilicates requiring 2760 C. How in gods name do you plan on explaining this when you admit that a smoldering fire can only reach around1500 C which is not even enough to melt steel or iron? How?

So, after all this tap and dance, it boils down to that age old truth movement statement of "The fires didnt burn hot enough" 1740 C

It would serve you a lot better if you could present some reasons why you think that this old truther statement is wrong, false, or inaccurate in relation to the production of molten pools, sphericules, and vaporizing metals. Otherwise, in the absence of such reasons, not only would the truth movement be right but I would also be better tap dancer than yours truly!

What it really boils down to is that you and debunkers in general have no rational explanation for the extreme temperatures required to produce the numerous anomolies discovered in the wtc dust and rubble.

An office fire feed by jet fuel cannot possibly generate a temperature of 1,300 F and above? Are you serious? Especially with all that paper and synthetics?

Nice strawman. Go re-read post 726 you will find that I was not claiming that an office fire cannot reach 1300 F; I claimed that it could not possibly generate temperatures of 1740 CELCIUS and above. A mountain of paper and synthetics wont produce those temperatures, period.

I would love for you to sit in a flashover simulator, just dont look up because that 1000 F rated SCBA mask will melt right to your face.

i would love to shout in your abyss-like earhole WAKE THE BLEEP UP, 911 WAS AN INSIDE JOB!!!

peace

 

[applecorped]

so you can give estimations after all. now all you have to do is explain how those temperatures can produce the various anomolies found in the wtc dust and rubble that require much greater temperatures

But if I understand you correctly, what your really saying is that a phenomenon never before observed in building fires: eutectic reactions, which caused "intergranular melting capable of turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese." A phenomenon that baffled engineers and other experts like Dr. Barnett and Mr. Baker of the American Society of Civil Engineers and the New York Times described as "perhaps the deepest mystery uncovered in the investigation."

You, NYCEMT86 have solved.

it was a SMOLDERING FIRE that explains everythng!!! the longest ever structural fires in history, the first ever eutectic reactons observed in a building fire. anything else you want to peg onto that smoldering fire? what about the formation of molybdenum sphericules requiring 2623 C, the vapourization of lead requiring 1740 C, and the vapourization of aluminosilicates requiring 2760 C. How in gods name do you plan on explaining this when you admit that a smoldering fire can only reach around1500 C which is not even enough to melt steel or iron? How?



It would serve you a lot better if you could present some reasons why you think that this old truther statement is wrong, false, or inaccurate in relation to the production of molten pools, sphericules, and vaporizing metals. Otherwise, in the absence of such reasons, not only would the truth movement be right but I would also be better tap dancer than yours truly!

What it really boils down to is that you and debunkers in general have no rational explanation for the extreme temperatures required to produce the numerous anomolies discovered in the wtc dust and rubble.



Nice strawman. Go re-read post 726 you will find that I was not claiming that an office fire cannot reach 1300 F; I claimed that it could not possibly generate temperatures of 1740 CELCIUS and above. A mountain of paper and synthetics wont produce those temperatures, period.



i would love to shout in your abyss-like earhole WAKE THE BLEEP UP, 911 WAS AN INSIDE JOB!!!
peace

Prove it. Simple as that. If you can't do it your words are for naught. Debating does not prove it, only evidence. Got any?

 

[Par]

...what your really saying is that a phenomenon never before observed in building fires: eutectic reactions, which caused "intergranular melting capable of turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese."...the first ever eutectic reactons observed in a building fire.

You seem to be forgetting that they’re weren’t just building fires. The buildings also collapsed, and the fires burned for weeks underneath the debris. There’s no reason to think that the eutectic reaction took place while the buildings were standing.

 

[thewholesoul]

It doesn't matter![/quote]

of course not DGM...thats perhaps the same sentiment the Ostrich feels when his head is tightly buried in the sand with a pack of dingoos circling him.

heres a tit bit http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Biederman/Biederman-0112.html

the most relevant part was the 1000 C

now all you have to do is explain how various anomolies found within the wtc dust and rubble requiring far greater temperatures could have been created.

can you do that for me DGM cos i am startng to get a little bored

Q: WHERE DID THE EXTREME TEMPERATURES ORIGINATE IN ORDER TO MELT STEEL, IRON, CREATE SPHERICULES, AND EVAPORATE OTHER METALS?

Q: IS ANYONE DENYING THAT EXPLOSIVE CHEMICAL REACTIONS ARE UNABLE TO PRODUCE THE NECESSARY EXTREME TEMPERATURES?

 

[Dave Rogers]

it was a SMOLDERING FIRE that explains everythng!!! the longest ever structural fires in history, the first ever eutectic reactons observed in a building fire. anything else you want to peg onto that smoldering fire? what about the formation of molybdenum sphericules requiring 2623 C, the vapourization of lead requiring 1740 C, and the vapourization of aluminosilicates requiring 2760 C. How in gods name do you plan on explaining this when you admit that a smoldering fire can only reach around1500 C which is not even enough to melt steel or iron? How?

This is all a little tricky to explain in terms of a thermite reaction, of course, which is limited to below 2519ºC by the boiling point of aluminium.

Dave

 

[Jonnyclueless]

thewholesoul

First you have to prove that steel was melted during the fire.

Is anyone denying that absolutely no physical evidence of any explosives have been found?

 

[Jonnyclueless]

And here we go again with the creationism arguments/logic....

 

[DGM]

It doesn't matter!

of course not DGM...thats perhaps the same sentiment the Ostrich feels when his head is tightly buried in the sand with a pack of dingoos circling him.



the most relevant part was the 1000 C

now all you have to do is explain how various anomolies found within the wtc dust and rubble requiring far greater temperatures could have been created.

can you do that for me DGM cos i am startng to get a little bored

Q: WHERE DID THE EXTREME TEMPERATURES ORIGINATE IN ORDER TO MELT STEEL, IRON, CREATE SPHERICULES, AND EVAPORATE OTHER METALS?

First you need to prove that the spheres were not there already. GOOD LUCK WITH THAT DR. JONES CAN'T.

PLEASE SHOW ME PROOF OF THESE POOLS OF MOLTEN IRON. NO "TRUTHER" EVER HAS.

Q: IS ANYONE DENYING THAT EXPLOSIVE CHEMICAL REACTIONS ARE UNABLE TO PRODUCE THE NECESSARY EXTREME TEMPERATURES?

DOES ANYONE NEED TO? REGULAR FIRES CAN DO THE SAME THING. ALL YOU NEED TO DO IS GET YOUR HEAD OUT OF THE SAND LONG ENOUGH TO REALIZE THAT CHEMICAL REACTIONS OCCUR IN FIRES


(CAPS LOCKS IS SO MUCH MORE TRUTHIE)

 

[DGM]

Thewholesoul:
Stop quoting Dr Barnett because you've obviously never read his work.

 

[Dave Rogers]

now all you have to do is explain how various anomolies found within the wtc dust and rubble requiring far greater temperatures could have been created.

Your supposed anomalies are generally based on anecdotal evidence, misrepresentation or poor sampling procedures. And the eutectic reactions are not a mystery - whatever a half-informed newspaper reporter may think - but the explanation of the mystery of how steel members were thinned in the rubble pile, something which can't be explained by melting but in fact proves that the steel wasn't raised above its melting point. Just because you refuse to accept that the mystery is solved, that doesn't mean that it isn't.

Meanwhile, what you have to do is come up with an explanation for those same imaginary anomalies that requires that WTC7 was deliberately demolished. Repeating the word "thermite" until you're blue in the face doesn't constitute an explanation; describe in detail, citing precedents as you're demanding everybody else should, how the use of thermite to demolish a building results in high temperatures in the rubble pile several weeks later. As yet, nobody from the truth movement has succeeded in doing this.

Dave

 

[A W Smith]

Jonesin For Jones Micro Spheres

The Micro sphere question was answered HERE
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=102021

 

[Grizzly Bear]

it is not an impasse. you agreed to the fact that molten iron is an end product of a thermite reaction.

i agree the argumnet from historical precedence does not strenghten either position but the argument from fact (i.e. thermite reaction does produce molten metal and gravity driven collapse does not) strenghtens a CD hypothesis.

TWS, TWS, you're missing the point... The molten steel was found several weeks AFTER the collapse was it not?

You have been claiming that only thermite can do this, but then how does the thermite sustain the reaction for that long? How does the thermite retain its functionality and survive the collapse? You saw what happened to all of the furnishing that was inside all three buildings, including computers, elevators, etc... nothing recognizable among those huh?

You seem to have a great deal of uncertainty in answering to those conditions, which are rather important to ultimately answering whether thermite could be responsible for it. unless you expected some government officials to miraculously manage to dig deep into the debris piles to plant this crap...

the question of temperature supports a CD hypothesis over a natural collapse hypothesis.

I said this before, I am attacking the weakest part of your argument... for the thermite to be able to create the molten metal several weeks later it would have had to SURVIVE the collapse of all three towers without being pulverized or shattered in the process, and be able to remain functional.

lets just make the following distinction: controlled demolition is the intentional destruction of a building and a natural collapse is the unintentional destruction of a building.

CD or no CD the towers were brought down intentionally. There was nothing UNintentional about it regardless of the culprit. They rammed planes into two of the tallest towers in the world, and brought them down.

so let me get this straight: eventhough you can admit that thermite reactions produce molten iron you cannot admit that a CD with thermite cutter charges can produce molten iron?

I admit to where there are no inconsistencies in what you're asking. It's a stated fact that thermite produces molten metal. But the conditions required to produce it several weeks out don't support your claims.

are you going to remedy this obvious inconsistency?

You need to clear up how those thermite charges survived all that time... It's not just a matter of 'oh they were dormant'... it's a matter of whether they not only survived the collapse of all three buildings but as well as if they'd have even been functional at all. THAT is the single biggest contradiction in your theory.

as mentioned previously just because there is no historical precedence does not remove the fact that melting point for iron is 1538 C, and thermite reactions can melt iron and even evaporate steel.

Precedents establish validity, without them the presence of thermite is rather speculative... We are not debating what thermite does to metal here, we know what it does to metal already.

as for no molten pools for natural collapse with fire and gravity. the answwer is obvious, it is not a question of historical precedence its a question of physics i.e. a normal office or hydrocarbon fire cannot melt steel.

Metal found in a molten state seven weeks after the collapse doesn't prove much of anything, particularly since the steel construction would have never had to melt in order for structural failure to come into play. All three buildings not only had redistributed static loads, but the fires 'softened' the steel supports. That combination is the worst possible scenario for any building.

molten iron is not an end product of TNT

... So I C UR NOT A SQIUBZ TZYPE... I C WAT U DID THAR

what was so unique about a water saturated and under oxygenated pile at ground zero?

September 11, 2001 to June of the following year, do I have my timeline correct? Correct me if I'm wrong, but do most collapse cleanups take 8 months to complete?

The smoldering, or chemical reactions, in the end being oxidation had 8 months to curdle... that is the most unique part of this...

Q: How does thermite/explosives produce molten metal weeks after it as gone off?

A: I dont know and i dont care.

That killed your argument... flat out... if the thermite created the molten metal it would require that these charges are located within the debris pile. And it would require that we assume that these charges not only survived the collapse, not only remained functional, but also continually generated reactions for the extended period of time. All of which at this point is subject of speculation... You stated before to my questions regarding these conditions that you weren't certain...

Whether that explanation involves thermite or not doesnt matter much in the grand scheme of things.

Was this not originally your basis for thermite in this thread?

PLEASE SHOW ME PROOF OF THESE POOLS OF MOLTEN IRON. NO "TRUTHER" EVER HAS.

This is one of the images commonly used to support the molten metal claim:

Although if that were the immediate result of thermite, I'd expect to see less 'whitish' smoke, and a few more sparks... Doesn't thermite give off a yellow or brackish colored smoke?

looking forward to it my friend. i shall put my responses to others on hold as i can see you are interested in good clean debate.

I may be delayed a bit in getting to it... since I'm getting into the last week of one of my classes... I have a coupla essays I need to finish with a 3D model... I'll begin once I have those cleared up...