Gage's next debate

[Carlos]

Wrong yet again. Open air means not in a jet engine.

Source?

 

[Christopher7]

Source? No temperature to go with your extreme? What temperature are vapors present from lead, Pb? Present proof for your claims; like science stuff.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0CBQQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.eurisol.org%2Fsite02%2Fsecure.php%3Foperation2%3Ddownload%26file%3D202----talk-1044-Sergej%2520Ivanov-PT13%3A%2520Heat%2520removal%2520estimates%2520%26%2520possible%2520loop%2520scheme%2520for%2520EURISOL%2520100-kW%2520liquid-metal%2520targets%2520.ppt%26id_meeting%3D202%26type%3Dtalk-Sergej%2520Ivanov-PT13%3A%2520Heat%2520removal%2520estimates%2520%26%2520possible%2520loop%2520scheme%2520for%2520EURISOL%2520100-kW%2520liquid-metal%2520targets&rct=j&q=lead%20vapor%201000&ei=j0-MTYz4BZOksQOSnID9CA&usg=AFQjCNEwQVtbuzIRd4vGJrR77g8WerMWLQ&sig2=AS1RXUJbuQaVlMjZkuXjKg&cad=rja

Office fires burn at about 1400^oF - 760^oC
At 800^oC - 1470^oF the amount of vaporation is zero.
At 900^oC - 1650^oF the amount of vaporation is negligible.
At 1000^oC - 1800^oF the amount of vaporation is minimal.
At 3182^oF - 1750^oC lead vaporizes.

Any vapor created before the collapse left the building with the smoke.
The collapse put the office fires out. Another source of heat vaporized the lead after it was crushed in the collapse.

RJ Lee Group report 2004 pg 12 [pdf pg 13]
The presence of lead oxide on the surface of mineral wool indicate the existence of extremely high temperatures during the collapse which caused metallic lead to volatilize, oxidize, and finally condense on the surface of the mineral wool.

The fires did not go out in the collapse, they kept burning because fuel from the WTC was still there, on fire.

There is no fire in the pulverized dust being ejected from the tower.

I have source from my air force classes that open pools of jet fuel can reach 2,000 F. And another source fuel fires reach 1200 F in a seconds and start melting Al.

Please post the URLs

 

[Christopher7]

The report you cite says "pulverized during the collapse and the combustible components were partially burned in the ensuing fires."

As everything was pulverized and mixed together on the way down, the fires went out. For a fire to keep going, the burning combustibles have to ignite other combustibles next to them but tiny burning particles of combustible material would burn out quickly.

How can pulverized combustibles in a pile burn when they are mixed with a greater quantity of pulverized noncombustible and no fire to start with?

Try to start a fire in a pile of pulverized combustibles, mixed with a greater quantity of pulverized noncombustibles like concrete,drywall and rock wool.

 

[Justin39640]

As everything was pulverized and mixed together on the way down, the fires went out. For a fire to keep going, the burning combustibles have to ignite other combustibles next to them but tiny burning particles of combustible material would burn out quickly.

How can pulverized combustibles in a pile burn when they are mixed with a greater quantity of pulverized noncombustible and no fire to start with?

Try to start a fire in a pile of pulverized combustibles, mixed with a greater quantity of pulverized noncombustibles like concrete,drywall and rock wool.

Hmmm, So you are saying there were no fires in the pile? That there were no ignition sources underground? Lets see... there were cars and trucks full of fuel and with batteries, gas lines, mineral oils from transformers, thousands and thousands of tons of paper, furniture, etc, etc. The list of fuel sources is endless.

The collapse snuffed out the large fires above but undoubtedly there were hot embers and smoldering material that made it all the way down. Friction and sparks from metal settling could also ignite fuel sources.

Maybe if I tried to start a fire in a wheelbarrow full of a mix of non-combustibles and combustibles I would have some difficulty but in a debris field 16 acres square, 50 or more feel high and many stories deep... not so much.

 

[Carlos]

As everything was pulverized and mixed together on the way down, the fires went out. For a fire to keep going, the burning combustibles have to ignite other combustibles next to them but tiny burning particles of combustible material would burn out quickly.

How can pulverized combustibles in a pile burn when they are mixed with a greater quantity of pulverized noncombustible and no fire to start with?

Try to start a fire in a pile of pulverized combustibles, mixed with a greater quantity of pulverized noncombustibles like concrete,drywall and rock wool.

First of all, the "everything was pulverized" is a strawman.

 

[Justin39640]

Another example from my job. This one concerning batteries, fuel, and misplaced pieces of metal. Forklift operators have a bad habit of leaving pull chains on the hoods of their machines. On a few occasions, those chains have worked their way into the engine compartment and settled on the starter. Bye bye forklift!

Starters use a heavy cable directly hooked to the battery so essentially the B+ (battery positive) on the starter is the same thing as B+ on the battery (unless the cable is bad and is dropping voltage across it). The frame of the starter is bolted to the block which is bolted to the frame which is hooked up to B- as almost all IC machines, trucks, and cars use a frame ground (a lot of old ones used to use a positive grounded frame). When the chains hit the B+ terminal while laying on the starter it directly shorts the battery, and since it's a crappy connection, it produces sparks and LOTS of heat. Dust and papers (they are also bad with paperwork all over the hoods and getting in there) then ignite. Then I get the call for the rental. lol

It isn't hard to see that same or similar situations happened to at least some of the vehicles underground. Lets not forget every emergency light in the complex was basically a battery pack as well.

 

[Christopher7]

Hmmm, So you are saying there were no fires in the pile?

No

That there were no ignition sources underground?

Yes

17 gallons of kerosene falling 1000 feet down a 10 ft by 10 ft elevator shaft would burn up before it got to the basement levels and the overpressure would be relieved out the top. Kerosene is not as volatile as gasoline, that's why it is used in lamps. The gases expand at a much slower rate and don't have a lot of pushing power.

10,000 gal kerosene. 1/3 burned up in the fireball. That leaves ~6,700 gal
Divided by 40,000 sq/ft = .1675 gal per sq/ft
A 10 x 10 ft elevator shaft = 100 sq/ft x .1675 = 16.75 gallons falling down the shaft.

Lets see... there were cars and trucks full of fuel and with batteries, gas lines, mineral oils from transformers, thousands and thousands of tons of paper, furniture, etc, etc. The list of fuel sources is endless.

Correct

The collapse snuffed out the large fires above but undoubtedly there were hot embers and smoldering material that made it all the way down. Friction and sparks from metal settling could also ignite fuel sources.

Everything was reduced to dust so there were no burning embers and sparks won't ignite dust that is more noncombustibles than combustibles.

Maybe if I tried to start a fire in a wheelbarrow full of a mix of non-combustibles and combustibles I would have some difficulty but in a debris field 16 acres square, 50 or more feel high and many stories deep... not so much.

There is no difference really, the dust near the top of the pile was mixed all the way down.

 

[Christopher7]

First of all, the "everything was pulverized" is a strawman.

At 1:26 "As time went by you realized that everything was pulverized. There were no desks, there were no phones. Maybe now and then you would find a fragment of something but basically, everything was just pulverized.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCrinZM9b2Q&feature=player_embedded



"You don't find a desk, you don't find a chair, you don't find a telephone, computer. The biggest piece of a telephone I found was half of a keypad"
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/videos/index.html

 

[Carlos]

At 1:26 "As time went by you realized that everything was pulverized. There were no desks, there were no phones. Maybe now and then you would find a fragment of something but basically, everything was just pulverized.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCrinZM9b2Q&feature=player_embedded

Have you ever heard about figures of speech?

Have you ever seen any picture of WTC debris? Do you really think everything was literally pulverized?

"You don't find a desk, you don't find a chair, you don't find a telephone, computer. The biggest piece of a telephone I found was half of a keypad"
http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/videos/index.html

Tell me, how could he have found a telephone keypad if everything was literally pulverized (as you are suggesting)?

 

[Christopher7]

He used the word "pulverized" literally and qualified "everything" by saying:
"Maybe now and then you would find a fragment of something"

RJ Lee 2003 report pg 2
"Building contents of the WTC included computers and
other electronic equipment, fluorescent lights, furniture, office supplies, and
a myriad of other items. The brittle and friable components of these
materials were pulverized during the collapse and the combustible
components were partially burned in the ensuing fires."

 

[DGM]

He used the word "pulverized" literally and qualified "everything" by saying:
"Maybe now and then you would find a fragment of something"

RJ Lee 2003 report pg 2
"Building contents of the WTC included computers and
other electronic equipment, fluorescent lights, furniture, office supplies, and
a myriad of other items. The brittle and friable components of these
materials were pulverized during the collapse and the combustible
components were partially burned in the ensuing fires."

Considering this report was some 8 years ago, You now have an update (where you've clarified their positions) that you would like to discuss?

 

[grandmastershek]

Have you ever heard about figures of speech?

Have you ever seen any picture of WTC debris? Do you really think everything was literally pulverized?




Tell me, how could he have found a telephone keypad if everything was literally pulverized (as you are suggesting)?

Don't you see, you bold the parts where they say everything was pulverized while ignoring the parts that show everything wasn't literally pulverized. It a way to avoid being accused of quote mining while entertaining fantasy.

 

[Carlos]

He used the word "pulverized" literally and qualified "everything" by saying:
"Maybe now and then you would find a fragment of something"

Pictures from WTC debris prove the "everything literally pulverized" is wrong.

Again: Have you ever seen any picture of WTC debris?

RJ Lee 2003 report pg 2
"Building contents of the WTC included computers and
other electronic equipment, fluorescent lights, furniture, office supplies, and
a myriad of other items. The brittle and friable components of these
materials were pulverized during the collapse and the combustible
components were partially burned in the ensuing fires."

You missed the hilited part.

 

[Christopher7]

Considering this report was some 8 years ago, You now have an update (where you've clarified their positions) that you would like to discuss?

RJ Lee 2004 report
Pg 8
"Additional Testing and Results Reported Herein:
S1: Aerosolization of Ultra Fine Fibers and Particles from WTC Dust

Pg 9
"The National Resources Defense Council (NRDC) report estimated more than 1.2 million tons of building materials were pulverized during the WTC Event including an estimated 300 to 400 tons of asbestos,35 mainly from insulation and from fireproofing."

 

[DGM]

RJ Lee 2004 report
Pg 8
"Additional Testing and Results Reported Herein:
S1: Aerosolization of Ultra Fine Fibers and Particles from WTC Dust

Pg 9
"The National Resources Defense Council (NRDC) report estimated more than 1.2 million tons of building materials were pulverized during the WTC Event including an estimated 300 to 400 tons of asbestos,35 mainly from insulation and from fireproofing."

So?

 

[Christopher7]

So?

The total weight of the Trade Towers was 1,500,000 tons including 50,000 tons of steel in each tower.
Total components other than steel* = 1.4 million tons.
1,400,000 - 1,200,000 = 200,000 tons not pulverized
200,000 `/. 1,400,000 = 14% of the components* in the debris pile were not pulverized.
86% of the debris pile* was pulverized dust.

This pulverized dust would leave few if any air pockets other than inside the columns in the upper portion of the debris pile.

 

[TheRedWorm]

You know nothing

 

[A W Smith]

Christopher7 still basking in ignorance

The total weight of the Trade Towers was 1,500,000 tons including 50,000 tons of steel in each tower.
Total components other than steel* = 1.4 million tons.
1,400,000 - 1,200,000 = 200,000 tons not pulverized
200,000 `/. 1,400,000 = 14% of the components* in the debris pile were not pulverized.
86% of the debris pile* was pulverized dust.

This pulverized dust would leave few if any air pockets other than inside the columns in the upper portion of the debris pile.

No, no it certainly wasn't. Stop lying.

 

[Christopher7]

No, no it certainly wasn't. Stop lying.

[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]Those pictures were taken weeks or months into the clean up after most of the dust had been removed.[FONT=&quot]

Show pictures taken during the first few days.

[/FONT]

 

[Carlos]

[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]Those pictures were taken weeks or months into the clean up after most of the dust had been removed.[FONT=&quot] [/FONT][/FONT]

So?