• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

How were WTC core columns separated at the weld planes?

Boys, boys, boys. Are you still attempting to create a controlled demolition (or some such variant) when there wasn't one? To will it into being? Doesn't it ever get tiring? Does your head muscle ever get sore?
 
That ain't no squib! That's just a wisp of aluminum-oxide.

* * *

Although this does not address the opening post, since people are discussing "squibs", allow me to bring something to light...

Notice in this video the relatively small plume of white "smoke" well below the MER, and far below the collapse front. (Note that the "smoke" actually casts a shadow.)

I say that that is not dust ejection from pressure buildup, but rather aluminum-oxide ash from thermite that had been ignited at a perimeter splice or connection, just as the collapse started.

The function of the thermite was to make the steel ductile during the collapse.

I suspect there were many more instances of thermite being ignited in the perimeter during the collapse, but in this case, the aluminum-oxide escaped through a broken window.


Max

* * *
 
Max Photon said:
The function of the thermite was to make the steel ductile during the collapse.
Click to expand...

That would be a pretty stupid function given that the majority of core columns seem to have snapped at the welds rather than bending. What you need is something to make steel less, not more, ductile. I suspect that the white smoke seen was nothing of the sort, therefore; it was condensation due to the boiloff of liquid nitrogen placed in contact with the welds to induce brittle fracture failure. This would be much easier to achieve than heating with a thermite reaction, as the liquid nitrogen could simply be poured into a plastic container attached to the weld point and there would be no issues with their destruction by heat. Using insulated tubes for distribution (wrongly identified by you as thermite-dusted shock tubes due to the deposits left by surface cracking of the cold plastic), this could be done automatically using straightforward, commercially available, automatically controlled cryostatic valves.

What I find frightening about all this is that all of the above came to me in the act of writing it - composing the whole thing took about a minute - and as far as I can see it's at least as good a theory as Max's.

Dave
 
Last edited:
Good 911-God! He's correct about the aluminum-oxide.

Belz... said:
And you say this... because ?
Click to expand...



Because I am 911-God.


911-God


ETA: And because the plume is awfully far below the collapse front to reasonably be construed as a pressure plume.

* * *
 
Last edited:
Belz... said:
And on what authority to you base this ? Do you have any idea how air gets compressed in such a scenario or how it moves ?
Click to expand...

Obviously on 911-God authority, of course.
 
Last edited:
Max pointed out:

Notice in this video the relatively small plume of white "smoke" well below the MER, and far below the collapse front.
Click to expand...


Many of the people posting seem to believe that all noticable gaseous ejections can be explained through natural pressure build-ups being released during "progressive collapse".

There are so many of these forceful gaseous ejections witnessed in both towers that this conversation would probably be more productive if we talk about individual cases.

So how could people explain the two ejections seen well below the collapse plane in the video posted by Max as releases of high-pressure gas?

Video is at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbvx9i5O46M
 
Last edited:
Major Tom said:
Many of the people posting seem to believe that all noticable gaseous ejections can be explained through natural pressure build-ups being released during "progressive collapse".
Click to expand...

Why, yes, yes we do. Because an actual explosive wouldn't produce something that looked like that.

So how could people explain the two ejections seen well below the collapse plane in the video posted by Max as releases of high-pressure gas?
Click to expand...

What's so different about them ?
 
Last edited:
A discussion of the lower ejections from WTC2.

Major_Tom said:
Max pointed out:

Notice in this video the relatively small plume of white "smoke" well below the MER, and far below the collapse front.


Many of the people posting seem to believe that all noticable gaseous ejections can be explained through natural pressure build-ups being released during "progressive collapse".

There are so many of these forceful gaseous ejections witnessed in both towers that this conversation would probably be more productive if we talk about individual cases.

So how could people explain the two ejections seen well below the collapse plane in the video posted by Max as releases of high-pressure gas?

Video is at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbvx9i5O46M
Click to expand...


Major Tom,

While everyone is busy dribbling on their bibs, let's see if we can't get a little work done.

Notice the distinct differences between the first ejection below the MER, and the later ejection above the MER. (I will not discuss the ejections from the MER at the moment.)

The event below the MER seems to be a bright white light that suddenly appears, and then maintains a consistent appearance throughout the collapse.

White "smoke" appears to emerge from it, and the "smoke" trail becomes more pronounced, as does its cast shadow, as time progresses.

The white "smoke" does not appear to be shot out forcefully, but rather seems to drift away from the source.

Also, given that this event is separated from the collapse front by a MER and by great distance, and given that the tower is sectioned to prevent chimney effects, it is very difficult to see this event as the result of pressure from the collapse.

Lastly, it is hard to imagine what would be the source of this white "smoke", even if it were from pressure buildup.


Now, look at the (later) ejection just above the MER.

That event has a much different appearance that the first.

Note that there is no sustained white glow at the facade.

Also, rather that "white smoke" just drifting away from the source, as in the first case, here we see a very forceful ejection.


It should also be noted that both events are approximately equidistant from the edge of the tower closest to each event. In other words, there is a symmetry to their locations.


Max

* * *
 
Max Photon said:
Major Tom,

While everyone is busy dribbling on their bibs, let's see if we can't get a little work done.
Click to expand...

Translation: "While everyone is busy getting ignored by us, let's speculate some more and pat each other on the back for making stuff up."

Notice the distinct differences between the first ejection below the MER, and the later ejection above the MER. (I will not discuss the ejections from the MER at the moment.)
Click to expand...

I just love self-styled specialists.

White "smoke" appears to emerge from it, and the "smoke" trail becomes more pronounced, as does its cast shadow, as time progresses.
Click to expand...

Yep. Analyses work like that in movies. Reality ? Why not!
 
Last edited:
apathoid said:
How did I get dragged into this.....?

I don't want to know, do I? :aaa!
Click to expand...


It's a running joke around these Max-threads that he won't even pretend to have read your paper. Since all of his nonsensical fabrications depend on those terribly inconvenient planes having been flown into the buildings by remote control, your paper is a spear through his heart.
 
pomeroo said:
It's a running joke around these Max-threads that he won't even pretend to have read your paper. Since all of his nonsensical fabrications depend on those terribly inconvenient planes having been flown into the buildings by remote control, your paper is a spear through his heart.
Click to expand...



Oh good. I thought it had something to do with remote controlled thermite......or something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom