Molten metal in basement of WTC

Lizzy Dripping said:
Would you care to expand on that?
Click to expand...
Yes. JohnDoeX (Rob Balsamo) is a liar who, among his many other lies, deliberately misrepresents the course of AA77 by not correcting the heading for true north.

Now back to your molten metal, do you have a different theory of what could cause it? If not, then you will accept that the fires burned for many weeks within the rubble and caused the heat, yes?
 
Anti-sophist said:
Please note the title of that video and stop confusing STEEL with METAL.

There is no evidence there was molten steel. Eye-witness who said they saw molten steel were mistaken (an easy and highly forgivable mistake). The fires were plenty hot enough to melt aluminum. There was plenty of aluminum. Your NIST quote, as usual, is severely misinterpreted.

Where there is smoke, there is fire. So, please do not tell me there wasn't fire in the rubble when there is smoke coming out of it.

I understand you've done some "research" on some trashy websites but I assure you that this nonsense you are spouting here is well debunked.
Click to expand...

I suggest you actually watch it. I watched it again and you had already written and submitted your post. The NIST spokesman readily admits that fires would not cause what the winesses are talking about. You ahve debunked nothing. That wreckage was smoldering for weeks despite having hundreds of thousands of gallons of water systematically pumped onto it. You do not want to know the truth, that is obvious.
 
WildCat said:
Yes. JohnDoeX (Rob Balsamo) is a liar who, among his many other lies, deliberately misrepresents the course of AA77 by not correcting the heading for true north.

Now back to your molten metal, do you have a different theory of what could cause it? If not, then you will accept that the fires burned for many weeks within the rubble and caused the heat, yes?
Click to expand...

Oh yes everybody is a liar apart from the Bush administration who never lie, right? They didnt lie about WOMD, right? They didn't lead the American public to believe that the invasion of Iraq was linked to 9/11, right? They are not systematically killing hundreds of thousand of Iraquis for oil, right? Is that evil? Is that the work of mentally disturbed individuals?? But the same individuals told the truth about 9/11?? I am 17 years old and these lies stand out like the evil they are. How come you guys dont see it?
 
Lizzy Dripping said:
Voila!


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7180303712325092501
Click to expand...
Ah, just as I thought. The "claw" video showing red hot, not molten, metal. The NIST engineer rightly says there's no witnesses to molten steel. The only people in that video who claim molten steel are lay persons who did not actually test the material.

BTW, does Jones know of a way to make thermite/ate burn for weeks on end, rather than for a few seconds? No? Then the "official" explanation stands.
 
Lizzy Dripping said:
Oh yes everybody is a liar apart from the Bush administration who never lie, right? They didnt lie about WOMD, right? They didn't lead the American public to believe that the invasion of Iraq was linked to 9/11, right? They are not systematically killing hundreds of thousand of Iraquis for oil, right? Is that evil? Is that the work of mentally disturbed individuals??
Click to expand...
Politics is thataway ------------->

But the same individuals told the truth about 9/11?? I am 17 years old and these lies stand out like the evil they are. How come you guys dont see it?
Click to expand...
Of course, a 17 year old has solved the mystery all the worlds engineering community missed!

Have you ever read the NIST reports?
 
WildCat said:
Ah, just as I thought. The "claw" video showing red hot, not molten, metal. The NIST engineer rightly says there's no witnesses to molten steel. The only people in that video who claim molten steel are lay persons who did not actually test the material.

BTW, does Jones know of a way to make thermite/ate burn for weeks on end, rather than for a few seconds? No? Then the "official" explanation stands.
Click to expand...


Yeah it stands, alongside the passports and bandanas?
 
Lizzy Dripping said:
Dragon, did you read the NIST guy's body language?
Click to expand...

What about his palms, did you read his palms?

His horoscope said he would "meet with a challenge".


How about: abandon the body language claim, because you cannot prove it. I can easily say that his body language was due to the fact that he was being pestered by a stupid conspiracist and he was trying to be as patient in his response as possible. In fact, I'd be willing to bet- from his body language- that it was not the first question like that he had to deal with.
 
Lizzy Dripping said:
I suggest you actually watch it. I watched it again and you had already written and submitted your post. The NIST spokesman readily admits that fires would not cause what the winesses are talking about. You ahve debunked nothing. That wreckage was smoldering for weeks despite having hundreds of thousands of gallons of water systematically pumped onto it. You do not want to know the truth, that is obvious.
Click to expand...
How do you know that the molten "steel" reported by some witnesses was not molten aluminium or some other material?

Aluminium melts at 600-660 degrees C
Steel melts at 1300-1500 degrees C

Here's a picture of a car caught in a forest fire which illustrates these facts -
3.gif


(From the Aluminium Federation)
 
WildCat said:
Politics is thataway ------------->


Of course, a 17 year old has solved the mystery all the worlds engineering community missed!

Have you ever read the NIST reports?
Click to expand...

Do me a favour, I have read some of their b******t. Still after five and a half years we are waiting for their wtc7 collapse conclusion with baited breath. They are employed by the US government for christ sake. Get with the programme. I love how all you guys call yourselves skeptics when you are nothing but b******t swallowers.Did you feel cheated about the lies they told you about WOMD?
 
Last edited:
Lizzy Dripping said:
I suggest you actually watch it. I watched it again and you had already written and submitted your post. The NIST spokesman readily admits that fires would not cause what the winesses are talking about. You ahve debunked nothing. That wreckage was smoldering for weeks despite having hundreds of thousands of gallons of water systematically pumped onto it. You do not want to know the truth, that is obvious.
Click to expand...

The official explanation, and one that appears to me (professional physicist, 20+ years experience but in an unrelated field) to be physically reasonable, is that heat was unable to escape from fires burning under the rubble pile, resulting in temperatures much hotter than one would normally expect from an open fire.

I think it's probably my turn to ask this question, because the regulars here have got sick of asking it over and over again of Truther after Truther and getting evasion after evasion. Lizzy, what do you think was present under the rubble pile, what do you think was the cause of it, and can you explain how this shows the official account of 9-11 to be a lie?

Dave
 
Lizzy Dripping said:
Do me a favour, I have read some of their ********.
Click to expand...
Excellent. Now please specify one example of NIST BS, be sure to refer to the exact report, page number, and the quote you will refute. No troofer has been able to do this to date, are you up to the challenge?
 
Lizzy Dripping said:
Do me a favour, I have read some of their ********. Still after five and a half years we are waiting for their wtc7 collapse conclusion with baited breath. They are employed by the US government for christ sake. Get with the programme. I love how all you guys call yourselves skeptics when you are nothing but ******** swallowers.Did you feel cheated about the lies they told you about WOMD?
Click to expand...

Another quick question (which you won't answer):

Does being "employed by the US government" make them wrong?

Seriously. I have friends employed by the US Government, and they tend to be right on many things. They tend to be wrong on some too- so it doesn't seem to be a factor.

Who do you work for? Should we trust anything you say based on who employs you?
 
Dragon said:
.. or how do I respond to this nonsense without appearing arrogant? Lizzy, discomfort does not equal lying.
Click to expand...

Dragon did you lie about being a policeman? If you are a policeman you would have read the NIST guy's body language? Did you read it??
 
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