Merged Molten metal observations

Joey McGee said:
bic lighters might get up to 450 or so, well under the melting temperature for aluminum or even solder, but not that far. Close, but no cigar. And for the record that did make me question your sincerity.
Click to expand...

Really? So that's why the metal is seen red hot? Mhhhh a bic lighter that produces incandescence at 450º. Maybe mine is magical.
 
Java Man said:
Really? So that's why the metal is seen red hot? Mhhhh a bic lighter that produces incandescence at 450º. Maybe mine is magical.
Click to expand...

How about you get a heat sensor, put that lighter on it properly, and get back to me on that one.

I want to see a picture with some circles and arrows on it pointing to the missing aluminum, that's really interesting to me, honestly, you're taking up pages of thread on this one I'm really hoping to actually see some evidence of something.
 
Java Man said:
I'm sure the metal from the wings also leapfrogged into the fuselage. Yea right.

Oh I'm sure aluminum can melt. I'm not under the impression that aluminum cannot melt. But airplanes are not made out of pure aluminum, but rather alloys that as you see burn. That's why a close look at the fuselage shows an rough ash like edge rather than a molten drip. Like you see in my aluminium foil picture.
Click to expand...

What is YOUR alternative?

If not aluminum, then what? The location of the metal seen pouring out of the building is EXACTLY where the aircraft came to rest.

2+2 =?

As for my aircraft photos, it's patently insane to think that these aircraft burn like a log, and don't melt like...well....metal. Metal MELTS. That's why you refer to the MELTING point of a metal, and the BURNING point of an organic material like wood.

Metal melts. That's what it does. Just because you can't see massive pools of metal on the ground, doesn't mean they don't exist. They are inside these planes, solidified. The photos are clearly taken after the fires are out, so the aluminum has cooled to the point where its no longer melted. Does that make any sense?

Plus - refer to the Saudi Airlines crash photo I put up.... did you notice the bottom of the plane is still intact? How is anything from the top of the plane supposed to pass through the bottom of the plane to the ground? Any melted aluminum is INSIDE the aircraft.
 
Joey McGee said:
How about you get a heat sensor, put that lighter on it properly, and get back to me on that one.

I want to see a picture with some circles and arrows on it pointing to the missing aluminum, that's really interesting to me, honestly, you're taking up pages of thread on this one I'm really hoping to actually see some evidence of something.
Click to expand...

Here's a picture on the gas stove. Same piece of aluminum foil and as comparison a copper wire melting.

Notice both become incandescent and still the foil fails to melt. Just turns into this ash like material that is very brittle and peals with the touch of my finger. The copper on the other hand fuses into a ball as seen in the bottom picture.

metals.jpg
 
Ugh.

Why would you use aluminum foil to make your point, but say that the airplane is an aluminum alloy? Wouldn't it stand to reason that you'd have to use the same material to prove your point?

It. Was. Aluminum.
 
NoahFence said:
Plus - refer to the Saudi Airlines crash photo I put up.... did you notice the bottom of the plane is still intact? How is anything from the top of the plane supposed to pass through the bottom of the plane to the ground? Any melted aluminum is INSIDE the aircraft.
Click to expand...

And I guess here:

http://msnbcmedia3.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Photo/_new/090323-japan-crash-hmed-1125p.grid-6x2.jpg

They just flipped the whole airplane over after they finished extinguishing the fire right? Still not molten aluminum pools even with the airplane flipped over.

Same here?

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/03/22/article-1369020-0B4898DD00000578-574_634x392.jpg

There's not much fuselage left to hide any molten aluminum if there ever was.

Same here:

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/03/22/article-1369020-0B49964400000578-446_634x385.jpg
 
NoahFence said:
Ugh.

Why would you use aluminum foil to make your point, but say that the airplane is an aluminum alloy? Wouldn't it stand to reason that you'd have to use the same material to prove your point?

It. Was. Aluminum.
Click to expand...

Because its what I have at hand to prove my point. Maybe you'd like to get some bits of aircraft fuselage and run the test yourself with some A1 jet fuel.
 
Oh god this is sooooo painful. He's confusing temperature with total heat available. A bic lighter will have a
Diffusion flame [which] produces a temperature of 1032 K at a height of h = 1.0 mm,gradually increasing to a peak temperature of 1930 K at h = 19.0 mm just below the
flame height hf = 20 mm. This temperature is near the adiabatic flame temperature
for butane. It is slightly lower due to radiative heat losses from the flame
Click to expand...
http://drum.lib.umd.edu/bitstream/1903/1866/1/umi-umd-1258.pdf

So 759 to 1657°C. Hot enough to melt steel eleventy111!!!! Ever tried to melt steel with a butane lighter? Did the steel pool everywhere? Nope. Why not?
 
Java Man said:
No you haven't answered the question. The question is regarding the ability of molten aluminum to remain in a vertical position. Let's look at the picture:

[qimg]http://img857.imageshack.us/img857/8396/metald.png[/qimg]

The green line surrounds the material that's clearly falling. The red surrounds an area which is incandescent and the source of the material in the green. Now if it is molten aluminum or glass how can it remain vertical. Shouldn't have pooled and we should just see the material as it pours out and not the incandescent wall?

Looks more like something is actively affecting the vertical surface and it is pouring down. In other words melting it as we watch. Considering the video was shot from ground level many stories below the "crucible" it should be very hard to see the bottom of the molten pool from such a low observation point.
Click to expand...

My guess is that it is somethingdripping down the side of the tower, and once it is no longer able to hold itself up, it begins to drip.

As Noah said, maybe it was the consistancy of molasses. Who knows.

What is your point?
 
Sunstealer said:
Ever tried to melt steel with a butane lighter?
Click to expand...

No I haven't. Have you seem me post photos of me trying to melt steel with a butane lighter? Nope. Have you even seen the word steel or iron in the posts that include photos of my butane lighter? Nope.

Are you trying to divert the discussion to something that isn't being put forward? Yes. Are you trying to disprove said something which is obviously so clearly wrong and makes you so clearly right? Yes. Are you then trying to overlap your clearly correct comment regarding the failure to melt steel with a butane lighter with the conversation regarding aluminum foil and copper? Yes. Are you overall trying to score a victory by disproving something that's not even on the table and was brought by you in the attempt to score for the debunker team? Yes.

After this brief intermission back to the aluminium discussion.
 
Java Man said:
You're just pulling at straws here in a desperate attempt to make your point. I've said this before in this thread. Airplane fuselages burn in fires they don't melt.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...S-pilots-F-15E-plane-crash-near-Benghazi.html

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01210/denver-plane-crash_1210284c.jpg
Click to expand...

There are two problems with your photos.

1-They do not show the ground in good enough detail to see if there is any molten metal that has solidified.

2-You keep forgetting the other componets of an airplane that are made of aluminum. Like the structural supports for one.....
 
090323-japan-crash-hmed-1125p.grid-6x2.jpg


Uh... how high off of the ground was that helicopter? 500 feet? 600 feet? I'm sure that it might look a bit different if you were actually on the ground. Find one of those fellas down there and ask them if they saw any evidence of melted aluminum.
 
Java Man said:
Because its what I have at hand to prove my point. Maybe you'd like to get some bits of aircraft fuselage and run the test yourself with some A1 jet fuel.
Click to expand...

It's not the same alloy, and it's paper thin. If you can find a big chunk of aluminum from a 767 and turn it to ash on your stove, that might have something to say.

You haven't shown any evidence that aluminum from a plane can't become molten. Your technique is misunderstanding photographs. It's telling that you didn't reply to any of the other points I published, and choose instead to focus on something that is basically an endless loop of misunderstanding. Steven Jones doesn't even dispute that the aircraft could have melted, you should contact him in order to update his theories.
 
Last edited:
NoahFence said:
[qimg]http://msnbcmedia3.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Photo/_new/090323-japan-crash-hmed-1125p.grid-6x2.jpg[/qimg]

Uh... how high off of the ground was that helicopter? 500 feet? 600 feet? I'm sure that it might look a bit different if you were actually on the ground. Find one of those fellas down there and ask them if they saw any evidence of melted aluminum.
Click to expand...

Here are a few more:

http://www.welt.de/english-news/article3425802/FedEx-plane-crashes-at-Tokyo-airport-two-dead.html

http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200903/r352229_1616419.jpg

http://www.primera-clase.com/wp-content/uploads/fedex-narita-1.jpg

http://media.washtimes.com/media/im....jpg?ea66fbce325d4e15b545912c341f51dada3e59ff
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom