Merged Molten metal observations

Maybe the airplane moved the therm*te canister. You know, the airplane that didn't get piled up in that corner of the building? This is the thread where there's still an airplane, right?
 
Last edited:
oody said:
Maybe the airplane moved the therm*te canister. You know, the airplane that didn't get piled up in that corner of the building? This is the thread where there's still an airplane, right?
Click to expand...

Even that one is not bullet proof.

How did those who positioned the canister know which floor the plane would crash into?

:)

Truther logic is an oxymoron of the same rank as truther thinking. :rolleyes:
 
ozeco41 said:
At risk of becoming serious this is just another example of how we fall for the truthers tactics. They focus on one isolated issue - "was it molten steel" - and separated from any reference to context. Then "they" (with "us" tacitly agreeing) keep the discussion on very narrow tracks - for this one colour v temperature matching has been one.

The reality in the proper context is that it could not be molten steel for at least a dozen reasons any one of which exclude molten steel.

Hence my bit of parody a few posts back. The logistics of producing a tonne of molten steel in the one corner of the tower most affected by damage and fire whilst the fires raged... Well it would require a fire suited suicide worker team doing some very difficult manual labour tasks...

...an we don't force the truthers to face those logical consequences of their nonsense claims. (And I don't know how you force them either.. :o )
Click to expand...
Alas, it doesn't even change when they are forced to discuss it in context. That's because then you're just denying their evidence! Who cares if thermite wasn't present in the debris pile! That just means the perps teleported it there!!!! It's the DEEEEEW I tell ya! The DEEEEEW!!!
 
GlennB said:
Ah, got it. Some massive thermite delivery system was attached to an obscure part of the insides of WTC2 office space by accident.

You are quite good, I must admit, but not quite (yet?) in the Bill Smith league :D
Click to expand...

I'm a Telltale Tom fan myself. Java has a long way to go.
 
oody said:
Maybe the airplane moved the therm*te canister. You know, the airplane that didn't get piled up in that corner of the building? This is the thread where there's still an airplane, right?
Click to expand...

hehe, very good...

I can't seem to convince therm*te-obsessed truthers to argue with no-planer truthers, but that would be soooo much fun!!
Sadly, they do seem to recognize the hopeless woo of the other, while adhering to their own brand with fervor.

I'm beginning to think that most truthers are just really, really dumb. Is there hope?
 
GlennB said:
Yo done lost yer bonus right there boy. Dang thermeete don' come cheap y'all knows.
Click to expand...

Laboratory grade thermite grows spontaneously in buildings. It loves steel columns. That's why they put on fireproofing.
 
ozeco41 said:
At risk of becoming serious this is just another example of how we fall for the truthers tactics. They focus on one isolated issue - "was it molten steel" - and separated from any reference to context. Then "they" (with "us" tacitly agreeing) keep the discussion on very narrow tracks - for this one colour v temperature matching has been one.

The reality in the proper context is that it could not be molten steel for at least a dozen reasons any one of which exclude molten steel.

Hence my bit of parody a few posts back. The logistics of producing a tonne of molten steel in the one corner of the tower most affected by damage and fire whilst the fires raged... Well it would require a fire suited suicide worker team doing some very difficult manual labour tasks...

...an we don't force the truthers to face those logical consequences of their nonsense claims. (And I don't know how you force them either.. :o )
Click to expand...

You could quit posting here and giving them the hope that someone is agreeing with their claims.
 
dafydd said:
All the smart ones realized that 911 conspiracies were a crock. We are left with the dumb and the trolls.
Click to expand...

And those who are concerned we don't treat the trolls right.
 
ozeco41 said:
The reality in the proper context is that it could not be molten steel for at least a dozen reasons any one of which exclude molten steel.
Click to expand...

Can't help but notice you don't mention the proper context nor do you enumerate the dozen reasons. So you're trying to put the belief of valid arguments without even enumerating them. Forget even having to support them with proof. You're implying they are there, but you're not even actually listing them. You're master of debunkers indeed!
 
<facepalm>
1. can you eliminate any of the ten very common metals found in the towers which melt at under 1000C from the molten material we are seeing fall? Yes or no (the answer is no not really. We can try to eliminate the ones which aren't as common, but that still leaves aluminum and lead (from the lead acid batteries which were directly ABOVE that fire).

2. Can you identify any molten metal by sight alone, due to the color of the molten materials? yes or no (the answer there is NO)

Because of those two simple questions you cannot claim it was molten steel.

that leaves out the whole host of other issues including
the temperature of the fires was not hot enough to melt steel
there is no tell tale bright flash which accompanies therm*te as it goes off
in the recovered dust there is no trace of aluminum, nor of the other chemical signatures of therm*te
and we have several much simpler explanations which can account for molten metals pouring out of that specific corner
 
TruthersLie said:
<facepalm>
1. can you eliminate any of the ten very common metals found in the towers which melt at under 1000C from the molten material we are seeing fall? Yes or no (the answer is no not really. We can try to eliminate the ones which aren't as common, but that still leaves aluminum and lead (from the lead acid batteries which were directly ABOVE that fire).
Click to expand...

Wrong, those metals don't behave like we see in the video at red, orange or yellow hot. They would be melted long ago and could not stand vertical and be seen shining. The would have pooled into a horizontal pool of incandescent metal rather than a vertical wall. Such pool would not be visible from the street so many stories below. The only way for metal to be that hot and in a vertical position is for it to be a high temperature melting point metal. AKA steel.


TruthersLie said:
in the recovered dust there is no trace of aluminum, nor of the other chemical signatures of therm*te
and we have several much simpler explanations which can account for molten metals pouring out of that specific corner
Click to expand...

No traces of aluminium??? Mhh hard to believe given that NIST claims it was molten aluminium flowing. You claim it was aluminium. Everyone here is talking about the aluminium from the airplanes. Yet no trace of aluminium was recovered from the dust? No wonder they didn't find signatures of therm*te. They got the wrong dust!!!!! It doesn't even belong to the WTC incident as there should have been aluminium traces from all that molten aluminium that according to NIST was flowing out.

And yes your explanations are simple. Just as simple as the explanation for day and night. You know which one right? The one about the Sun going around the Earth. No need for complicated orbits, and gravity and equations and you know all that which astronomy knows now that makes the explanation so much complicated now. I guess you liked it when it was simple back then.
 
Java Man said:
Wrong, those metals don't behave like we see in the video at red, orange or yellow hot. They would be melted long ago and could not stand vertical and be seen shining. The would have pooled into a horizontal pool of incandescent metal rather than a vertical wall. Such pool would not be visible from the street so many stories below. The only way for metal to be that hot and in a vertical position is for it to be a high temperature melting point metal. AKA steel.
Click to expand...
and yet the temperatures do not allow for it to be steel.

It could easily be any of the 10 common metals which all melt at under 1000C.

Nice handwave.



No traces of aluminium???
Click to expand...
I was not clear enough. In the dust sampled by S Jones and Harrit, their "red grey chips" do not have the aluminum to be any type of therm*te. How do you have therm*te w/out the aluminum? Oopsie.

Mhh hard to believe given that NIST claims it was molten aluminium flowing. You claim it was aluminium. Everyone here is talking about the aluminium from the airplanes. Yet no trace of aluminium was recovered from the dust? No wonder they didn't find signatures of therm*te. They got the wrong dust!!!!! It doesn't even belong to the WTC incident as there should have been aluminium traces from all that molten aluminium that according to NIST was flowing out.
Click to expand...
as I stated above, I was not specific enough.

avoid the strawman and answer the question posted above.

And when you do, can you then tell me what any of the 8 molten materials that OY posted are by sight alone?

And yes your explanations are simple. Just as simple as the explanation for day and night. You know which one right? The one about the Sun going around the Earth. No need for complicated orbits, and gravity and equations and you know all that which astronomy knows now that makes the explanation so much complicated now. I guess you liked it when it was simple back then.
Click to expand...

Ah yes... comparing your deluded, miniscule "movement" with historical movements that changed the world. Yuppers...

Now if you can only find evidence, proof or even provide a simple narrative which explains the events of the day... (weren't you working on one? How is that coming along?)
 
TruthersLie said:
and yet the temperatures do not allow for it to be steel.
Click to expand...

Yes they don't. The temperatures proposed by the official report. Which leads us to consider alternative sources of heat. Namely said agent which could be therm*te.

TruthersLie said:
It could easily be any of the 10 common metals which all melt at under 1000C.
Click to expand...

No, because such metals could not stand vertical at such temperatures.

TruthersLie said:
I was not clear enough. In the dust sampled by S Jones and Harrit, their "red grey chips" do not have the aluminum to be any type of therm*te. How do you have therm*te w/out the aluminum? Oopsie.
Click to expand...

Good point! Maybe it isn't therm*te, but some other agent. Maybe something fluorine based? But does it matter? Since NIST didn't even care to look for beams exposed to the high temperatures claimed in its own model who could we expect them to be due diligent enough to sample for other things. So it wasn't that it was not found. It wasn't even searched for.
 
Java Man said:
Good point! Maybe it isn't therm*te, but some other agent. Maybe something fluorine based? But does it matter? Since NIST didn't even care to look for beams exposed to the high temperatures claimed in its own model who could we expect them to be due diligent enough to sample for other things. So it wasn't that it was not found. It wasn't even searched for.
Click to expand...

1. Appeal to magic noted. It must have been some exotic non-thermitic silent explosive/melting agent.
2. Who really gives a crap what YOU think NIST should and shouldn't have done?
 
twinstead said:
1. Appeal to magic noted. It must have been some exotic non-thermitic silent explosive/melting agent.
2. Who really gives a crap what YOU think NIST should and shouldn't have done?
Click to expand...

Yea yea yea. Always playing your ignorance in your favor. That you can't come up with some compound or are unaware a certain compound doesn't exist doesn't mean it doesn't exist and can't be used. You can't rule out molten metal out of your ignorance of agents capable of doing the job.
 
Java Man said:
That you can't come up with some compound or are unaware a certain compound doesn't exist doesn't mean it doesn't exist and can't be used. .
Click to expand...

It also doesn't mean it exists either, show us a reason to think this exists.

When you have people like Richard Gage talking about explosives so powerfull they were flinging steel around yet so quiet they weren't picked on all the videos pointed at the towers collapsing, then you're not just talking about a kind of explosive never used before or since and you can point to absolutely no examples, but it actually would break the laws of physics so have a high explosive be able to do that.

This is why people make fun of how truthers use the idea of thermite to explain everything. It can do anything and everything they want.
 
Edx said:
It also doesn't mean it exists either, show us a reason to think this exists.

When you have people like Richard Gage talking about explosives so powerfull they were flinging steel around yet so quiet they weren't picked on all the videos pointed at the towers collapsing, then you're not just talking about a kind of explosive never used before or since and you can point to absolutely no examples, but it actually would break the laws of physics so have a high explosive be able to do that.

This is why people make fun of how truthers use the idea of thermite to explain everything. It can do anything and everything they want.
Click to expand...

But thanks to the wonderful conversations I've had with debunkers here it has become quite clear that the collapse could have been initiated with less potent devices. Namely just releasing the floor panels in a controlled fashion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom