Merged Molten metal observations

Java, why are you trying to disprove a theory that no one really believes (that acid dissolved the beam) rather than prove your own theory that thermite somehow did it?
 
Here's a great way to end the beam sample talk; thermite doesn't cause metal to rust and flake apart, therm*te melts the metal. Since the WTC 7 samples doesn't show any physical evidence of melting, we can safely conclude that temperatures were far too low for thermite to have done it. It is explained by oxidation of the steel (rust/corrosion) that was accelerated by the environment's high temperature, and chemical content. Furthermore, if we're using the WTC 7 to "prove" what happened in WTC 2, then the WTC7 sample does absolutely nothing to support the theory of thermite being inside the buildings. What happened to that sample was not done by thermite, /end
 
phunk said:
Java, why are you trying to disprove a theory that no one really believes (that acid dissolved the beam) rather than prove your own theory that thermite somehow did it?
Click to expand...

He has no theory,no draft,nothing.
 
java man said his "molten metal" (the topic of this thread) argument would be conceded if someone posted a pic showing molten aluminum from an aircraft, Ive done that.
http://hwstock.org/lomb/html/molten_aluminum_closeup.htm
Now he moves the goalposts and is on acid, Pick another drug Java because you have no credibility here, You have shown nothing but wild conspiratorial speculation and incredulity, No evidence of your conspiracy whatsoever. Hell you can't even spell Floor Joists right. No one saw a reaction consistent with Therm*te at any exterior wall. You claimed earlier in this thread that molten material could not run uphill. Are you even aware of the truss layout on the north east corner of the south tower? Do you even know the core orientation? Check it out Java and you will see due to the truss layout in that north east corner that indeed it is expected and possible that molten debris can flow out of that particular truss bay. I have to laugh at your childish half baked conspiracy claim of conspirators planting therm*te in an occupied building. Why not give us a tonnage of the therm*te required to achieve your clownish CD? Or is that going to be in your "paper" you claim to be working on?

barjoisrspan.gif
 
Last edited:
A W Smith said:
java man said his "molten metal" (the topic of this thread) argument would be conceded if someone posted a pic showing molten aluminum from an aircraft, Ive done that.
http://hwstock.org/lomb/html/molten_aluminum_closeup.htm
Now he moves the goalposts and is on acid, Pick another drug Java because you have no credibility here, You have shown nothing but wild conspiratorial speculation and incredulity, No evidence of your conspiracy whatsoever. Hell you can't even spell Floor Joists right. No one saw a reaction consistent with Therm*te at any exterior wall. You claimed earlier in this thread that molten material could not run uphill. Are you even aware of the truss layout on the north east corner of the south tower? Do you even know the core orientation? Check it out Java and you will see due to the truss layout in that north east corner that indeed it is expected and possible that molten debris can flow out of that particular truss bay. I have to laugh at your childish half baked conspiracy claim of conspirators planting therm*te in an occupied building. Why not give us a tonnage of the therm*te required to achieve your clownish CD? Or is that going to be in your "paper" you claim to be working on?

[qimg]http://i294.photobucket.com/albums/mm89/AWSmith1955/barjoisrspan.gif[/qimg]
Click to expand...

Let's get this straight. No one has shown a slab 40x40m of molten metal under an airplane. I was challenged to bring the calculations of the amount of aluminium. I brought it. It showed that it was not consistent with the amount of visible aluminium on the tarmac. After that many have brought images of molten aluminium. But they're just drips and bits and droplets on grass. We even went around with the soot comment and I'm still waiting to receive a convincing counter argument as to why the aluminium from the burnt car was shiny. Remember that? Maybe the polished it for the photo!! LOL

Look, even the debunkers here were not aware of the actual configuration on that spot. Only when I mentioned the amount of supports was I challenged by Glen and guess what. His comment countered what others said about the slide being formed. So as crazy as my claims may be they are better articulated among them than your buck shot arguments which hold no water at all. And can only be brought here because you don't carry the burden of proof.

How is the acid calculation coming along?
 
Java Man said:
Let's get this straight. No one has shown a slab 40x40m of molten metal under an airplane. I was challenged to bring the calculations of the amount of aluminium. I brought it. It showed that it was not consistent with the amount of visible aluminium on the tarmac. After that many have brought images of molten aluminium. But they're just drips and bits and droplets on grass. We even went around with the soot comment and I'm still waiting to receive a convincing counter argument as to why the aluminium from the burnt car was shiny. Remember that? Maybe the polished it for the photo!! LOL

Look, even the debunkers here were not aware of the actual configuration on that spot. Only when I mentioned the amount of supports was I challenged by Glen and guess what. His comment countered what others said about the slide being formed. So as crazy as my claims may be they are better articulated among them than your buck shot arguments which hold no water at all. And can only be brought here because you don't carry the burden of proof.

How is the acid calculation coming along?
Click to expand...

How's the draft coming along? It will be needed for the new investigation,so get a move on.
 
Java Man said:
Let's get this straight. No one has shown a slab 40x40m of molten metal under an airplane. I was challenged to bring the calculations of the amount of aluminium. I brought it. It showed that it was not consistent with the amount of visible aluminium on the tarmac. After that many have brought images of molten aluminium. But they're just drips and bits and droplets on grass. We even went around with the soot comment and I'm still waiting to receive a convincing counter argument as to why the aluminium from the burnt car was shiny. Remember that? Maybe the polished it for the photo!! LOL

Look, even the debunkers here were not aware of the actual configuration on that spot. Only when I mentioned the amount of supports was I challenged by Glen and guess what. His comment countered what others said about the slide being formed. So as crazy as my claims may be they are better articulated among them than your buck shot arguments which hold no water at all. And can only be brought here because you don't carry the burden of proof.

How is the acid calculation coming along?
Click to expand...

Goal post shifts highlighted, And expected.
 
Last edited:
Java Man said:
... How is the acid calculation coming along?
Click to expand...
You failed to show anything but your ignorance on 911 and post the dumbest stuff to date to support your delusions.

Java Man said:
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/275/5306/1621.abstract

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V6S-3WDC4CB-9&_user=10&_coverDate=08%2F31%2F1996&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=gateway&_origin=gateway&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1726876783&_rerunOrigin=google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=a79ff03b520df13d26d667d87a86c021&searchtype=a

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005AGUFMMR13A0083S
Click to expand...

The post of posts, prove you have no idea what you are talking about. Explain why you post nonsense which has nothing to do with 911, things you can't explain. Go ahead explain your 650 kbar stuff, exactly how does it fit with 911? I suggested you take a course in chemical engineering to bring you up to speed, to do this will take at least 6 months, and may take 5 or 6 years depending on your present grade level and preparation to attend engineering school.
 
Why didn't any of the people working in the rooms that the Thermite was planted in notice anyone ripping out the walls and floors to get to the steelwork?

WHere are the thermite charges that didn't get used on the other floors?
 
beachnut said:
You failed to show anything but your ignorance on 911 and post the dumbest stuff to date to support your delusions.



The post of posts, prove you have no idea what you are talking about. Explain why you post nonsense which has nothing to do with 911, things you can't explain. Go ahead explain your 650 kbar stuff, exactly how does it fit with 911? I suggested you take a course in chemical engineering to bring you up to speed, to do this will take at least 6 months, and may take 5 or 6 years depending on your present grade level and preparation to attend engineering school.
Click to expand...

Lol
Did he figure out 650 KBar is over 9 million PSI yet?
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Why didn't any of the people working in the rooms that the Thermite was planted in notice anyone ripping out the walls and floors to get to the steelwork?

WHere are the thermite charges that didn't get used on the other floors?
Click to expand...

Dude. Get with the program.

The SilversteinBushChenyR security organization had full access to the human resource files of the company in that corner. I thought you knew that. They simply took note of when the employees went out to lunch and did it then.

That is ssoooooo 2004 stuff.
 
Justin39640 said:
Lol
Did he figure out 650 KBar is over 9 million PSI yet?
Click to expand...
... he googled eutectic or a set of Fe S and other things. He did something, albeit it has nothing to do with 911 or the topic. This is an attempt at critical thinking, but without sound judgment. It proved he has no clue what he is talking about, therefore he can only ask for stuff, he can't support his failed claims, except with nonsense. He is reduced to asking questions, if he presents information it exposes his ignorance in science.
 
Java Man said:
Got no idea at this time. Would you care getting back on track regarding the molten metal. Any idea regarding the amount of acid required? I already posted my numbers. What are yours?
Click to expand...

As many times that you have gone off topic, and you say something about me.:( I wish I had a laughing dog.
I am happy to see that you are learning something. You mention molten metal instead of molten steel. Maybe there is some hope for you.:D
 
Last edited:
fess said:
As many times that you have gone off topic, and you say something about me.:( I wish I had a laughing dog.
I am happy to see that you are learning something. You mention molten metal instead of molten steel. Maybe there is some hope for you.:D
Click to expand...
There is hope,but he is a slow learner.
 
ElMondoHummus said:
Wait... what?? He said what? What the :talk034: does 9 million PSI have to do with anything? The bottom of the Marianas Trench only gets you up to 15,000-some PSI.
Click to expand...

It means it is too late to claim he understands 911, science, physics and more. It means he is not armed to argue 911 issues. It means we are learning things way outside the scope of 911.
 
Last edited:
A W Smith said:
Goal post shifts highlighted, And expected.
Click to expand...

Are you still unable to identify the huge slab of molten aluminium on the tarmac?

How is the calculation for the amount of acid required coming along? I already posted my numbers, should we go ahead with them or do you have something to challenge them with?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom