Molten Steel

[boloboffin]

Where does it say the dogs were used to test for explosives residue at the WTC durring the cleanup?

How do you think bomb-sniffing dogs detect bombs, Christopher7?

 

[GStan]

I have said that thermite melts steel.

There is no other explanation for the molten steel in the debris pile.

You are trying to sweep the molten steel under the rug by asking questions that cannot be answered.

Deal with the question at hand and stop trying to change the subject.

Name another possibility or stop denying that thermite created the molten steel.

There was no liquid steel. There is no need for thermite to be included in any explanation of the collapse or the conditions in the rubble pile. To steal from Beachnut, thermite is a delusion.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

I have said that thermite melts steel.

There is no other explanation for the molten steel in the debris pile.

You are trying to sweep the molten steel under the rug by asking questions that cannot be answered.

Deal with the question at hand and stop trying to change the subject.

Name another possibility or stop denying that thermite created the molten steel.

Nah, somehow I find thermite to be some random theory conspiracy theorists pulled out there nether regions when thinking of ways to speculate controlled demolition. Generally theorists of this category automatically assume that witnesses are not only absolutely infallible regardless of their professional field, that no mistakes exist period, but they also stick to thermite even when the very witness statements they cite don't support thermite. To theorists of this category it is absolutely unthinkable for these people to not have been literal and when they do not claim what these theorists are chanting they have absolutely been silenced or they appeal to the emotions of their audience by exclaiming that they are calling all of the witnesses liars with no reason whatsoever behind doing so. When you show that there is a fundamental flaw in how they interpret the information they have they shift goal posts even if it means making obvious that they are hopelessly uninformed on a subject they are attempting to lecture on

 

[ravdin]

Name another possibility or stop denying that thermite created the molten steel.

There was no "molten steel" at Ground Zero weeks after the fact.

Naming other possibilities is easily done- and my explanation doesn't rely on the magical properties of an insulating/explosive material that was allegedly planted in the buildings by a shadowy crypto-government agency in advance.

 

[Toke]

There is something going for the teori of military explosives at WCT.

The resulting mess looks much more like military destruction than CD.

 

[Christopher7]

No possible way for thermite to burn hot enough for long enough to create the quantity of molten metal/steel that was reported without anyone noticing.

The people who might have noticed died in the collapse.

Do you know of another possible explanation for the molten steel in the debris piles?

Really hot fires in an insulated environment. Lots of hydrocarbon fuel and the subway would have been a plentiful source of oxygen.

Where have you been?
Carbon based fires [office contents, jet fuel etc.] don't burn hot enough to melt steel.

Since you cannot provide the location of the molten metal sightings, you cannot state what the conditions were inside the debris pile.

True. Neither can anyone else.

thermite is the only known possibility for the molten steel.

Wrong as usual. As stated many times, the quantities reported and the length of time that it remained molten rules out thermite.

Someone said that. So what? There is no way to make a determination like that because there is no data on how much molten steel there was or where it was or how deep it was buried or the insulating qualities of the pulverized rubble etc. etc.

You are the one that is making the thermite claim. The onus is on you to prove that thermite could create or even start the phenomenon

Dude,
Thermite melts steel

that occurred in the debris pile.

You are assuming the steel melted after the collapse. Think outside the pile.

 

[Sunstealer]

This thread is hilarious. Poor C7 doesn't actually know what his own theory is. One minute it's explosives the next it thermite, then the liquid steel made by thermite pre-collapse, wasn't liquid when it hit the ground, then the fires weren't hot enough to melt steel, then the steel started the fires which then with insulation remelted the steel. Now no-one knows the properties of thermite cos it's super-sekrit but C7 knows even though he claims no-one knows, no evidence of the hundreds of thermite devices or detcord were ever found, no-one reported hundreds of people planting these devices along with explosives and mats to muffle sound. Yaddy yaddy yadda.

It's a complete dogs breakfast of a theory and therefore a thread. The whole thermite idea is crazy, only someone who isn't educated would believe such a theory.

We have some unclarified witness statements, a claw photo and some liquid coming out of the corner of a tower. All of these have been given alternative and far more credible and possible explanations than thermite.

C7 has to come up with a narrative of the events that lead to liquid steel. He has to back this up with scientific papers to show that each stage is possible. If he is unwilling to do this then he loses. Saying, oh the military had this and that, is zero proof and for all the difference it would make you might as well claim space lasers or giant invisible faeries is wot dunnit!

C7 come up with something that isn't pure crazy and debunked in 5 minutes, show that you have put atleast 30 minutes work and thought into it rather than 30 seconds. Actually don't, it's far more entertainment watching you squirm rather than answer perfectly good questions and then make us laugh with even more nonsense. We are laughing at you not with you.

 

[Toke]

Nah, somehow I find thermite to be some random theory conspiracy theorists pulled out there nether regions when thinking of ways to speculate controlled demolition.....

Agree.

And with no more support than vanilla ice or orange sorbet.

 

[Christopher7]

There was no "molten steel" at Ground Zero weeks after the fact.

If you say so. We'll just put the eyewitness on ignore. That'll get'er done.

Naming other possibilities is easily done- and my explanation doesn't rely on the magical properties of an insulating/explosive material that was allegedly planted in the buildings by a shadowy crypto-government agency in advance.

What is your explanation for the molten steel?

 

[ravdin]

C7 come up with something that isn't pure crazy and debunked in 5 minutes, show that you have put atleast 30 minutes work and thought into it rather than 30 seconds. Actually don't, it's far more entertainment watching you squirm rather than answer perfectly good questions and then make us laugh with even more nonsense. We are laughing at you not with you.

I agree with the last part. This thread is pure comedy gold!

 

[Sunstealer]

Oh and btw Plasma cutters will melt steel too.

 

[GStan]

The people who might have noticed died in the collapse.


Where have you been?
Carbon based fires [office contents, jet fuel etc.] don't burn hot enough to melt steel.

True. Neither can anyone else.


Someone said that. So what? There is no way to make a determination like that because there is no data on how much molten steel there was or where it was or how deep it was buried or the insulating qualities of the pulverized rubble etc. etc.

Dude,
Thermite melts steel

You are assuming the steel melted after the collapse. Think outside the pile.

Finally you're getting it! All of that is correct! Except for the parts where liquid steel exists at ground zero. There wasn't any. But the rest is fine.

 

[Sunstealer]

C7 - until you can come up with an experiment that proves that liquid steel can remain liquid for 5 months with a temperature of no more than 1000°C and using insulation then you have nothing, nada, zip, sweet felicity arkwright.

You are making the claims - it is upto you to prove that what you claim the witnesses saw is actually possible.

You can scream DUDE - THERMITE MELTS STEEL all you want but it proves nothing.

Get up off your arse and start doing the experiment. I've already told you how to do it so go and do it. Prove me and everyone else here wrong by doing a day's work at a place that has a furnace capable of melting A36 steel. 8 hours work and you can prove us all wrong - come on super truther! get out there and show us we are wrong. Hell you can even upload the video to youtube if you want.

 

[ravdin]

If you say so. We'll just put the eyewitness on ignore. That'll get'er done.

By "eyewitnesses" do you mean the second or thirdhand accounts that you have quoted in earlier threads without links? You're expecting us to believe that the US government and/or military is involved in a massive crime and coverup based on this hearsay? And even if these reports are accurate (I know- you can't cite them directly because the government has removed the articles from the internet) then so what? Is it possible that a GZ worker could be brave and honorable but still not be a reliable witness when it comes to "molten steel" excavated from the site?

What is your explanation for the molten steel?

There was no molten steel. You may ask yet again but you'll get the same answer.

 

[Toke]

Oh and btw Plasma cutters will melt steel too.

I checked up on the steel cutting link a few pages back.
Noticed two things I had wrong.

Throught that carbon in steel helped the cutting by burning, and that the plasmacutters burned the steel with the oxygen in the air like an oxy/acytelene cutting nozle does with pure oxygen.
But no, it just uses hot air.

 

[lapman]

Name another possibility or stop denying that thermite created the molten steel.

I still go back to the torches that were used in the cleanup. As I showed quite a while ago, they create plenty of molten steel. Since there were quite a bit of torch cutting activity during the cleanup and there isn't really a report of quantity or size of the "pools," the runoff from the cutting could be what was seen. That is much more plausible that your unknown quantity and invisible placement of thermite.

 

[Christopher7]

This thread is hilarious.

You got that part right.

Poor C7 doesn't actually know what his own theory is. One minute it's explosives the next it thermite,

There is evidence of both.

then the liquid steel made by thermite pre-collapse, wasn't liquid when it hit the ground

You pull that one out of . . . . . your hat.

the fires weren't hot enough to melt steel

True

then the steel started the fires which then with insulation remelted the steel.

That's all yours baby.

Now no-one knows the properties of thermite cos it's super-sekrit

Everybody knows thermite melts steel except for a few very slow learners here.

evidence of the hundreds of thermite devices or detcord were ever found,

You have not a clue how or where thermite was used.

No no-one reported hundreds of people planting these devices along with explosives and mats to muffle sound.

It can't be because you cant figure it out because you haven't got a clue how it was done.

We have some unclarified witness statements, a claw photo and some liquid coming out of the corner of a tower. All of these have been given alternative and far more credible and possible explanations than thermite.

Wrong.

C7 has to come up with a narrative of the events that lead to liquid steel. He has to back this up with scientific papers to show that each stage is possible.

No, only the part where thermite can melt steel and nothing else at the WTC could.

You just ran thru Gravy's denial list again. Give it up.
It's just a bunch of garbage that tries to prove a negative and ignores the fact that thermite is the only explanation for the molten steel.

"It can't be thermite because . . ."
"It can't be thermite because . . ."
"It can't be thermite because . . ."
"It can't be thermite because . . ."
We all say so.

 

[Christopher7]

I still go back to the torches that were used in the cleanup. As I showed quite a while ago, they create plenty of molten steel. Since there were quite a bit of torch cutting activity during the cleanup and there isn't really a report of quantity or size of the "pools," the runoff from the cutting could be what was seen. That is much more plausible that your unknown quantity and invisible placement of thermite.

That's absurd for a lot of reasons but if it makes you feel good, go with it.

We have already been over that one so don't ask, go back and read.

 

[Sunstealer]

So how can thermite keep liquid steel liquid for 5 months?

 

[Christopher7]

By "eyewitnesses" do you mean the second or thirdhand accounts that you have quoted in earlier threads without links? You're expecting us to believe that the US government and/or military is involved in a massive crime and coverup based on this hearsay?

There are very credible eyewitnesses who saw molten steel but I don't expect you to believe them either. You are in denial and you won't believe any evidence of molten steel.

Have a nice day.