Molten Steel

Status
Not open for further replies.
BigAl said:
1/2 cubic mile would be 5280x5280x2640 ft.

Since each tower was 210x210x1200, intact, you are way high even before it collapsed "in it's own footprint".
Click to expand...

Oh, sure, if you don't account for thermal expansion, Thermite is hot.
 
Grizzly Bear said:
If I'm seeing the error you speak of... Christopher hasn't seen it yet... :)



Yeah there would be solid metal inside the concrete floor assembly, it is part of what adds to the tensile integrity of the floor system. That tends to lean on the area of "not having melted" at all. The "rust" is pretty irrelevant and doesn't require the materials to be combined in some form of mixture, the rust is a surface feature of the concrete which came from both the material that was used with it and whatever material was adjacent to it prior to it being recovered. A rather normal phenomenon found in what was the product of an unprecedented event. It's not screaming "I WAS MELTED BY THERMITE LOL!"
Click to expand...
The rust just denotes the presence of an abundance of iron (as opposed to aluminum).

The conformation of molten steel was made by Mr. Voorsanger.
 
Christopher7 said:
Are you calling Mr. Voorsanger a liar?
Click to expand...
No, he is mistaken. Just the same way that someone says, "boy that was a hell of a bang, what an explosion!", only to be told that what he heard was a large balloon going pop.

He says molten x,y,z, but he doesn't clarify this. Infact he is as much use as my friends 3 year old, because he simply asserts it. If he said, "hay yeah! I saw red pixies dancing in my garden at 3am!", would you believe him? If not why not? Tell us how that is any different to him standing next to the "meteorite" claiming "molten metal" as it is to him standing in his garden claiming the existence of red pixies.

There IS zero difference.

He does not point to specific areas of the lump and say, "look, look at this bit, this bit here, it has these characteristics that indicate this and this, and because of this you can claim liquid metal". He does nothing of the sort, he just says it without any justification. If I were an amateur in court and this guy was claiming molten metal and I was opposing his side, I'd be able to show very quickly that he's not able to do so and therefore it would be shown that he has no justification for his claims.

As a metallurgist who has carried out investigations, one of which, ultimately lead me to being in court and therefore questioned on technical matters*, I can safely conclude that Voorsanger's narrative would be ripped apart. He makes a statement and that's it, he does not back it up - If someone wanted me attend court and show why his was wrong it would be a pleasure.

*Christ that was bad, but not as bad as an audit I once had concerning material and statistical standards whereby the bloke who was doing the audit had written two of the bloody standards and was an "amateur" buff on the others! We didn't realise he was and he screwed us down tighter than a medieval king's daughter's chastity belt! We passed, but it was hell.
 
Christopher7 said:
Steven Jones said quite clearly:

"The following photograph has become available, evidently showing the now-solidified metal with entrained material,"
Click to expand...
Please point directly to the part in the photo that evidently shows solidified metal.
 
Christopher7 said:
The rust just denotes the presence of an abundance of iron (as opposed to aluminum).

The conformation of molten steel was made by Mr. Voorsanger.
Click to expand...

Voorsanger is an architect, not a government scientist. Give us the name of government scientist(s) who you claim said the "meteorite" was "molten."
 
Last edited:
Sunstealer said:
Please point directly to the part in the photo that evidently shows solidified metal.
Click to expand...
Get serious. I don't need to point to it.

Mr. Voorsanger said about the "meteorite":
"molten steel and concrete and all these things all fused by the heat into one single element"

About the section of the antenna he said:
"I think it must have fallen far enough away from the internal fires within the center of the towers that it was not melted."

He knew that within the center of the towers the temperatures were hot enough to melt steel.
 
bje said:
Voorsanger is an architect, not a government scientist. Give us the name of government scientist(s) who you claim said the "meteorite" was "molten."
Click to expand...
Where have you been? I said in an earlier post that I was wrong about his being a scientist. What matters is what he said.

"molten steel and concrete and all these things all fused by the heat into one single element"
 
Christopher7 said:
Get out of town! :D

That's just pure denial.
Click to expand...
You obviously don't care much for context do you? :D

Clearly he didn't elaborate on what he was observing to back up the claim, and apparently whatever he saw didn't seem to concern him enough to surmise the same conclusion as yourself. Ahhh... government conspiracy cover up epic fails work like a charm no doubt...
 
Last edited:
Christopher7 said:
Get serious. I don't need to point to it.

Mr. Voorsanger said about the "meteorite":
"molten steel and concrete and all these things all fused by the heat into one single element"

About the section of the antenna he said:
"I think it must have fallen far enough away from the internal fires within the center of the towers that it was not melted."

He knew that within the center of the towers the temperatures were hot enough to melt steel.
Click to expand...
And I think the moon is a big button. I don't need to point to it because Mr Spoon went there. Why should I believe you over Mr Spoon? How does Mr Spoon determine that Button Moon is actually a button and Mr Voorsanger determine that the "meteorite" once contained "molten" steel.
 
Last edited:
Christopher7 said:
Get out of town! :D

That's just pure denial.
Click to expand...

You've "purely denied" literally 1,000s of pages of scientific documents, hundreds of experts, hundreds of witness testimonies, hundreds of thousands of investigative man hours. Throw a dog a bone why don't ya!
 
Grizzly Bear said:
You obviously don't care much for context do you? :D

Clearly he didn't elaborate on what he was observing to back up the claim, and apparently whatever he saw didn't seem to concern him enough to surmise the same conclusion as yourself. Ahhh... government conspiracy cover up epic fails work like a charm no doubt...
Click to expand...
What part of :

"molten steel and concrete and all these things all fused by the heat into one single element"

don't you understand?


ETA: He did elaborate when he said:
"I think it must have fallen far enough away from the internal fires within the center of the towers that it was not melted."
 
Last edited:
GStan said:
You've "purely denied" literally 1,000s of pages of scientific documents, hundreds of experts, hundreds of witness testimonies, hundreds of thousands of investigative man hours.
Click to expand...
No. I'm just pointing out that there was molten steel in the "meteorite" and elsewhere in the debris piles.
 
Sunstealer said:
And I think the moon is a big button. I don't need to point to it because Mr Spoon went there. Why should I believe you over Mr Spoon? How does Mr Spoon determine that Button Moon is actually a button and Mr Voorsanger determine that the "meteorite" once contained "molten" steel.
Click to expand...
He was there. He inspected the "meteorite" up close.

His comment about the antenna section not melting because it fell far enough from the center of trade towers clearly shows that he knew the temperatures in the debris pile were hot enough to melt steel.

You guys just can't deal with this reality so you try to double talk around it.

"molten steel and concrete and all these things all fused by the heat into one single element"

Deal with it. Stop denying it.
 
bje said:
Voorsanger is an architect, not a government scientist. Give us the name of government scientist(s) who you claim said the "meteorite" was "molten."
Click to expand...
Man, this thread is sad. I was also "there," and I say there's no evident molten metal. I also say it would do nothing to support conspiracist claims if there were molten metal.

Just another nonsensical red herring pursued with pathetic desperation by people who are utterly bereft of evidence to support their claims. This is it, "truth" movement? This is your best stuff?
 
Christopher7 said:
He was there. He inspected the "meteorite" up close.

His comment about the antenna section not melting because it fell far enough from the center of trade towers clearly shows that he knew the temperatures in the debris pile were hot enough to melt steel.

You guys just can't deal with this reality so you try to double talk around it.

"molten steel and concrete and all these things all fused by the heat into one single element"

Deal with it. Stop denying it.
Click to expand...

Until their findings can be verified independently, they are NOT considered science fact.

Right?

Christopher7 said:
Until their findings can be verified independently, they are NOT considered science fact.
Click to expand...
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4291069#post4291069


"Take my word for it" does not cut it in science.

Right?

Christopher7 said:
Take my word for it does not cut it in science.
Click to expand...
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4291069#post4291069
 
Last edited:
Christopher7 said:
"molten steel and concrete and all these things all fused by the heat into one single element"

Deal with it. Stop denying it.
Click to expand...

Which element? Concretium?

If you chose to take the "molten steel" at face value why ignore the "single element" part?
 
molten steel

Did anybody ever wonder if the molten steel in the rubble pile was burning all the other stuff or if all the other stuff was making the molten steel ?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom