Molten Steel

[funk de fino]

I respectfully disagree. All the photos where the aluminum glows red are in dark rooms.

That is a lie, I suggest you go and look at the pictures so kindly supplied by the poster.

 

[Senenmut]

All of the demonstrations you cite show essentially pure aluminum.

Who says that what came out of the tower was pure aluminum? It wasn't. It was a ground-up 757 with all the metals and organics and inorganics that were on board. Add to that all the material in the office, much of it aluminum alloy, none of it pure aluminum. The colors and melting points of impure aluminum differ from pure aluminum.

There is lots of logic and evidence that makes the case that this is aluminum (and maybe lead.)

There is no case for it being steel unless you postulate some magic sauce for which there is no evidence the public can consider. There is no known magic sauce works in a way that fits the eyewitness accounts of 9/11.

In any case, what does this have to do with how and why three towers collapsed?

can your aluminum and the temp your talking about + organics do this: notice when mr chaistain describes high temps, he also talks about structural members deforming.

mr chaistain's assumption might be correct-
http://www.debunking911.com/moltensteel.htm
"If the approximate melting temperature of steel is 2750 F the the material would be plastic at 1650 F. Even assuming a safety factor of 3, you would expect the bolts or other structural members to deform and fail near this temperature, especially with the additional weight if a jet air liner."

dr asl-
"To support his theory, he cites the way the steel has been bent at several connection points that once joined the floors to the vertical columns. If the internal supporting columns had collapsed upon impact, he says, the connection points would show cracks, because the damage would have been done while the steel was cold. Instead, he describes the connections as being smoothly warped: "If you remember the Salvador Dalí paintings with the clocks that are kind of melted -- it's kind of like that. That could only happen if you get steel yellow hot or white hot -- perhaps around 2,000 degrees."

dr asl is describing the steel that had been deformed first and contributed to the collapse. could your aluminum do that to that steel or did something else do it?

and remember he also saw melted girders.

 

[Jono]

Thank you for your straightforward, informative post.

I respectfully disagree. All the photos where the aluminum glows red are in dark rooms.
It has been demonstrated that aluminum is silver in daylight at 660C when other metals glow red at that temperature.
To demonstrate the color of aluminum at 1000C in direct sunlight, you need to produce a photo taken in direct full sunlight like the actual conditions on 9/11.

Yes the typical argument used against glaringly obvious photographic evidence of red and yellow aluminum in many variants. Not all were in dark rooms and besides this variable matters only slightly to the surface reflections of light bouncing off from the molten aluminum, it doesn't change the colour itself.
As I've already told you, I do not want to hear your repeated rejection that had there been more light on the aluminum it would'n't have had these colours, that's a general myth because while light increases the reflection and makes aluminum glow less dark and reflect light on its surface, like the hood of a blue car just waxed giving off blinding light yet still obviously of blue colour, it doesn't magically transform the obvious red and yellow glow into pure silver glow in any case scenario.

While the above pictures suffice more than well, here's another picture of molten aluminum being poured. It's a bit small but you can clearly see to the left snippet that it's not silvery AND broad daylight is beaming into the factory from the entire back wall.

Mr Brown, you do not get red glowing aluminum like in the above pictures to look all silvery just by turning on a bright light bulb or letting daylight hit the molt. Furthermore, the second picture in my previous post was taken outdoors and the melt is obviously not silver.
Are you going to retort with, well it was probably a cloudy day and that's the reason why aluminum looked reddish and not pure silvery colour? I mean come one?!

At 660C pure aluminum looks silvery, but at 1,000 degrees it does not, simple as.

The only actual tests I have seen clearly show that organic materials do not mix with molten aluminum because they burn up [carbonize] immediately.

Before claiming that aluminum can mix with anything you must site a verifiable case where this has been done.

Hogwash. I've already done that.

However, here's another paper of relevance; "Method for manufacturing clad components".

It includes the binding between components to be comprised partially by carbon particles:

"A binder, preferably organic, such as rosin, gum, glue, dextrin, acrylic, cellulose, phenolic or polyurethane, is applied to a portion of the preliminary cladding workpiece 1 ( FIG. 1 ) evenly or in a certain pattern. As an alternative embodiment, the binder is blended with additives. These additives may consist of metal and/or carbon particles in the size range from 0.1-500 □m, preferably 25-147 □m, in the binder and additive ratio up to 1:10, preferably either 50:1 to 10:1 or 1:1 to 1:6."

If these components would burn up when blended with the molten aluminum poured into the mold, they would be patently useless. They mix and bind.

If aluminum and organic materials can't mix then how can one extract aluminum from aluminum-organic matter? Or better, yet, how can the latter even exist? How could aluminum-organic chemicals exist??
*Extraction of Aluminum from Aluminum-Organic Matter in Relation to Titratable Acidity

I recommend you read the book "The Enviromental Chemistry of Aluminum", especially chapter 5 which is entitled; 'Enviromental Chemistry of Aluminum-Organic Complexes', and particulary the sub-section of 'Organic Bound Forms of Aluminum in Soil Solutions'.
If you'd prefer something a bit more advanced, I suggest you read; "Applied Organometallic Chemistry" Volume 17 Issue 5, Pages 268 - 276, article; "Materials, Nanoscience and Catalysis: Characterization of aluminum-organic-stabilized platinum-colloid networks with electron and photon spectroscopies".

But wait a minute, organometallic chemistry? Isn't that impossible?

Btw, as a test of your preferred scenario, what on earth stopped all of the aluminum alloys from becoming molten and pouring out while the steel was allegedly liquified and was pouring out??

Page does not load.

I just clicked it, it loads perfectly for me.

Instead of telling me to go to Hellen Hunt for it, Quote the information and give the reference URL.

I've done so but I also requested you, since you doubted my personal experience on this subject, to inquiry with experts and engineers and foundries who also does this for a living. So, instead of me emailing them to be confirmed about what I already know, why not ask the proverbial horse's mouth yourself if you are so doubtful and clueless about this matter? Why not do just that? Do you not care enough to validate it for yourself?

None of these metals were in concintrations. They were mixed in with thousands of tons of debris.

Yes, about 10% or so of the debris would be steel, but with a lot of chemicals and metal components dispersed throughout the piles, especially aluminum and especially from the hot-spots underneath the three buildings, ergo you can't by a look determine the componental nature of any melted material like so.

Again, for the hundreth time, as has been clairified, molten aluminum gets mighty red then yellow when it travels toward temps like 1800F, it has a real colour spectrum only varied by its alloyed nature (in any case aluminum does not remain silvery alone independant of its temperature reached after its melting point, unless it remains around its approximate melting temperature).

 

[BigAl]

can your aluminum and the temp your talking about + organics do this: notice when mr chaistain describes high temps, he also talks about structural members deforming.

mr chaistain's assumption might be correct-
http://www.debunking911.com/moltensteel.htm
"If the approximate melting temperature of steel is 2750 F the the material would be plastic at 1650 F. Even assuming a safety factor of 3, you would expect the bolts or other structural members to deform and fail near this temperature, especially with the additional weight if a jet air liner."

dr asl-
"To support his theory, he cites the way the steel has been bent at several connection points that once joined the floors to the vertical columns. If the internal supporting columns had collapsed upon impact, he says, the connection points would show cracks, because the damage would have been done while the steel was cold. Instead, he describes the connections as being smoothly warped: "If you remember the Salvador Dalí paintings with the clocks that are kind of melted -- it's kind of like that. That could only happen if you get steel yellow hot or white hot -- perhaps around 2,000 degrees."

dr asl is describing the steel that had been deformed first and contributed to the collapse. could your aluminum do that to that steel or did something else do it?
and remember he also saw melted girders.

Steel girders deforming at the temps of molten aluminum and under stress is to be expected. So what?

"molten" and "melted" are much abused words. If someone that knows better used the words to describe beams bent at elevated temps, so what? That's sloppy English, not evidence for any magic sauce.

 

[twinstead]

Uh oh, Chris. Somebody else who appears to know what the hell he is talking about. Whatever shall you do?

 

[Jono]

Steel girders deforming at the temps of molten aluminum and under stress is to be expected. So what?

"molten" and "melted" are much abused words. If someone that knows better used the words to describe beams bent at elevated temps, so what? That's sloppy English, not evidence for any magic sauce.

Yes they are oft misused and easily misunderstood. For example, a steel bar starts to gain the qualities similat to a cookie-dough like substances, in a sense it is melting but it is not molten into a liquid. Usually people just paste their idea of molten ice, which goes from solid to liquid rather quickly and visibly, unto the more complext and longated process of steel (or metals of other sorts) turning less solid and more licorice'like until it reaches liquid state.

 

[R.Mackey]

dr asl is describing the steel that had been deformed first and contributed to the collapse. could your aluminum do that to that steel or did something else do it?

and remember he also saw melted girders.

No.^TM
He has clarified himself in discussion with Ron Wieck and other people. His comments do not support actual melting of steel at any time. He does not believe that any steel melted. And as explained to you, personally, before, all the steel he was talking about was recovered and studied in the NIST Report. The "mysterious" bending is described in NCSTAR1-3. Its temperature was quite plausible in a normal fire.

Stop repeating this crap.

And by the way, it isn't "Dr. Asl." It's "Dr. Astaneh." For your information, -asl is an honorific suffix found, in particular, in Iranian culture. What you typed is like me saying "Doctor Mister." See his brief bio here.

I continue to be amazed at how spectactularly wrong you all can be, about everything. And the slenderness of straws you're willing to grasp at to maintain your ridiculous delusion.

 

[Sunstealer]

Uh oh, Chris. Somebody else who appears to know what the hell he is talking about. Whatever shall you do?

Do what he has already done and turn his nose up at another "anonymous internet expert".

The thing is it's quite easy to tell when people know their stuff. They write elegantly and concisely using correct terminology and make a point backed up with evidence. I'm a metallurgist, but it's been a very long time since I have seen casting of aluminium in the quantities that WhiteLion shows. He has far more experience of this environment than I do. As a professional I've always had the belief that talking to and listening to people who actually do the job and have years of experience makes problems easier to solve. You also gain the extra knowledge and earn a lot more respect (especially from the guys on the "shop floor" than if you breeze about with an air of superiority and an us and them approach).

It's annoying to post something that is perfectly accepted, known and studied only to have a truther rubbish it without understanding or counter evidence.

C7, Bill, senenmut et al - There is no shame in listening to someone who has vastly more experience than you or I and thereby learning from them.

 

[kookbreaker]

All of the demonstrations you cite show essentially pure aluminum.

Who says that what came out of the tower was pure aluminum? It wasn't. It was a ground-up 757 with all the metals and organics and inorganics that were on board. Add to that all the material in the office, much of it aluminum alloy, none of it pure aluminum. The colors and melting points of impure aluminum differ from pure aluminum.

There is lots of logic and evidence that makes the case that this is aluminum (and maybe lead.)

Why would there be pure aluminum in the 1st place? I may be remembering incorrectly, but isn't pure aluminum rather weak, structurally? I think most objects made with aluminum (like airplanes) are actually made with an aluminum alloy.

 

[JimBenArm]

So you are trying to deny that it's sherbert? After all the proof I posted?

Deniers!

 

[Sunstealer]

Why would there be pure aluminum in the 1st place? I may be remembering incorrectly, but isn't pure aluminum rather weak, structurally? I think most objects made with aluminum (like airplanes) are actually made with an aluminum alloy.

There will be number of different alloys, wrought and cast with differing temper designations

Most common to me are 2014, 2024, 2219, 6061, 7005, 7050, 7150, 7075 wrought. I think some 8000 series have been used for wing skins but iirc there were problems with those. A356, A357 cast. It's a bit of a nightmare because France, Germany, Britain the US use different specs but we all recognise the international designations like above.

Wiki page is pretty good and gives alloy compositions so you can see the additional elements.

 

[T.A.M.]

Well the likely sources of aluminum were (A) the WTC siding, and (B) The Aircraft. So if someone had the specs on the aluminum alloy used in both, it might be a start. However, given the huge unknown (amount of organic contamination), I am not sure how relevant the alloy type would be.

TAM

 

[progge]

He [Dr. Astaneh] has clarified himself in discussion with Ron Wieck and other people. His comments do not support actual melting of steel at any time. He does not believe that any steel melted.

The full quote from PBS reveals this already.

ABOLHASSAN ASTANEH: Here, it most likely reached about 1,000 to 1,500 degrees. And that is enough to collapse them, so they collapsed. So the word "melting" should not be used for girders, because there was no melting of girders. I saw melting of girders in World Trade Center.

SPENCER MICHELS: But they got soft, though, didn't they?

ABOLHASSAN ASTANEH: Yes. When steel gets to 1,000 degrees, it loses its strength.

After his claim "I saw melting of girders in World Trade Center" he wants to add something, starting with "but", listen to the audio of the interview. But the reporter butts in.

 

[Kent1]

Well the likely sources of aluminum were (A) the WTC siding, and (B) The Aircraft. So if someone had the specs on the aluminum alloy used in both, it might be a start. However, given the huge unknown (amount of organic contamination), I am not sure how relevant the alloy type would be.

TAM

Boeing 767 is formed from two aluminum alloys 2024 and 7075
Its also under
http://wtc.nist.gov/progress_report_june04/appendixh.pdf

http://www.unitedaluminum.com/aaa.php
http://www.aviationmetals.net/2024_aluminum.php
http://www.aviationmetals.net/7075_aluminum.php

I don't believe the alloy would change the emissivity much. However oxidization, glass, and lead will have a greater change.

 

[Christopher7]

All of the demonstrations you cite show essentially pure aluminum.

Who says that what came out of the tower was pure aluminum? It wasn't. It was a ground-up 757 with all the metals and organics and inorganics that were on board. Add to that all the material in the office, much of it aluminum alloy, none of it pure aluminum. The colors and melting points of impure aluminum differ from pure aluminum.

You have not been paying attention. Organics do not mix with molten aluminum. They carbonize on contact. This test by NIST confirms the tests done by Steven Jones.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQdkyaO56OY

Organics mixing with aluminum is a baseless theory. There is no scientific proof it can happen. The tests that have been done show that it does not happen.

There is no case for it being steel unless you postulate some magic sauce for which there is no evidence the public can consider. There is no known magic sauce works in a way that fits the eyewitness accounts of 9/11.

Now you are denying the existence of thermite and hand waving all the witness testimony.

In any case, what does this have to do with how and why three towers collapsed?

Your denial is complete.

 

[JimBenArm]

You have not been paying attention. Organics do not mix with molten aluminum. They carbonize on contact. This test by NIST confirms the tests done by Steven Jones.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SQdkyaO56OY

Organics mixing with aluminum is a baseless theory. There is no scientific proof it can happen. The tests that have been done show that it does not happen.

Now you are denying the existence of thermite and hand waving all the witness testimony.

Your denial is complete.

So, you're denying that it was sherbert, and hand-waving away all my conjecture?
Your denial is complete.

 

[Senenmut]

No.^TM
He has clarified himself in discussion with Ron Wieck and other people. His comments do not support actual melting of steel at any time. He does not believe that any steel melted. And as explained to you, personally, before, all the steel he was talking about was recovered and studied in the NIST Report. The "mysterious" bending is described in NCSTAR1-3. Its temperature was quite plausible in a normal fire.

Stop repeating this crap.

And by the way, it isn't "Dr. Asl." It's "Dr. Astaneh." For your information, -asl is an honorific suffix found, in particular, in Iranian culture. What you typed is like me saying "Doctor Mister." See his brief bio here.

I continue to be amazed at how spectactularly wrong you all can be, about everything. And the slenderness of straws you're willing to grasp at to maintain your ridiculous delusion.

give me a date and source for dr astaneh clarifying his position.

 

[Sunstealer]

You have not been paying attention. Organics do not mix with molten aluminum. They carbonize on contact.

Organics mixing with aluminum is a baseless theory. There is no scientific proof it can happen. The tests that have been done show that it does not happen.

You have been shown papers sourced by WhiteLion - why do you continue to lie when you have been shown evidence to the contrary?

I have shown you the solubility of many elements including C, 0, H in liquid Aluminium yet you think you know better. C7 - just spouting off without any evidence does not make something true. Liquid Aluminium is one of the most reactive metals, it will react with it's surrounding. Burnt materials will give off gases and some of this will dissolve in liquid aluminium. Show scientific papers to the contrary or your argument fails.

That video you attach is laughable. Where is the scientific experiment and the paper detailing the results? There isn't one, just someone claiming to heat up some aluminium. There's nothing to say what temperature that "mixture" got upto apart from the claim that it was aluminium and that it became liquid. I saw no analysis in that video of the control sample and the sample mixed with things we didn't see. Learn how science is done and then comeback and prove your claims. Hint: Youtube is not evidence.

 

[Gravy]

Mr Brown, you do not get red glowing aluminum like in the above pictures...

I think you're mistaking Christopher7 (Chris Sarns) for Christophera (Chris Brown). Easy mistake to make. Unfortunately, arguing with Sarns and trying to get him to admit his errors is like trying to get Chris Brown to admit that the BBC didn't make a documentary showing the WTC being constructed with 3-inch C-4-coated rebar on 4-foot centers.

Which raises the question yet again: at what point do you decide that arguing with Christopher7 is a fruitless endeavor? I see experienced people getting very frustrated with him, which seems to me to be irrational, like "doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result." I don't see his writing cited by truthers as being worth reading. I see no evidence that he influences anyone but the people responding to him here.

Is it best for all concerned to keep arguing with him for another few years?

 

[Kent1]

I think you're mistaking Christopher7 (Chris Sarns) for Christophera (Chris Brown). Easy mistake to make. Unfortunately, arguing with Sarns and trying to get him to admit his errors is like trying to get Chris Brown to admit that the BBC didn't make a documentary showing the WTC being constructed with 3-inch C-4-coated rebar on 4-foot centers.

That's one of the reasons why I won't speak to him directly anymore.
His posts are becoming more canned and robotic. Without any meaningful response.