Molten Steel

[tsig]

Yes... that's exactly it... and a very good excuse for you not to come over and participate... I mean those of us over there do not have a problem with the discussion and the way it flows

Like liquid metal, always seeking the lowest place?

 

[Christopher7]

The dogs were threatened with loss of dogfood and cat chasing privileges so they turned their nose up at any explosive evidence.

It's so hard to find good help these days.

 

[SteveAustin]

HINT:

And all of your magical worries about thread directions disappear. Nobody can tell you you're off topic if you've made a thread about that very thing

And then to see related arguments (which may be "termed" "off-topic") you will then have to jump from thread to thread and never be able to see the big picture.

Compartmentalizing the discussion like that is great for the OCT but does not lend itself to a real open discussion.

BTW what I linked to is the BBC's "editor's blog", it is not a forum where you can start your own threads, but you can discuss the subject of the blog in the first place.

 

[Christopher7]

Well Chris the steel was solid before the collapse(it was still holding up the building) and you say it was liquid when it hit the ground. Sounds like "mid-air" to me.

Please point out where I said the molten steel "was liquid when it hit the ground".

I remember saying I don't know how or where they used thermite.

 

[GStan]

Please point out where I said the molten steel "was liquid when it hit the ground".

I remember saying I don't know how or where they used thermite.

Post 2942:

The steel was probably not melted in the debris piles. It was probably melted in the process of the collapse.

If it melted during the collapse process and not in the debris pile, wouldn't it have to have been liquid when it hit the ground? or hit the pile? or hit whatever stopped it from falling any further?

 

[R.Mackey]

Would bomb sniffing dogs smell thermite??

(I doubt it. Look for C7 to add that factoid to his list of strawmen.)

My source for the dogs is the book, Bomb Squad by Esposito & Gerstein
(The history of the NY Bomb Squad.)

While bomb-sniffing dogs are unlikely to detect thermite, since it's just rust and aluminum, it is highly likely they would detect the ignition systems.

Of course, no conspiracist has ever got as far as thinking about how this vast quantity of thermite was triggered, so obviously in their minds this doesn't exist....

This thread is closing in fast on Christophera territory.

 

[Christopher7]

Perhaps you could be SO KIND as to explain what the you actually intend to mean, instead of laughing up your sleeve at attempts to make any bloody sense of the words you use.

Well, here's what I said:

The steel was probably not melted in the debris piles. It was probably melted in the process of the collapse.

What part don't you understand?

 

[Christopher7]

While bomb-sniffing dogs are unlikely to detect thermite, since it's just rust and aluminum, it is highly likely they would detect the ignition systems.

Of course, no conspiracist has ever got as far as thinking about how this vast quantity of thermite was triggered, so obviously in their minds this doesn't exist....

Perhaps you missed the point we were discussing:

NIST did not test for explosives residue.
No one tested for explosives residue.

Where does it say the dogs tested the steel for explosives residue?

 

[lapman]

Please point out where I said the molten steel "was liquid when it hit the ground".

When you stated:

It was probably melted in the process of the collapse.

Where is your evidence to support this?

I remember saying I don't know how or where they used thermite.

Then you cannot state that termite is the only possibility. The fact that thermite melts steel is irrelevant until you can state how it was used. You have yet to provide any evidence that thermite could even create the quantities of molten metal/steel that was reported. Until you can do that, your "thermite melts steel" statement is nothing but a red herring.

 

[tsig]

Please point out where I said the molten steel "was liquid when it hit the ground".

I remember saying I don't know how or where they used thermite.

Molten steel is a liquid.

 

[Christopher7]

If it melted during the collapse process and not in the debris pile, wouldn't it have to have been liquid when it hit the ground? or hit the pile? or hit whatever stopped it from falling any further?

You missed this part:

Do you know of anything other than thermite which could have melted steel in the WTC debris piles?

The steel was probably not melted in the debris piles. It was probably melted in the process of the collapse.

So within a matter of seconds thousands of tons of steel liquefied in mid air?

I said nothing about "a matter of seconds" or "thousands of tons" or " steel liquefied in mid air".

His response didn't make any sense and your desire to clarify a meaningless interpretation of what I said doesn't make any sense either.
The original point is:

Thermite is the only explanation for the molten steel in the debris pile.

 

[lapman]

Thermite is the only explanation for the molten steel in the debris pile.

Due to the quantities involved and length of time the metal stayed molten, that statement is 100% false.

 

[boloboffin]

Originally Posted by boloboffin
You are ignoring the facts. Bomb-sniffing dogs means that explosives were tested for.

Source?

It's included in the definition bomb-sniffing dog.

You are conflating two different incidents. Before 9/11, more bomb-sniffing dogs had been added to the one already there. Those were taken away, but the one that was always there remained there.

Source?

The same original source you're using to claim that bomb-sniffing dogs were taken away from the tower. Find your source and you've found mine.

No devices or explosive residue was ever discovered.

How could they find something they did not look for?

They did. See definition of bomb-sniffing dog.

No one tested for explosives residue.

See definition of bomb-sniffing dog.

Stop lying about it!

I would have to start before I could stop.

ETA: So you are going to ignore the long post I made and keep on flying in the face of definitions and facts. Well, whatever melts your core structure...

 

[X]

You claim both "The steel was probably not melted in the debris piles. It was probably melted in the process of the collapse." and "Thermite is the only explanation for the molten steel in the debris pile."

So you are in fact claiming that the steel was melted immediatly before/during the collapse, and was motlen when on the ground.

Thus, tsig's question:

Well Chris the steel was solid before the collapse(it was still holding up the building) and you say it was liquid when it hit the ground. Sounds like "mid-air" to me.

Please point out where I said the molten steel "was liquid when it hit the ground".

I remember saying I don't know how or where they used thermite.

Deserves a better response.

You may not have stated outright that molten steel hit the ground, but you implied it. Really, the other explanation (from your posts) is that the steel in the building was melted using thermite to cause the collapse, then solidified, and then metled again using thermite when on the debris pile.


And, as tsig mentioned, molten steel is liquid, by definition.

 

[Christopher7]

When you stated:
"It was probably melted in the process of the collapse."

Where is your evidence to support this?

What part of "probably" don't you understand?

Then you cannot state that termite is the only possibility.

Why not?

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

The fact that thermite melts steel is irrelevant until you can state how it was used.

Wrong!
That is a denial tactic. You are asking for the impossible in a vain attempt to ignore the fact that thermite is the only known possibility for the molten steel.

Name another source or stop denying it was thermite.

 

[ravdin]

Thermite is the only explanation for the molten steel in the debris pile.

You have previously admitted that you don't understand the properties of the material that was used in the alleged CD. Somehow, it's able to maintain steel buried underground at a very high temperature but it also is extremely lightweight, invisible, noiseless when it explodes, and undetectable to bomb sniffing dogs.

These military types really are at the cutting edge, aren't they? But since you're quite convinced that this stuff is the "only" explanation, it's for the best if we sweep the messy and inconvenient questions under the rug.

 

[Christopher7]

No one tested for explosives residue.

See definition of bomb-sniffing dog.

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

 

[lapman]

What part of "probably" don't you understand?

Irrelevant. Your statement backs up what was said. Dodge noted

Why not?

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.

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

Wrong!
That is a denial tactic. You are asking for the impossible in a vain attempt to ignore the fact that 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.

Name another source or stop denying it was thermite.

Dodge noted. 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 that occurred in the debris pile. You have yet to do that.

 

[Christopher7]

You have previously admitted that you don't understand the properties of the material that was used in the alleged CD.

I have said that thermite melts steel.

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

But since you're quite convinced that this stuff is the "only" explanation, it's for the best if we sweep the messy and inconvenient questions under the rug.

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.

 

[GStan]

What part of "probably" don't you understand?

Why not?

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


Wrong!
That is a denial tactic. You are asking for the impossible in a vain attempt to ignore the fact that thermite is the only known possibility for the molten steel.

Name another source or stop denying it was thermite.

There was no liquid steel.