Split Thread The Towers should not hve collapsed (split from Gravysites)

[stateofgrace]

wait

For what? Christmas?

Or for you to actually do something about your ground breaking evidence and theories?

There you are getting all upset on an internet forum when in your very hands you hold the key to unravelling the most elaborate mass murder plot in history. So why are you here? Why do you dwell here, wasting your time on this forum, the world awaits you, go for it tiger, lets see you take the bull by the horns and present all your evidence to the authorities.

Will you do that?



If not why not?

 

[T.A.M.]

ummm....they explained that in the quote I gave you. Are you saying they are wrong? prove it. Prove that contaminants (and adding a few wood chips like Jonesy did is not sufficient) cannot make molten aluminum alloy look this way.

Beyond that, as I have said before, you have a video that is of poor quality, which may not be color corrected or gamma corrected. This alone could make the video unusable for analysis.

So in the end you do not have evidence of thermite. Unless you can prove all other causes impossible, such as the aluminum alloy plus contaminants theory, and unless you can prove that the video was color and gamma correct.

TAM

 

[Dabljuh]

So in the end you do not have evidence of thermite. Unless you can prove all other causes impossible, such as the aluminum alloy plus contaminants theory,

Done. What now?

and unless you can prove that the video was color and gamma correct.

NIST figured they were good enough and so do I. If you edit the video and play around with the color correction and come up with a surprising revelation (has to be better than "It's actually a green liquid and the world trade center is in reality pink") please go ahead and post it.

 

[Bananaman]

Dub:

Also, seriously. Aluminium with dirt in it, bright like that? And how would it have gotten 1000°C hot if not even the windows were blown out due to the heat? Furthermore, as they say, the Aluminum alloys melt between 500 and 700°C - why would they sit around, liquid, and wait until they got 1000°C hot until they decided to jump out of the windows? Bovine Scatology.

Oh God, you're serious aren't you.

Have a guess at what you're looking at other than any idea beginning with the letters 'ther'.

Here's a clue for you: read back through the thread, and try not to cry at your own posts.

Bananaman (In despair).

 

[T.A.M.]

Done. What now? NIST figured they were good enough and so do I. If you edit the video and play around with the color correction and come up with a surprising revelation (has to be better than "It's actually a green liquid and the world trade center is in reality pink") please go ahead and post it.

excuse me? Where did you PROVE, that the material dripping in that video COULD NOT HAVE BEEN Aluminum plus contaminants. I saw no proof. So NOT DONE.

So is it your opinion that Aluminum plus large amounts of Organic Solids will not appear to glow orange to yellow when at certain temperatures?

TAM

 

[SDC]

Well, to follow up. Indeed, my point was that eyeballing photos and video of highly variable quality, from many different sources, is no way to run a railroad.

The eye is a liar. So is the ear. We did not evolve like Superman with all those supervision and superhearing abilities. Except, perhaps, Dabljuh did. And Truthers in general seem to claim great sensory powers. Say, you don't think... Are they all from Krypton?

 

[T.A.M.]

Here, even a nutbar like Woods can make a decent argument that the metal seen in your video might very well be molten aluminum.

http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/aluminum/Aluminum_Glows.html

Pretty bad when a "no-planer" can shoot down your "Aluminum must be silver when molten" argument.

As for your argument that the temps didn't get high enough...malarkey. The temps were not uniform for each floor. There were pockets with higher temperatures than others. Certainly the window is gone from where the material drips out...isn't it? Who is to say whether or not just in that particular area, the temp did not exceed 1000 C? Got any proof it did not in that particular area??

TAM

 

[T.A.M.]

SO in the end, I am afraid, there are many other possibilites, more likely then planted thermite, that can explain what we see in that video. Your alleged "proof" that it could not be any of the other possibilities, is nothing more than speculation, conjecture, and more reliance on a poor quality video.

I'll take the word of a panel of highly qualified scientists who actually investigated the matter, over an internet poster with a youtube video.

TAM

 

[Dave_46]

Just let me point out there that oxidized aluminium is more commonly called clay

Here's a link
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/emissivity-coefficients-d_447.html

Aluminum Rough 0.07
Aluminum Commercial Sheet 0.09

So I'd guess molten aluminium is going to be in the ballpark of those values. From memory, it's 0.11

The thing about aluminium is not just that it has a very low emissivity compared to iron for example, but it also has a very high reflectivity - so in daylight conditions, up to high temperatures, the reflected light's color (silvery) will marginalize the light (read: color) emitted from incandescence.

1. Your link does not give the wavelength for the emissivity quoted. My reference (although I didn't state it at the time) was for a wavelength of 0.65µm.

Another table I found through your link at http://www.raytek.com/Raytek/en-r0/IREducation/EmissivityTableMetals.htm gives ranges for various wavelengths of 0.2-0.4 for oxidised aluminium, and 0.02-0.2 for unoxidised. I am unclear as to what use the unoxidised figures are, as aluminium oxidises quickly on exposure to air. (I realise that I gave unoxidised figures in my earlier post, I was doing that for completeness).

2. From your link there is a note at the head of the table

Note that the emissivity coefficients for some products varies with the temperature. As a guideline the emmisivities below are based on temperature 300 K.

We are not discussing temperatures of 300K, so the figures should be treated carefully. (Note, this applies to all the emissivities quoted for solid material).

3. You state

So I'd guess molten aluminium is going to be in the ballpark of those values. From memory, it's 0.11

Because of the information in point 2 above, I am not happy to "guess" the emissivity of molten aluminium.

4.

so in daylight conditions, up to high temperatures, the reflected light's color (silvery) will marginalize the light (read: color) emitted from incandescence.

I have stated before (I'm can't remember who to) that I have seen crucibles of molten aluminium that glow red.


Dave

 

[Dabljuh]

excuse me? Where did you PROVE, that the material dripping in that video COULD NOT HAVE BEEN Aluminum plus contaminants. I saw no proof. So NOT DONE.

Sparks indicative of iron rather than aluminium.

The fact that aluminium is liquid at 700°C and thus would have flown away long before magically heating itself to...

So is it your opinion that Aluminum plus large amounts of Organic Solids will not appear to glow orange to yellow when at certain temperatures?

Oh, like in the video? Yes it will, at above 2000°C. You're arguing 2000°C hot aluminium is in the video. Where did it come from? How did it get so hot? Please answer these questions. You may use pixies as part of the answer but I reserve the right to reject unsound hypothesises.

 

[Dabljuh]

I'll take the word of a panel of highly qualified scientists who actually investigated the matter, over an internet poster with a youtube video.

Oh yeah. Appeal to authority. "I'll believe anything a panel of qualified scientists tell me, even when it is demonstrated to me on an internet message board that their analysis is scientifically unsound"

That's really skeptic of you.

 

[T.A.M.]

Alternative explanations could all be dismissed.
- Aluminium would have to be far over 2300°C hot to be even nearly as bright, and even then, the color range observed does not corroborate this being aluminium at all.

Proof? Please prove with scientific REFERENCES, that Aluminum must be 2300C or greater to be AS BRIGHT as what we are witnessing (I am not going to take YOUR word for it). The color does match Aluminum at 1000-1200C, or any material at that temperature for that matter, that does not burn off.

- The temperatures in the WTC were not hot enough to heat the glass windows above 700°C where they blow, also, glass, depending on composition has a melting point in the range of 1500°C to 2300°C

The only part you get right here is the melting point of most glass. Like I said earlier, there were many pockets where the temperature may have exceeded 700 C.

- Lead (from lead-acid batteries which would have exploded above 100°C) liquifies in the 300°C range and would have run off long before reaching red-hot, much less yellow-hot temperatures
- The color range is not consistent with radioactive materials or fireflies

Most of this aspect I could care less about. However, one thing to note, in general, is that the molten material may have been held up from running out of the window by any form of obstruction, which may have suddenly given way, allowing the material, molten, to THEN flow out the window...just a thought.

- The most important piece of evidence is the temperature of the substance itself - with an appearance of over 1300°C merely when it enters the screen, the fire can't possibly be the source - In fact, the hot substance appears to light a fire in the corner. Without a temperature source in the immediate vicinity, it can be expected to come from the core, which means it must have started out at a vastly higher temperature and cooled significantly before it even enters the screen.

Oh noes, evidence! What are you going to do now!? Quick, ignore the evidence and stick with your preconceived notions just like every religious nut!

Your subjective estimate of the temp being in excess of 1300C once again, is subjective (yes your interpretation of the material color in the video and comparing it to a temperature color chart). Is it 1200, or 1150, or 1600, who knows. A slight alteration to the color (not enough to turn the WTC pink mind you), and who knows...

So as much as you may think you have PROVEN Thermite, you have proven nothing...sorry.

But it isn't us you have to convince, it is the authorities, right?

Oh wait, I forgot, truthers have now decided that it is JREFers that must be convinced. It is a few people posting on a skeptic forum that stands in the way of "true" justice for 9/11.

TAM

 

[Dabljuh]

I have stated before (I'm can't remember who to) that I have seen crucibles of molten aluminium that glow red.

Oh, Aluminium can certainly glow, it can get as bright as iron... just at different temperatures. And as it so happens, aluminum at a temperature where it melts... doesn't glow.

If you bring it above 2000°C it'll glow brighter than iron does at 1300°C though.

 

[T.A.M.]

Oh yeah. Appeal to authority. "I'll believe anything a panel of qualified scientists tell me, even when it is demonstrated to me on an internet message board that their analysis is scientifically unsound"

That's really skeptic of you.

No I am saying that their explanation makes sense, and you HAVE NOT PROVEN THEM WRONG, so therefore, I will continue to believe their explanation of things, as they are more qualified, and THEY ACTUALLY INVESTIGATED.

TAM

 

[T.A.M.]

4.

I have stated before (I'm can't remember who to) that I have seen crucibles of molten aluminium that glow red.


Dave

Though most of her work is unreliable, to say the least, the link I posted above to a page from Judy Woods site, actually has a number of photos showing just that...but don't tell Dabljuh.

TAM

 

[Dabljuh]

Well, to follow up. Indeed, my point was that eyeballing photos and video of highly variable quality, from many different sources, is no way to run a railroad.

The eye is a liar. So is the ear. We did not evolve like Superman with all those supervision and superhearing abilities. Except, perhaps, Dabljuh did. And Truthers in general seem to claim great sensory powers. Say, you don't think... Are they all from Krypton?

What would you guess is the temperature of the incandescent liquid and with what margin of error? What, in consequence, would you guess is its composition and why?

You don't seem to realize that, while we can't trust our eyes to convey us the absolute truth, no theory is worth even mentioning if it does not stand up to the tests of reality.

 

[Evilgiraffe]

Just let me point out there that oxidized aluminium is more commonly called clay

Much as I hate to interrupt this highly enlightening discussion on the emmisivity of materials. I have to point out that the above statement is flat out wrong.

Clays are not aluminium oxide, they are layered alumino-silicates.

Seriously Dabljuh, if you're going to lay on the sarcasm that thickly, you should at least get your facts straight.

[/derail]

Carry on chaps.

 

[SDC]

What would you guess is the temperature of the incandescent liquid and with what margin of error? What, in consequence, would you guess is its composition and why?

You don't seem to realize that, while we can't trust our eyes to convey us the absolute truth, no theory is worth even mentioning if it does not stand up to the tests of reality.

I wouldn't guess. I would go to some reliable source.

Your "reality" is unreal at best. Testing facts against your reality... Well, good luck in your bizarro world.

 

[Dabljuh]

I wouldn't guess. I would go to some reliable source.

But tests have to be repeatable to be scientific. That means, if you can't possibly guess, then by the same standards, no one else can.

And we can go down the slippery slope:

You can't guess the color of the sky because your eyes could be deceiving you. But you trust another to make that judgement?

Doesn't that ultimately mean, that you have no opinions on your own and simply parrot what others tell you the world is like?

Isn't that what organized religion is like?

 

[Dabljuh]

Clays are not aluminium oxide, they are layered alumino-silicates.

No, clay isn't layered nor is its main ingredient aluminosilicate. Feldspar is an aluminosilicate for example. Of course, naturally ocurring clay is not pure, but its effective ingredient, the thing that makes it clay, is Gamma-Al2O3, in its pure form also known as "white clay"