The Serious 9/11 Arguments Compilation.

neutronflux We will never agree about the steel and when it was shipped to China. End of the day it does not matter if we agree or not on this. FEMA unknown to them in 2002, has let the cat out of the bag.

They were given a wide flange beam from WTC7 and it was melted. Skeptics can't then claim no melting of steel occurred. Unless you accusing FEMA of lying in their investigation. The truther movement was not even reality in 2002, so obviously FEMA was looking for a conventional explanation to explain the melting of the steel.

NIST messed up badly because they never talked about the steel melting and what caused that and what impact that would have. They claimed and you can deny this its in their own study steel beams on east side only experienced temp of 600c and dropped rapidly over 15 minutes. They really messed up claiming the steel beam at column 79 experienced a temp of 400c.

FEMA clearly states the WTC7 steel beam wide flange was hit by a high temp in range of 1000c and melted and they are saying it only melted because sulphar was introduced 1000c plus heat +sulphar where FEMA admits they have no idea where the sulphar came from.

You can't skip over this and go on to something else and pretend this doesn't matter. This what FEMA and NIST are claiming there no truther involvement in these claims.

I still amazed Skeptics are still debunking 9/11 demolitions. When a leading FEMA investigator Abolhassan Astaneh says this on video.




Melted girders are melted steel it cannot be anything else. When did office fire start melting steel? Should this not be researched by scientists?

a reply to: Jesushere

Not when you ignore that only 60,000 tons of the 3000,000 tons of WTC steel was sold to China. Not when you ignore the WTC site was treated as a crime scene. Not when you ignore there was no cut columns. Not when you ignore the WTC steel was taken to lay down yards for further examination, identification, sampling, and documenting before being recycled.

originally posted by: Jesushere
I still amazed Skeptics are still debunking 9/11 demolitions. When a leading FEMA investigator Abolhassan Astaneh says this on video.

Melted girders are melted steel it cannot be anything else. When did office fire start melting steel? Should this not be researched by scientists?

News flash intelligently dishonest person, the truth movement claims cut by thermite or explosives to achieve the witnessed collapse speeds.

How would you use melting charges floor to floor to achieve the rate of collapse witnessed at the WTC.

Or you again saying once collapse is initiated, gravity alone can achieve the witnessed rates of collapse.

NIST’s official stance is buckling from misaligned columns, buckling from loss of lateral support, and broken floor connections.

You using another sound bite with no context. Say it isn’t so.
The individual said “melted” as steel looses its strength at 1000 degrees and deforms under load. He never mentioned temperatures where steel turns to liquid. If the columns turned to liquid, there would be no structural steel to cut up at the WTC. And there where vertical columns and floor trues at the WTC. So what is the girders he is talking about?

Nice to pick on a guy that English is probably his second language.

Nice argument that is not factually true, not supported by any of the photographic / video record, WTC steel sampling, not supported by the truth movement in that there claim is cut columns, and using miss wording of a statement that has nothing to do with NIST’s findings.

a reply to: Jesushere

Again...

And you still need to address

And you still need to answer to this....

Now. Why would you post

Professor Harrit paper was peer-reviewed by the Physics Dept at BYU and accepted as scientifically sound.

Is that a total fabrication by you?

Or can you cite the source that would cause you to post Harrit and Jones’s active thermite paper was peer reviewed as a whole by the BYU physics department, and sanction by the BYU as scientifically sound?

Who in the BYU physics department had the credentials and background to peer over what is essentially a forensic chemistry problem concerning pyrotechnics?



Thermite (/ˈθɜːrmaɪt/)[1] is a pyrotechnic composition of metal powder, which serves as fuel, and metal oxide.
en.m.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: Jesushere

Out of the 60,000 ton of steel sold to China, do you have any evidence it was structural steel from WTC 1, 2 and 7? Or was it junk cars? Or was it steel from WTC 5 and 6?

originally posted by: neutronflux

originally posted by: Jesushere
I still amazed Skeptics are still debunking 9/11 demolitions. When a leading FEMA investigator Abolhassan Astaneh says this on video.

Melted girders are melted steel it cannot be anything else. When did office fire start melting steel? Should this not be researched by scientists?

News flash intelligently dishonest person, the truth movement claims cut by thermite or explosives to achieve the witnessed collapse speeds.

How would you use melting charges floor to floor to achieve the rate of collapse witnessed at the WTC.

Or you again saying once collapse is initiated, gravity alone can achieve the witnessed rates of collapse.

NIST’s official stance is buckling from misaligned columns, buckling from loss of lateral support, and broken floor connections.

You using another sound bite with no context. Say it isn’t so.
The individual said “melted” as steel looses its strength at 1000 degrees and deforms under load. He never mentioned temperatures where steel turns to liquid. If the columns turned to liquid, there would be no structural steel to cut up at the WTC. And there where vertical columns and floor trues at the WTC. So what is the girders he is talking about?

Nice to pick on a guy that English is probably his second language.

Nice argument that is not factually true, not supported by any of the photographic / video record, WTC steel sampling, not supported by the truth movement in that there claim is cut columns, and using miss wording of a statement that has

nothing to do with NIST’s findings.

For me, there only two options, as NIST theory about WTC7 collapse, does not hold up. What i believe happened was WTC7 was taken down deliberately, but in saying that both 9/11 camps potentially could have missed something critical in their analysis? The south face of building 7, for example, was obscured by smoke must of the day and there were no clear video or photographs taken of this side taken on 9/11. What was the level of damage internally on this side was their core columns and floors missing before the collapse?

Right now CD brought down WTC7. The building experienced freefall, the steel was melted by high temp oxidation and sulphur attack (this is evidence nano-thermite was used to cut the central core columns?) NIST fire temperatures in WTC7 are too low to have caused steel to melt and break off.

NIST model does not work and you still have failed to see why. Their own model features deformations on the corner walls on the North side, you see internal buckling occurring everywhere on the face of WTC7. What you have not accepted yet and you have the actual video of the north side collapse to prove this, the walls did not buckle inwards, the corners came straight down almost in a perfect vertical line. Then there is the added problem NIST removing shear studs, girder plates and fasteners to get their beam to expand 5.5 inches to the east. That expansion is not possible the seat plate is actually 12 inches wide not 11 it would have got caught moving laterally against the steel beam.

By just breaking the seat plate this may be enough to buckle columns and floors?. Nano-thermite igniting can break shear studs and fastener connections.

Skeptics overly use the words cut columns. Do you think the columns were still intact as one piece when WTC7 collapsed? How would you know what columns buckled or where destroyed by CD? I have not seen my photographs of the cleanup operation at WTC7. If I am incorrect and you have images I would like to see them?

FEMA investigator Abolhassan Astaneh is not mistaken what he said is supported by images and photographs. FEMA images show steel that was melted. Skeptics need to stop making excuses when the evidence is in front of their eyes the steel was melted.

These images are ignored even they show clear melting of WTC7 steel.

You can see the clear melting of the grains of the steel.


This image is very weird the materials have been turned into a molten volcanic rock


A box column does not look like rescue workers have touched it yet? Notice the hole at the side of the column. Something ripped through there and widened the hole out. That could have been caused by something placed inside that hole and when it went off the explosion blasted outwards?

a reply to: Jesushere

You need to address the below first to verify that you are engaging in intellectually honest debate.

Now. Why would you post

Professor Harrit paper was peer-reviewed by the Physics Dept at BYU and accepted as scientifically sound.

Is that a total fabrication by you?

Or can you cite the source that would cause you to post Harrit and Jones’s active thermite paper was peer reviewed as a whole by the BYU physics department, and sanction by the BYU as scientifically sound?

Who in the BYU physics department had the credentials and background to peer over what is essentially a forensic chemistry problem concerning pyrotechnics?

Thermite (/ˈθɜːrmaɪt/)[1] is a pyrotechnic composition of metal powder, which serves as fuel, and metal oxide.
en.m.wikipedia.org...

And maybe actually link to the sources of your posted pictures.

neutronflux

Quote Professor Jones.
Further, our paper was reviewed prior to publication by the Physics Dept. chair at BYU -- and he approved it for publication. His peer-review was NOT under the auspices of Bentham. (This peer-review was done because two of the authors are from this dept. at BYU... and Dr Farrer requested the review.)

I think debunkers will look for any way to criticize the Active Thermitic Material paper without actually dealing with doing experiments or papers themselves. Our results are based on an experiment, not on who published the results.

911blogger.com...-209987

The images were not on the website I was reviewing images from 9/11 through google.

neutronflux I saying the steel that was touched by fire was sent to China and other countries. Why was the steel damaged by planes not kept? Have you heard anyone say this is a steel beam hit by a plane? Steel members are coded it be easy to find the steel that was hit by the plane and was heated up. Keeping steel that was not near the fires it not going to show us anything.

originally posted by: Jesushere
The images were not on the website I was reviewing images from 9/11 through google.

So you cannot provide context, dates, or locations of the pictures? And you want people to comment on them? With no credit given to the source of the intellectual property?

I went through the images last night this is the image of the box column. Do you still want me to look for the other two links?

www.google.ie... wtc+tower&gs_l=img.3...43579.45544.0.46067.8.7.1.0.0.0.86.357.7.7.0....0...1c.1.64.img..0.1.86...35i39k1.0.HBSWr2_cS_I#imgrc=XjMOkNUtRoTCCM:

originally posted by: Jesushere
I went through the images last night this is the image of the box column. Do you still want me to look for the other two links?

www.google.ie... wtc+tower&gs_l=img.3...43579.45544.0.46067.8.7.1.0.0.0.86.357.7.7.0....0...1c.1.64.img..0.1.86...35i39k1.0.HBSWr2_cS_I#imgrc=XjMOkNUtRoTCCM:

Did not see the picture in the google link?

What are people to comment on if you provide no context? No source?

edit on 10-9-2018 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed

neutronflux You did not look hard enough I clicked on the image the source for image is this

skepticproject.com...

originally posted by: Jesushere
neutronflux You did not look hard enough I clicked on the image the source for image is this

skepticproject.com...

The picture with this text?

skepticproject.com...

For the sake of proper research and investigation, let's pursue the conspiracy theorists' hypothesis that there were more 30 foot sections after the collapse than any other length. If that is the case, why in the world would that happen? Perhaps we can look to the construction of the peripheral columns, as described in FEMA's report[74]:


The structural steel used in the exterior 14-inch by 14-inch columns that were spaced at 3 feet 4 inches on center around the entire periphery of each of the WTC towers was fabricated from various grades of high-strength steel [...] The cross-sectional shape of the columns can be seen in Figure B-1. These varied in length from 12 feet 6 inches to 38 feet, depending on the plate thickness and location.

So the columns were a maximum of 38 feet long in the first place. If they were to break at the point where one column met another, naturally they would have had a strong probability of being around 30 feet long. This does not require demolition to explain.

Is that a Skeptic site? Cannot find pictures of columns worked on by demolitions on a conspiracy site?

neutronflux Are you not happy the image was uploaded on a The Skeptic site? Problem is though they skipped past talking about damage on the side of the box column. The just talk about the column length and size and if broke or not.

You clearly see the side has been pushed out it expanded. I would not rule it out this is where they placed the nano-thermite or explosives?

originally posted by: Jesushere
neutronflux Are you not happy the image was uploaded on a The Skeptic site? Problem is though they skipped past talking about damage on the side of the box column. The just talk about the column length and size and if broke or not.

You clearly see the side has been pushed out it expanded. I would not rule it out this is where they placed the nano-thermite or explosives?

Like something was pulled through or off the column? Like a floor connection?

Funny you cannot find example of WTC steel worked on by demolitions? With no burns, cut ends, or the steel blown out vs pulled into the center?

originally posted by: Jesushere

You can see the clear melting of the grains of the steel.

This doesn't look like.




This.



So wich one is evidence of nano thermite.

a reply to: Jesushere

You

The building experienced freefall

The exterior facade fell at the acceleration of free fall in phase two of its collapse because the exterior columns offered negligible resistance.

The interior of WTC did not fall as a single unit as proven by the order items on the roof disappeared below the roof line.

The interior was a progressive collapse from east to west.

The facade did not began to fall until one of the WTC 7’s penthouse totally fell out sight below the roofline.

Once all of WTC 7’s interior columns buckled, then the facade then collapsed.

Thermite is used to weld metal in the field. It does not cause corrosions that would cause a building’s collapse in hours. If thermite causes catastrophic corrosions, it would be impractical to use as a welding agent.