What Melted Cars 7 Blocks Away From WTC

Right away I found this:

wtcdemolition.blogspot.com...

It goes into detail as to the missing steel. Hope this helps, and there is a lot more.

reply to post by jprophet420

Conspire to answer why the gas tanks on about half of those vehicles weren't burned out then.

So how many car fires you been too?

I've put out dozens - Guess what this aint Hollywood where every car explodes in giant fireball !

Unless the fuel tanks or lines are breached in some manner the vehicle will
burn, but not explode - most cars today are made mostly of plastic,
especially the interiors. Lot of flame/smoke

If the fuel tank is breached, only seen this happen a few times, fuel will run DOWNHILL. If this happens can ignite other vehicles

Most vehicles fires dont involve the gas tanks

Sorry to puncture your conspiracy fantasty.......

"Conspire to answer why the gas tanks on about half of those vehicles weren't burned out then."

"I've put out dozens - Guess what this aint Hollywood where every car explodes in giant fireball! Unless the fuel tanks or lines are breached in some manner the vehicle will burn, but not explode. Sorry to puncture your conspiracy fantasty......."

Sorry to puncture your delusional response, but where in the statement above does it state that these vehicles should have exploded, something which you mention, not once, but twice?

The point is, it is extremely unlikely that so many vehicles were struck with falling burning building debris, causing them to catch fire to just one section of the vehicle. Sorry, but fire isn't that selective, as you would like to deceive us to believe. But, you should know this, since you've put out so many car fires.

If there were so many pieces of burning building debris falling from the Towers setting numerous vehicles on fire, why weren't there a bunch of people out in the street running around on fire? Was this fire ridden debris so selective that it only targeted automobiles? From the photos I saw, once the towers collapsed, people down on the street were covered in dust and not on fire.

And from the videos of the collapse, I don't see any flames falling from the Towers, just dust and debris.

reply to post by thedman

Most vehicles fires dont involve the gas tanks

Sorry to puncture your conspiracy fantasty.......

You have not punctured anything, but give your opinion and opinions are not facts.

If the fuel tank is breached, only seen this happen a few times, fuel will run DOWNHILL. If this happens can ignite other vehicles

Who is making the claim that all of these cars were parked on a hill?

Since you feel opinions are facts, here’s mine, 911 was an inside job. Some of the vehicles that caught on firer and had melted engine blocks were probably because the “thematic dust” was still burning in the dust clouds as the WTC came down and ate through the engines blocks on many of the cars and trucks as many pictures shows.
I have seen many vehicles’ fires yet. I have never seen an engine completely melt from a normal car fire it’s not possible for fire to burn though steel and cast iron through a regular fire.





[edit on 21-6-2010 by impressme]

Originally posted by impressme

Since you feel opinions are facts, here’s mine, 911 was an inside job. Some of the vehicles that caught on firer and had melted engine blocks were probably because the “thematic dust” was still burning in the dust clouds as the WTC came down and ate through the engines blocks on many of the cars and trucks as many pictures shows.
I have seen many vehicles’ fires yet. I have never seen an engine completely melt from a normal car fire it’s not possible for firer to burn though steel and cast iron through a regular fire.

keep in mind that impress me was presented with sciences that support the OS on this thread. All sources were cited 6/8/2010:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Sources from the Journal of Engineering Mechanics, the Journal of Structural Engineering, the Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, the Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction, the American Society of Civil Engineers, the Civil Engineering staff at the most prestigious engineering university on the planet, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, as well as all the other universities Northwestern and Perdue.

Then a few days later 6/14/10. After noticing the sources of science that were presented. He says:

"the nonsense (OS) you are supporting has no credible sciences into support itself, nothing."

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Meaning that he honestly believes that the Journal of Engineering Mechanics, the Journal of Structural Engineering, the Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, the Practice Periodical on Structural Design and Construction, the American Society of Civil Engineers, the Civil Engineering staff at the most prestigious engineering university on the planet, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, as well as all the other universities Northwestern and Perdue are all NOT CREDIBLE!

Originally posted by TheComte
If it was so hot to melt tires that far away, I'm sure a lot of people would have been burned as well. I doubt that what ever happened at the towers had anything to do with these cars.

This. If it melted and warped cars from 7 blocks away, then you would probably have a hell of alot more deaths and other building damage severe enough to make note.

Thus, said cars were either likely taken from the WTC or proximity and photographed after.

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

Originally posted by TheComte
If it was so hot to melt tires that far away, I'm sure a lot of people would have been burned as well. I doubt that what ever happened at the towers had anything to do with these cars.

This. If it melted and warped cars from 7 blocks away, then you would probably have a hell of alot more deaths and other building damage severe enough to make note.

Thus, said cars were either likely taken from the WTC or proximity and photographed after.

I have shown quotes over and over again that prove without a doubt that there was NO intense heat at the scenes of exploding vehicles...people were stnding right next to them, and they just exploded, with parts flying off and injuring the witnesses.

There is NO SUCH thing as ' thermatic dust'...it is a figment of the imagination. Others have had the nerve to suggest that ' active dust' could melt engine blocks and such...it is the worst kind of fantasy...so desperate that is almost makes the reader feel sorry for whomever has to reach that far into silliness to come up with an answer.

There IS one phenomenon that fits ALL of the effects seen; EMP. EMP causes electrical arcing in metal while not affecting people. That is why cars were blowing up and catching fire for NO APPARENT reason, leaving the people bewildered.

If you cannot wrap your mind around EMP, you are always going to be wasting time hoping that ' dust' can somehow affect letal but not people..and you will always find ridicule from those who will not exliminate all the possibilities just because they mean some big things are rotten in Denmark!!

Forget dust...forget heat...forget where the vehicles were towed to..it doesnt matter where they were photographed...the CONDITION is what matters, and we KNOW that there were cars and trucks affected far from the zone of falling debris, so unless you will accept EMP, you are left floundering around in the most impossible excuses...not a great place to be in a debate.

Originally posted by richierich


I have shown quotes over and over again that prove without a doubt that there was NO intense heat at the scenes of exploding vehicles...people were stnding right next to them, and they just exploded, with parts flying off and injuring the witnesses.

There is NO SUCH thing as ' thermatic dust'...it is a figment of the imagination. Others have had the nerve to suggest that ' active dust' could melt engine blocks and such...it is the worst kind of fantasy...so desperate that is almost makes the reader feel sorry for whomever has to reach that far into silliness to come up with an answer.

There IS one phenomenon that fits ALL of the effects seen; EMP. EMP causes electrical arcing in metal while not affecting people. That is why cars were blowing up and catching fire for NO APPARENT reason, leaving the people bewildered.

If you cannot wrap your mind around EMP, you are always going to be wasting time hoping that ' dust' can somehow affect letal but not people..and you will always find ridicule from those who will not exliminate all the possibilities just because they mean some big things are rotten in Denmark!!

Forget dust...forget heat...forget where the vehicles were towed to..it doesnt matter where they were photographed...the CONDITION is what matters, and we KNOW that there were cars and trucks affected far from the zone of falling debris, so unless you will accept EMP, you are left floundering around in the most impossible excuses...not a great place to be in a debate.

Um...set that pipe down for a moment and think about what you just posted.

An electromagnetic pulse did that to cars.....without causing SERIOUS damage to people, neighboring cars, metal objects, buildings, ect....it selectively decided to destroy cars? And somehow, said pulse did not completely wipe out all electronic equipment such as radios, cameras, ect?

I don't even think this is a debate, because you seem to be occupying a totally different universe than to the one the rest of us occupy.

Do you really expect us to believe that falling debris from an oxygen starved fire burned the paint, the grills, the cast iron engine blocks, etc. from all these vehicles? I know you debunkers are accustomed to selling rubbish to morons, but let's get real.

According to the paramedic witness, the vehicles began catching fire when one of the Towers was collapsing. By this time, the fire in the Tower had died down (recall photo of victims standing at impact points in Towers?) and was in no way hot enough to burn the bodies of these vehicles to a crisp. The odds of debris which was on fire falling from the towers and causing this devastation are astronomical.

Many auto body shops employ ovens which bake the paint onto the vehicle's metal. Even these ovens, which are extremely hot, do not burn the paint off. And you're giving us some garbage about some random debris falling from an oxygen starved fire being hot enough to burn the paint, the grill, the light assemblies, the cast iron engine blocks off vehicles? Yeah, sure!

Here's an experiment which you can try with a blow torch. Go to your local automotive junk yard and try and burn the paint off one of the wrecked vehicles with the blow torch. See how long it will take you to burn the paint off an entire section of the vehicle. Also, see if you can set fire to the metal. My guess is you'll be there a pretty long time making yourself look like a fool.

And this is a blow torch we're talking about, which has a temperature of 2000F+, which is a heck of a lot hotter than those oxygen starved fires in the towers. It never ceases to amaze me the amount of fertilizer which keeps getting shoveled around, with idiots aimlessly believing and not bothering to question the nonsense.

The cars were really made of wax is why they melted from that far of a distance, they were put there for the purpose of melting them so it would cause more conspiracies. The more you can make conspiracy theorists question each other, fight, and see things they arent there, then the more paranoid schizophrenic you can make them look so media can point and laugh.

trust me it was wax.. not only normal wax it was special wax only government uses you know like that special government thermite!


beware the wax...

keep eyes on saudi backed candle companies....

reply to post by SphinxMontreal

I have to agree with you on the oxygen-starved fire and yes, you are right about that woman standing in the impact hole without a scratch.
I feel the only thing that makes sense would be something to do with Thermite and Thermate. I remember Steven Jones saying we are dealing with “military science,” this is not normal nano Thermate, or nano Thermite he said this was Super nano Thermite and Super nano Thermate.
A study needs to be done on nano thermite to see what are the effects in the dust after being used in an explosion, and nearby metal objects. This would help us understand if this is possible to melt car engine blocks.

I do recall the steel under the WTC rubble continued to burn for several months at such a hot temperatures that it created pools of melted steel and iron. The only thing that could scientifically do that would be a super nano thermite and Thermate.



[edit on 22-6-2010 by impressme]

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by jprophet420

 

Conspire to answer why the gas tanks on about half of those vehicles weren't burned out then.

So how many car fires you been too?

I've put out dozens - Guess what this aint Hollywood where every car explodes in giant fireball !

Unless the fuel tanks or lines are breached in some manner the vehicle will
burn, but not explode - most cars today are made mostly of plastic,
especially the interiors. Lot of flame/smoke

If the fuel tank is breached, only seen this happen a few times, fuel will run DOWNHILL. If this happens can ignite other vehicles

Most vehicles fires dont involve the gas tanks

Sorry to puncture your conspiracy fantasty.......

Once a vehicle is set on fire it will ignite adjacent vehicles (called extension in firespeak) until runs outs of fuel

reply to post by Cito

I expect a little more out of an eve player.

Originally posted by jprophet420
reply to post by Cito

 

I expect a little more out of an eve player.

seriously?

the place where grief, scams, dev corruption, metagaming, lying, stealing, cheating is king?




but yea dude wax

hehe

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

And somehow, said pulse did not completely wipe out all electronic equipment such as radios, cameras, ect?

Don't expect ananswer.

I raised this same question and got ignored.

Well, what did I expect?

Confronting this obvious problem with the theory would require the poster to confront his cognitive dissonance.

Can't have that now.....

Originally posted by Joey Canoli

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

And somehow, said pulse did not completely wipe out all electronic equipment such as radios, cameras, ect?

Don't expect ananswer.

I raised this same question and got ignored.

Well, what did I expect?

Confronting this obvious problem with the theory would require the poster to confront his cognitive dissonance.

Can't have that now.....

Well Joey we don't often agree, but I have never heard of an emp that doesn't emit electromagnetic pulses. I am pretty sure thats what E M P stands for. If it does it will Bork all the electronics in there area. A star for you.

Originally posted by Joey Canoli


Don't expect ananswer.

I raised this same question and got ignored.

Well, what did I expect?

Confronting this obvious problem with the theory would require the poster to confront his cognitive dissonance.

Can't have that now.....

Don't worry, I wasn't expecting an answer. At least, not a rational one.

But still the question remains for those who believe in "space beams" or whatever: how an electromagnetic pulse can supposedly flatten three very tall buildings, yet leave surounding structures standing, then cause cars far away to explode or melt, without wiping out every phone, radio, camera, or electronic device in Manhatten. Not to mention the number of immediate casualties that an EMP of that strength would cause.
And not be detected.

Riddle me that, Batman.

I spend quite a bit of time reading transcripts from the first responders and firemen, people who were right there and are familiar with fires and such.

You can find proof positive of EMP in virtually all oral histories, in great detail. Here is a quote from ROBERT RUIZ, in which he relates his observations. I recommend reading the entire thing:


graphics8.nytimes.com...


" A. I tried to call -- I ended up -- oh,
this is so funny. I had a cell phone in my
pocket. After we came back from Bellevue, I said
let me try to call home. The cell phones weren't
working. Everything was completely -- I'm
telling you, it was completely shut down.
After maybe an hour or two, I got a
signal, so I ended up calling. "

Some people claim falsely that there was no evidence of EMP symptoms , and ignore all the testimonies. There was system wide failures of the telephone, cell and radio networks beginning with the explosions in the lower levels of each Tower at the approximate time of the plane strikes, and again when the Towers were being pulverized shortly thereafter.

There is MUCH more: "Like things weren't bad enough already,
the car that's parked right on that corner
catches on fire. I don't mean a little fire, the
entire thing. Don't ask me how. The entire car
caught on fire. You would think maybe just a
motor part or just the engine part. But this
entire car just goes up in fire."

There were many reports of cars and trucks exploding and catching fire with people right next to them...NO falling debris ( not that falling debris could melt engine blocks while leaving the rear end pristine!_) no tremendous heat...nothing. Nothing that is but EMP bursts, which is the ONLY explanation that makes sense.

Here are more testimonial by various NY officials:

wtcdemolition.blogspot.com...

Another firefighter who thought the WTC destruction was nuclear is NYFD Lt Richard Smiouskas, whose statement is here. He was an official NYFD photographer, and has some startling testimony, regarding other matters, as well. It appears that with his telefoto lens, he witnessed people being pushed out of tower one. He said:

"...I was photographing the fire from the roof. I had a long lens on the camera, and I had people in the windows. It looked like they were being -- they weren't actually jumping. One or two people I saw, they seemed like they were being forced out by the people behind them. There was half a dozen faces. In between the smoke you could see people..." (snip) "I guess they were all trying to get air, and this guy was actually standing in the window, standing in the frame with each hand on each frame and he kind of like got nudged out."
In the second sentence, it looks like he just stopped himself from saying “pushed”. The last incident may even indicate the NON-jumper was trying to keep himself from being pushed out!

"Lt. Smiouskas believed that a nuclear bomb went off, due to the magnitude of Earth shaking that he felt. As a tower is being destroyed he recalls:
"It looked like an earthquake. The ground was shaking. I fell to the floor. My camera bag opened up. The cameras went skidding across the floor…I'm thinking maybe a bomb blew up. I'm thinking it could have been a nuclear….”
Then he writes of seeing “glitter” through the black smoke, during tower destruction.
“Everybody started running north, and this huge volume like ten stories high billowing, pushing black smoke and like a glitter. I guess it was glass that was glitter that was in the cloud of smoke.”
I do not believe this “glitter” was glass in the black smoke. Perhaps it is more likely that gamma rays from nuclear explosions which could readily traverse the black smoke, impinged on his retina. This is like the atronauts in earth orbit seeing (retinal) flashes from cosmic rays when they tried to go to a higher earth orbit, and like medical x-rays that go through you and onto a photographic plate. "

There are many more people listed and what they say proves beyond any doubt that ONLY an EMP can answer the hard questions and explain the ' anomalies ' that the perps are so deathly afraid of. Anomalies are facts that are not properly recognized foir what they are, usually for reasons that have nothing to do with science or fact.

There really is NO OTHER logical or even remotely close excuse for the exploding cars and trucks and electric grid failure along with radio and cell...as well as lights bursting and localized waves of heat not attributable to any other sorce.

The perps are caught; their method has been exposed. Now it is up to the People to get the word out and see if it really is too late to save America. We are under the control of a cabal that committed murder, mass murder, treason and so many other counts that it staggers the mind to contemplate an indictment....it would surely run thousands of pages.

I have never heard ANY explanation other than EMP that makes sense...' active dust' falls far short, don't you think?

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

Originally posted by Joey Canoli


Don't expect ananswer.

I raised this same question and got ignored.

Well, what did I expect?

Confronting this obvious problem with the theory would require the poster to confront his cognitive dissonance.

Can't have that now.....

Don't worry, I wasn't expecting an answer. At least, not a rational one.

But still the question remains for those who believe in "space beams" or whatever: how an electromagnetic pulse can supposedly flatten three very tall buildings, yet leave surounding structures standing, then cause cars far away to explode or melt, without wiping out every phone, radio, camera, or electronic device in Manhatten. Not to mention the number of immediate casualties that an EMP of that strength would cause.
And not be detected.

Riddle me that, Batman.

You are mistaking the EMP for the blast source. Let me explain: When a nuke is exploded, s small fission device or whatever they have in our military or contractor arsenal, the blst of tremendous heat it creates as well as its blast ability does the main damage to structures.

EMP is the RESULT of the blast. When the nuke goes off, it produces gamma rays, which go out and are deflected by objects and radiate outward. Here is a good article that tells you a lot:

www.saunalahti.fi...

EMP is a byproduct of a nuke blast. it can be used also as a weapon all on its own, with terrible results. A nuke blasted over a nation would cripple all electric and communications for a long time. In NY it only lasted a few hours.

Here is PROOF that EMP is the ONLY logical way to explain it all:

wtcdemolition.blogspot.com...

If you can read all the above and still reject the EMP scenario, please tell us why. Tell us what OTHER source of energy could do all these things?

You still haven't answered the question.

If you know anything about EMPs, you would know that an EMP blast that supposedly can disintigrate 3 gigantic buildings would have knocked out every piece of electronic equipment around. Yet we know this did not happen, as TV cameras were still filming the collapse without interruption. Emergency radios were still operating, though with some problems, which is to be expected when you have a monster ash cloud filling the air, providing interference.

Furthermore, I don;'t quite get what Robert Ruiz's testimony or your blog link have to do with providing proof for EMP. I see nothing of the sort. What specifically is your evidence?

A. I tried to call -- I ended up -- oh, this is so funny. I had a cell phone in my pocket. After we came back from Bellevue, I said let me try to call home. The cell phones weren't working. Everything was completely -- I'm telling you, it was completely shut down. After maybe an hour or two, I got a signal, so I ended up calling. It just so happens that I hadn't charged my phone. So I was on low cells. So I called my girlfriend. She picked up the phone and she said, "How are you?"

Hmmm...you think the fact that he hadn't charged his cell might explain his earlier problems getting through?

Some people had problems on their cell phone networks that day. There are many mundane explainations. Like, circuits incredibly busy as everyone and their hamster were frantically calling loved ones and friends to see if they were ok, or knew what happened. Hell, I was in Seattle at the time, 3500 miles away from NYC, and I couldn't call local or to California for ages. The networks were overloaded.

There is also the fact that lower Manhatten was covered in a cloud of dust, which certainly would screw with radio and cell reception.

And of course, there is the very sad, tragic final call from Kevin Costgrove.



An EMP burst would have knocked his phone out before the rumbling and his last terrified words.

So far, everything you present as "evidence" is less than convincing. It makes absolutely no sense when used in this context.