Molten metal vs. Molten steel

Originally posted by Griff
I guess there's no point in talking with you then because you've already made up your mind. Even if we showed you a video of molten steel flowing, we wouldn't convince you by your own admission.

I hope you ment that "so far, you haven't been convinced". Not "you are not going to convince".

Why do you have a video of molten steel flowing in the debris of the WTC weeks after 9-11?

I have already changed my opinion on there being molten metal there. There has been nothing to change my mind about it being molten steel.

Originally posted by JIMC5499
Why do you have a video of molten steel flowing in the debris of the WTC weeks after 9-11?

I have already changed my opinion on there being molten metal there. There has been nothing to change my mind about it being molten steel.

Video of molten steel 6 weeks after the buildings were down. Listen to the fire chief.

www.youtube.com...

I also have some photos.

I have sent Freedom of Information requests to the following.

NSA
FBI
NTSB

I have e-mailed Tully Construction, 1 of the big construction companies at Ground zero and asked some questions about the molten steel but they stated they could not answer my questions due to 911 law suits.

[edit on 6-6-2007 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by JIMC5499

Why do you have a video of molten steel flowing in the debris of the WTC weeks after 9-11?

I don't. I would have definately posted it if I had. I was talking just if we did. hould have been more lear.

There has been nothing to change my mind about it being molten steel.

That's better. For a second I thought you had closed down. Since my keyboard is running out of batteries and this took about 15 minutes to type, I'm done for the day. Take care.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
I have e-mailed Tully Construction, 1 of the big construction companies at Ground zero and asked some questions about the molten steel but they stated they could not answer my questions due to 911 law suits.

[edit on 6-6-2007 by ULTIMA1]

Interesting. Thanks for the information. Let us know what comes of your questions. Thanks.

Originally posted by Griff
Interesting. Thanks for the information. Let us know what comes of your questions. Thanks.

I just sent the FOIA requests out. Will let you know what i get back.

Originally posted by Griff

Originally posted by JIMC5499
but you are not going to convince me that there were large pools of molten steel weeks after 9-11.

I guess there's no point in talking with you then because you've already made up your mind. Even if we showed you a video of molten steel flowing, we wouldn't convince you by your own admission.

I hope you ment that "so far, you haven't been convinced". Not "you are not going to convince".

I suspect he's got the same problem I do - without an external heat source at a temperature high enough to maintain the metal's molten state, it's not very likely that a pool of molten metal with no further heat input is still going to be molten weeks later, especially so when other metal is resting in it, such as the beams of which pictures are posted upthread.

The beams with their ends in the molten metal would rapidly conduct the heat away. But even without junk metal stuck into the pool doing that, it's still going to take some hellacious insulation to keep molten metal molten with no heat input for weeks.

I suspect that if you did the calculations, you'd find that it's not possible for any reasonably sized pool of metal.

Originally posted by Tom Bedlam
The beams with their ends in the molten metal would rapidly conduct the heat away. But even without junk metal stuck into the pool doing that, it's still going to take some hellacious insulation to keep molten metal molten with no heat input for weeks.

I can see there being no pools for weeks. They were still red hot for weeks though. I suspect that the witnesses to pools where early on in the disaster. The point of the thread though is that it was steel as quoted by Leslie Robinson. That being said, that amount of heat (to melt steel) should not have been present pre/post and during collapse. That was the point of the thread.

But, I agree that the pools were probably not present for weeks but just by going on what the guy in the video said, they were red hot for weeks. And that definately WAS steel they were talking about. Thing is though, I would have liked to see them pull stuff out. Is there a longer version anywhere. I have suspect when they cut the video right at the time when they are about to pull the steel out. I hope it was just an oversight and not propaganda editing.

JIMC, is it so hard to convince you it was steel because you know that it couldn't have been steel, or because you think there's more evidence of it being what must have amounted to acres of some other assorted metals? And metals tend to be good heat sinks. Where did such tremendous heat come from immediately after the collapses?

Originally posted by Griff (to BSB as well)

I can see there being no pools for weeks. They were still red hot for weeks though. I suspect that the witnesses to pools where early on in the disaster. The point of the thread though is that it was steel as quoted by Leslie Robinson. That being said, that amount of heat (to melt steel) should not have been present pre/post and during collapse. That was the point of the thread.

And my question still stands, I guess. If it was red hot for weeks, that's still a spectacular temperature differential to maintain without external heat input, and with long steel beams there to act as heat sinks.

The point being, there is an active heat source in the rubble with a temperature high enough to keep the metal red/molten for that duration.

Originally posted by Tom Bedlam
The point being, there is an active heat source in the rubble with a temperature high enough to keep the metal red/molten for that duration.

Exactly. So, are we arguing the same thing? Still, the question stands. What was that external heat source? Especially right after the collapses.

Originally posted by Griff

Exactly. So, are we arguing the same thing? Still, the question stands. What was that external heat source? Especially right after the collapses.

Well, there's another question. I think there's a multitude of stuff happening in the videos.

The battery banks melting down and dribbling lead may account for the metal seen up front.

Immediately after the collapse (in the first few hours?) the metal in the basement may not have BEEN molten. The hot spots seen may have been just the unknown heat source, which then proceeded to heat up pockets of the mass to a molten/red-hot state over a few days.

So what was under there? You have all the office furniture, I think some of the buildings had heating oil? I'm not sure on that point though. What about gas lines in the vicinity? Are there any? You'd need a steady supply of oxygen under there and the subway tunnel question I thought was definitely worth following up on.

If you had molten aluminum in the basement, and a steady supply of air, there is at least the potential for an ongoing oxidation reaction that releases lots and lots of heat and free hydrogen to burn if there's water applied. But generally you only get that to go if you have gallium and/or mercury in the melt.

Gallium is in LEDs. Could there be enough from the towers do you think?

As far as mercury. The gaseous form is in mercury-vapour lamps (like a street lamp but those are high pressure sodium). I would imagine once broken, the gaseous form would turn to it's liquid form.

I'm just trying to fit the pieces together.

Well we are talking about office buildings so with that in mind sources of metals which is by no means complete:

Lead: pipes, batteries, solder
Mercury: solder, fluorescent lighting fixures, mirrors
Aluminum: Desks, chairs, paperclips, staples, (just to name uncommonly thought of sources), windows, outer flashing, conduits, modern ductwork
Copper: Wiring, plumbing, computers
Tin: Ductwork
Bronze: copper and tin
Chrome: chrome chair and desk legs, bathroom fixtures
Brass: brass fixtures

I feel the need to add sulfur to the mix as a fuel source. Often in electrical fires sulfur is produced from the insulation being electrified and burning and in rubber which would also be plentiful in the towers.

Ahabstar,

Nice list of things that could account for the molten metals.

Here's a post from another thread. I'm not disputing that there was other molten metals, but we can't just throw away clear evidence of molten steel just because we don't believe it to be true.

This debate is pointless. Here is molten steel that has cooled. As stated in the video of a government employee (I assume) that states it is steel and concrete fused together from the heat. He obviously is an expert. He obviously has described this object as molten steel. The picture shows slag. There are no papers in it.

I can believe that the other meteorite that BsBray showed could be from pressure alone. This meteorite though is a different story. Please people, don't confuse the two.

Can we now agree that there was molten steel observed?

www.abovetopsecret.com...'

Please watch the videos. Thanks.

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by JIMC5499
The beams being moved by the demolition claw could be glowing because they were just cut free from the tangle of debris.

Wow, JIMC. Would they REALLY be glowing simply from being cut with a lance or thermite or etc.? Because I have never once in my entire life seen anything cut through steel AND heat a whole big chunk of it to orange/yellow glowing. In other words, until I see otherwise, this to me is extremely unrealistic, and you're more or less talking out of your ass. Those things only cause very localized heating, and that's the point. The heat required to do what is seen in the photo must be tremendous by comparison.

I would also like to add to this.. I used to cut up cars with the same torches they used to cut the metal at WTC. There is no way in hell that the whole piece of I beam would get hot enough to get hot like that...

When I used a Oxy-Acetylene torch on a car in a junk yard.. I would cut a frame bolt or something of.. leaving the rest of the car in tact. I think of those torches did that I don't think the owners of said Junkyard would allow them wouldnt you say?

They only heat the area you are cutting at that point. not the whole peice of metal.

and here is an image of a nice sexy bead from a torch they used at WTC.. and yes its all used for cutting but the point is to show how the metal looks after the torch is applied to the metal after a while..






And here is an explanation on how these torches work so you dont use that same excuse next time.

www.weldingvideos.com...

[edit on 6/19/2007 by ThichHeaded]

It is possible that thermite were use to bring down the wtc and cause those molten steel.

Lets say that thermites were planted along the center of the wtc (which would have to be alot of theremite charges), when it detonated the thremites start burning slowly and getting to work and all the floors would fall on itself. But even after the collapses the theremites would still burn in the center of the whole rubble because of several charges being use on each floor.

Thats just my theory on what happen that day.


Now lets see how theremites are made:

Mixture of powder aluminium and irion oxide (rust) or office items mixing together

A thermite reaction is a type of aluminothermic reaction in which aluminium metal is oxidized by the oxide of another metal, most commonly iron oxide. The name thermite is also used to refer to a mixture of two such chemicals. The products are aluminium oxide, free elemental iron, and a large amount of heat. The reactants are commonly powdered and mixed with a binder to keep the material solid and prevent separation. The reaction is used for thermite welding, often used to join rails.

To explain the explosion witnesses heard during the event could be the cause of emergency water sprinkler spraying onto the theremite when it was reacting

Safety

Mixing water with thermite or pouring water onto burning thermite is dangerous because it can cause a phreatomagmatic explosion, spraying hot fragments in all directions.

Source is from www.answers.com...
You can google and search what thermites are made of and what kind of reaction it get when water is added.

Sorry if i didn't explain my theory clear enough because it is early in the morning for me.

[edit on 24-6-2007 by IspyU]

Thermite stops burning once it's components are used up. I've seen it used to weld railway tracks and it typically burns for about 3 minutes then extinguishes itself.

Underground fires can burn for very long periods, in fact there's been one going on for 45 years in Pennsylvania

Smoldering is probably a better term, but the result is the same - the fuel is being consumed and generating huge amounts of heat, only the flame is missing because of the lack of oxygen.

I'm sorry but I don't see anything unusual about the fires under the rubble of the WTC buildings, or the presence of molten steel.

Originally posted by mythatsabigprobe
I'm sorry but I don't see anything unusual about the fires under the rubble of the WTC buildings, or the presence of molten steel.

Wow.

Eyes wide shut there.

Very simply, to achieve the molten steel still found at WTCs 1, 2 & 7 weeks after they fell requires an absolutely enormous energy source. Enormous.

This to you is not unusual?