Meteorite proof that there WAS molten steel

Bray, what you said really struck a chord. Whatever force caused other concrete to turn to dust did not have the same effect on the concrete in the meteorite we see here.. Couple of questions:

Were there different types of concrete used throughout the building.. I.E. The lightweight stuff they used in the upper floors as opposed to the concrete used in the basement? I hope that makes sense because to me because I would assume they did not use the light weight stuff in the basement and perhaps other areas of greater stress and load bearing areas.

Either the force that caused the 'dustified' concrete either didn't exist in this particular locale or there was some type of "shielding" effect because this particular concrete was under great pressure while the mystery force was present.

Things that make you go hmmm..

Originally posted by twitchy

Originally posted by Ahabstar
Underground coal mine fires. How do they keep going after years?

Just a wild guess, but I'd say the Coal probably has something to do with it.

Nice, now add thought to guess...as in where does the oxygen to feed the burning coal in the UNDERGROUND fires for 40+ and 100+ years in those two examples.

Explaining that might lead to explaining how the WTC hotspots lasted so long. And thus lead to explaining how the metal was kept hot enough to remain molten.

Ahabstar

Explaining that might lead to explaining how the WTC hotspots lasted so long. And thus lead to explaining how the metal was kept hot enough to remain molten.

That's a good question but I'm assuming that the molten steel that existed at the base of WTC 1,2 and 7 AFTER the collapse was not 'on fire' but was heated beyond the exibited temperature before it got to the bottom, thus, the extreme temperature that it was heated to a priori and the fact that it was covered up really sheds some light on how it stayed hot for as long as it did.

What I'm trying to say is I find it hard to compare an underground coal fire with the melted steel found after the WTC collapse..

Don't forget that melted steel was only found under 1,2 and 7 which I find highly suspicious. Also, the overhead flight thermal analysis that was done recorded extreme temperatures that were only present at WTC 1,2 and 7 which in and of itself is HIGHLY suspicious. Some of you try and divorce this thermal analysis from the molten steel but for obvious reasons that might not be such a good idea.

pubs.usgs.gov...

This is still pretty damning evidence as far as I'm concerned.

Originally posted by ViewFromTheStars
Were there different types of concrete used ...
Things that make you go hmmm..

Actually the pulverization, indeed atomization of that concrete is what initially got me started on this thread...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
There's some discussion of the concrete there you might find of interest.
The amount of energy required to pulverize that much concrete isn't accounted for in any of the mathematical formulas I've seen tossed around to explain the collapses, and considering the size of some of the particulate, there's an enormous amount of something going there that appears, at least visually, anamolous to me.

Thanks Twitch, lots to read and looking at that now. Interesting theory concerning explosives in the concrete and I am curious as to how 'harmonics' could have played into the pulverization of the concrete. Just like a wine glass cracking at the right frequency I wonder if that's possible with concrete if the right amplitude and frequency were reached? And what on earth could have created that amplitude and frequency.....I don't see the collapse in and of itself doing that.

Bump.

I'd like to hear from some of our earlier skeptics in this thread. Do you now believe that there was molten steel?

Reminds me of Hutchinsons experiments he does. That guy can make things levitate metal turn to liquid all kinds of weird stuff. So apparently fire/heat isn't necessarily needed to melt steel or weaken it. As much secret satellites going up who knows maybe there is a death ray in orbit. Which is scary because thinking back I do remember NASA sending up a reflector like dish. If it can be thought up then it probably exists.

I'm going to assume there are no arguments that there indead was molten steel at ground zero from the lack of responses. Funny how when I'm proven wrong, I concede. I guess it's too much to ask for the skeptics in here to concede. Just goes to show who really is searching for truth and who really is just a person who likes to argue for the sake of it.

That's not directed at one person.

www.studyof911.com...

4 videos here stating Molten Steel.

I thought I would add this in for help on the molten steel area.

Twitchy,

Can you get me a video on the guy from CDI stating the molten steel?

Originally posted by Fowl Play
Large pieces of debris, likened to meteorites by preservationists, are actually several floors of the towers compressed together as the buildings collapsed. Furniture, twisted metal, pipes, cords and even papers with legible type are visible. The pieces are kept in a humidity-controlled tent in Hangar 17 of Kennedy International Airport.

Sorry Griff but that one was easy.

Only smoking gun, i have just Debunked it.



[edit on 15-6-2007 by Fowl Play]

You really do not know much about energy do you?

I think you will need to go take a physics class or two to understand the hilarity of the above post.

By the way... great thread GRIFFY.

[edit on 19-6-2007 by Pootie]

Originally posted by ThichHeaded
Can you get me a video on the guy from CDI stating the molten steel?

The president of Tully Construction of Flushing, NY, said he saw pools of "literally molten steel" at Ground Zero. So did Mark Loizeaux of CDI in interviews with American Free Press reporter Christopher Bollyn.

I'm pretty sure there was a taped interview by somebody with Loizeaux where he mentions molten steel, I can't find it at the moment, but I did find some quotes from AFP and others by him.

"If I were to bring the towers down, I would put explosives in the basement to get the weight of the building to help collapse the structure."

Where the molten steel was reportedly found by the way.

"Yes, hot spots of molten steel in the basements.... at the bottoms of the elevator shafts of the main towers, down seven [basement] levels,"

and interestingly molten steel was found...

"...three, four, and five weeks later, when the rubble was being removed,"
(If I remeber right this is the quote I think I saw taped.)

"paper, carpet and other combustibles packed down the elevator shafts by the tower floors as they 'pancaked' into the basement."

The elevator shafts were interspersed within the central columns, I wonder if anybody was working on any of the elevator shafts that weekend, or if perhaps any of the elevators were 'out of order' prior to the incident?

And describing the actual collapses,

"Everything went simultaneously."

Quite nearly freefalling, which is a big problem for the pancakers.

[edit on 19-6-2007 by twitchy]

Sorry Griff, i have been away.. im afraid thats not quite enough for me, but i am leaning towards it as more of a possibility, the first image , i dont believe is molten steel, and all we have at the moment is Statement, could they of been mistaken? or in fact was there molten steel there?
Either way it does not prove CD, but i definitely think it worthy of further study, i am just not convinced enough yet... but i am thinking it is a possibility..
I stick to my word Griff.. i will adapt how i feel, but there is many people (nist included) citing no CD and nothing on molten steel, all we have against it is a few sketchy accounts.. at the moment it is 80/20 on there not being molten steel, and 90/10 on even if there was there was no CD..
JM2C

Originally posted by Fowl Play
im afraid thats not quite enough for me... all we have against it is a few sketchy accounts...

No we pictures of molten steel actually being pulled from the rubble and we have two of the top experts in their field who were contracted to clean up WTC who said that there WAS indeed molten steel, and in fact went into some detail about it and where it was found. If that's a sketchy account to you, then you really are a hard row to hoe.

Do we have any surviving details about building maintenance around the same time, I really would like to know if any of the elevators were being serviced or were inoperable. The molten steel found in the elevator shafts and perhaps therefore subsequently the basement levels would seem to suggest we need to look more closely at the central support structure for evidence of demolition. If one of those shafts were lined with explosives, it would explain the seismic data and the simultaneous failure of the columns throughout which the elevators were dispersed. 20 some odd hours is plenty of time to string an elevator shaft, especially if some of the security systems were disabled and the bomb sniffing dogs were pulled from the job (which they were).

Originally posted by twitchy

Originally posted by Fowl Play
im afraid thats not quite enough for me... all we have against it is a few sketchy accounts...

No we pictures of molten steel actually being pulled from the rubble and we have two of the top experts in their field who were contracted to clean up WTC who said that there WAS indeed molten steel, and in fact went into some detail about it and where it was found. If that's a sketchy account to you, then you really are a hard row to hoe.

The picture has not been proven to be from ground zero..
Some experts say there was..
But 100s of experts in formal reports state no such thing..
Even if there was, i dont think it proves CD, what about the story about the steel building i posted that had melted?
I have studied this for a long time Twitchy, and debunked myself from one way of thinking to another, this makes me a hard row just by proving or disproving things to myself, so i aint an empty canvass, i have a friggin intricate picture on mine..

Originally posted by Fowl Play
But 100s of experts in formal reports state no such thing..

You have no idea what you're talking about. Show me these "hundreds" of experts or stop making up numbers.

Originally posted by bsbray11

Originally posted by Fowl Play
But 100s of experts in formal reports state no such thing..

You have no idea what you're talking about. Show me these "hundreds" of experts or stop making up numbers.

Should mind your tone.. you are similar to some others, you post ignorance, with absolutely nothing to back up your statements.. Not even really worthy of an answer, because anyone with a slight adeptness towards study knows what i am saying. Next time in the same style , you wont get a response.
NIST conducted an extremely thorough three-year investigation into what caused the WTC towers to collapse, as explained in NIST’s dedicated Web site, wtc.nist.gov.... This included consideration of a number of hypotheses for the collapses of the towers.

Some 200 technical experts—including about 85 career NIST experts and 125 leading experts from the private sector and academia—reviewed tens of thousands of documents, interviewed more than 1,000 people, reviewed 7,000 segments of video footage and 7,000 photographs, analyzed 236 pieces of steel from the wreckage, performed laboratory tests and sophisticated computer simulations of the sequence of events that occurred from the moment the aircraft struck the towers until they began to collapse.

Yeah... the Warren Comission was very thorough too.
They considered what they were given to consider, nothing more, nothing less. Selective examination of evidence can proove any construance you like. A complete examination of all evidence and all accounts NEVER TOOK PLACE.
Ok look, let's simplify, say you and I were at a crime scene where Grimace was shot and killed. We find a smoking gun lying on the floor with hamburglar's finger prints and we assume that Hamburglar killed him and we spend alot of time studying bullet trajectories and powder burns and the wound, throw some math around about angles and velocities and we build an incredible and convincing case against Hamburglar. But then we completely and utterly ignore other evidence at the scene, say the semen stains from one of the fry guys, or the maid saying she saw birdy fleeing the scene with a new toaster oven. By selectively reviewing the evidence to proove our predisposition towards hamburglar, in this case of course we can 'prove' that hamburglar shot grimace, meanwhile birdy and the fry guy get away with murder.
NIST didn't consider anything but what they were predisposed to consider and what was given to them. The rest was destroyed, ignored, or obscured from them in the interest of national security.

I agree totally with the above statement to quite a high degree.. I just see so many people involved with the NIST investigation, and i cannot believe they are all bent.. and by the sounds of it, they were allowed to do extensive investigations and experiments..
Do they all wanna be remembered in history as liars? has none of them got a shred of integrity?
I cant believe the answer would be no.

Here is what NIST says about the so called " Presence of molten Steel"

7a. How could the steel have melted if the fires in the WTC towers weren’t hot enough to do so?
OR
7b. Since the melting point of steel is about 2,700 degrees Fahrenheit, the temperature of jet fuel fires does not exceed 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit and Underwriters Laboratories (UL) certified the steel in the WTC towers to 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit for six hours, how could fires have impacted the steel enough to bring down the WTC towers?

In no instance did NIST report that steel in the WTC towers melted due to the fires. The melting point of steel is about 1,500 degrees Celsius (2,800 degrees Fahrenheit). Normal building fires and hydrocarbon (e.g., jet fuel) fires generate temperatures up to about 1,100 degrees Celsius (2,000 degrees Fahrenheit). NIST reported maximum upper layer air temperatures of about 1,000 degrees Celsius (1,800 degrees Fahrenheit) in the WTC towers (for example, see NCSTAR 1, Figure 6-36).

However, when bare steel reaches temperatures of 1,000 degrees Celsius, it softens and its strength reduces to roughly 10 percent of its room temperature value. Steel that is unprotected (e.g., if the fireproofing is dislodged) can reach the air temperature within the time period that the fires burned within the towers. Thus, yielding and buckling of the steel members (floor trusses, beams, and both core and exterior columns) with missing fireproofing were expected under the fire intensity and duration determined by NIST for the WTC towers.

UL did not certify any steel as suggested. In fact, in U.S. practice, steel is not certified at all; rather structural assemblies are tested for their fire resistance rating in accordance with a standard procedure such as ASTM E 119 (see NCSTAR 1-6B). That the steel was “certified ... to 2000 degrees Fahrenheit for six hours” is simply not true.
Link
wtc.nist.gov...

Come on then, anyone?? rip this to shreads.. The Pancake theory is old news..


[edit on 19-6-2007 by Fowl Play]