Richard Gage Debates a Member of International Association of Bomb Technicians and Investigators

Originally posted by Damocles
reply to post by billybob

 

ok bb heres an excersise. figure out how many of the core columns had to be cut to facilitate a collapse.

take taht number times 3.6 and that will give you the HE yeild needed per floor in lbs.

THEN find a national guard unit that has combat engineers and see if they'll let you come watch them do some demo training sometime (tell them you may want to enlist, they love recruiting chances) and watch some real live demo going off. (or anywhere else using HE for some purpose)

ask how much they were using per shot.

see if what you witness with your own eyes jives with what ANY recording device picked up on 911

get back to me.

(3.6 is the absolute minimum required per column using LSC's based on the 'leaked' schematics for columns on the 66th floor. they do of course get bigger as you get lower in the tower but 3.6 is still a pretty good sized boom)

well, i don't really need to.
why, you ask? (i thought i heard someone ask why.)
because, we not need to assume only one type of device.

thermite can be used to soften, and then lower yield devices used to sever than would be needed if the steel was cold. regarding the basement explosions and "why didn't it fall right away?".
because, if the safety factor is, say, 5, as is typical i understand, then, with a huge basement blast, you can knock it down to 1.5 without the overall structure even budging.

watch any demo. there are ALWAYS a series of explosions that bring the building the the BRINK of collapsing. and then, the "money shots" do the final "straw that breaks the camel's back".

and i didn't even need to bring in the probabilty of space-based beam weapons(which are possibly evidenced by the circular holes on wtc6's roof).

you know, incredulity is a great red herring red herring.

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
You do NOT know that it was steel. It was NOT analyzed. PERIOD. Either show your source with analisis or retract your statement...if not... you are lying.

How about we go beyond MELTED steel and look at the evidence of SUBLIMATION of the steel. It's known that some of the steel had high temperature corrosion, so it just fits that some of the steel would be MELTED. It's just common sense CO. And you sitting there saying "there's no proof, there's no proof" just prooves that you have an agenda here.

Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure. A liquid eutectic mixture containing primiarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel.

www.fema.gov...

From FEMA. One of your golden "peer reviewed" papers even states melting of the steel. How much more evidence do you need?

reply to post by billybob

and i didn't even need to bring in the probabilty of space-based beam weapons(which are possibly evidenced by the circular holes on wtc6's roof).

God help us all !!! Well BB.. what little credibility you had... was gone faster than you can say "Clickety clunk" after reading that statement.

reply to post by Griff


Thanks for the info Griff... and what is my agenda? The molten steel that was witnessed was not analized. The iron that was gathered was not molten at the time of the analyisis? Correct?

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
reply to post by billybob

 

and i didn't even need to bring in the probabilty of space-based beam weapons(which are possibly evidenced by the circular holes on wtc6's roof).

God help us all !!! Well BB.. what little credibility you had... was gone faster than you can say "Clickety clunk" after reading that statement.

not everyone lives in 1945, captain obvious.

reply to post by billybob


True... and not all of us live in a fear filled land of woo either.

BB .. here is a video of Judy "Space Beam" Woods... you may like it. There is a special appearance from the PentaCon king as well.

widgets.clearspring.com...

[edit on 2-12-2007 by CaptainObvious]

Originally posted by billybob

you know, incredulity is a great red herring red herring.

im not even going to bother with the rest of your post. im willing to just accept we disagree and move on with my life...

but, am i being called a red herring or being accused of throwing one out?

because i chose to fall back on what i know when i examine the evidence?

wow, that would be like me accusing griff of that for falling back on his engineering education experience and training.

yeah, ya'll have fun.

Originally posted by Damocles

Originally posted by billybob

you know, incredulity is a great red herring red herring.

im not even going to bother with the rest of your post. im willing to just accept we disagree and move on with my life...

but, am i being called a red herring or being accused of throwing one out?

because i chose to fall back on what i know when i examine the evidence?

wow, that would be like me accusing griff of that for falling back on his engineering education experience and training.

yeah, ya'll have fun.

no, it's got nothing to do with you.
step away from the mirror.

what i mean, is when major psy-ops(yes there is such a thing) are executed, like for example, the kennedy assassination and cover-up, there are infinite false leads which can be followed. (okay, not INFINITE, but enough to frustrate even some of the most tenacious researchers)

these pre-made false leads are the red herrings i mean.

and then, any one of the false leads can be disproved, and then the whole counter-current's momentum is compromised.
so, i'm not talking about YOU. i'm talking about all the intentional cointelpro flak that gets thrown out to hide the SINGLE TRUTH.

however, like any mirage, only something REAL can remain standing under scrutiny.
perhaps you can explain the cylindrical holes in wtc6? they're quite geometrically impressive.

Originally posted by billybob
perhaps you can explain the cylindrical holes in wtc6? they're quite geometrically impressive.

well im glad that you and i havnt had to resort to name calling. so that i respect.

can i explain the holes? nope, cant explain any of it personally. all ive EVER said for sure was that based on my knowledge of military grade, or even civillian grade demo ordinance that to ME it doesnt appear to be a CD.

so i cant explain why the buildings fell and never said i could. but, i sleep pretty well at night with my opinion of what it wasnt.

Originally posted by CaptainObvious
You do NOT know that it was steel. It was NOT analyzed. PERIOD.

I have shown photos of molten steel.

I have a video of a fire chief talking about the temps inside the debris that were hot enough to melt steel up to 6 weeks later.

I also have the data from NASA on the thremal temps on the debris field.

Aslo there is the testing by FEMA.

So unless you have evidence to debate my evidence, i will stand by the evidence i have that it is molten steel.

Fire Chief video.
www.youtube.com...

NASA Data.
pubs.usgs.gov...

[edit on 3-12-2007 by ULTIMA1]

quick question to anyone who cares to answer...anyone know what temp the safety glass they use in highrises melts?

seems all the pics ive ever seen of molten glass it looks like its glowing red/orange.

ANY chance thats what we saw flowing out of the corner of the building?

Originally posted by Damocles
quick question to anyone who cares to answer...anyone know what temp the safety glass they use in highrises melts?

I'm still trying to look into it. Not finding much right now.

Most codes say to conform to ASTM E163. Problem is, our copy of ASTM goes from E162 to E164. I can't find E163 at the moment.

I'll keep looking though.

Originally posted by Damocles
quick question to anyone who cares to answer...anyone know what temp the safety glass they use in highrises melts?

seems all the pics ive ever seen of molten glass it looks like its glowing red/orange.

ANY chance thats what we saw flowing out of the corner of the building?

I've seen 600C given as a temp. That would explain why as time passes, more and more windows are observed broken in WTC 1. I believe NIST stated around 1300 broken by the time of the collapse.

Aluminum alloys melt at 450-600C, depending on the specific alloy. Plus, that corner of WTC2 - floor 81, held the uninterruptable power supply for Fuji Bank, which had that entire floor. UPS means batteries. Batteries mean lead and solder. They melt at cooler temps than even aluminum. The metal flowing from that corner was aluminum mixed with unburned plastics, carpeting, etc, which is why it doesn't display the expected silvery appearance of pure melted aluminum.

Originally posted by Damocles
quick question to anyone who cares to answer...anyone know what temp the safety glass they use in highrises melts?

It shatters around 700 C, way before it would melt. It would have to shatter and fall inside of the building and then be heated to probably unrealistic temperatures by the flames near the window.

Originally posted by Haroki
Aluminum alloys melt at 450-600C

It's reasonable to say that the aluminum holding the windows in place would have become unstable and given before the glass would have melted or probably even shattered, if any of those things had enough flame around the given area to occur.

Originally posted by Haroki
The metal flowing from that corner was aluminum mixed with unburned plastics, carpeting, etc

Hydrocarbons do not dissolve into molten aluminum, which what you would suggest, since the molten material has a consistent appearance to it that comes from WTC2. (It's also consistently orange/yellow -- in broad daylight, falling through cold air.)

The science behind this kind of stuff (look up 'black body radiation') doesn't justify what you're saying, either. And on top of that, I can post you a video of a Ph.D. in physics mixing hydrocarbons (small wood chips) with molten aluminum and noting what reaction took place (ie, absolutely none).

You can watch it here:

stj911.org...
stj911.org...

In fact, molten aluminum in general tends to always stay silvery on the surface at just-molten temperatures of around 600-700 C, and that's just what that video shows.

the wood floated on top of the liquid aluminum. While we could see embers of burning wood, we observed the bulk of the flowing aluminum to be silvery as always, as it falls through the air.

stj911.org...

Btw, notice that these guys are out actually testing what the NIST team asserted with no references or supporting science at all (none exists, because this "theory" doesn't work).

[edit on 3-12-2007 by bsbray11]

reply to post by Damocles



Although this doesn't answer your question, I found it interesting non-the-less.

The transformation of raw materials into glass takes place around 2400°F (1315°C);

en.wikipedia.org...

Steel with 2.1% Carbon by weight begins melting at 1130 °C (2066 °F), and is completely molten upon reaching 1315 °C (2400 °F).

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by Griff


heh well that is interesting...and pretty much blows my little idea firmly outta the water.

gee, THANKS GRIFF :p
jk


though as a post script to this idea, ive seen bottles start to melt (get soft) in wood fire. id thought once that smaller chunks of glass might melt easier, say the shattered windows. but that would be a LOT of melted glass when i thought more about it

Originally posted by Haroki
Aluminum alloys melt at 450-600C, depending on the specific alloy. Plus, that corner of WTC2 - floor 81, held the uninterruptable power supply for Fuji Bank, which had that entire floor. UPS means batteries. Batteries mean lead and solder. They melt at cooler temps than even aluminum. The metal flowing from that corner was aluminum mixed with unburned plastics, carpeting, etc, which is why it doesn't display the expected silvery appearance of pure melted aluminum.

pure, unadulterated, bulldada.

the material flowing is yellow hot, which indicates temperatures WAY above the temps aluminum or lead become liquid. both lead and silver are still silver when they start to flow. unless you can produce some scientific, repeatable experiment that shows unburned plastics and carpet cause these metals to glow, you're talking out the wrong end of your digestive tract.

the molten metal is most likely structural steel. (notice i didn't popishly say "is steel")

the NIST report says there was a metal fire in that corner. it can be seen inside the building behind the corner burning white hot in one picture.
the most likely metal to burn, absent some demolition incendiary, is magnesium wheel rims from the aircraft.

a guy burning a solid magnesium rod

reply to post by Damocles


I believe glass does melt at lower temps. than what I posted. I think that is just saying that the silica and other stuff starts to form glass at those temps. But, they put other things in glass to lower the melting temps.

Oh, BTW, you're welcome. It's payback for always shooting down my theories.



Have a good one.

[edit on 12/3/2007 by Griff]

Originally posted by billybob
the most likely metal to burn, absent some demolition incendiary, is magnesium wheel rims from the aircraft.

heh, someone make a note. billybob and i agree. ill even concede the "absent some demo incendiary" part.

@griff: well id kind of been kicking around a hypothesis where the glass melted, pooled, and thats what was witnessed flowing outta the tower.

lets fact it, we have some good ideas of what it isnt (aluminum, lead, polluted variations thereof) but we dont really know what it actually is.

glass does glow orange when molten

but id never stand on that theory or try to prove it. just something id been kicking around.

reply to post by Damocles


[lumberg]I will have to go ahead and disagree. [/lumberg]

I actually started a thread that did not get the hooplah I was expecting regarding the flowing metal from the wtc.

Molten Metal Before the Collapse?

In this thread I posted a hypothisis from an Italian dude that speculates the battery (UPS) theory.

11-settembre.blogspot.com...

He proves that in fact there was a very large room FILLED with batteries for Fuji bank.

Yes, NIST states that it is most likely the aluminum from the airplane. Which is possible.

I encourage you guys to read this website and come back with your comments.