Giving this one more go.... molten metal

If I post these videos in a debate about molten metal, they get ignored. What is the arguement against them? I'm assuming there is none?

Arguements I have herd....

denial of molten metal - im sorry, video/picture proof + witnesses, nice try and if anything there is undeniable proof of temps exceeding what an office fire can produce. Look at the glowing rock you guys like to say is not molten metal, its tempature cannot be denied.

derail it by saying the steel doesn't have to melt for the buildings to fall down - True, but what about the molten metal that is there?

claiming it's molten aluminum and the fires did get hot enough to melt aluminum - i've seen molten aluminum just at melting temp, my dad has a home foundry for his machine work, its silver. For it to be the color we see, w/e metal it is, it would have to be alot hotter than an office fire.

can anyone point me to a link where this got debunked? thanks.

[edit on 29-4-2010 by ohhwataloser]

[edit on 29-4-2010 by ohhwataloser]

This is a question that people who believe the OS tend to avoid at all cost. They know that there is no reasonable explanation for the molten metal, so they just leave it alone. Even though there is video proof of molten metal, and several key eye-witnesses. I honestly don't think we will ever get the full truth behind what happened that day.

It was obviously fujitsu UPS batteries burning up. I mean clearly, plastic electrolyte and lead batteries burn, emitting huge showers of molten metal.

Oh wait sorry it was melting LPG cylinders.


Urr... it was the planes aluminium melting many floors below.

Whoops, of course it was simply thermi... therm...al expansion!

[edit on 29/4/10 by GhostR1der]

NIST said they weren't aware of anyone claiming there was molten steel. Not only were dozens of witnesses shown in the two videos above to have seen molten steel, here's a list of dozens more experienced ironworkers, architects, engineers, and firefighters who saw the molten steel first-hand:

911conspiracy.wordpress.com...


For those that cling to the fantasy that it was molten aluminum, let's take a look at what molten aluminum looks like:


[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/bfd23d5c4134.jpg[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/06735d7d5298.jpg[/atsimg]
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/60703d95245d.jpg[/atsimg]


Notice that time, after time, after time again, aluminum is silver when it is melted. Not a single, solitary image shows silvery liquid and not a single, solitary person says that they saw silvery liquid flowing anywhere. Every single witness said red, orange, yellow hot steel flowing like lava. Lava is not silver. Are we clear now that there is zero proof of molten aluminum and all proof of molten steel?


Mark Loizeaux, President of Controlled Demolition, Inc. talks about the molten steel at the WTC in an email reply from Loizeaux to "honway" dated 12/13/2003:

Molten steel was encountered primarily during excavation of debris around the South Tower when large hydraulic excavators were digging trenches 2 to 4 meters deep into the compacted/burning debris pile. There are both video tape and still photos of the molten steel being “dipped” out by the buckets of excavators. I’m not sure where you can get a copy.

Sorry I cannot provide personal confirmation.

Regards,

Mark Loizeaux, President
CONTROLLED DEMOLITION, INC.
2737 Merryman’s Mill Road
Phoenix, Maryland USA 21131
Tel: 1-410-667-XXXX
Fax: 1-410-667-XXXX
www.controlled-demolition.com

Here's one of the very images that Mark Loizeaux says exists of molten steel in the bucket of an excavation machine:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/539834a09446.jpg[/atsimg]



Then finally, admitting there was molten steel will also now conclude that there was some sort of incendiary that wasn't supposed to be there that melted those steel beams. I wonder what that could've been?










[edit on 29-4-2010 by _BoneZ_]

ask Jesse Ventura..."super" thermite is the cause.



www.youtube.com...

S and F because I believe that the molten metal issue holds one of many keys to what transpired on 911. Some say there was none despite evidence in front of them (like the video) only because of their faith in the powers that be and the fairy tale known as the 911 Report. That aside, there is and will always be a direct evidentuary link between the truth of what really happened on 911 with and/or within the molten metal examples that have been collected.






[edit on 4/29/2010 by mikelee]

reply to post by _BoneZ_


BoneZ,

Aluminium is not only silver when melted, at its lowest temperature it is. When heated beyond melting point it gives off black body radiation, glowing red, orange, white etc.

Sorry due to certain err... 5gb to download before my cap is replaced tomorrow and utorrent open I can't find the link I want to show you (as for some reason there are no spare connections for google, while ats works...).

If you google 'molten aluminium black body radiation', I'm sure you will see the proof I am attempting to locate. It shows the black body radiation chart and photos of orange glowing molten aluminium.

Funniest thing is the above text still does nothing to help the official theorytale. The temperatures required for it to be glowing, molten aluminium are still impossible in a open air smouldering office fire (getting towards 1000 degrees C). So either way... another nail in the coffin.

reply to post by _BoneZ_


this molten aluminium is also at it's purest form, what happens when this is then mixed with other meltable items and debris it makes contact with.

Originally posted by redgy
this molten aluminium is also at it's purest form, what happens when this is then mixed with other meltable items and debris it makes contact with.

It doesn't really matter. I've shown an image of red-hot steel with molten steel dripping off of it. An image confirmed to exist by the president of CDI. I also posted a link with dozens of professionals that saw the molten steel-first hand, on top of the witnesses in the videos in the OP.

NIST lied or is grossly incompetent. There should be no more denying molten steel. What type of incendiary that melted the steel should be the next question.












[edit on 29-4-2010 by _BoneZ_]

reply to post by _BoneZ_

NIST lied or is grossly incompetent. There should be no more denying molten steel. What type of incendiary that melted the steel should be the next question.

After further evaluation NSIT has definitely mislead the public in all ways.

Wisking the metal away before reevalutaions was key to that!

I agree What melted the metal is in need of explanation.

Originally posted by GhostR1der
The temperatures required for it to be glowing, molten aluminium are still impossible in a open air smouldering office fire (getting towards 1000 degrees C). So either way... another nail in the coffin.

Exactly, and that temperature of the molten aluminum would have to be sustained. In reality as it falls through cooler air it would not be able to retain that temperature even if it did achieve it inside the building.

Aircraft aluminum Get 1750 lbs. high grade steel scrap such as railroad rails , 250 pounds of pop cans 2% to 3% magnesium . One electric induction furnace , one hand held thermometer accurate to 1 degree f . Melt steel rails enough to make a melt at 2600 bring up to 2860 f large enough to consume 250 lbs. of pop cans temp will drop heat down bring back up to nice melt at 1700 f bring up to 1900 f add remainder of steel rails . Crank her wide open, test constantly to 3000 f . Yell for pouring crew sound pouring alarm. This is aircraft aluminum white hot and when the magnesium flares the shadows become lighted like day light. magnesium burns at 5400 f. No steel can withstand this f in temperature.

Originally posted by ohhwataloser

If I post these videos in a debate about molten metal, they get ignored. What is the arguement against them? I'm assuming there is none?

We have been discussing that very subject in the thread, "Somebody called me a "Truther" for the first time."

See: www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by _BoneZ_

Here's one of the very images that Mark Loizeaux says exists of molten steel in the bucket of an excavation machine:

That's not a bucket. That's a clamshell. Which proves, beyond the shadow of a doubt, that the material being handled in that photo is not "molten" or liquid. It is in solid state.

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by redgy
this molten aluminium is also at it's purest form, what happens when this is then mixed with other meltable items and debris it makes contact with.

It doesn't really matter. I've shown an image of red-hot steel with molten steel dripping off of it. An image confirmed to exist by the president of CDI. I also posted a link with dozens of professionals that saw the molten steel-first hand, on top of the witnesses in the videos in the OP.

What happened to the 4,000,000 kg of aluminum cladding of WTC 1 and 2? Did it not melt because no one reported seeing "streams of molten aluminum"? Were the temperatures high enough to melt construction steel, approximately 2,600 F.?

NIST lied or is grossly incompetent. There should be no more denying molten steel. What type of incendiary that melted the steel should be the next question.

Loizeaux told AFP that the steel-melting fires were fueled by "paper, carpet and other combustibles packed down the elevator shafts by the tower floors as they 'pancaked' into the basement."

www.serendipity.li...

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by redgy
this molten aluminium is also at it's purest form, what happens when this is then mixed with other meltable items and debris it makes contact with.

It doesn't really matter. I've shown an image of red-hot steel with molten steel dripping off of it. An image confirmed to exist by the president of CDI. I also posted a link with dozens of professionals that saw the molten steel-first hand, on top of the witnesses in the videos in the OP.

NIST lied or is grossly incompetent. There should be no more denying molten steel. What type of incendiary that melted the steel should be the next question.












[edit on 29-4-2010 by _BoneZ_]

BoneZ, according to this article your picture of red hot metal in the jaws of a machine is a photoshop manipulation :-

www.sharpprintinginc.com...:79

Originally posted by jthomas
What happened to the 4,000,000 kg of aluminum cladding of WTC 1 and 2? Did it not melt because no one reported seeing "streams of molten aluminum"?

If you remember from watching the videos of the collapses, the outer walls of the towers were peeled out and fell outward. So with that fact in mind, you might want to explain how the aluminum cladding that was on the outside of the towers, managed to get itself inside and into the basements.

Originally posted by jthomas
Loizeaux told AFP that the steel-melting fires were fueled by "paper, carpet and other combustibles packed down the elevator shafts by the tower floors as they 'pancaked' into the basement."

Well first and foremost, I'd love to see someone melt steel with paper and carpeting.

Secondly, and I already discussed this in the other thread, the fires were almost a quarter-mile up and would have been mostly extinguished by the dust/debris from the collapses.

And lastly, the basements, being covered with storeys of debris, had no direct oxygen to burn massive fires, let alone get hot enough to melt steel or aluminum. Aluminum melts at around 1300 degrees and that's dangerously close to the 1800 degree maximum temperature of office fires under the most ideal, oxygen-fed, open-air conditions.

The basement explosions before and during collapse could have caused the molten metal in the basements.

Originally posted by hooper
the material being handled in that photo is not "molten" or liquid. It is in solid state.

So the yellow/orange stuff dripping from the yellow/orange steel is just invisible and not really in the image?

Denial makes people say crazy things.

Originally posted by Alfie1
BoneZ, according to this article your picture of red hot metal in the jaws of a machine is a photoshop manipulation

According to the opinion of the author. He can't find one certain beam, which it appears I can see in several different photos, and he doesn't understand the different camera angles of the first beam. That pretty much sums up why he thinks the image is fake. There is no real image analysis to prove the image was photoshopped, just like the no-planers have done no analysis on the videos to prove the videos were tampered with or CGI added to them.

I'll quote something from the link you posted:

"You would think that some people who view this photo would question it's authenticity by simply considering how absolutely stupid the machine operator would have to be to attempt to pick up molten metal in his bucket."

Yet the president of Controlled Demolition, Inc. said that is exactly what happened:

"There are both video tape and still photos of the molten steel being “dipped” out by the buckets of excavators."

Whether the image is fake or not can be debated endlessly. Whether there was molten steel, can not. Too many people saw the molten steel and to say otherwise would be calling all of them liars.

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Whether the image is fake or not can be debated endlessly. Whether there was molten steel, can not..

I, King Bonez, have declared the issue over.....

Nice.

Too many people saw the molten steel and to say otherwise would be calling all of them liars.

False dichotomy.

Disputing the presence does not require debunkers to call thr eyewitnesses liars. They could be honest about what they believe, and yet still be wrong, since it cannot be disputed that whatever whoever saw at any specific time, no samples were taken at that particular time to see what it is. This is undeniable by any rational person.

There are many other possibilities, and these have been pointed out.

Aluminum is one. Which, BTW, raises the question about your statement, backed by photos, that liquid aluminum is silver only. See now here, anyone reading the bulk of your posts must make a decision. You have repeatedly said that you are an honest researcher. How can this be true when such a basic mistake is made? There are 2 choices here: you're right about being a good researcher, and have lied about aluminum only being silver; or you're seriously wrong in your assessment about your research skills and made an honest mistake. Which is it? Canyou see a third? Can anyone?

Limestone also melts at less then 1000C, so is a possibility.