Molten Steel and 9/11: The existence and implications of molten steel in "the pile".

I can't believe there is an argument whether there was molten steel or not. It's obvious just how the buildings fell that they were a demolition. 3 buildings in one day fell the exact same way. Almost free fall speed. WTC 7's penthouse collapsed seconds before the building did. How could that be possible any other way than demolition if only the lower floors where on fire? There is no proof needed other than to watch a video on the collapses. How can anyone argue what's right in front of their eyes?

A river of molten steel is just a stepping stone into this subject. You can stay here and try and take jabs at everyone who believes the OS is a lie all you want. It doesn't excuse that it is indeed still a lie.

Originally posted by okbmd
The most disappointing thing about these 9/11 threads is that in most every one of them I see truthers posting stuff that has been debunked hundreds of times , and all the other truthers are right there , starring and flagging , and repeating all of the same old nonsense that still , as of yet , has not , can not , and will not , be proven as fact .

Reminds me of a bunch of third graders .

And that is one of the reasons the truthers are getting nowhere, they are even fighting amongst themselves about if someone is a truther or not. I predict that at the 20th anniversary of 911 the same truthers will still be bringing up the same much debunked nonsense, and nothing will have changed.

Originally posted by TheLieWeLive
3 buildings in one day fell the exact same way. Almost free fall speed.

Again a truthers lie, just by looking at WTC 1&2 you can tell that they are not falling at freefall speed, as the debris that are falling at free fall speed are much faster than the buildings are falling!

WTC 7's penthouse collapsed seconds before the building did. How could that be possible any other way than demolition if only the lower floors where on fire? [/uote]

Why ignore the firemen who knew the building was going to fall as it was bulging, and thus they pulled the firefighters out?

reply to post by dereks


dereks, in 20 years we could have already established that 9/11 was an inside job, figured out exactly what happened, how it happened, and put everyone we could find guilty in jail or had them executed already, 99% of everyone now in agreement, and you would still be saying all of our evidence was debunked years ago.

mod delete please

Originally posted by bsbray11
dereks, in 20 years we could have already established that 9/11 was an inside job, figured out exactly what happened, how it happened, and put everyone we could find guilty in jail or had them executed already, 99% of everyone now in agreement, and you would still be saying all of our evidence was debunked years ago.

Except nothing like that will happen, as it was not a inside job, all that will happen is the truthers will keep spreading the same much debunked lies.

reply to post by dereks


they did fall at free fall speed, NIST had to admit WTC 7 fell at free fall speed after trying to deny it for 8 years. 1 and 2 can be timed from the video to show free fall speed.

reply to post by pteridine


The proof of thermite found in the dust can be read here:

www.bentham-open.org.../2009/00000002/00000001/7TOCPJ.SGM

reply to post by dereks


the only thing getting debunked is the government's story. Some people may try to apologize for the government's version of events but for the most part the truth will get out, and people will just have to make up their own mind. But from my perspective, the only debunked lies are the lies the government continuously speaks in order to prolong wars.

reply to post by dereks


Umm, dereks, I said almost free fall speed. Again, almost free fall speed. Almost being the key word. The debris was at free fall speed. The build fell at almost free fall speed.

Dr. Judy Wood's work on what happened during the events of 9/11 make perfect sense, however improbable it seems, but only when viewed within the context of the work of Dr. Joseph P. Farrell.

reply to post by dereks


dereks; Here I was expecting a great scientific post and then we get a "probably" molten lead on a picture showing an orange to light yellow colored molten metal. Lead melts at 601 F. Before it would ever get to the 1800 degree, plus or minus, necessary for that color it would have hit the boiling point and become lead vapor. Lead boils, that is, vaporizes, at 1740 C. It really doesn't flow like a liquid after that. The important point is not that something was molten, it is the amount of heat energy pumped into the substance to make it pump out photons at the 580-625 nanometer (yellow/orange) wavelength. I don't care if it's Giordino Bruno being burned. Before he turned that color the fire has to be hotter than an uncontained hydrocarbon fire.

reply to post by Whyhi


Ahh the backup batteries leaking argument. They've used that so many times on youtube it gets old. What part of 'alleged fujitsu UPS batteries' can make a molten stream of that magnitude?

Lets see, UPS batteries like the one next to me are usually sealed lead batteries with plastic, lead, water and electrolyte. What part of plastic, lead, water and electrolyte can cause molten plumes of metal? Hydrogen in free air/insufficient temperature problem still applies.

Furthermore, please apply the law of conservation of energy to any freefall 'collapse' and you'll see an inherant problem with the official theorytale.

Two years ago, I helped my dear old daddy make medieval swords in his backyard.

We melted iron using lots of wood, concrete kiln and air from a bellows.

The cellulose curve from your source shows it peaks at 1110C

The melting point of iron is 1530C.

Now either, we broke the laws of physics with this simple display. or the steel in the WTC was the victim of the same force as our little project.

Air, forced into a fire under pressure. The same type you might get say at 100 stories up in the air being fed from updrafts.

I do note that your temperature curves are based on underground fires... you dont get alot of airflow in one of those.

reply to post by okbmd

Airspoon , I'm disappointed that you actually posted those pics that have been debunked hundreds , if not thousands of times , right here on ATS .

I have yet to see those pics debunked in any satisfactory manner. A simple "photoshoped" answer doesn't cut it, as I have seen no evidence to suggest that they are photoshoped, even under close scrutiny. Furthermore, the pics correlate directly with witness testimony.

As far as the "angled-cut" photo, I have heard the iron-worker excuse before and while I agree that there is a possibility iron-workers could have cut those beams, it certainly hasn't been proven. If you look at the photo, the cut is very sloppy and it doesn't extend all the way to the bottom. Thermite creates a sloppy mess of the metal, something that obviously happened here with jagged edges and dripping but hardened metal running down the column and even a chunk out of the top.

Here is a bigger photo for better reference:

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/c9f1ef0375f0.jpg[/atsimg]

Look where that beam is. From what little information we can ascertain from the picture, it doesn't appear as if that column would have been immediatley attended to by the iron workers. It would seem that the rubble around that column would be cleared before cutting it down, if for nothing other than saftey due to the "timber" effect, though certainly as common sense seeing how it would have been much harder to get to it. Also, look at the firefighters in the picture, part of the rescue operation, presumably before the clean-up began. Were there firefighters there during the cleanup? Sure, though not many (relatively speaking) and they were not combing the pile.


Furthermore, due to the flimsy case put on by the government and OCTs, I feel that the burden of proof is on government. The people are owed an explanation as to what either happened or didn't happen. The point that I try to make through all of my 9/11 threads, is that we don't know for sure and we hardly have any information about what, how and why happened, along with who is at fault. A simple independent investigation would easily provide the information that many of us are seeking. Why anyone wouldn't want a real invesrtigation is beyond me, especially seeing how freedom is on the line and liberty is nothing more than a distant memory. America, being the beacon of not only freedom, but liberty and justice too, was provided the death blow on 9/11 and since it was such a hefty price to pay, we should all at least know if it was worth it and warranted. Such a cloak and dagger process would not have been tolerated just a few decades ago. If the OS can't be proven or is disproven, then we need an investigation. The price we had to bear is far too much when the whole case is based on the word of the government and a few administartion and industry insiders.


--airspoon

It's the same thing. Thread after thread after thread of people arguing about what happened that tragic day. Whatever your stance is, I say what would it hurt having another investigation? We will either find out that all is the same or it was an inside job. People want a new investigation. They need to just do it already.

reply to post by 4nsicphd


it is not molten lead.
lead stays the same grey dull color

Airspoon, FANTASTIC thread. Thank you. Talk about catching the guy in a blatant attempt at IGNORANCE. But, he stated that he was on site, I believe. Therefore, he must have noticed the steam, fire, smoke and temperatures. He must have heard about the molten steel and extreme temperatures. *weeks* into the clean-up. He reveals that he must have known. And plays dumb. I especially despise his ridiculing smile when the question is asked, as if that smile dismisses the question as utter folly. That, in particular, is what I find most distasteful: someone who really has no idea about the facts, and when they hear about the FACTS of 9-11, not "conspiracy theory," but FACTS, such as molten steel, eyewitness reports from firefighters/police/responders, they immediately go into "You're just a conspiracy theorist" mode, and laugh and smile. It's frustrating, but I suppose ignorance is truly bliss, and it must be easier to enjoy a barbeque get-together when the world is simple, well-defined and "logical."

Thanks for the post. S & F.

reply to post by GhostR1der


your calculations of the traveled distance of an object falling from 1150 feet is incorrect.

gravity accelerates an object at a -32feet per second per second.

At the very start of the first second the object has not moved.
at the end of the first second the object is travelling at 32 feet per second.
at the end of the first second the object has fallen a total distance of 16 feet.

at the end of the second second the object is travelling at 64 feet per second
at the end of the second second the object has fallen a distance of 48 feet.
at the end of the second second the object has fallen a total distance of 16-48 feet or 64f

3sec velocity is 96 fps.
3 sec distance is 80 ft
3 sec total distance 144 ft

4. 128 fps
4. 112 ft
4. 256 ft

5. 160 fps
5. 144 ft
5. 400 ft

6. 192 fps this is slightly above terminal velocity (terminal velocity is 125 mph or about 187 fps)
6 176 ft
6. 576 ft about half of the height.

7. 192 fps
7. 176 ft
7. 752 ft total distance

8. 192 fps
8. 176 ft
8. 928 ft total distance

9. 192 fps
9. 176 ft
9. 1104 fet total distance traveled.

it will take @ nine seconds for a free fall object to hit the ground on earth, using terminal velocity of 125 mph.

Originally posted by Gaderel
I do note that your temperature curves are based on underground fires... you dont get alot of airflow in one of those.

Subways.