|
Post by twinstead on Jul 7, 2006 8:37:29 GMT -4
Is this really the sort of madness you actually think happens?
In CT world? It certainly does
|
|
|
Post by phunk on Jul 7, 2006 11:03:32 GMT -4
There's no way it was hot enough to melt aluminum near the edge of the building, exposed to outside air, where the molten metal was dripping from. Still waiting for some evidence that the video actually shows molten metal falling and not just hot embers from the pile of burning office materials seen above the 'drip'.
|
|
lenbrazil
Saturn
Now there's a man with an open mind - you can feel the breeze from here!
Posts: 1,045
|
Post by lenbrazil on Jul 7, 2006 11:11:30 GMT -4
- Citation please - The other material wouldn’t have to had mixed well with the molten aluminum only well enough to have changed it from silver (essentially colorless) to light yellow The only metals that would be available in significant quantities to discolor molten aluminum would be steel or iron. But they wouldn't be liquid at those temperatures. Carbon-based materials such as plastics or wood turn black at those temperatures, and they wouln't mix with a molten metal, they would just burn away. ] Still waiting for a citation, i.e. a reputable source, I could say ash could easily have mixed with the aluminum to discolor it. Perhaps there could have been some glass in the mix “Depending on the composition, some glass will melt at temperatures as low as 500°C (900°F); others melt only at 1650°C (3180°F).” [Arlene Palmer Schwind, M.A. Former Associate Curator of Glass and Ceramics, Winterthur Museum, Wilmington. Contributor to Journal of Glass Studies and other periodicals. Coauthor of Bristol Glass. encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761554489_2/Glass.html ] 1 You have yet to show that only metal could have mixed with molten aluminium. 2.I believe the engineers from NIST theorized that the source may have been a magnesium alloy wheel from the plane. What’s the color of molten magnesium? There could also have been significant amounts of lead; computer monitors have up to 2.6 lbs (1.2 kilos) of that metal which also would have been the solder material in about 90% of the electronics [ skeptically.org/env/id2.html ] . So we have three metals which could easily have been present that would have been molten at temperatures reached in high rise fires Obviously temperatures would have varied at different locations in the towers, I don’t remember seeing any people in that part of the tower. CTists say this all the time but I never see them produce any evidence. Funny normally CTists claim that the fires couldn’t have been hot enough because they were oxygen starved. Wind would literally have "fanned the flames" Responded to by AG. But I’ll add my few cents. -Yes it took about 10 seconds. How could thermite/thermate charges have been timed to fractions of a second precision? - In all the demonstrations I’ve seen of thermite it’s been gravity driven, how could it have been made to work horizontally? Since Jones is pushing this theory it’s up to him to conduct tests under controlled conditions showing that what he theorized happened could have happened. The first step would be to get some steel beams as similar to those used in the WTC as possible and cut them with thermite or thermate. Then explain how such charges could have been precisely timed and made to work horizontally. I don’t remember him saying that I’ll have to listen to the interview again. In any case there were significant sources of sulfur and the components of thermite in the debris, he said nothing about barium nitrate which makes up more than a quarter of thermate. A few more questions 1) What was the source of the steel you think the thermate melted? 2) Shouldn’t thermite and molten steel have caused the concrete to spal? [ www.atypon-link.com/TELF/doi/abs/10.1680/macr.53.3.197.39478;jsessionid=oq34yG1TGU1aE8qCjX?cookieSet=1&journalCode=macr ] or perhaps even burn or melt?
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Jul 7, 2006 12:36:39 GMT -4
I am curious as to what happened to all the aluminum left over from the thermite reaction. It should have been prevalent everywhere thermite was used. Is there any evidence for this?
|
|
|
Post by phunk on Jul 7, 2006 13:12:02 GMT -4
I'm wondering how thermite could have been installed in the EXTERIOR columns of the WTC where that "molten metal" is dripping, and why none of those columns are melting in the video.
|
|
|
Post by sts60 on Jul 8, 2006 19:30:49 GMT -4
By the time of the collapse, the fire appeared to be smoldering.
Not to me. But I'm just a firefighter; what do I know?
|
|
|
Post by Apollo Gnomon on Jul 9, 2006 1:42:06 GMT -4
If a fire is "smoldering" then that is a reducing atmosphere. I read the Greening paper recently, and learned that Gypsum drywall, CaSO4, decomposes to Ca and SO2 with the other O2 being pulled off by the fire when in a reducing combustion environment.
Sulphur dioxide is highly corrosive to Fe.
Also, (now, this is my thinking, not something in the Greening paper) the O2 being pulled off of the Gypsum would support continued combustion sequences in the rubble pile, hence high temperatures deep in the rubble pile.
The chemical environment of the WTC event was very complex. To summarize it as "sulfer (sic) = thermate" and "glowing metal = thermate" is simplistic at best.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Jul 9, 2006 4:43:36 GMT -4
The chemical environment of the WTC event was very complex. To summarize it as "sulfer (sic) = thermate" and "glowing metal = thermate" is simplistic at best.
Very, but then I have noticed that CT's seem to like to have simplistic answers to what are really complex problems and overly complex answers to the actual simple problems.
|
|
|
Post by 911: Inside Job on Jul 9, 2006 15:36:24 GMT -4
The chemical environment of the WTC event was very complex. To summarize it as "sulfer (sic) = thermate" and "glowing metal = thermate" is simplistic at best. You're knocking down straw men. Nobody said sulfur residue proves thermate. I'm sure Jones' analysis was a bit more sophisticated than that, i.e., quantitative as well as qualitative. Molten steel was videoed coming off the tower before the collapse. Attempts at explaining it as aluminum remain unpersuasive, especially since it looked identical to a thermate reaction. Even in the hottest of high rise fires, we never see steel turn to liquid. Only an incendiary like thermate can liquefy and cut through steel without a violent explosion.
|
|
|
Post by frenat on Jul 9, 2006 16:05:26 GMT -4
There is no proof that it is molten steel. There is no proof it is molten metal. There is no proof it is even liquid. It could be melted plastic but it could also just be buring debris that happens to be falling and trailing sparks on a low quality highly compressed video. I've seen similar effects before. Of course you'll scoff at this idea and continue on thinking you're superior to us because you "know the truth". Whatever.
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Jul 9, 2006 20:44:14 GMT -4
I'm sure Jones' analysis was… When you find out what analysis he really did to come to this conclusion, you will let us know won’t you?
Oh. And what about all the aluminum oxide residue from all that thermite? Where is it?
|
|
|
Post by grashtel on Jul 9, 2006 21:30:11 GMT -4
Oh. And what about all the aluminum oxide residue from all that thermite? Where is it? And for that matter as thermate is roughly 30% barium nitrate (and only 2% sulfur) shouldn't there be a considerable amount of barium there as well?
|
|
|
Post by bpd1069 on Jul 11, 2006 15:17:25 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Jul 11, 2006 17:01:55 GMT -4
Scroll down in Dr Jones’ paper provided in this link until you see the picture of the collapsed WTC 7 sprawled out across the neighboring streets The caption reads “WTC 7 collapsed completely, onto its own footprint.” That’s really all the time I need to spend on Jones’ investigations.
|
|
|
Post by PhantomWolf on Jul 11, 2006 18:57:34 GMT -4
I gave up on Dr Jones when he declared what was obviously a slab of concrete to be "solidfied metal slag." Well okay I'd given up on him well before then, but that one just totally proved him to be utter incompetent and willing to say whatever he needed to support his political adgenda.
|
|