WTC Collapses

How long would it have been in a fireball? I know that you are a truther, but even you must realize that for something to burned, it has to have prolonged exposure.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

lol, you people are goofy.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Once again Scott, you are covering your eyes and ears on this issue to keep your pathetic fantasy going.

I have shown you tests in which steel supports reached a temperature of 1000c in 40 minutes. This wasn't in a furnace, but a regular office fire.

So you don't get to pretend like this is a big mystery, because it's not.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

how did the fire reach a high enough temperature to melt the steel into a liquid? the consensus is that the steel could not have melted due to the fire. fire experiments confirm this too. steel is melted in a blast furnace with pure oxygen pumped in. these conditions were not possible in the wtc.

Professor Steven Jones has analysed the "dust" and found the chemical fingerprint of thermite at the nano, the micro and the macro level. He has also claimed to have found unreacted nanothermite, a high tech explosive which releases immense heat way above the melting temperature of steel.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FCqsIgCcZQ
further analysis of the red chips has shown the composition of the red chips to be less than 25 nanometers, confirming the substance to be nanothermite.

http://www.journalof911studies.com/articles/WTCHighTemp2.pdf

http://www.journalof911studies.com/...ollapse_Jones_Thermite_World_Trade_Center.pdf

http://scitation.aip.org/getabs/ser...00845000001001006000001&idtype=cvips&gifs=yes

 

This is for headspin who asked to see some debunking of Steven Jones' claims.

Several documents regarding thermite
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/theyoughtaknowbetter:critiquesoftheinept

Debunks Jones’ paper Why Indeed Did the blah blah
http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/commentsonstevenjones'hypothesesbydavero

http://www.911myths.com/WTC7_Lies.pdf

Addresses the early claims of Thermite
http://www.911myths.com/html/traces_of_thermate_at_the_wtc.html


http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/stevene.jones'thermitethermateclaims

Jones’ claims in general.
http://www.debunking911.com/jones.htm

http://www.jnani.org/mrking/writings/911/king911.htm

Ryan Mackey’s document is a response to David Ray Griffin, but he repeats most of Jones’ claims. Thermite is brought up many times.
http://911guide.googlepages.com/drg_nist_review_2_1.pdf

This is a good summary of Jones claims over the years.
http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4157113&postcount=1

 

I know. It is the blind leading the blind.

No check the site. There are more than 500 "architectural and engineering professionals". They have padded those numbers up with software developers, chemists, electrical engineers, urban activists.

 

Where does that come from?

The NCSTAR1 report says it was a 53% to 47% ratio, almost equal. But the perimeter columns had the higher overload capacity because there were so many of them.

psik

 

That is correct. However very few of the samples came from the area of the impacts.

There is still plenty of evidence to confidently say that the temperatures went well over 250C.

The fires in building four caused warping to the steel. Explosives? Thermite?

 

So you think he is implicated in the super conspiracy of bombs and megathermite because he was a shareholder in the security company responsible for WTC? That is a desperate attempt to make a link. Think about it.

The claim appears to have no substance to it. No I don’t think it should be investigated.

But there isn’t sufficient evidence. Your idea of sufficient evidence appears to be anything that you read on the internet.

But Scott you are missing something very important. The (shaky) claim is that only one tower had the power down. So the other tower which collapsed fell due to the fires and structural damage? If one did then why not the other?

Oh. I’ve never looked at it before.

I’m sure he could contribute to this forum - http://www.sciforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=22

 

The problem with the concrete is there are so many different stories. Some sources which existed before 9/11 say there were a total of 425,000 cubic yards in the towers. That would come to 280,000 tons of the lightweight type in just one tower. Now obviously they would want to avoid putting a lot of concrete high up in the towers but there had to be a hell of a lot in the foundation and there were SIX basement levels. So why don't we have numbers specified for every level? Why are we supposed to believe that this is difficult information to get?

psik

 

Perhaps it's not so difficult. I'm a bit confounded as to why you haven't responded to this post.

 

Your missing the fact that was filmed by the media in a coptor of the second tower that shows melted, liquid, metal, running out of the corner like slow running water from a fawcet.
You can toss any link from any professor you want from either camp that says the metal of the buildings did not melt prior to the towers collapsing. But the footage of the film of the second tower before collapse factually shows the fires had became hot enough to melt the metal used in the structure of that tower prior to it's collapse.
Thus if film footage shows metal from within the tower was melting and running out of it and onto the street below, it is very safe and very logical to believe that the heat of the fires had also weakened the metal framing enough to cause inner dammage so the framing holding up the concrete floors caved in.
That caving in/collapsing was the initial blast heard of the upper floors collapsing onto the damaged floors giving into the destruction caused to them.

 

What does "debunk" mean?
It means to expose as false, to disprove.

None of those links provide anything that disproves Jones work.
I said originally that i have not seen any debunking of Jones work. I cannot find anything in those links that show Jones work to be false. It didn't take long to encounter the usual politically driven rhetoric, distortions and ad hominem arguments.

What you have there is everything that has ever been offered as criticism with no regard to integrity. If you think Jones work is bunk, it should be easy to present a clear case.

 

Or it could be aluminium from the planes. There was tons of the stuff in the building.

This is particularly more likely if the flow of molten material is near the impact point. The sagging of the floors would have caused it to flow out.

 

Those articles point out just how flawed, idiotic, and at times dishonest, his claims are.

You read them right? Or like a Christian reading about the mechanisms behind evolution did you just know that they were wrong before reading them… which you may not have actually done.

Some of the articles are more professional than others. Only a few resort to ad hominem.

It’s there if you want to see it.:shrug:

 

yes I have read most of them over the last few years. I don't intend to read them again. It is also not necessary to read the entirety of the big documents after one encounters blatant falsehoods.

do you know how many times i have encountered people using the "its like intelligent design" argument without seeming to realise it is not a valid argument.

 

four times?

 

I think the conversation has veered just a -tad- off the topic at hand. In the next day or 2, I'll try to update my web site a bit with all the information that people have brought to it regarding particular sub topics atleast. My hope is that I'll be able to present the latest counters (from either side) and we can get back to the meat of the matter. I just realized I've passed the 1000 post mark (yay me

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

).

 

Those buildings weren't that massive compared to the twin towers. Something the size of the twin towers can't tip, it will only collapse upon itself, think about it, if it started tipping at any place of the building it would not be able to maintain structure.

- if reality proves different than your ideas, trust reality.

 

there were reams of paper that were blown out of the hole the plane made, the very same hole that had the huge fireball coming out of it.
quite a few of those pages made their way to new jersey without any signs of being burnt.