Blacksmiths

Discussion in '9/11' started by sunnyside, Sep 8, 2015.

You are viewing posts in the Conspiracy Theory forum. PF does not allow misinformation. However, please note that posts could occasionally contain content in violation of our policies prior to our staff intervening.

  1. sunnyside

    sunnyside Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    Messages:
    4,573
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Among the general population I keep hearing the "jet fuel can't melt steel" thing.

    However it occurs to me that for thousands of years blacksmiths have been making and shaping various forms of steel using charcoal or other primitive sources that have far lower energy density and specific energy than jet fuel.

    Is the "jet fuel can't melt steel" thing not seriously discussed in a place like this were people routinely debate the issue and just a 9/11 meme out among the general population?
     
  2. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,812
    Likes Received:
    1,827
    Trophy Points:
    113
    they are correct, its a matter of process, that process is not available in a open air fire.

    blacksmiths dont simply throw steel on top of a fire to melt it, they us a 'forced air' forge filled with red hot coals, or at a minimum place the steel into burning coal bed.

    its not a meme its simple thermodynamics that all these official story supporters have little real or working knowledge of or they are simply disinformationalists or both, usually the latter.

    Its been seriously discussed as has the conditions to obtain yellow white hot unrestrained flowing material.
     
  3. Blues63

    Blues63 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2014
    Messages:
    1,161
    Likes Received:
    37
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    It is an idiotic meme circulated by 9/11 truth. No-one ever said steel was melted by the jet fuel on 9/11. That is a simplistic misinterpretation of the fact that the jet fuel fires weakened the steel in the WTC attacks.

    There is quite a difference between 'melted' and weakened'.

    In the following video a Jet fuel fire makes a steel beam lose its structural integrity in under four minutes:

    [video]https://youtu.be/CGsOkT__M7Y[/video]
     
  4. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,812
    Likes Received:
    1,827
    Trophy Points:
    113
    and the general population is correct.

    The problem you have is posers are not capable of understanding that the wtc was a lattice network where you can take out several of the coumns and the building would merely shift the loads. That is outside the knowledge base of posers so they simply pretend that a hirise building is made out of one i beam and claim invisible fires weakened the interior columns despte the FACT they cant show me one core column that failed due to overheating.

    You cant teach these guys anything either because they will start calling names but dont take my word for it just read their irrational posts.

    Then the best thing for you to do if you want to understand this is go to school and learn it so you can answer your own question.
     
  5. Blues63

    Blues63 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2014
    Messages:
    1,161
    Likes Received:
    37
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    Many believe the material flowing out of the façade just before the collapse is evidence for 'molten steel', therefore Thermite/ Thermate/ Nano-Thermite/ was deployed in 'demolishing' the WTC:

    [video]https://youtu.be/TJJPYTVjxug[/video]

    But it looks very similar to the material falling from the transformer:

    [​IMG]

    So the incredulity is somewhat unjustified. Too much :weed: ?

    The fact of the matter is, that this spot is precisely where much of the aircraft wreckage would have come to rest owing to the trajectory (see the Purdue simulation), therefore it is far more reasonable to conclude that this material contains a percentage of aluminium. 9/11 truth states that the colour is 'wrong' (it should be silver), and this is correct to a point. However, aluminium will exhibit such a colour if mixed with impurities, or if heated to approx. 1900 deg F (IIRC-I should check). 9/11 truth circulates a cropped version of the is video which often omits the fire flare-up in the spot next to where the flow originates, thus making it appear in isolation, however, it is obviously a reaction to the concomitant fire.
     
  6. Fangbeer

    Fangbeer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Messages:
    10,848
    Likes Received:
    3,823
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Truthers exist to promote a conclusion, not navigate the miasma of misunderstood minutia they use to support that conclusion.

    In their minds, whether or not fire melts steel is not in question. That's something they "know" whether they actually understand the process or not.

    The mechanics of the collapse of the building is what they question. And without the knowledge required to understand that collapse, they cling to strange and disjointed nuggets of information that they do understand, like, fire doesn't melt steel.
     
  7. Scott

    Scott Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2008
    Messages:
    5,343
    Likes Received:
    869
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Truthers don't say that heat didn't weaken the steel. They say that the buildings wouldn't have fallen nearly as fast as they fell if weakened steel had been the cause of the collapse.

    WTC7 in Freefall: No Longer Controversial
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVCDpL4Ax7I

    http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=49603.msg440497#msg440497

    Tom Sullivan - Explosives Technician - Loader - AE911Truth.org
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5IgqJXyLbg

    Architects & Engineers - Solving the Mystery of WTC 7 - AE911Truth.org
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMEHc14IWf4

    The Death of Controlled Demolition Expert Danny Jowenko after Speaking about 9/11 WTC 7 Building 7
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-zHHvo6U4lA

    September 11 -- The New Pearl Harbor (FULL)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DOnAn_PX6M
    (2:40:20 time mark)

    Building 7 - Sound Evidence for Explosions (10 min)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlRmaUCE8sM
     
  8. Eleuthera

    Eleuthera Well-Known Member Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2015
    Messages:
    22,990
    Likes Received:
    11,895
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Promoting a conclusion?

    How about stating the obvious--the official story is a bloody lie from start to finish.

    Promoting a conclusion is precisely what NIST did, and what the 911 Commission did.
     
  9. Margot2

    Margot2 Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2013
    Messages:
    73,644
    Likes Received:
    13,766
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well, the WTC used an Aluminum skin developed by Alcoa....
     
  10. Fangbeer

    Fangbeer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Messages:
    10,848
    Likes Received:
    3,823
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Case in point.

    I'm not exactly sure how you think your response to my point comes off, but it's clear you just did exactly what I claimed. Yes, the purpose of any investigation, including NIST's investigation, is to come to a conclusion. This would be an example of the miasma of minutia I referenced. The part I quoted is the conclusion you're trying to support using this specious tidbit of trivia. The fact that most investigations purport the goal as being to reach a conclusion is not in any way evidence that the "official story is a bloody lie from start to finish" Such a leap shows a sophomoric understanding of how logical arguments work.

    In fact, the evidence contrary to your claim is that NIST's conclusion was founded in scientific principal; formed after careful and repeatable experimentation, open to review, and was quite exhaustive. Truthers on the other hand typically shoot from the hip after a few minutes of viewing pictures on the internet, and then seek out arguments that agree with their position.

    For example:

    A truther decides after watching a video that a building "fell" too fast. This does not instill in them a hearty desire to study structural engineering, work the complex stress strain curves out themselves, or even seek out an impartial or independent source of information. Rather this causes them to shotgun through a bunch of other videos that promote the same view. This causes them to believe the "official story is a bloody lie from start to finish" so they crash down the rabbit hole of every wild eye'd theorist's pet piece of misunderstood trivia trying to support their forgone conclusion that the "official story is a bloody life from start to finish" The path is fraught with unintentional, and quite intentional disinformation. Lies uncovered in the information down the hole are consciously and unconsciously twisted to become lies in the "official story" It's self brainwashing at its finest.

    So you can go on about fire not melting steel. (A claim absurd on its face) The real question you're trying to solve is, what caused the buildings to collapse, and that my friend has a very long and very detailed explanation that you've already written off a "a bloody lie from start to finish" So good luck figuring it out.
     
  11. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So prove it...........making claims like yours won't do.
     
  12. Blues63

    Blues63 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2014
    Messages:
    1,161
    Likes Received:
    37
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    Yes, and that is the obvious conclusion, but 9/11 truth maintains that the colour is wrong therefore it must be steel.

    - - - Updated - - -


    No, they say 'jet fuel can't melt steel'.

    If so, they are missing a fundamental point. Do you know what that might be?
     
  13. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,812
    Likes Received:
    1,827
    Trophy Points:
    113

    DUH!

    Thats an explosion not melted flowing steel! LOL

    you guys always good for a laugh
     
  14. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,812
    Likes Received:
    1,827
    Trophy Points:
    113
    if there is anything truthers learned over the past 10 years is that we cant prove anything much less teach anything to posers pedaling the official lie. sheesh
     
  15. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,812
    Likes Received:
    1,827
    Trophy Points:
    113
    what a waste of rambling anti-truther rant... Cant address the subject only attack the truth.
     
  16. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,812
    Likes Received:
    1,827
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Once in a great while I run into someone on the official lie side of the fence with q little real understanding of the subject matter, but after a short burst of arguments they always bite the bullet when cornered and run off or they start posting really lamo meaningless childish snap backs and expect to be taken seriously. Like attorneys they always post lies by innuendo and slightly mischaracterizing events and required methods. Lies cant stand up to the truth.
     
  17. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,812
    Likes Received:
    1,827
    Trophy Points:
    113

    Thats really great information scott but frankly from what I have seen on the boards out here these official story guys dont understand it and need someone to hold their hand with a set of crayolas just to teach them enough so they can form an argument.

    I am still waiting for a reasonable rebuttal from them but it never seems to happen for some reason.
     
  18. Blues63

    Blues63 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2014
    Messages:
    1,161
    Likes Received:
    37
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Gender:
    Male
    No, it's obviously a fire. :bored:
     
  19. LoneStrSt8

    LoneStrSt8 New Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    33
    Trophy Points:
    0
    There's something seriously wrong with Koko...
     
  20. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,812
    Likes Received:
    1,827
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'd like to thank both of you for proving my point.

    Everyone I am sure is taking note that you simply attacked me and blues did not address my point instead posting the ridiculous.

    Hey wow, its yellow too! How about that. So what?

    See not to hard to be equally as ridiculous posers and degenerate any discussion into crayola loony zone.
     
  21. Fangbeer

    Fangbeer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Messages:
    10,848
    Likes Received:
    3,823
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You want me to address the so called issue of heat from a fire melting steel? What a worthless waste of time this will be. The ensuing conversation will eventually devolve into you denying that fire is hot, but let's give it a go, again, again, and again.

    To start with, the research has already been done and presented. A scale office was built using the same steel configured in the same structural design. It was coated with the same fireproofing material. It was filled with the same combustible materials. Was loaded with similar loads. It was set on fire and temperatures were recorded, charted, and presented. There's no need to re-do what you refuse to read.

    Beyond that, energy is energy. There's lots of things around an office that contain enough energy to melt steel. There are lots of ways a fire will precipitate the release of that energy. I can weld steel with just the UPS we have in our server rack. Heat is heat. Doesn't matter where it's stored. Just matters how much and how fast it's transferred.

    Lastly, melted steel didn't cause the collapse, so I'm not sure why there's any need at all to entertain the discussion at all.

    On the flip side of the argument you have truther science. This consists of a crackpot architect with some cardboard boxes, a few Youtube geeks with some chicken wire, matches, wooden dowels, metal washers, and chewing gum.
     
  22. Kokomojojo

    Kokomojojo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2009
    Messages:
    23,812
    Likes Received:
    1,827
    Trophy Points:
    113

    I will reserve comment on the rest of that drivel until I see the experiment you are proposing supports your claims. Unless of course you dont post it then I will call bull(*)(*)(*)(*).
     
  23. Fangbeer

    Fangbeer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Messages:
    10,848
    Likes Received:
    3,823
    Trophy Points:
    113
  24. sunnyside

    sunnyside Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2008
    Messages:
    4,573
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ok, so the issue isn't that anyone doubts that a fire within an enclosed structure fueled by furniture and jet fuel couldn't weaken the remaining load bearing steel in an already severely damaged structure. It's that:

    and therefore the conversation moves to

    because

    So it's a more complicated question about higher temperatures, the nature of high temperature metallic slurries, and how well the possible internal structure of the building would have acted as a furnace.

    And I guess issues of how the damaged metals involved would have been shaped. After all you can light up steel wool at room temperature with a lighter.

    And perhaps moreso how fast the heat can dissipate. I'd be curious about this study as well.

    It sounds like they found seemingly molten steel in the wreckage. Though I can appreciate that given the tremendous pressures that would have been involved in the collapse that it could be hard to tell molten steel from softened steel that was smooshed.
     
  25. Fangbeer

    Fangbeer Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2011
    Messages:
    10,848
    Likes Received:
    3,823
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The provenance of such molten steel findings not withstanding.

    In other news, a crack team of expert potato munchers saw something in a photo once that they positively identified as a Sasquatch.

    I guess it must also be so.

    Implied by the word transfer. The system is obviously not closed (a point that the conservation of momentum crowd tend to struggle with)
     

Share This Page