Well it suggests the most ludicrous of all things as the cause for the temperatures, don't you find a problem with THAT? One amazing analysis NOT performed by any "911-truther" is the amount of explosives needed to do this. I'm guessing that @Kokomojojo agrees that his "silent thermite cutters" aren't going to do any hurling of any multi-ton debris! With the upper portion of the tower carrying 2 tons of TNT equivalent kinetic force after falling 20 feet, growing exponentially, I'd like to suggest the totally obvious and far simpler mechanism being internal collisions. Needless to say(or it should be!) there were no such massive detonations heard, to do this huge expelling of debris. Reposting this analysis of the explosive power needed to eject items: Research paper analyzing the explosives needed to eject massive steel structures. "Plugging in plausible values for real existing explosives, the height from which WTC wall panels might have originated, and a range of maximum observed distances, we find that roughly 10 kg of explosives are needed to propel 1 ton of steel thusly. Since the steel pieces found at distances from the towers weighed at least 2.75 tons, but may have weighed twice or more, and since any such explosive propulsion would have been less than 100% energy-efficient, it can be estimated that minimum charge sizes of 30 to 100 kg are realistic. The gas velocities of the explosion are found to be several times the speed of sound, which would create shockwaves. Such events, occurring 300 to 400 meters above Ground Zero, would have resulted in extremely loud, highly brisant explosion sounds, created at collapse initiation or early into the collapse (before the top had descended too far down for ejections to fly laterally this far). Nothing even remotely suggesting such blasts was heard or recorded on 9/11/2001. It is thus extremely unlikely, if not outright impossible, that wall panels found ca. 600 feet away from the tower footprints were thrown there as a result of lateral ejection by explosive charges. This conclusion is independent of the type of explosive material"
It's more likely true there is no connection, but not necessarily true there is no connection. Do you understand? It is possible there could be a relation. Normal thermite, the way it is normally used, would not do that. But there could have been a variation of it that could have been used in a different way, that would have done that.
QUOTE="Bob0627, post: 1074237770, member: 70195"]Re-posting (yet again) for the purpose of this thread: Part two of Jonathan Cole’s incisive webinar series: ‘9/11 and the Scientific Method’ In part two of this series, Cole summarizes the results of his experiments regarding the extreme temperatures observed at the World Trade Center. He shows how none of the various hypotheses put forward — except controlled demolition using some form of thermite — can explain the multitude of evidence related to extreme temperatures. https://www.ae911truth.org/news/890...tHZImATN-_dXcckURPF9m4YU4wotObOQ0gTxUEJFf0CBM[/QUOTE] Just finished watching your clip, its excellent because it separates and proves by the scientific method 'experiment' the truthers are 100% correct, that all else is merely intellectual posturing. I dont know about others but I do know you know that Feynman was a kick azz physicist well known for his brilliance.
Normal thermate I presume you are referring to simple aluminum and rust, completely un-doped. For instance in the case of nano thermAte, a doped variant, it can be suspended in water its so fine very much like silt of muddy water. yeh you need to add sulfur and barium to the mix, and if magnesium is used its even hotter.
It's more than possible, it's highly probable. There were more than 150 documented eyewitness claims by first responders of seeing, hearing, feeling and being injured by explosions, including corroborated claims of hearing a massive explosion coming from the sub-basement prior to the first airplane impact. Some of these explosive sounds were caught on video. Not to mention the multiple videos of the twin towers being taken apart top down much like an erupting volcano by massive explosions and the resulting debris field. There were dozens of documented eyewitness claims by first responders of seeing molten steel, some described as "pools", "rivers" and "flowing like lava". One claim by a FEMA investigator of seeing "the melting of girders at the World Trade Center". None of these reported seeing molten aluminum. The molten steel claims in such large quantities were reported at all 3 tower sites. They are unprecedented in building fires. If a building was going to be prepared for demolition, it stands to reason that the supports would need to be weakened first by some sort of method. In the case of the WTC towers, it also stands to reason that it would be done as silently as possible, despite that multiple explosions were reported before the 3 buildings were destroyed. Thermitic cutters would most likely best serve that purpose as these can not only melt steel but vaporize it as well. If there isn't a relation, that would be quite an amazing coincidence.
That is true, it's not impossible, but equally absurd would be a couple of Abrams tanks blasting their way through the columns. Not even remotely absurd is the physics involved showing the falling top section + gathered debris field falling at ever increasing speeds. It isn't even a matter of "defending" anything. If somebody came out with something more likely that didn't involve countless numbers of people involved in a ridiculous number of needless tasks, well then I wouldn't rule it out. The whole premise of this thread was the quiet nature of these (thousands?) of devices, but unfortunately we still have the expelled debris, tons of it!
No, you need people to invisibly rig it and rely on it surviving plane impacts and fires. Yeah, and how many actually tested a) the material and b) the temperature. ZERO. Well if it was molten he wouldn't know it's a girder and you can't get partially molten through latent heat transfer in the metal. More likely a figure of speech huh? Well that's kind of irrelevant. They reported molten metal and assumed steel. Aluminum mixed with debris, other metals gets plenty dirty to look the same. Unfortunately, you cannot get past all the multi-ton ejections. Inaudible. No sound. Right there is your major problem. But if you don't want to address it, I understand.
You should by now, there's nothing about any of your posts related to 9/11 I'm interested in addressing.
Imagine how disappointed I am. But I really do understand why you won't be addressing how these "multi-ton structural components" are hurled "at 50-70+ MPH horizontally and in all directions at distances of up to 600 ft". There IS no explanation. Certainly not from the "silent thermite machines". ibid - referring to one large 3 ton outer panel and columns section: "To eject one such light panel laterally 600 feet using explosives, the minimum charge size can be estimated to be in a range of 10 to 40 kg, requiring gas velocities several times the speed of sound. As we saw earlier, some 9/11 Truthers have claimed 4 tons. Their highest claimed steel velocity was 70 mph = 31.1 m/s. With the most energetic explosives at SEC = 6.0 MJ/kg, using Equations (10) and (11c), we find that these claims necessitate a theoretical, lossless minimum of 41.7 kg of high explosive. Such an explosion would without fail result in an extremely powerful shockwave. NIST has calculated that exploding a hypothetical 9 pound (4.5 kg) demolition charge in the core of Building 7 of the WTC would result in a shockwave with a sound level of 130 to 140 dB – 1 km Nothing even remotely suggesting such blasts was heard or recorded on 9/11/2001."
Yeh so many reports of molten steel/iron flowing down the channels like lava, and this came from firefighters on the scene as they tried to dig down after several days of rain and millions of gallons of water sprayed on the pile. It was even laying all over the ground! but this guy, showing off with steel with eutectic erosion (flowing molten steel/iron) in charge of the investigation did a shultz on the world. I dont see any challengers to thermate cutters being virtually silent. Anyone?
Burning rubble, perfectly aerated and compressed - forge like conditions. Nobody disputes what they see, just what they think they are seeing. Molten metal is fairly easy to determine. Molten steel not so much. That could well be a pile of molten metal, forced upwards by pressure, but unlikely. Maybe aluminum if it is, dirtied up by contaminants. Metal would cool rapidly in open air. But let me point something out for the viewers, hopefully to understand properly. Molten steel/iron and water are not great friends, if the metal comes into contact with concrete/dirt it starts violently reacting with any water molecules within it. This causes spalling and sends splatters of molten material several yards! People who work with molten metals are always extremely careful about this. I see very thin metal panneling. What are you seeing? Eutectic erosion? Wow, pretty selective for "thermite"! And why the hell would the "Ace elevator" stooges put them on panneling? They're virtually silent. How do you figure they hurled 4 ton objects 600ft at 70mph? How many do you figure were needed, sizes, source for them? Who secretly fitted them? Got any "material evidence"? Anyone?
@Bob0627 I forgot to mention..... Lot of people immediately see the scientific mockery in the yellow circle and knowing you, you noticed it, but just in case you didnt, check out whats in the pink circle. Fraud and proud of it! MF should be in Leavenworth!
Well thanks for reposting that huge picture with "telling" circles drawn in. But the "viewers" are awaiting the enormous elephant in the room. How do a thousand or so invisibly-planted thermite machines, with no paper trail, money trail, electronic trail, no evidence whatsoever for any of them.....actually send multi-ton metal, 600ft at 70mph? Hushabooms. The noise from a detonation package needed to do this needless thing would be like a sonic boom! Any takers?
and what makes this a crime of massive proportions is that he testified that he saw no signs of molten iron. I guess we are supposed to believe that is the way columns normally look!
Me neither - the melting process of steel/iron just doesn't work like that. Colossal kinetic energy creates colossal heat, plenty enough to bend and sheer that panel. It isn't a column.
There is actually nothing to see and kindly ignore any random and irrelevant images that somebody has put together. Two planes and fire weakened floors. Kinetic energy and gravity did the rest. Oh, and bless my soul, but that isn't actually a column.
To be accurate, John Gross said he never heard of any eyewitness claims of molten steel despite the NIST claims that they interviewed hundreds of eyewitnesses. NIST also denied free fall for WTC7 until they were publicly schooled by David Chandler then had to add it to their WTC7 report. NIST also omitted critical structural components in their report, fabricated data, failed to follow NFPA guidelines that they helped develop, especially investigating for explosive residue and incendiaries under false pretenses, failed to follow the scientific method and withheld models and data refusing these under FIOA requests, falsely citing that the public release would "jeopardize public safety". To say this was a scam of massive proportions is to put it mildly. For me NIST's conspirators are responsible for crimes against humanity because their concocted conclusions helped give the US government a free pass to commit genocide in the Middle East.
Thanks for the specificity! ah they 'wrote' to him and he read it! It was laying all over the place. I know the attorneys deposed the witnesses so he heard it from the attorneys not the witnesses! 10 seconds of burning plane fuel cant make molten iron.
You mean the fuel that most of it exploded outside the building on impact but somehow managed to "pour" down the elevator shaft in liquid form and blow up the lobby but left a passport almost completely intact? That plane fuel?
Wait, are you suggesting those are "molten pools"? You are correct. But then again it's YOU lot who suggest it was molten in the first place! Oh come on Bob, are you suggesting as part of the magic-hushaboom-explosive remit that they were told to install jet-fuel squirters down the elevators? Or are these witnesses lying? Be specific here. Seems reasonable. Disintegrating fuel containment at 500mph is going to disperse some of it before it gets a chance to ignite - surely you cannot have a problem with THAT? The passport? No idea, but he would have been at the front of the plane so there would be a better chance of it surviving. Would they plant it to make a fait accompli? It's not out of the question, hard to prove though.
