It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

WTC-7 Mysteries FINALLY Solved.

page: 24
160
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 08:08 PM
link   
a reply to: LaBTop


it was lead that was flowing


I have heard that false molten lead claim before as well.

If you look at the corner of WTC 2, you will notice the fire burning inside that corner of WTC 2, which is generating temperatures high enough to melt aluminum, and where did tons of the aluminum airframe of United 175 come to rest? Right from the same location where the molten aluminum is seen flowing.

Image: Where the Aluminum Airframe of United 175 Came to Rest



Stephen D. Chastain of Metal Talk.

Several times over the last year I have been asked to comment on a photo of one of the Trade Center Towers. The photo shows a molten flow from one of the windows. The flow falls down along the building. It appears orange and turns to a gray color as it cools....

Summary: The flow is not steel because the structural steel would fail well below the melting temperature. The flow is likely to be a mixture of aluminum, aluminum oxides, molten glass and coals of whatever trash the aluminum flowed over as it reached the open window. Such a flow would appear orange and cool to a dark color.

Stephen D. Chastain

debunking911.com...


Report chronicles the final moments of WTC tragedy

The apparent source of this waterfall: molten aluminum from the jet's wings and fuselage, which had also piled up in that corner. Within minutes, portions of the 80th floor began to give way, as evidenced by horizontal lines of dust blowing out the side of the building. Seconds later, near the heavily damaged southeasterly portion of this same floor, close to where the aircraft had entered, exterior columns began to buckle.

www.taipeitimes.com...


Report on WTC 2

A photograph leaked from the ASCE-FEMA investigation shows a stream of what appears to be molten aluminum exiting from the northeast corner. This would indicate that what was left of the aircraft when it reached the north end of its travel was massive enough to have destroyed at least one floor.

NIST pg 43 Section H.9 App H Vol 4
Starting at around 9:52 a.m. a molten material began to pour from the top of the window 80-256 on the North face of WTC 2. The material appears intermittently until the tower collapses at 9:58:59. The observation of piles of debris in this area combined with the melting point behaviors of the primary alloys used in a Boeing 767 suggest that the material is molten aluminum derived from aircraft debris located on floor 81.

edit on 10-8-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-8-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 08:14 PM
link   



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 08:39 PM
link   
Originally posted by: skyeagle409
A reply to: LaBTop


it was lead that was flowing


No, that's not what I wrote, that's this :
""It was probably lead from the huge bank of newly installed accumulators.""

Drowning a thread in Trivia, is that a new tactical adagio from the other side?

Did you ever put some scrap aluminum in a carbon crucible and heated it up? Someone did and poured it out.
Btw, molten aluminum forms immediately a very hard thin oxide crust when heated in air.

And I'm not really interested in hard to prove debates. You and neither I have any photographic evidence what ended up nor what exactly happened in that corner. PERIOD. Next subject please.

And don't bring up too many of those excerpts with no names and no links to verifiable facts, it's quickly getting boring. Try to bring some meat to the matter, look through your own propaganda loaded links, and see the huge lack of real investigative work in most of your links.
It's mostly conjecture and pure opinion, no references to real investigations. It's like hearing a politician preaching to the choir, you can do better, do your OWN research, don't parrot the simplistic party followers.
edit on 10/8/15 by LaBTop because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 09:37 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409


It is apparent that you have been unaware that there have been those who have been planting disinformation to discredit the Truth Movement and it worked. It seems that you have been unaware of this video.


I am aware of the said video and I agree there has been many people, (OS supporters ) who have regurgitate many lies. However I do not support their fallacies. So stop lumping ALL truther under the same umbrella. I see your "ridiculing" is orchestrated at bashing all Truther as if we are the ones spreading all the disinformation concerning 911. This does not help your cause.


Shortly after I posted that video, a Truther--who was totally unaware that I had posted that hoaxed video to prove my case that Truther do not do their homework, or do it properly when they do-- had used that same hoaxed video against me in his argument that it was proof of demolition explosives taking down WTC 7.


I have to say the same thing goes to OS supporters who will use every trick and deception to support their Fallacies as I have seen it well demonstrated in this thread.


I posted a hoaxed video and a Truther claimed that it was proof of explosives. It is that kind of illogical logic that has resulted in the Truth Movement being the laughing stock that it is today.


There you go again calling the Truth movement a laughing stock. It only proves how desperate some of you OS supporters are in trying to prove a fallacy.

When debating facts one does not have to resort to ridiculing.

However it is a proven fact that the OS of 911 is a fallacy. You have a choice, you can chose the truth or you can defend a lie.



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 09:49 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409


"Several demolition teams had reached Ground Zero by 3:00 pm on 9/11, and these individuals witnessed the collapse of WTC 7 from within a few hundred feet of the event.

We have spoken with several who possess extensive experience in explosive demolition, and all reported seeing or hearing nothing to indicate an explosive detonation precipitating the collapse.


Clearly a cut and paste, cherry picking information desperately trying to fool the readers here. Yeah, a lot of eyewitness saw and heard different things that day. However there are more eyewitness that went on the Official record stating they saw and heard explosions are you going to dismiss them as well. Of course you will because it does not fit the OS narrative, does it.



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 10:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958




There you go again calling the Truth movement a laughing stock. It only proves how desperate some of you OS supporters are in trying to prove a fallacy.


Space beams
Mini nukes
Hologram planes
Silent explosives
I'd say the truth movement made themselves laughing stock.



However it is a proven fact that the OS of 911 is a fallacy. You have a choice, you can chose the truth or you can defend a lie.

After 14 years the truth movement has not come up with one comprehensive theory that explains all aspects of 911.
Not to mention one piece of proof that can stand cross examination.



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 10:25 PM
link   
a reply to: LaBTop



Did you ever put some scrap aluminum in a carbon crucible and heated it up?


I haven't, but I seen molten aluminum flowing from a number of burning aircraft to know what I am talking about in regards to molten aluminum flowing from the corner of WTC 2.

I was near this C-141, #0253 when this photo was taken.

Burning C-141
edit on 10-8-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-8-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 10:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958



Clearly a cut and paste, cherry picking information desperately trying to fool the readers here.


Four decades of knowledge and experience allows me to know when to "hold 'em, and when to throw 'em.


Yeah, a lot of eyewitness saw and heard different things that day. However there are more eyewitness that went on the Official record stating they saw and heard explosions are you going to dismiss them as well.


They heard the sound of explosions because during a NBC news play back in October 2014, firefighters reported the sound of explosions they heard were from exploding gas lines.


edit on 10-8-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 10:33 PM
link   
Look at the pictures of Air Canada 797.
797
Simple foam and plastic burned through the aluminum skin.
I would expect to find cooled puddles of aluminum after that fire.



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 10:35 PM
link   
What a Typical Fire Can Do: Create Pools of Molten Aluminum.
edit on 10-8-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 10:39 PM
link   
a reply to: samkent



I would expect to find cooled puddles of aluminum after that fire.


Take a look at the following photo.

Pools of Molten Aluminum
edit on 10-8-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 10:39 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409

This is your quote on pg 20


Because recorded temperatures never reached the melting point of steel, however, temperatures were high enough to melt aluminum, which was seen flowing out of the corning of WTC 2.


Your quote:


If you look at the corner of WTC 2, you will notice the fire burning inside that corner of WTC 2, which is generating temperatures high enough to melt aluminum, and where did tons of the aluminum airframe of United 175 come to rest? Right from the same location where the molten aluminum is seen flowing.


NIST's World Trade Center FAQ

A Reply to the National Institute for Standards and Technology's
Answers to Frequently Asked Questions



Why do some photographs show a yellow stream of molten metal pouring down the side of WTC2 that NIST claims was aluminum from the crashed plane although aluminum burns with a white glow?


911research.wtc7.net...


NIST never proved there was molten aluminum poring down the side of the WTC. Yes NIST makes the claim, however after reading their pseudo report no where does NIST prove that claim.

NIST makes a phony claim and you just demonstrated that you fell for their fallacy.

There is absolutely no science in the NIST report that proves molten aluminum. and your " opinion" is not fact.


Stephen D. Chastain of Metal Talk.

Several times over the last year I have been asked to comment on a photo of one of the Trade Center Towers. The photo shows a molten flow from one of the windows. The flow falls down along the building. It appears orange and turns to a gray color as it cools....

Summary: The flow is not steel because the structural steel would fail well below the melting temperature. The flow is likely to be a mixture of aluminum, aluminum oxides, molten glass and coals of whatever trash the aluminum flowed over as it reached the open _ Such a flow would appear orange and cool to a dark color.

Stephen D. Chastain


Stephen said The flow is likely to be a mixture of aluminum, aluminum oxides,
Stephen is only giving his "opinion" and nothing more.


Where is the science that proves aluminum was poring down the WTC?? There is none.

"opinions" are not facts.


Report chronicles the final moments of WTC tragedy

The apparent source of this waterfall: molten aluminum from the jet's wings and fuselage, which had also piled up in that corner. Within minutes, portions of the 80th floor began to give way, as evidenced by horizontal lines of dust blowing out the side of the building. Seconds later, near the heavily damaged southeasterly portion of this same floor, close to where the aircraft had entered, exterior columns began to buckle.


This is a script, there no evidence or any science to support this nonsense. This is the authors "opinion" which lacks any credible evidence or science to support his claims. Talk about gullibility.


Report on WTC 2

A photograph leaked from the ASCE-FEMA investigation shows a stream of what appears to be molten aluminum exiting from the northeast corner. This would indicate that what was left of the aircraft when it reached the north end of its travel was massive enough to have destroyed at least one floor.


A photograph does not prove anything to support your claim. You are basing someone's "opinions" as truth to support your false narrative.

Again "opinions" are not facts.


NIST pg 43 Section H.9 App H Vol 4
Starting at around 9:52 a.m. a molten material began to pour from the top of the window 80-256 on the North face of WTC 2. The material appears intermittently until the tower collapses at 9:58:59. The observation of piles of debris in this area combined with the melting point behaviors of the primary alloys used in a Boeing 767 suggest that the material is molten aluminum derived from aircraft debris located on floor 81.


Now NIST SUGGEST there was molten aluminum.

Is suggest a fact??
Is guessing a fact?
Is assuming a fact? No it is not.





edit on 10-8-2015 by Informer1958 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 10:50 PM
link   
a reply to: samkent


Space beams
Mini nukes
Hologram planes
Silent explosives
I'd say the truth movement made themselves laughing stock.


Another OS supporter who has just demonstrated by lumping ALL truther under the same umbrella


After 14 years the truth movement has not come up with one comprehensive theory that explains all aspects of 911.
Not to mention one piece of proof that can stand cross examination.


That is a fallacy!

www.ae911truth.org...

Try and do some real research before you make a fool out of yourself.



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 10:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958



Why do some photographs show a yellow stream of molten metal pouring down the side of WTC2 that NIST claims was aluminum from the crashed plane although aluminum burns with a white glow?


Aluminum glows a variety of colors, which depend on its temperature range.

Photo of White Glowing Molten Aluminum



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 10:56 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409


Four decades of knowledge and experience allows me to know when to "hold 'em, and when to throw 'em.


I hate to bust your ego, but you should have throw 'em.
Because your doing a poor job trying to convince the casual ATS readers you BS.


They heard the sound of explosions because during a NBC news play back in October 2014, firefighters reported the sound of explosions they heard were from exploding gas lines.


That was their "opinions" nothing more. Oh wait are you gonna tell me that the firemen were standing next to the gas lines?



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 10:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958



Where is the science that proves aluminum was poring down the WTC?? There is none.


Wrong!!

Molten Metal

Pure liquid aluminum would be expected to appear silvery. However, the molten metal was very likely mixed with large amounts of hot, partially burned, solid organic materials (e.g., furniture, carpets, partitions and computers) which can display an orange glow, much like logs burning in a fireplace. The apparent color also would have been affected by slag formation on the surface."

www.nist.gov...

The droplets says it all.

Silvery Aluminum Droplets



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 10:59 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409


Take a look at the following photo.



Pools of Molten Aluminum


That is not a photo of the WTC. You are trying to prove aluminum hubcaps is the proof. No it is not.



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 11:01 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958



I hate to bust your ego, but you should have throw 'em. Because your doing a poor job trying to convince the casual ATS readers you BS.


No BS by any means, which explains why after 14 years, the evidence supports my references and facts, not the disinformation of Truthers.


edit on 10-8-2015 by skyeagle409 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 11:02 PM
link   
a reply to: skyeagle409


Aluminum glows a variety of colors, which depend on its temperature range.



Photo of White Glowing Molten Aluminum


That is not a photo of the WTC you have proved nothing in your desperate attempts you are now grasping for straw.



posted on Aug, 10 2015 @ 11:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Informer1958



That is not a photo of the WTC. You are trying to prove aluminum hubcaps is the proof. No it is not.


This is!

Molten Aluminum Droplet Falling From WTC 2



new topics

top topics



 
160
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join