Melting steel?

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: PublicOpinion

I say let's remember our debate regarding the WTC dust first.

Let's begin here.

RJ Lee Group Report

The analytical results are as follows:




• Chrysotile asbestos was pervasively present in the Building. The WTC towers were built, in part, using fireproofing materials that contained chrysotile asbestos. In contrast, the Building was not constructed with asbestos-containing surfacing materials. Chrysotile asbestos is a distinguishing WTC Dust Marker for WTC Dust.

• Mineral wool was pervasively present in the Building. Mineral wool is a WTC Dust Marker for WTC Dust. The WTC towers used construction materials that contained mineral wool.

• Gypsum, also designated as a WTC Dust Marker for WTC Dust based on its high abundance and small particle size (not its mere presence), wasubiquitously present in the Building.

• Particles of partially burned or melted plastic (vesicular carbonaceous particles), not expected in “normal” dust, were commonly observed in WTC Dust due to the fire that accompanied the WTC Event. Additionally, the concentrations of various burned phases and the characteristics ofspecific phases, also proved to be excellent “fingerprints” for WTC Event
dusts.

• Particles of materials that had been modified by exposure to high temperature, such as spherical particles of iron and silicates, are common in WTC Dust because of the fire that accompanied the WTC Event, but are not common in “normal” interior office dust.

• The investigation has established that WTC Dust is a carrier of toxic substances.

911research.wtc7.net...

In other words, the high temperature referred to in the RJ Lee Group pertains to fires raging within the WTC buildings, and nothing to do with explosives nor thermite.

.

What was that have to do with 3180* F...

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: PublicOpinion

Evaporated steel in extraordinarily high temperatures is something I would like to know more about though. Pity.

Let's remember that torches and high temp wands were used to cut steel beams during cleanup operations at ground zero.

maybe they could have used jet fuel....that seemed to melt steel just fine in the initial collapse...why use those hotter torches?

a reply to: skyeagle409

Steel columns preserved in hanger 17 at JFK airport

911research.wtc7.net...

Note bending of columns.......

a reply to: skyeagle409

The heat generated during the WTC Event caused some plastics to form residual vesicular carbonaceous particles, and paints to form residual spherical particles. Some metals, plastics and other materials were vaporized thus producing new chemicals that were deposited onto the surfaces of solid particulate matter, such as asbestos, quartz, and mineral wool..

There you go. Now please, bear with me for a second: the temperatures we would need to vaporize said 3 materials are how high exactly? And don't even start to think about 'small particle sized Gypsum' or 0.54% Hi Temp Si/Al-rich particles. Nothing happened, ever.
19,57 % mineral wool and iron spheres in the dust only, yet you come up with torches...

You're a funny guy! Did you even read the study in the first place? Ha, gotcha!

a reply to: wildb

The RJ Lee Group Report referred to fires and the use of torches in regard to high temperatures at ground zero, not explosives and thermite.

a reply to: PublicOpinion

It's all there in the report and the RJ Lee Group Report has shown that their dust samples found no evidence of explosives nor thermite.

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: PublicOpinion

It's all there in the report and the RJ Lee Group Report has shown that their dust samples found no evidence of explosives nor thermite.

Once again you deflect , were are talking temps not explosives.

a reply to: firerescue

Thanks! I also noticed the so-called "Meteors," which 9/11 conspiracy theorist claim is molten concrete, but the other day, I posted a close-up photo that shows paper and carpet material embedded within the object.

The embedded rebar show no signs that it was in a molten state.

a reply to: wildb

In other words, the RJ Lee Group found no evidence of explosives and thermite in its dust samples.

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: firerescue

Thanks! I also noticed the so-called "Meteors," which 9/11 conspiracy theorist claim is molten concrete, but the other day, I posted a close-up photo that shows paper and carpet material embedded within the object.

The embedded rebar show no signs that it was in a molten state.

But there were other examples which you chose to ignore..

a reply to: wildb

In some photos, there is paper embedded within the "Meteors" that were not burned and once again, the embedded rebar and steel do not show signs they were ever in a molten state.

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: wildb

In some photos, there is paper embedded within the "Meteors" that were not burned and once again, the embedded rebar and steel do not show signs they were ever in a molten state.

But there were other examples which you chose to ignore..

a reply to: wildb

There are no other examples that depict the objects were molten concrete. Even the recovered gun shows no sign that it was ever in a molten state.

originally posted by: skyeagle409
a reply to: wildb

There are no other examples that depict the objects were molten concrete. Even the recovered gun shows no sign that it was ever in a molten state.

It did not have to be..

a reply to: skyeagle409

Temperatures, please?

You know Phage? Call me PubOps, it's a kinda different experience but remotely comparable.

It's all there in the report and the RJ Lee Group Report has shown that their dust samples found no evidence of explosives nor thermite.

Care to explain where exactly it has shown, that 'their dust samples found no evidence'? Sorry to break it for you, but dust samples never searched for evidence in the first place. They get collected, hence they are the evidence.

Any further questions?

a reply to: wildb

Investigations have determined that the objects are compacted floors, not molten concrete and you can actually see embedded carpet material in some photos.

a reply to: skyeagle409

Molten concrete?

WTC Dust, conversely, contains very little pristine organic fibrous or particulate material. Much of the organic or polymeric content of the WT C Dust has been heat hydrolyzed and partially consumed or burned

Heat hydrolyzed. There is your 'molten' concrete, look out for small particle sized Gypsum as well. And mind the particle size, not it's abundance in general.
Support for any explosive theory, yes. Thank you.

Any further questions?

a reply to: PublicOpinion

There was no molten concrete because that story was a fabrication. The RJ Lee Group Report has proven that no evidence of explosives or thermite was ever found in its dust samples. All you have to do is to look at its dust sample chart.

a reply to: skyeagle409

The RJ Lee Group Report has proven that no evidence of explosives or thermite was ever found in its dust samples.

Correction: it can be found in it's composition and morphology. At least when you're able to read and comprehend the statistical analysis.
Heat hydrolyzed and partially consumed/ burned organic or polymeric content, small particle sized Gypsum, 20% irony iron and lots of asbestos. No fabrication at all, that's your 'molten' concrete next to the vanished cores with a layer of fireproofing full of asbestos.

And to nail it with a second dataset, let's take a look here:

pubs.usgs.gov...

Mo-rich spherule in the USGS report, that's right. Mo melts at 2,623 °C.

Further questions?

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: skyeagle409

The RJ Lee Group Report has proven that no evidence of explosives or thermite was ever found in its dust samples.

Correction: it can be found in it's composition and morphology. At least when you're able to read and comprehend the statistical analysis.
Heat hydrolyzed and partially consumed/ burned organic or polymeric content, small particle sized Gypsum, 20% irony iron and lots of asbestos. No fabrication at all, that's your 'molten' concrete next to the vanished cores with a layer of fireproofing full of asbestos.

And to nail it with a second dataset, let's take a look here:

pubs.usgs.gov...

Mo-rich spherule in the USGS report, that's right. Mo melts at 2,623 °C.

Further questions?

Looking at the data, it is hardly Mo rich. Further, the melting point of metallic molybdenum has nothing to do with the melting point of a mineral containing molybdenum. Further questions?