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 9/11 Site - Molten Metal & Copper Oxide Thermite

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
MMC

posted on Jun, 17 2006 @ 10:09 AM
link   
A new site has opened discussing the numerous examples of molten metal found at the WTC. The site is strictly related to the scientific aspect and has isolated events which are physically impossible using the known laws of physics.

A lot of videos are available at the site, all the latest scientific material from Professors, Engineers and even ex-L.A. Police officers run directly from the web pages...so no need to wait for downloads to complete before viewing.

WTC - 9/11
www.gieis.uni.cc...

Check it out...



MMC

posted on Jun, 17 2006 @ 04:25 PM
link   
Here is a brief list of some of the material that can be found on the site. Other videos, such as molten copper flowing from the side of the WTC moments before the collapse can be viewed from part 2 of the analysis, as well as throughout the site:

Draft 0.0.4


The Analysis

Part 1: 27th September 2001 & Molten Steel
Part 2: 11th September 2001 & Molten Copper
Part 3: Scrap WTC Metal in a New York Warehouse November 2005 & Copper Oxide
Part 4: 21st October 2001 & 1000C+ Steel


The Additional Notes

Additional Notes 1: Calculations on the Number of People Required to Plant 20,000lbs of Thermite or Explosives
Additional Notes 2: Analysis of Maximum Ground Temperature using USGS Thermal Imaging
Additional Notes 3: Limiting Noise from Explosives at the WTC
Additional Notes 4: Copper-based Thermite and the PATH Railway
Additional Notes 5: Analysis of Jet fuel as the Source of Molten Copper on 11th September 2001


The Videos

Video 1: MIT Engineer Breaks Down WTC Controlled Demolition
Video 2: Thermite Explained
Video 3: Building the World Trade Center Towers
Video 4: 2/1/2006 - BYU Professor Steven E Jones WTC Lecture - UVSC
Video 5: BYU Professor Steven E. Jones 9/11 Update April 6 2006
Video 6: David Ray Griffin - 911 Commission Report: Ommissions and Distortions
Video 7: The Psuedo-Scientific Model of the Pancake-style Collapse
Video 8: The Truth & Lies of 9/11


Resources

Software & Downloads: Offline versions and freeware E-Book Browser software
Links to additional resources



posted on Jun, 17 2006 @ 05:23 PM
link   
wow. I haven't seen this video from this angle before. The WTC 2 looks relatively undamaged from this view. I enjoyed the link. Thanks.
www.gieis.uni.cc...

Pie



posted on Jun, 17 2006 @ 07:11 PM
link   
still, there are so many questions unanswered... it gets more and more obvious, that 9/11 was indeed the *pre-text* for the bush administration to establish their NWO or however u want to call it... and don't forget those tapes of the pentagon-crash, which haven't been made public yet... they're definitely hiding something from us!


MMC

posted on Jun, 17 2006 @ 07:27 PM
link   
I think it is best to let the science develop the theory at this stage.



wow. I haven't seen this video from this angle before. The WTC 2 looks relatively undamaged from this view. I enjoyed the link. Thanks.
www.gieis.uni.cc...


I'm glad you like it. I'm going to put up everything you haven't seen in the mainstream that has solid science behind it. I had yet to find a site that dealt with the forensics side of things alone, so I decided to create one. I'm focusing on the scientific 'anomolies' that have yet to be answered in a rational fashion. So far, the evidence suggests the use of an accelerant (i.e. something providing large quantities of heat) before and after the collapse in localised places.

www.gieis.uni.cc...

The evidence so far, including the surrounding context is quite damning. Sit down, take several hours and watch the videos...you'll be stunned.

Here's a link to the homepage:

www.gieis.uni.cc...


MMC

posted on Jun, 17 2006 @ 09:58 PM
link   
Thought some may find this statement interesting:



The concentrations, in terms of ppm required for a eutectic reaction, would not exist to do significant damage in under 2 hours. Whilst the basic raw materials were present, they were not in the appropriate form, nor was their delivery replenished after the main impact.

The 1993 bombing would have released the same, if not more, of these compounds and provided similar temperature ranges.

The theory has been falsified by the 1993 bombing.


www.gieis.uni.cc...


MMC

posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 11:10 AM
link   
A little more on this 'eutectic reaction':



C6 Suggestions for Future Research

The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No explanation for the source of the Sulphur has been identified. The rate of corrosion is also unknown. It is possible that this is the result of long-term heating in the ground following the collapse of the buildings. It is also possible that the phenomenon started prior to the collapse and accelerated the weaking of the steel structure.

www.fema.gov...

This tells you exactly the same thing I have been saying. It was either done after the collapse, or it was the result of pre-existing damage to the towers.

This type of eutectic reaction is a mild surface attack that takes several weeks to penetrate the steel under high temperatures. Without those high temperatures this form of corrosive attack takes several years. It due to the concentration levels in the atmosphere.

We can observe this type of damage in Cortlandt Street:

img469.imageshack.us...

As I said earlier:



The concentrations, in terms of ppm required for a eutectic reaction, would not exist to do significant damage in under 2 hours. Whilst the basic raw materials were present, they were not in the appropriate form, nor was their delivery replenished after the main impact.

The 1993 bombing would have released the same, if not more, of these compounds and provided similar temperature ranges.

The theory has been falsified by the 1993 bombing.


The upshot is that Silverstein can breathe a sigh of relief...this would put the people who arrange the deal in the frame.

www.gieis.uni.cc...

Mod Edit: Image Size – Please Review This Link.



[edit on 21/6/2006 by Mirthful Me]



posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 11:50 AM
link   
Ineresting site to say the least. Thanks foir sharing.


MMC

posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 08:14 PM
link   
Thanks, I have still more to add to the site...as I said before I'm trying to keep it focused on the scientific 'anomolies'...read this for example:

Someone posted these references citing that they showed that the WTC could collapse within 2 hours as a result of a surface attack causing a 'eutectic reaction'.



Severe corrosion of carbon steel and low-alloy steel in sulfur-containing atmospheres starts at temperatures as low as 500 deg C. According to the Dechema CORROSION HANDBOOK (1991 Edition), steels scale at 7.5 g/m^2/hour in atmospheres containing as little as 0.09 vol % sulfur (as H2S) at 500 deg C.


That would be only 15g per square meter removed from the surface in two hours.

If we now examine the density of steel:

7.85 g/cm3
hypertextbook.com...

So, if we have a steel plate 1mx1m and a depth of 10cm:
100cm (H) x 100cm (W) x 10cm (D) = 100,000 cm3

We now translate this into our formula:

Mass = Density x Volume
www.gmhsscience.com...

100,000cm3 * 7.85 g/cm3 = 785,000g
Mass = 785Kg

I don't think losing 30g or so from a surface attack is going to make much difference in two hours...




Similarly, data reported by G. R. Colby in Materials Performance Vol 13(4), page 20, (1974) show that A106 and A 213 carbon steels scale at a rate of 50 microns per day at 500 deg C in 0.05 vol % SO2. This rate increases to about 1000 microns per day at 900 deg C.


1 micron = a metric unit of distance equal to one millionth of a meter. Also known as a micrometer.
www.unc.edu...

1000 microns = 0.001 per day or 1cm every 1000 days (3 years approx.)


www.gieis.uni.cc...



posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 08:57 PM
link   
This is absurd:


Thus, it is feasible for there to be as little as 33 people involved if each carried 90kg. Gaining access has numerous plausible scenarios and only requires a window of 5 minutes. Given a good hiding spot for the devices, 1 person could move across 4 floors, positioning 60 devices, in 3-4 hours.




"Given a good hiding spot for the devices"

Er, yeah, I'll just hide this in the waste basket.


MMC

posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 09:02 PM
link   
Hiding 180kg of explosives every 4 floors in a building with 110 x 1 acre floors for less than 4 hours would be relatively easy. Especially with almost 100,000 people a day going through the place.

A simple mail boy could walk around the building with 3kg packages unchallanged.



posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 09:11 PM
link   


A simple mail boy could walk around the building with 3kg packages unchallanged.


Perhaps, but once he started tearing out drywall columns to get to the steel he might have a little splaining to do.


MMC

posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 09:14 PM
link   
We need access to the blue-prints to make determinations like that.



posted on Jun, 18 2006 @ 09:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by HowardRoark
This is absurd:


Thus, it is feasible for there to be as little as 33 people involved if each carried 90kg. Gaining access has numerous plausible scenarios and only requires a window of 5 minutes. Given a good hiding spot for the devices, 1 person could move across 4 floors, positioning 60 devices, in 3-4 hours.




"Given a good hiding spot for the devices"

Er, yeah, I'll just hide this in the waste basket.





Oh wait I gues you missed the part where they shut down parts of the towers prior to 9/11.

And and lets not forget about the fact that the Bomb sniffing dogs were removed from the towers a few weeks prior to 9/11 also..

In that Howard, I dont think your trash holds up.. instead of knocking something prove it.. I just proved it to possibly to have happened.



[edit on 6/18/2006 by ThichHeaded]


MMC

posted on Jun, 19 2006 @ 11:13 AM
link   


Oh wait I gues you missed the part where they shut down parts of the towers prior to 9/11.

And and lets not forget about the fact that the Bomb sniffing dogs were removed from the towers a few weeks prior to 9/11 also..


It has been well established that planting 3000 devices within the WTC is feasible. It only requies a small group functioning for 3-4 hours.

That's all that really needs to be demonstrated at this point.

Additional Notes 1: Calculations on the Number of People Required to Plant 20,000lbs of Thermite or Explosives
www.gieis.uni.cc...



posted on Jun, 19 2006 @ 11:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by ThichHeaded
Oh wait I gues you missed the part where they shut down parts of the towers prior to 9/11.


You must be talking about this, right?

Hardly conclusive evidence.


And and lets not forget about the fact that the Bomb sniffing dogs were removed from the towers a few weeks prior to 9/11 also..


So I guess that Sirus is still alive, then huh?

Tell me, how were these explosives or thermite charges or whatever positioned next to the appropriate structural elements?

The structural elements were all hidden behind drywall enclosures, above ceilings, etc.

Like I said, the notion that someone could just waltz in and plant a bunch of explosives might work for a Bruce Willis movie, but not in real life.



posted on Jun, 19 2006 @ 11:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by MMC
It has been well established that planting 3000 devices within the WTC is feasible. It only requies a small group functioning for 3-4 hours.

That's all that really needs to be demonstrated at this point.

Additional Notes 1: Calculations on the Number of People Required to Plant 20,000lbs of Thermite or Explosives
www.gieis.uni.cc...


You are truly ignorant beyond compare if you think that that is even remotely possible.

There is no way in hell 50 guys could go running all over the building opening up walls and ceilings, scraping off fireproofing (in some cases asbestos fireproofing), installing and wiring all those “devices” closing up the ceilings, walls, etc, repairing ceilings and walls, repainting, etc, without the full and implicit knowledge and co-operation of everyone involved in the maintenance, management and operation of the buildings from the building managers down to the cleaning ladies.


MMC

posted on Jun, 19 2006 @ 11:58 AM
link   


You are truly ignorant beyond compare if you think that that is even remotely possible.

There is no way in hell 50 guys could go running all over the building opening up walls and ceilings, scraping off fireproofing (in some cases asbestos fireproofing), installing and wiring all those “devices” closing up the ceilings, walls, etc, repairing ceilings and walls, repainting, etc, without the full and implicit knowledge and co-operation of everyone involved in the maintenance, management and operation of the buildings from the building managers down to the cleaning ladies.


Nonsense...I can wander around most buildings unchallanged during business hours. There was a TV series a while back that showed people were able to enter 'Royal Mail' and just start working, the managers couldn't tell they weren't employees. Temporary works were also being brought in without the proper background checks.

There is a million and one ways...100,000 people a day went through that building...anywhere else in the world, it would have been a city in its own right.

[edit on 19-6-2006 by MMC]



posted on Jun, 19 2006 @ 12:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by HowardRoark

Originally posted by MMC
It has been well established that planting 3000 devices within the WTC is feasible. It only requies a small group functioning for 3-4 hours.

That's all that really needs to be demonstrated at this point.

Additional Notes 1: Calculations on the Number of People Required to Plant 20,000lbs of Thermite or Explosives
www.gieis.uni.cc...


You are truly ignorant beyond compare if you think that that is even remotely possible.

There is no way in hell 50 guys could go running all over the building opening up walls and ceilings, scraping off fireproofing (in some cases asbestos fireproofing), installing and wiring all those “devices” closing up the ceilings, walls, etc, repairing ceilings and walls, repainting, etc, without the full and implicit knowledge and co-operation of everyone involved in the maintenance, management and operation of the buildings from the building managers down to the cleaning ladies.




The possibility is there, all they have to do is pose as a utility or maintainance worker. Do you really think someone working in the WTC as an office worker is going to side step their job to examine what a utility worker is doing, however suspicious. Provided that the WTC Leaseholder was probably in on it, he could of put the orders out for maintainance to be done as a cover-story when he was really having people place the charges.

Possibility? Yes, that's not being ignorant or thick headed or TOO open minded.

[edit on 6/19/2006 by Masisoar]



posted on Jun, 19 2006 @ 12:37 PM
link   
Another possibility is you set up dummy companies and lease office space as tenants. Free reign after that. Speculation, sure, but certainly possible.




top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join