posted on Mar, 24 2007 @ 01:35 PM
Where to start?
What could have caused the damage seen in these photos?
In a word: Heat.
Intense heat, like from a fire, or from being on fire, or having something that is on fire impact the the vehicle.
Just something as simple as that.
Whoever posted the series of photos Sauron referenced in his post either does not know or, (for the sake of furthing a sensationalistic agenda, for
puposes unknown) hopes his/her audience does not know, that modern vehicles are no longer made of simply of metal, glass and paint.
What appears to be metal may in fact be thin steel sheet, or aluminum, or fiberglass, or plastic, or a high-strength resin composite, or even carbon
fiber. For some applications even resin impregnated paper (known as Phenolic) is used.
What appears to be glass may actually be glass, or it could be Plexiglas, or high-strength Lexan, both of which are actually plastic products, or it
could be a combination of plastic and glass (ie.: "Bullet=Proof glass is a 'sandwich', often of Lexan between two sheets of glass.)
And paint isn't always paint.
Nowadays, the markings and insignias one sees on commercial and emergency vehicles are acheived with thin, self-adhesive, semi-permantent vinyls.
Intended to enhance the re-sale value of such vehicles at the end of their "service" lives, these materials allow a police car, for example, to shed
its department markings, thus allowing it to be offered as a more marketable "solid-color" vehicle.
A Heat-gun is used to de-laminate what appears to be painted-on markings. Heat, like from a fire. No mysterious "Space Ray" gun!
The poster also seems unaware that different metals have different melting points.
Exposure to a fire that might just scorch a cast iron engine block could reduce an aluminum alloy block to a molten puddle on the street.
In short, the multitude of materials used in modern vehicles react to differnt tempuratures in a multitude of different ways. Nothing "exotic", or
even "unusual" is evident in any of the photos presented, once this simple fact is considered.
As to why would the officials would resort to moving the vehicles blocks away from the WTC site, but leave the steel beams in place?
Again, a simple explaination is readily available:
The WTC's steel beams were part of the original "crime scene", They were Evidence considered vital to investigation of the crime.
Evidence is not removed from the scene of the crime until it's role in the crime is judged to have been fully documented.
The vehicles damaged and destroyed by the collapse of the WTC, are "after the fact"; they are not considered to have been part of the original crime
scene and were moved from the scene to facilitate the investigation of the scene itself.
[edit on 24-3-2007 by Bhadhidar]