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 Molten Metal: Fact or Fiction?

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 01:32 AM
link   
The following is a piece written by me.

Questions more than welcome!







WTC Molten Metal: Fact or Fiction?

Analysis of the Evidence


If 9/11 was an inside job, the perpetrators obviously have total control of the media. In this case, would it not make sense for them to plant propaganda in the media to distract those who are already suspicious of the attacks? As Dr Judy Wood has asked, “If 9/11 was well planned, wouldn't the cover-up be even more well planned?”

The perpetrators are experts at propaganda. Those who know 9/11 was an inside job also know the official story told by the media to be nothing but propaganda. Interestingly, the Washington Post says the military is targeting the “U.S. Home Audience” with a “propaganda campaign”.

Americans have a bad habit of believing those who they consider trustworthy instead of examining evidence for themselves. As former Assistant Secretary to the US Treasury, Dr Paul Craig Roberts said, “Americans never check any facts. Who do you know, for example, who has even read the Report of the 9/11 Commission, much less checked the alleged facts reported in that document. I can answer for you. You don’t know anyone who has read the report or checked the facts.”

Many still trust George W Bush simply because of the media.
People don’t check facts.
People don’t analyze evidence.
People don’t think.

How do we really know there was molten metal at Ground Zero? Just because a “mild mannered” scientist says so?

Let’s take a look at the molten metal evidence piece by piece. The reader is encouraged to look at the information for themselves and to think for themselves.




See here for the full article:
www.checktheevidence.co.uk...




posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 02:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by CB_Brooklyn
Let’s take a look at the molten metal evidence piece by piece


Im not upto date on what the current theory is regarding what caused the molten metal. But i found this pic of it.




To me that looks alot like molten steel at ground zero on 9/11.

CT



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 02:21 AM
link   
He'll probably tell you it was adultered. He posted this same thing on some other forums, and the argument was basically that everything was lying about it and it never existed. Figures, coming from a mouthpiece for Judy Wood.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 02:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Conspiracy Theorist


Originally posted by CB_Brooklyn
Let’s take a look at the molten metal evidence piece by piece


Im not upto date on what the current theory is regarding what caused the molten metal. But i found this pic of it.




To me that looks alot like molten steel at ground zero on 9/11.

CT



The picture is of a solid item, not molten. But that image is not real. Please read the article I wrote as I address that very picture.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 02:39 AM
link   
The problem with all the molten steel argument as I see it, is what kept it molten for so long. Because the temperature is extremely high to melt steel, and if it was down there, it would heat everything else nearby, such as the wreckage everyone was walking on. And AFAIK, no one there had problems with ground heat.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 02:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by apex
And AFAIK, no one there had problems with ground heat.


What about clean-up workers' boots melting? That's a common story. Hell, NASA even took thermal imagery and showed that the surface temperatures were extremely elevated in places. Just nobody went around walking in them, or digging in them with excavation equipment. I can link to videos where a guy is telling his co-workers not to spray water on the glowing steel, because it would create so much steam that nobody would be able to see. Sounds like legit stuff to me.

[edit on 8-8-2007 by bsbray11]



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 03:01 AM
link   
Fair enough, but is there actually the image, so we can see where they were? And when they did that survey too. But what kept it hot? The molten material in Chernobyl froze relatively quickly, and that was heated by nuclear fission. As soon as it dissipated it cooled relatively quickly. And in the mound of wreckage, unless it was right at the bottom, I don't see how it could stay so hot.

Are there any reports of it getting down to the subway station or whatever it's called? I believe there was one under the WTC complex?



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 03:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by apex
The problem with all the molten steel argument as I see it, is what kept it molten for so long. Because the temperature is extremely high to melt steel, and if it was down there, it would heat everything else nearby, such as the wreckage everyone was walking on. And AFAIK, no one there had problems with ground heat.



I agree. The government's own thermal images show the hot temperatures to have mostly disappeared just two weeks after 9/11. (So much for those "molten metal flowing for 99 days" stories!) But those images are fake anyway, since Dr Wood showed the hottest spot to be nothing but an empty damp hole.

And you're right about the no ground heat. Believe it or not, some people reported that the firefighters' steel-tipped boots melted because of extreme heat. But anyone with thinking abilities knows that if the ground were that hot, the firefighters' feet would have been cooked!



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 03:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by apex
Fair enough, but is there actually the image, so we can see where they were? And when they did that survey too. But what kept it hot? The molten material in Chernobyl froze relatively quickly, and that was heated by nuclear fission. As soon as it dissipated it cooled relatively quickly. And in the mound of wreckage, unless it was right at the bottom, I don't see how it could stay so hot.

Are there any reports of it getting down to the subway station or whatever it's called? I believe there was one under the WTC complex?




There are no pictures of molten metal in the ruins at Ground Zero.

There was no molten metal in the ruins at Ground Zero.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 03:30 AM
link   

But anyone with thinking abilities knows that if the ground were that hot, the firefighters' feet would have been cooked!


Everybody but the firefighters that it actually happened to, I guess. But they lie just like everyone else according to you, right? So it doesn't matter what they say anyway.

Apparently only Judy Wood is right and everybody else is just too damned stupid to realize it, even the people that 9//11 actually happened to!




posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 03:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by CB_Brooklyn
There are no pictures of molten metal in the ruins at Ground Zero.

There was no molten metal in the ruins at Ground Zero


Yes almighty lord of all knowledge. Your decree shall now be taken as fact.
Im sorry for ever questioning anything without consulting you first.




Please read the article I wrote as I address that very picture


No. I will not read your propaganda articles. Post the relevant sections.

[edit on 8/8/2007 by Conspiracy Theorist]



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 03:41 AM
link   
I was told to edit my post...

All I have to say is Judy Wood is a bad bad person.

[edit on 8/8/2007 by ThichHeaded]



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 04:25 AM
link   
I'll monitor this thread from time to time, and will be glad to answer questions / discuss the issues with anyone posting intelligent comments who take the time to read my article instead of making baseless assumptions. All other comments will be ignored, as they should be, as they are usually posted by "bad bad people" who lack thinking skills, and have nothing much to say except insults.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 04:29 AM
link   
Its not that we aren't thinking...

I want to see proof of why you state this..

of the 21 or so sites I visited with your name on where you were banned. You have not given proof of anything your spew out onto the internet.

This and that space beam theory..

Give us some hard proof and maybe we can consider it being sorta true.. till then all the stuff you put out is garbage in my book.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 07:24 AM
link   
Oh please, not again.

We've already had the "Molten steel argument needs to stop" thread, which you can just click on and read through to see this is a baseless proposition being pushed by people with an agenda, the OP being well-known as one of them. Why start it all over again just to humor someone with such an obvious agenda and aversion to evidence?

This thread provides no information to support the OP's claims and should just sink down into the muck of unanswered posts.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 07:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by CB_Brooklyn
There are no pictures of molten metal in the ruins at Ground Zero.

There was no molten metal in the ruins at Ground Zero.


I guess you haven't seen the molten metal that flows from WTC 2 before it fails then? This is the most unethical, disingenious, untruthful pair of sentences I have ever heard. Next to Ferretman2 saying he was there and there were absolutely no explosions.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 11:11 AM
link   
man i read your articles... they really didnt seem very trustworthy... or whatever u might call it... but i just didnt like them.. lol... idk...i dont believe alot of the officail stuff... hell (can i say that?) im not even that up to date of this stuff anymore... (nothing new ever seems to appear)

sometimes you have to think.... MAYBE SOMONES TELLING THE TRUTH .... man not everyone in the world is out to make you life suck.... we arent all lying to you... i garuntee you half the people who make those claims of boots melting.... DONT CARE ABOUT THE NATION ENOUGH TO GO WITH A LIE TO COVER IT UP....

comon... im sooo sick of this childish stuff man



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 11:31 AM
link   
Statemetns like---


If 9/11 was an inside job, the perpetrators obviously have total control of the media.


Are not true, 9/11 could be an inside job without "TOTAL" control of the media. Futhermore the word "MEDIA" is kicked around forgetting that the people that day were part of the MEDIA. In order for the first part of what the OP says to be true then the MEDIA which includes the people would be under "TOTAL" control which then self-refutes his own point since there is no reason to trust him either!

Since he could be under the very control he speaks of!

My guess on the motive on posting this and other things that the 9/11 researchers group does is to try and sow seeds of doubt on everyone practically that the end user is left believing no one.

The fire-figthers saw and reported Molten Metal and that is good enough for me.


[edit on 8-8-2007 by talisman]



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 01:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Griff
I guess you haven't seen the molten metal that flows from WTC 2 before it fails then?


Oh, he's seen it. Apparently it's faked, too. Everything's faked, everyone lies.

If you're going to use that kind of "logic" so much, CB, you know you don't have to stick with space beams. You could say an invisible King Kong did it or anything else, and any evidence to the contrary is only the result of people lying and faking videos.

I once saw you post a long list of things you aimed to establish, like that Dr. Jones is a shill and there was no molten metal and etc., just to end it with "people should think for themselves". Well that's what we're doing when we all tell you so many times that you're full of it. You can't even tell me how a space beam works when it destroys steel, let alone prove any were used.

It's a fact that to molecularly dissociate steel in any fashion, just to separate the chemical bonds between each atom in the steel, would take an enormous amount of power, greater than the entire output of the world in kWh could accommodate. Mumbling something about free energy doesn't cut it, either.


I can't put it any better than to just say you have no idea what you're talking about, literally. You can't tell me what you're talking about, because you can't even tell me what a DEW is or how it works, besides stating the obvious that it's a beam and there's energy behind it.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 02:29 PM
link   
Molten Metal: Fact

www.journalof911studies.com...

"I collected iron-rich particles in the dust by pulling a magnet across the outside of a plastic bag containing the dust, pulling upwards to the top the magnetic material and pulling this aside for further analysis. These magnetic particles were, as one might expect, rich in iron. There was a surprising amount of this iron-rich material. Although others have reported the presence of iron-rich particles in the dust41, I was surprised to find the abundance of spherical particles in this iron-rich component some of which were considerably larger than previously reported. It was exciting to me to find for the first time iron-rich spheres up to about 1.5 mm in diameter in a 32.1-gram sample of dust.

The iron-rich component of the WTC dust sample was analyzed in some detail by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and x-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy (X-EDS). Using the scanning electron microscope, we found that much of the iron-rich dust was in fact composed of roughly spherical particles – microspheres. The presence of metallic microspheres implies that these metals were once molten, so that surface tension pulled the droplets into a roughly spherical shape. Then the molten droplets solidified in air, preserving the information that they were once molten in the spherical shape as well as chemical information.



Iron melts at 1538 oC, so the presence of these numerous iron-rich spheres implies a very high temperature. Too hot in fact for the fires in the WTC buildings since jet fuel (kerosene), paper and wood furniture – and other office materials – cannot reach the temperatures needed to melt iron or steel. (Remember the wood-burning stove…) Of course, elemental sulfur as found in thermate can lower the melting point of steel as discussed above."

CB, why is it that you try to prove 9/11 was an inside job with fake evidence (no planes, space beams, TV fakery) and cover up the real evidence like molten steel? It's called disinformation.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join