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.

 

9/11: WTC High Temperatures & Molten Steel Video!

page: 2
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 08:04 PM
link   
reply to post by cashlink
 


What snide remarks?

Do you or do you not ignore evidence that has been presented to you in this forum?

Allow me to add...

You have not listed the first responders from the FDNY that think 911 was an inside job.

You have also not show me any evidence to support the fact that you think firemen are capable of analyzing molten materials just by looking at them

Oh.. and one more thing. My brother (the firefighter)was at ground zero a couple days posts 911.

[edit on 1-9-2008 by ThroatYogurt]




posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 08:39 PM
link   
The Most Damning Evidence Yet! Molten metal pools under all three WTC.
www.youtube.com...

Proof thermate was used on 911
www.youtube.com...

Steven E. Jones has made a strong case that some molten steel (or iron-rich
metal) was observed pouring from high up in the South Tower (4). In that case
gravity was not a factor. However, much more molten steel was probably found in
the rubble than was observed pouring out of the buildings, and the purpose of this
report is to show that gravity could not have played a significant role in its formation.
www.journalof911studies.com...

Molten Metal
Workers Reported Molten Metal in Ground Zero Rubble
911research.wtc7.net...

WTC MOLTEN STEEL - THE 9/11 SMOKING GUN
www.takeourworldback.com...

It is fascinating to see all the disinformation regarding the very high temperatures and molten steel weeks and months after 9/11, at the WTC. Let us examine what all the 911 non-nuclear demolition theorists have to say in this regard. The regime/media "collapse" mechanism of planes/fuel/gravity/pancaking does not allow for such high temperatures weeks and months later. So the MSM, and the regime's 911 Commission report hide any mention of this. They simply ignore it, or say there was no evidence of molten steel, as this NIST "investigator" does here. The government (the actual perps), was also very active in destroying any proof of high temperatures after the 9/11 event-such as altering the second AVIRIS data set.
wtc-chinasyndrome.blogspot.com...

January 21, 2008
Molten Steel Found at Ground Zero Weeks After 9/11
tobefree.wordpress.com...

I think there are enough eyewitnesses to show there was molten steel. For nonbelievers this is as much or more proof as you have offered explaining what supposedly happened at the Pentagon.



posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 08:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
Still waiting for the metallurgical reports stating that what they found was indeed steel and not aluminum.

Man its fun to act like a "toofer" at times.


Quite funny that so am I. Although, I feel the very people who were tasked with investigating this should have done it and not "twoofers". I would be talking about NIST here.



posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by cashlink
For nonbelievers this is as much or more proof as you have offered explaining what supposedly happened at the Pentagon.



Yet you look at this as fact and then say what "supposedly" happened at the Pentagon.

I guess it's pretty clear why you are avoiding my question.



posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 08:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by cashlink
The Most Damning Evidence Yet! Molten metal pools under all three WTC.
www.youtube.com...





I just want to point out that the still picture used in this video is mis-representing the facts.. the one where the firemen are leaning over a supposed pool of molten metal.. this picture has been altered..




its actually just a light they were using to search through the debris..



www.youtube.com...



posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 09:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThroatYogurt
reply to post by billybob
 


You mean the meteor with unburned paper inside it?

Yeah... thanks.



Wrong one.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Read through that thread and please tell me there wasn't molten steel found.

Or this one that even FEMA says in their analysis about molten steel.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Are we still to deny there was molten steel found and some even analyzed?



posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 09:24 PM
link   
Wow, this thread got nasty pretty quick, with the usual cast of players. Perhaps I can jump in here to zero in on the topic with specifics.

Well, the I-beam bent in a perfect arc is a good place to start I suppose. Is it true that it would require 1,000 degrees to do that? Because jet fuel burns at about half that. And if I remember correctly, an open-air fire can't burn at more than about 800 degrees.



posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 10:23 PM
link   
reply to post by cashlink
 


Good posts on the video.
The Illuminati can't be defeated.
I only see a slow progress to Tesla's ether and free energy.
Hardy's Looping water wheel ain't much but ether power rules.

Once the Illuminati had Tesla's electrical generation patents and
their electricity corporations built, any other devices from Tesla
were not necessary.
A Dr. Moray met the same fate with his generators.

Illuminati political and corporate power is well know and each one
plays their humble part.

Profiles in Courage is not a book written every day.



posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 10:23 PM
link   
reply to post by jackinthebox
 


Bronx firefighter/responder, Joe O'Toole stating that he saw molten steel in February, 2002 -- five months later. The GCN article now brings "1500 degree temperature, sometimes higher" to SIX months after 9/11. This is further proof of heat GENERATING sources underground-- namely the China Syndrome. That is, as already detailed here, there were fragmented nuclear reacting criticalities, that needed no oxygen to generate high temperatures, almost indefinitely, until "cleaned up"-- PERHAPS BY UNSUSPECTING, UNINFORMED, UNPROTECTED HUMAN BEINGS. So we are now into March 2002 for the China Sydrome still occurring at the WTC.


Interesting that only two months after this March, 2002 date, the "clean-up" was declared officially over. Could the clean-up only have been declared to be over, on 5/30/02, because all the China Syndrome fragments had been recovered by then? Will all the now-unfolding thyroid, blood, lymph, and other cancers among the firefighters, and other responders, at the WTC, be further proof of their exposure to the radiation of the China Syndrome at the WTC? These cancers are highly unlikely to arise from "inhaling asbestos" or other toxins; they are commonly related to exposure at radiation-releasing sites-Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Chernobyl, and the latest Ground Zero: the World Trade Center. And if these firefighters/responders wore masks/respirators, it would even more strongly lead to the conclusion that their cancers are from radiation, not inhalation of toxins.

Once again, I assert that the high temperature hotpsots ("1500 degrees, sometimes higher") revealed in this article, to be present until at least March, 2002 could only have been caused by the GENERATION of heat from nuclear reacting criticality sites underground-- the China Syndrome. The over 40,000 WTC responders must be provided with this crucial information. They, and their physicians, must be told of their radiation exposure. Let their subsequent outrage upon learning this "ultimate truth", and the outrage of their families, CAUSE--as heroic New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison put it (and as now appears on his headstone)--"JUSTICE [to] BE DONE, OR THE HEAVENS FALL."
wtc-chinasyndrome.blogspot.com...

We cant handwave this till it is fully investigated.




[edit on 9/1/2008 by cashlink]

[edit on 9/1/2008 by cashlink]

[edit on 9/1/2008 by cashlink]



posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 10:31 PM
link   
reply to post by jackinthebox
 




[edit on 9/2/2008 by cashlink]



posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 10:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Griff
Are we still to deny there was molten steel found and some even analyzed?

It depends on your criteria. The typical 'truther' argument relies on this chain:

1. Molten steel was found
2. Molten steel has a temperature of at least 1500C
3. Fires have a maximum temperature of around 1200C
4. Material existing at 1500C can not be created purely from a fire at 1200C
5. Therefore a hotter burning substance was involved

If you are to use FEMAs analyzed steel to try and fit #1, you cannot use it to fit #2, as what FEMA observed was a eutectic reaction which occured below 1000C. This results in a collapse of this chain of causality, and while technically you could define the steel as molten, it was not at the temperatures required, nor shows any sign of Thermite, which burns in excess of 2500C.



posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 10:37 PM
link   
WTC Ground Zero Molten Steel (Part One)
Must watch video!
www.youtube.com...



posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 10:43 PM
link   
9/11 Truth: NIST engineer denies molten steel at Ground Zero!
www.youtube.com...
This FOLKS, is NIST trying to avoid at studing the truth!
What a joke!



posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 10:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by cashlink
Following the World Trade Center collapses thermal hot spots with temperatures in excess of 7000C existed deep within the wreckage of the buildings. These temperatures were sustained for a long period of time.

whatreallyhappened.com...


This is an outright lie by the website in question, the thermal image map they use indicates temperatures of around 730C, nowhere near 7000C. The website used to be a little different and there were some great claims on there, Russian children who could apparently manipulate matter with their minds etc. It's really not a good source for factual information.


whatreallyhappened.com
A thermite reaction generates extraordinarily high temperatures (>25000 C)


The reference they use to support this
temperatures above 2,500°C (4,500°F) are often reached


They literally multiplied by 10



posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 10:47 PM
link   
reply to post by exponent
 


Your proof please?



posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 10:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by cashlink
Your proof please?


Go to their site and click the link that says >25000C. You will see where it leads you says nothing of the sort. If you would like a link to the USGS survey of Ground Zero where they have taken the image from, I can find you that, just let me know.

edit: Had it in my 'handy links' file: pubs.usgs.gov...

[edit on 1-9-2008 by exponent]



posted on Sep, 1 2008 @ 11:05 PM
link   
If you wanted to bring down the towers as your objectives,
what would you do?
Rely on a plane crash.
Don't think so.

So the Towers went down unexpectedly.

Why rely on hijackers and suicide pilots.
Its much easier to fake plane flights and use explosives.
Watch videos on thermite and thermate eat through engine block.
Look of core beams in pancaking scenarios, standing tall or gone.
Kids in college now never heard of core beams, good job Illuminati.

Assuming Osama warned us of the attack, he lucked out big time.



posted on Sep, 2 2008 @ 12:22 AM
link   
reply to post by exponent
 


Hummm, you have something here, and it looks like you are right.
I did a little research on this information and it appears the writer on the site has made a mistake.
I am here to find the truth as most people are, and you have pointed out an era, which I accept is misleading. I had no idea, so let me try to fix this if I can.
Hay, I cannot be putting out misleading info, or I cannot be a twoofer.




[edit on 9/2/2008 by cashlink]



posted on Sep, 2 2008 @ 05:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by exponent
If you are to use FEMAs analyzed steel to try and fit #1, you cannot use it to fit #2, as what FEMA observed was a eutectic reaction which occured below 1000C.


If you read the FEMA report carefully, they never state the temperature of the eutectic reaction. They state the steel got to near 1000C. It's all in the wording.

It's like stating that ice reaches a temperature of 0C until all of it is molten (water). No matter how much energy you expose the ice water to, it will never go beyond that point until it is all molten.

Wouldn't the same principal apply to steel as well? I'm not a thermodynamics guy, so that is a real question.



posted on Sep, 2 2008 @ 07:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by scotty18

Originally posted by cashlink
For nonbelievers this is as much or more proof as you have offered explaining what supposedly happened at the Pentagon.



Yet you look at this as fact and then say what "supposedly" happened at the Pentagon.

I guess it's pretty clear why you are avoiding my question.


No comment cash? Are you down to ignoring the things that smack you in the face?



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join