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.
Originally posted by ohhwataloser
Originally posted by jthomas
- Molten aluminum at high temperatures and/or contaminated with impurities, as would be expected running through the debris in the pile, glows and looks like any other molten metal.
your missing something, it looks like any other molten metal at the same temperature otherwise no it doesn't.
Originally posted by _BoneZ_
Originally posted by Joey Canoli
So do you discount Jones' findings?
Or do you propose another source of sulfur?
Remember Dr. Jones' findings are preliminary and not 100% definitive. I also don't recall sulfur being mentioned in the findings, nor do I recall testing for sulfur or found during the tests. This would be a good question to ask Dr. Jones.
Originally posted by pteridine
Jones found trace sulfur and claimed contamination by gypsum wallboard [CaSO4] which is probably the thing he got right. No large amounts of sulfur or barium were found. Thermate is eliminated.
Originally posted by pteridine
The number of charges necessary, the patterns of the explosions, and the sizes of those charges would leave no doubt of CD, had it occurred. It didn't and there is not an iota of evidence to say that it did.
Originally posted by pteridine
You are most definitely wrong, BS. I will explain again, carefully. Please try to follow along. Steelmaking is a multi-step process.
As to your second point about "There was no oxygen or fire down there...", I believe that you are wrong again. The plots of heat show that there was definitely fire down there. Underground fires are the most plausible explanation. How would you explain long term heating otherwise?
Originally posted by bsbray11
We aren't talking about how steel is made. We are talking about the "theory" that "debunkers" have made here that a blast furnace was created under the debris pile, so it was able to produce massive temperatures and even melt steel. But to do that DOES require heated air being circulated.
You still haven't learned that I don't have to have a better theory to debunk yours. The evidence still contradicts what you're saying. Specifically the clean-up workers contradict what you're saying and so do the geologists and others who contributed to the pdf I posted showing where molten steel hot spots were located.
Other degrading solutions are sulfur dioxide in water and carbon dioxide in water. Under these corrosive conditions, iron(III) species are formed. Unlike iron(II) oxides, iron(III) oxides are not passivating because these materials do not adhere to the bulk metal. As these iron(III) compounds form and flake off from the surface, fresh iron is exposed, and the corrosion process continues until all of the iron(0) is either consumed or all of the oxygen, water, carbon dioxide, or sulfur dioxide in the system are removed or consumed
Microstructural examination of a beam from Building 7 showed that temperatures higher than 940 °C were experienced in localized regions. Concurrent examination of the beam surfaces and surface layers showed evidence of extensive metal removal, and the analysis suggests that this removal occurred while the beam was exposed to the fire in the rubble pile after the building had collapsed.
Originally posted by GenRadek
On the contrary, there was enough oxygen: via the subway tunnels, cracks, voids, spaces, sewers. The oxygen can enter through any of the underground and buried openings, and when the oxygen is consumed, the fires can suck in more through the holes. Dont you know this bsbray?
A backdraft is a situation which can occur when a fire is starved of oxygen; consequently combustion ceases (due to the lack of oxygen) but the fuel gases and smoke remain at high temperature (at a temperature above the fire-point of the fuel gases). If oxygen is re-introduced to the fire, eg. by opening a door (or window) to a closed room, combustion can (will) restart often resulting in an explosive effect as the gases are heated by the combustion and expand because of the rapidly increasing temperature (see also flashover).
Originally posted by GenRadek
bsbray, there is always "guesswork" involved when dealing with scenarios like this.
WTC Debris Piles Composition
WTC cleanup, fires in piles, Fresh Kills, etc.
9/11 Links
– Up to 180,000 gallons of fuel oil, diesel fuel and transformer oil (See varying estimates in links below)
– 2,000 automobiles and trucks. Not all were burned, but many were (I'm not aware of a count) Each one with fuel on board, each with four tires, foam and fabric upholstery and carpeting, engine oil, rubber hoses, belts, weatherstripping, wiring harnesses, loads of plastic, paint.
– Carpeting. Doesn't sound like a big deal. Imagine going into your local carpet dealer and asking for installation for your living room. Dimensions: 20 feet wide, 65 miles long.
– Tens of thousands of miles of wiring covered with plastic insulation.
– 5 million square feet of painted surfaces.
– Hundreds of tons of wood and particle board.
– Millions of pounds of paper
– 20,000 viscoelastic tower shock absorbers.
– Tens of thousands of computer terminals covered in plastic.
– Hundreds of tons of trading-floor equipment.
– Tens of thousands of telephones covered in plastic.
– Thousands of fax machines covered in plastic.
– Thousands of copiers and toner cartridges covered in plastic.
– Thousands of computer peripherals: printers, scanners, hubs, zip drives (remember them?), millions of CD-ROMs and floppy disks. User manuals for everything. Calculators. Everything covered in plastic.
– All of the electronics above have plastic-insulated wiring and plastic circuit boards.
– About 75,000 chairs, most with foam padding and synthetic coverings.
– Hundreds of upholstered couches.
– Millions of plastic pens and markers.
– Tens of thousands of cardboard boxes
– Tens of thousands of plastic wastebaskets
– Tons and tons of flammable mailroom supplies
– Hundreds of supply closets filled with office consumables, including untold quantities of paper and plastic.
– The contents of the receiving areas: perhaps thousands of boxes of supplies
– Thousands of flammable items used by repair and maintenance crews.
– The contents of over 75 retail stores, with all their merchandise, shelves and display cases, and back rooms filled with stock in boxes. These include 18 clothing stores, several bookstores, newsstands, card shops, two music stores (plastic!), two consumer electronics stores, pharmacies.
– The contents of Windows on the World, the highest-grossing restaurant in the U.S., with all of its supplies, oils, table linens, wall treatments, upholstered furniture, etc.
– The contents of numerous other restaurants, cafés and snack bars.
sites.google.com...
Originally posted by bsbray11
Originally posted by GenRadek
On the contrary, there was enough oxygen: via the subway tunnels, cracks, voids, spaces, sewers. The oxygen can enter through any of the underground and buried openings, and when the oxygen is consumed, the fires can suck in more through the holes. Dont you know this bsbray?
This is all theoretical.
Originally posted by bsbray11
Speaking of evidence, I'll mention it to you again so you can reformulate your poor guesswork. There was no fire until the extremely hot steel under the pile was exposed to oxygen. Then there was fire.
A backdraft is a situation which can occur when a fire is starved of oxygen; consequently combustion ceases (due to the lack of oxygen) but the fuel gases and smoke remain at high temperature (at a temperature above the fire-point of the fuel gases). If oxygen is re-introduced to the fire, eg. by opening a door (or window) to a closed room, combustion can (will) restart often resulting in an explosive effect as the gases are heated by the combustion and expand because of the rapidly increasing temperature (see also flashover).
You will be ignorant for as long as you choose to ignore this and fail to offer any real evidence for what you are suggesting. You might as well be saying the Twin Towers were brought down with nuclear weapons, because you'd have just has much evidence at your disposal. Not only ignorant of what you say, but a hypocrite to boot, putting on like your guesswork is suddenly worth a damn. Maybe if your credentials were better than "internet troll." But without evidence that's still a damned big maybe.
Originally posted by bsbray11
reply to post by pteridine
Come on man. You know when you are ranting. I know when you are ranting. You are grasping at straws.
Even though I just provided two separate and direct pieces of evidence that prove the "underground fire" theory wrong, two pieces of evidence that there was no oxygen to supply fire heating this steel, you ignore that because you say there is no better theory. Okay, you stick with that "argument" then.
Saying massive underground fires can heat so much steel for so long without an oxygen supply is ignorant, and an embarrassment to real science, which you still don't understand. I could die before you finally figured out how to make a legitimate argument that fits the evidence.
Originally posted by pteridine
You provided no evidence that there were no underground fires.
Originally posted by bsbray11
The fact that the fires didn't exist until they were introduced to oxygen, as stated by both the clean-up workers and geologists working with them, and this directly contradicts the theory that the steel was so hot because of underground fires.
Underground fires weren't a proven fact to begin with, as an explanation to why the steel was immediately so hot and stayed smoldering for months. It's just a theory internet "debunkers" like to pose as a fact.