Molten Steel and 9/11: The existence and implications of molten steel in "the pile".

page: 3
86
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 06:33 PM
link   
9/11 MADNESS
post removed because of personal attacks

Click here to learn more about this warning.




posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 06:34 PM
link   
Ok.

Chemistry 101.

Q. What happens to a chemical reaction when all the oxidant is used up?

A. The reaction stops.

Unless someone was adding thermitic material to the rubble of the WTC, there would be nothing there to create molten steel. Once the reaction is dead, it cools and hardens.

So... molten steel. Where from?



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whyhi

reply to post by ThichHeaded
 



How is this? The things we bring up can be backed up most of the time by well I don't know.. Science, or news or I don't know people who were there..


Yeah...I mean look at how it's obviously proven to be molten metal / thermite coming out of tower, right?


Google Video Link




Originally posted by Whyhi

Some of us are smart enough to see through the smoke and mirrors and realize things weren't as they were told..


Or "I know better than thousands of experts in the relevant fields because I'm a truther just by watching a clip of a building falling"

Ya A&E for truth and many other people no just is truthers.. Isn't it true that other governments are looking into this? Japanese perhaps?
Post by _Bones_
www.abovetopsecret.com...


Originally posted by Whyhi

Maybe they should eh? Who knows.. I hear they spend money on useless crap anyway like a war on terror..


I know, terrorists are holograms too.


I never said anything about holograms did I?

Last i check at least 7 of these hijackers still walk amongst the living.. Need proof of that?
whatreallyhappened.com...
news.bbc.co.uk...
guardian.150m.com...

The question is if these arent them then why arent the faces and names taken off this list? They do have all the DNA or something from everyone on those flights do they not?

edit on 9/16/2010 by ThichHeaded because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 06:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whyhi
I don't think there's "millions" of truthers either...

You don't have to think it, but there are. Millions of truthers in every corner of the globe from every major country around the world. And growing by the day.



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 06:39 PM
link   
The best thing you can say to someone ignorant and close minded about 9/11 is:
Wouldn't you have wanted a 2nd and more thorough investigation had you been one of the 3000 people killed ?



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 06:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

The truth movement has already decided she's not a truther. That is clearly outlined in my thread




When was this witch trial held? Did you burn her at the steak? Who was on the jury? Are you going after Sophia next? Who are TPTB in the Truth Movement? Are you one of the TPTB in the TM. Should I bow before you?


Judy's on your team throw her the ball and let her run.



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 06:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by samhouston1886
Given the fact that same people still run the show, I am very suspicious of all of the press 9/11 truth has been getting.


Popular uprisings are pretty common throughout history.

I think TPTB anticipate them, and try to direct them, but have no way of directly controlling masses of angry people, and certainly don't cause them on purpose when they are already in control.


Today, information is so available and there are so many more people in general than before that I think they are having even more trouble trying to quell what is happening. They do try to commandeer various movements though, just like what they are doing with the so-called "Tea Party" and Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin.



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 06:48 PM
link   
reply to post by ThichHeaded
 


So a random firefighter that can distinguish the contents of a molten liquid with his eyes is your best evidence?

And a random assortment of equally gullible people / frauds as your evidence of what? There's gullible people in every country...?


Last i check at least 7 of these hijackers still walk amongst the living


It's obviously more probable that they are being framed than a simple mix up of names, right?


reply to post by SL55T0T0
 


How could a dead person demand a new investigation? What new evidence are you going to bring fourth to warrant a new investigation? Will you say it's still a cover up if another one was done and the same conclusion was reached?



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 06:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whyhi
Denying the existence of something which has no evidence is the only option.


Are you still denying there was molten steel?

Did you not read the first response to the OP?




Evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intragranular melting, was readily visible in the near-surface microstructure. A liquid eutectic mixture containing primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur formed during this hot corrosion attack on the steel. This sulfur-rich liquid penetrated preferentially down grain boundaries of the steel, severely weakening the beam and making it susceptible to erosion. The eutectic temperature for this mixture strongly suggests that the temperatures in this region of the steel beam approached 1,000 °C (1,800 °F), which is substantially lower than would be expected for melting this steel.


wtc.nist.gov...


Pour over that for a minute and then come back and let's talk about it. I know you'll be trying to rationalize it somehow the whole time you read it, even though FEMA's scientists were unable to figure out what exactly caused this. So come back and we'll see what you've come up with to explain this away.



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 06:53 PM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 



Unless someone was adding thermitic material to the rubble of the WTC, there would be nothing there to create molten steel. Once the reaction is dead, it cools and hardens.


Not unless the thermitic material made the steel molten as the building was coming down, which could have ultimately aided in the building coming down. Furthermore, more thermitic reactions could have gone off in "the pile", creating even more molten steel. We have 1st responder testimony that says as they were lifting debris and air pockets would allow oxygen in, parts of the pile or molten steal would flare up.


So... molten steel. Where from?


From the steel of the building and the thermite reacting to it.

--airspoon



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 06:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Whyhi
 


Do we really have to do this dance?

I can come back on anything you say.. People who cleaned up the WTC said there was molten metal, there were thermal images of molten metal.. gimme a break..

The photos of the hijackers..

So if they say i rob a bank and put a wanted post on me.. Then realize i didnt do it do they leave my image up for all to see for 9 yrs?

No is the answer they would take it down regardless of they have someone in mind or not.



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 06:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Whyhi
Which law(s) of physics were defied?


None. It's the official theories that are in violation of laws of physics.

For example NIST's WTC7 theory. NIST has even admitted that the building's roof line accelerated downwards at the rate of free-fall for at least a 2+ second time frame while we can still see it above neighboring buildings.

At the same time, NIST claims that the building undergoing a "progressive collapse." That means the upper mass is smashing into the lower mass and destroying it, theoretically.

The physics violation comes from the fact that you can't perform work and conserve all kinetic energy simultaneously. Therefore by definition WTC7 was not having a "progressive collapse" during that period, it was literally just free-falling from all of its supports having been destroyed beforehand.



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 07:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by neformore
Chemistry 101.

Q. What happens to a chemical reaction when all the oxidant is used up?

A. The reaction stops.


Thermite provides its own oxygen source. It can react underwater. In the common formula it's iron oxide and aluminum, and the aluminum strips the oxygen off of the iron oxide and becomes aluminum oxide, and produces molten iron. Of course there are a million variations on this basic reaction.

If they did use thermite, there is no way to tell how much was used.

And at this point it is really beyond question that there was in fact molten steel. Even FEMA's report that came out in May 2002 said this, as I posted above. All the witness testimonies and pictures and videos beyond that are just icing on the cake.



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 07:06 PM
link   
I wasn't going to get involved in this thread (due to the obvious agents at work here) but the shear denial by some posters is truely mind boggling.

Fact - There was molten steel at the base of the buildings.
Fact - Thermite and thermate were found in samples from the debris.
Fact - Eyewitness testimony, photo and video evidence, scientific reports by government departments all confirm the above. GET OVER IT.

I'm not going to post evidence as it's all available for you to see for yourselves - If you really are looking for the truth or just trying to derail the discussion.



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 07:18 PM
link   
The bad guys always win in real life, i guess this is no exception...





posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 07:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by airspoon
reply to post by neformore
 



Unless someone was adding thermitic material to the rubble of the WTC, there would be nothing there to create molten steel. Once the reaction is dead, it cools and hardens.


Not unless the thermitic material made the steel molten as the building was coming down, which could have ultimately aided in the building coming down. Furthermore, more thermitic reactions could have gone off in "the pile", creating even more molten steel. We have 1st responder testimony that says as they were lifting debris and air pockets would allow oxygen in, parts of the pile or molten steal would flare up.


So... molten steel. Where from?


From the steel of the building and the thermite reacting to it.

--airspoon


Thermite is a redox reaction between a metal oxide, in this case iron, and aluminum, a reducing metal. It either reacts or it doesn't. "Reacting to" the steel is not what happens. The amount necessary to maintain the surface temperatures would be large and the temperature profiles do not look like anything but underground fire. FYI, thermite does not need oxygen to react. Hot steel will get hotter in air as it oxidizes.



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 07:40 PM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 


You are still misinterpreting the FEMA report. Bulk molten metal was not claimed in the report, molten slag formed between grains of steel as it sulfided and oxidized.



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 07:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mythkiller
I wasn't going to get involved in this thread (due to the obvious agents at work here) but the shear denial by some posters is truely mind boggling.

Fact - There was molten steel at the base of the buildings.
Fact - Thermite and thermate were found in samples from the debris.
Fact - Eyewitness testimony, photo and video evidence, scientific reports by government departments all confirm the above. GET OVER IT.

I'm not going to post evidence as it's all available for you to see for yourselves - If you really are looking for the truth or just trying to derail the discussion.


Fact- There was hot steel in the rubble. Any molten metal was not proved to be steel.
Fact-There is absolutely no proof of thermite and no evidence of thermate samples
Fact- Your previous statements are wrong. GET OVER IT.



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 08:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by pteridine
You are still misinterpreting the FEMA report. Bulk molten metal was not claimed in the report


Please show me anywhere in any of my posts where I have said ANYTHING about there being "bulk molten metal."



Originally posted by pteridine
molten slag formed between grains of steel as it sulfided and oxidized.


Molten slag consisting of the iron from the steel with other elements, exactly.


Can you read this?


The eutectic temperature for this mixture strongly suggests that the temperatures in this region of the steel beam approached 1,000 °C (1,800 °F), which is substantially lower than would be expected for melting this steel.


wtc.nist.gov...

Spreading your lies to two threads now I see.

edit on 16-9-2010 by bsbray11 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 16 2010 @ 08:10 PM
link   
" I've got a song , aint got no melody , I'ma gonna sing it to my friends ..." That should be the TM theme song .

Airspoon , I'm disappointed that you actually posted those pics that have been debunked hundreds , if not thousands of times , right here on ATS . The angled cuts , I have posted proof , time and time again , were made by iron-workers with torches . And yes , I said PROOF , as in photos of iron-workers with torches , MAKING the cuts .

Firefighters fight fires , they don't work in steel mills . Even truthers make the claim that this type of event hasn't happened before so , how can a firefighter make a call as to something being molten steel if that firefighter hasn't seen molten steel in any of the numerous fires he has fought ? If he HAS fought fires where he witnessed molten steel , then that throws this whole conspiracy theory out the window , doesn't it ? Am I the only one who can see how ridiculous this theory is ?

Thermal images did not show molten steel . Thermal images showed hot-spots . How does a thermal image show proof of molten steel ?

The meteorite ? I will be back with a perfectly plausible explanation for that . It will take me a short while to locate my source , plus I have other things going on right now .

The most disappointing thing about these 9/11 threads is that in most every one of them I see truthers posting stuff that has been debunked hundreds of times , and all the other truthers are right there , starring and flagging , and repeating all of the same old nonsense that still , as of yet , has not , can not , and will not , be proven as fact .

Reminds me of a bunch of third graders .





top topics
 
86
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join