FAQ   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register   Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 
WTC - Molten Metal
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> 9/11 HardCorps Specifics Investigation
  ::  Previous topic :: Next topic  
Author Message
Fintan
Site Admin


Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 8209

PostPosted: Sun Aug 20, 2006 10:25 am    Post subject: WTC - Molten Metal Reply with quote

Reply to this topic with general evidence about the alleged
Molten Metal at the WTC Site after the collapses.


-------------------
S U M M A R Y
-------------------

A summary of the thread will be updated here as evidence
is presented in this topic.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
DeepLogos



Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 259
Location: Geostationary orbit around myself, sipping at a cup of DM Tea...

PostPosted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 12:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

A few photos and some comments regarding the alledged pools of molten metal at the WTC-site:

Possible Molten Iron From A Possible Thermite Reaction, On Cedar Street At Ground Zero, Likely From Collapsed WTC 2 , With 90 West Street Building In Background, 9/11/2001



I don't think these are the "pools" eluded to, but to me it looks like there was very hot metal on ground level too, if it indeed is metal we are seeing in this picture



USGS Spectroscopy Lab: http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2001/ofr-01-0405/ofr-01-0405.html

Prof. Steven E. Jones wrote:
Introduction

We start with the fact that large quantities of molten metal were observed in basement areas under rubble piles of all three buildings: the Twin Towers and WTC7. A video clip provides eye-witness evidence regarding this metal at ground zero: http://plaguepuppy.net/public_html/video%20archive/red_hot_ground_zero_low_quality.wmv . The photographs below by Frank Silecchia show chunks of the hot metal being removed from the North Tower rubble on September 27, 2001 (according to photographer's aid). Notice the color of the lower portion of the extracted metal -- this tells us much about the temperature of the metal and provides important clues regarding its composition, as we shall see.




(...)

The following photograph has become available, evidently showing the now-solidified metal with entrained material, stored (as of November 2005) in a warehouse in New York:



The abundance of iron (as opposed to aluminum) in this material is indicated by the reddish rust observed. When a sample is obtained, a range of characterization techniques will quickly give us information we seek. X-ray energy dispersive spectrometry (XEDS) will yield the elemental composition, and electron energy-loss spectroscopy will tell us the elements found in very small amounts that were undetectable with XEDS. Electron-backscattered diffraction in the scanning electron microscope will give us phase information; the formation of certain precipitates can tell us a minimum temperature the melt must have reached. We will endeavor to obtain and publish these data, whatever they reveal.

(...)

Peering into the yellow-white hot “core” under the WTC rubble. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/1858491.stm




From: http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html

911 Myths has a different take on this though:


9/11 Myths wrote:
First, there’s no proof here other than the caption of when and where this was taken. [refering to the first two pictures in S. Jones' presentation posted here]

Second, whatever’s glowing red here clearly isn’t isn’t “molten” in the sense of “melted”.There may possibly be something dripping off one end, but we don’t know what that is.

Third, there seems an odd lack of conduction amongst the materials being picked up. We can see that the excavator has picked up a considerable amount of nearby material that presumably was very close to the same heat source, and it looks like glowing metal, but it’s completely black. There’s no orange -- bright red -- dull red transition across the materials, it’s just a straight orange to black. Steel isn’t a good conductor of heat, it’s true, but is that enough to explain the photo?

And fourth, we know there were underground fires at the site for some time. How hot could they get? Depends on the materials and the supply of oxygen, but in some cases the temperatures can be surprisingly high:

Australia is the home of one of the world's few naturally burning coal seams...
The fire temperature reaches temperatures of 1,700°C deep beneath the ground.
http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/enviro/EnviroRepublish_786127.htm


Coal fires produce higher temperatures than we’d expect from the debris pile, but then Steve Jones suggests we only need 845°C to 1,040°C to explain our glowing steel (http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/htm7.html). Could that be produced with the materials available, and oxygen filtering in from above, or from the subways connected to the WTC basement level?

There’s a clue in the results of this fire test intended to simulate conditions in a timber frame building:

Peak temperatures in the living area of the fire flat reached approximately 1000°C and remained at this level until the test was stopped at 64 minutes...

Despite average atmosphere temperatures in excess of 900°C for 30 minutes...

http://www.mace.manchester.ac.uk/project/research/structures/strucfire/CaseStudy/Timber/default.htm


The Structural Fire Engineering department of the University of Manchester tells us that adding plastics to the mix can make things hotter still:

The standard fires do not always represent the most severe fire conditions. Structural members having been designed to standard fires may fail to survive in real fires. For example, the modern offices tend to contain large quantities of hydrocarbon fuels in decoration, furniture, computers and electric devices, in forms of polymers, plastics, artificial leathers and laminates etc. Consequently, the fire becomes more severe than the conventional standard fire.
http://www.mace.manchester.ac.uk/project/research/structures/strucfire/Design/performance/fireModelling/nominalFireCurves/default.htm


Office fires can be severe, then. What temperatures are achievable? The same page details four different fire types, and shows their temperature range over time.





Figure 1 shows the various nominal fire curves for comparison. It can be seen that, over a period of 2 hours, the hydrocarbon fire is the most severe followed by the standard fire, with the external fire being the least severe fire although the slow heating fire represents the lowest temperature up to 30 minutes. It is noteworthy that for standard and smouldering fires, the temperature continuously increases with increasing time. For the external fire, the temperature remains constant at 680°C after approximate 22 minutes. Whereas for the hydrocarbon fires, the temperatures remain constant at 1100°C and 1120°C after approximate 40 minutes.
http://www.mace.manchester.ac.uk/project/research/structures/strucfire/Design/performance/fireModelling/nominalFireCurves/default.htm


From: http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc_molten_steel.html

YouTube clip:



-DL-

_________________
"I'm pulling the plug on you now, Jmmanuel... I hope your resurrection ship is nearby..."

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
elbowdeep



Joined: 20 Jun 2006
Posts: 395

PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2006 1:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Does anyone know the origins of this photo?, which is ALWAYS used as "proof" that Thermite was used in WTC1&2.

I am particularly interested in WHO took it, WHEN (very important), and WHERE.

_________________
One day the cows will sprout wings and fly away...
http://twitter.com/elbowdeep
http://elbowdeep.posterous.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Lord Carpainter



Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Posts: 268
Location: Canada

PostPosted: Sat May 03, 2008 11:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The angle cut beam isn't proof of thermite, IMO. It is evidence of the use of a shaped charge, which cuts beams at an angle. A high velocity explosion which matched up pretty well with the sound of a shaped charge blast happened at the WTC, and can be heard here (With comparison): http://youtube.com/watch?v=I84-_hcbtyU

Molten metal is a hoax to cover up the use of DEW, just as DEW-linked Van Romero's scripted and deliberate 'small amount of explosives' statements were: http://www.checktheevidence.co.uk/cms/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=91&Itemid=60

Molten metal serves as a distraction from the real story. The 'fuming' that continued at Ground Zero, long after 9/11. It also leads people down the Thermite/Thermate road, which distracts from evidence of directed energy weaponry.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RockDock



Joined: 07 Feb 2007
Posts: 366

PostPosted: Sat May 03, 2008 10:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wtf LC, are you some sort of shill for the fuckers who ran the operation?

DEW?

Shaped charges?

How about a plasma cutter in the weeks after the day? No one has ever proven to me the provenance of that photo. I think the photo is a red herring.

So, you proselytize the no planes at all theory, go for the Directed Energy Weapons, and act as Killtown's wiingman.

Do you work for Grumpy's people or somebody else?

_________________
There are souls in the boots
Of the soldiers America
Fuck your yellow ribbon
If you want to
Support your troops
Bring them home
And hold them tight
When they get here
-Andrea Gibson - For Eli
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lord Carpainter



Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Posts: 268
Location: Canada

PostPosted: Sun May 04, 2008 12:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

RockDock wrote:


1)Wtf LC, are you some sort of shill for the fuckers who ran the operation?

2) DEW?

3) Shaped charges?

4) How about a plasma cutter in the weeks after the day? No one has ever proven to me the provenance of that photo. I think the photo is a red herring.

So, you proselytize the no planes at all theory, go for the Directed Energy Weapons,

6)and act as Killtown's wiingman.

7) Do you work for Grumpy's people or somebody else?


1) No, I'm not. Everyone who has a theory different than yours or disagrees with you is not a shill.

2) Yeah, DEW. I think Explosives/DEW were used. You've got a problem with that? Then cut the 'ARE YOU A SHILL??' nonsense and present some evidence already.

3) Yeah, shaped charges. Did you watch the comparison video I presented?

4) Is plasma cutter a possibility? Of course it is. But the comparison video clearly shows that at least one shaped charge detonated at the WTC, so it is also possible that this beam was cut by a shaped charge.

5) I go for NPT yes, and I go for DEW yes. Got a problem with that? I haven't seen you present anything of substance. Blindly calling theories disinformation because of your disagreements with them is not open-minded.

6) 'Killtown's wingman'? I assume you are referring to my defense of him in the "Killtown or Killfake?" post. I know more about the origins and reasons for the 'Stewart Nurick' accusations than a lot of the people in that post. Am I a shill for pointing out that there is no evidence for that accusation and that Genghis6199 is a freaking nutcase? And what did you contribute to that post? All you did was help redirect it to discussion of NPT.

7) No.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RockDock



Joined: 07 Feb 2007
Posts: 366

PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2008 10:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lord Carpainter wrote:


1) No, I'm not. Everyone who has a theory different than yours or disagrees with you is not a shill.

I have not claimed that everybody who disagrees with me is a shill. So you are a liar too.

Lord Carpainter wrote:

2) Yeah, DEW. I think Explosives/DEW were used. You've got a problem with that? Then cut the 'ARE YOU A SHILL??' nonsense and present some evidence already.



DEW makes no sense. Why use esoteric weaponary when a 395,000 pound airliner plus a bunch of fuel traveling at close to 600mph is available? None of the links I have followed from your posts have proven anything to me. Other than you are a fan of CB_Brooklyn and Killtown. And Judy Wood. Yes, Judy Wood the credible scientist who is promoted by the likes of Fetzer and Rense. I am not going to rehash OLD DIVISIVE crap with you. You want to wade through the Judy Wood threads on here, go ahead.

http://www.google.ca/search?q=+Judy+Wood+site:breakfornews.com

Lord Carpainter wrote:

3) Yeah, shaped charges. Did you watch the comparison video I presented?


You don't get it. The evidence is gone man. It no longer really matters how it happened, why the towers fell. It likely was a combination of plane crash, fire (yes there were big fires and yes I can get me head around truss flooring giving way and initiating a collapse sequence.

Perhaps too there were judicious use of shaped charges to help it along. Certainly there appears to be weird shit going on in the WTC in the days before 911, with power-downs and "telephone installers". There seemed to be some evidence for that with explosion-like sounds and the squib-like action on some of the floors. Unfortunately, and probably criminally, there were no attempts to find explosive residue in the days following the collapses.

As much as I would love to see clear evidence of shaped charges, it is not likely to happen. Damn near all of the steel and debris was hauled away without ever being checked for explosives. It has been six and half year. That "unimpeachable evidence" is unlikely to show up. The grainy fucked-with youtube videos and photographs do nothing to advance the cause. Indeed they muddy the waters.

The more time folks spend arguing about "No planes - yes there were planes" "Exotic weapons - no exotic weapons" "Hijackers - remote controls - NO PLANES" "Steel core - concrete core" the less time is spent on identifying the bastard scum sucking perpetrators who have led the "free world" further into slavery, depravity and slaughter through the handy device of "problem-reaction-solution".

Lord Carpainter wrote:

4) Is plasma cutter a possibility? Of course it is. But the comparison video clearly shows that at least one shaped charge detonated at the WTC, so it is also possible that this beam was cut by a shaped charge.


Sure is, but since we will never know who took the picture - or more importantly when and specifically where in the ruins - it is a useless piece of crap evidence that serves to distract from the fact we live in a fascist regime that is controlled by the corporations who "employ" us.

Lord Carpainter wrote:

5) I go for NPT yes, and I go for DEW yes. Got a problem with that? I haven't seen you present anything of substance. Blindly calling theories disinformation because of your disagreements with them is not open-minded.


Ooo de ooo, I am not "open-minded." Open mind this buddy. If arguing about how the fuck something happened is not resolvable how about give it up and look to who is fucking us over as a result of the towers falling? It sure ain't al Quaeda is it?

Lord Carpainter wrote:

6) 'Killtown's wingman'? I assume you are referring to my defense of him in the "Killtown or Killfake?" post. I know more about the origins and reasons for the 'Stewart Nurick' accusations than a lot of the people in that post. Am I a shill for pointing out that there is no evidence for that accusation and that Genghis6199 is a freaking nutcase? And what did you contribute to that post? All you did was help redirect it to discussion of NPT.


So you are an "inside" guy with Killtown.
Quote:
I know more about the origins and reasons for the 'Stewart Nurick' accusations than a lot of the people in that post.
If that is the case why don't you elucidate? Why do people think Killtown is a weenie and you his bun? Could it be because of statements such as "I know more about the origins and reasons for the 'Stewart Nurick' accusations than a lot of the people in that post."

Lord Carpainter wrote:

7) No.


No you don't work? Do you still live with Mommy?

_________________
There are souls in the boots
Of the soldiers America
Fuck your yellow ribbon
If you want to
Support your troops
Bring them home
And hold them tight
When they get here
-Andrea Gibson - For Eli
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lord Carpainter



Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Posts: 268
Location: Canada

PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2008 5:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I have not claimed that everybody who disagrees with me is a shill. So you are a liar too.


It is the impression I get when you start going "WTF ARE YOU A SHILL" just because it is my opinion that DEW/TV Fakery were involved.

Quote:
DEW makes no sense. Why use esoteric weaponary when a 395,000 pound airliner plus a bunch of fuel traveling at close to 600mph is available? None of the links I have followed from your posts have proven anything to me. Other than you are a fan of CB_Brooklyn and Killtown. And Judy Wood. Yes, Judy Wood the credible scientist who is promoted by the likes of Fetzer and Rense. I am not going to rehash OLD DIVISIVE crap with you. You want to wade through the Judy Wood threads on here, go ahead.

http://www.google.ca/search?q=+Judy+Wood+site:breakfornews.com


-Because an airplane can't turn a building into dust.

-I respect the work of those three, yes, and I think they have done a great deal shedding light on what really happened on 9/11.

-I ran a search on Google, and could find no articles on Rense that promoted Judy Wood. The only one I found was a Dick Eastman article on Rense, which attacked Wood and Reynolds: http://www.rense.com/general78/derk.htm

Quote:
You don't get it. The evidence is gone man. It no longer really matters how it happened, why the towers fell. It likely was a combination of plane crash, fire (yes there were big fires and yes I can get me head around truss flooring giving way and initiating a collapse sequence.

Perhaps too there were judicious use of shaped charges to help it along. Certainly there appears to be weird shit going on in the WTC in the days before 911, with power-downs and "telephone installers". There seemed to be some evidence for that with explosion-like sounds and the squib-like action on some of the floors. Unfortunately, and probably criminally, there were no attempts to find explosive residue in the days following the collapses.

As much as I would love to see clear evidence of shaped charges, it is not likely to happen. Damn near all of the steel and debris was hauled away without ever being checked for explosives. It has been six and half year. That "unimpeachable evidence" is unlikely to show up. The grainy fucked-with youtube videos and photographs do nothing to advance the cause. Indeed they muddy the waters.

The more time folks spend arguing about "No planes - yes there were planes" "Exotic weapons - no exotic weapons" "Hijackers - remote controls - NO PLANES" "Steel core - concrete core" the less time is spent on identifying the bastard scum sucking perpetrators who have led the "free world" further into slavery, depravity and slaughter through the handy device of "problem-reaction-solution".


OK, I agree here. While I think finding out the perps' means of deception is important, what is ultimately important is exposing the perps themselves.

Quote:
So you are an "inside" guy with Killtown.


You don't need to be 'on the inside' to know the Genghis accusations are trash. You just had to be going to 911 movement forums at the right time, and followed this drama. At 911movement.org, where I go, and where KT is an administrator, numerous members thought he was a perp because Genghis6199 was telling everyone how strange it was that he's remained anonymous for so many years (Despite the fact that the Internet is full of anonymous people).

The Stewart Nurick crap started when a bunch of people over at Genghis' forum (911Taboo), started going on about how similar KT's voice was to a guy called Stewart, who called in on 9/11. They then said that the KT was Stewart Nurick (Based solely on the fact that the guy on the phone was Nurick, and they had absolutely zero evidence that KT was the guy on the phone, except that they had a similar voice.).


Quote:
If that is the case why don't you elucidate? Why do people think Killtown is a weenie and you his bun? Could it be because of statements such as "I know more about the origins and reasons for the 'Stewart Nurick' accusations than a lot of the people in that post."


I told them what I knew. That the accusations were started by a guy called Genghis6199, based on the fact that one of the guys who called in to the TV station on 9/11 sounded like Killtown. Now, if you go back to that post, I provided evidence that Genghis is insane and has something against Killtown. There is nothing in the 'Killfake' accusations. Anyone who looks into it will conclude the same.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lord Carpainter



Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Posts: 268
Location: Canada

PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2008 5:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I have not claimed that everybody who disagrees with me is a shill. So you are a liar too.


It is the impression I get when you start going "WTF ARE YOU A SHILL" just because it is my opinion that DEW/TV Fakery were involved.

Quote:
DEW makes no sense. Why use esoteric weaponary when a 395,000 pound airliner plus a bunch of fuel traveling at close to 600mph is available? None of the links I have followed from your posts have proven anything to me. Other than you are a fan of CB_Brooklyn and Killtown. And Judy Wood. Yes, Judy Wood the credible scientist who is promoted by the likes of Fetzer and Rense. I am not going to rehash OLD DIVISIVE crap with you. You want to wade through the Judy Wood threads on here, go ahead.

http://www.google.ca/search?q=+Judy+Wood+site:breakfornews.com


-Because an airplane can't turn a building into dust.

-I respect the work of those three, yes, and I think they have done a great deal shedding light on what really happened on 9/11.

-I ran a search on Google, and could find no articles on Rense that promoted Judy Wood. The only one I found was a Dick Eastman article on Rense, which attacked Wood and Reynolds: http://www.rense.com/general78/derk.htm

Quote:
You don't get it. The evidence is gone man. It no longer really matters how it happened, why the towers fell. It likely was a combination of plane crash, fire (yes there were big fires and yes I can get me head around truss flooring giving way and initiating a collapse sequence.

Perhaps too there were judicious use of shaped charges to help it along. Certainly there appears to be weird shit going on in the WTC in the days before 911, with power-downs and "telephone installers". There seemed to be some evidence for that with explosion-like sounds and the squib-like action on some of the floors. Unfortunately, and probably criminally, there were no attempts to find explosive residue in the days following the collapses.

As much as I would love to see clear evidence of shaped charges, it is not likely to happen. Damn near all of the steel and debris was hauled away without ever being checked for explosives. It has been six and half year. That "unimpeachable evidence" is unlikely to show up. The grainy fucked-with youtube videos and photographs do nothing to advance the cause. Indeed they muddy the waters.

The more time folks spend arguing about "No planes - yes there were planes" "Exotic weapons - no exotic weapons" "Hijackers - remote controls - NO PLANES" "Steel core - concrete core" the less time is spent on identifying the bastard scum sucking perpetrators who have led the "free world" further into slavery, depravity and slaughter through the handy device of "problem-reaction-solution".


OK, I agree here. While I think finding out the perps' means of deception is important, what is ultimately important is exposing the perps themselves.

Quote:
So you are an "inside" guy with Killtown.


You don't need to be 'on the inside' to know the Genghis accusations are trash. You just had to be going to 911 movement forums at the right time, and followed this drama. At 911movement.org, where I go, and where KT is an administrator, numerous members thought he was a perp because Genghis6199 was telling everyone how strange it was that he's remained anonymous for so many years (Despite the fact that the Internet is full of anonymous people).

The Stewart Nurick crap started when a bunch of people over at Genghis' forum (911Taboo), started going on about how similar KT's voice was to a guy called Stewart, who called in on 9/11. They then said that the KT was Stewart Nurick (Based solely on the fact that the guy on the phone was Nurick, and they had absolutely zero evidence that KT was the guy on the phone, except that they had a similar voice.).


Quote:
If that is the case why don't you elucidate? Why do people think Killtown is a weenie and you his bun? Could it be because of statements such as "I know more about the origins and reasons for the 'Stewart Nurick' accusations than a lot of the people in that post."


I told them what I knew. That the accusations were started by a guy called Genghis6199, based on the fact that one of the guys who called in to the TV station on 9/11 sounded like Killtown. Now, if you go back to that post, I provided evidence that Genghis is insane and has something against Killtown. There is nothing in the 'Killfake' accusations. Anyone who looks into it will conclude the same.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hdog



Joined: 12 Dec 2006
Posts: 77

PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2008 5:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="RockDock]

You don't get it. The evidence is gone man. It no longer really matters how it happened, why the towers fell. It likely was a combination of plane crash, fire (yes there were big fires and yes I can get me head around truss flooring giving way and initiating a collapse sequence.

[/quote]

It appears you don't get it. You actually think plane crashes, fire and gravity caused the Towers to destroy themselves, straight down through the path of maximal resistance? And this somehow caused the South Tower cap to lose is angular momentum.

We're supposed to foreget about direct evidence for the use of explosives because you don't understand physics?

And btw, the truss failure theory is officially dead.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Lord Carpainter



Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Posts: 268
Location: Canada

PostPosted: Mon May 05, 2008 6:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Whoa, I didn't even read that part. Are you actually saying that planes+fire brought down the World Trade Center? Dude, consider that both buildings were completely dustified. Also note that when the top falls, since the Tower is redundant, it would not have caused global failure. Also, the top disintegrates quickly, so to think that it brought down the building does not make sense.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
bri



Joined: 16 Jun 2006
Posts: 3185
Location: Capacious Creek

PostPosted: Tue May 06, 2008 2:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The whole thing may be a trick. Maybe 9/11 was an inside job and it's good to be aware, but it's a perhaps unsolvable crime that while research should be done on the event slowly and carefully. It should not become this major center "issue".

So where did the BEAM come from? A satellite? Building 7? Wink
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    The Next Level Forum Index -> 9/11 HardCorps Specifics Investigation All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

Theme xand created by spleen.