News clips from 9-11-2001 **You can't debunk this**

So it's also a fact that steel buildings don't lose strength at 800 degree's farenheit.

Emergency crews at the scene said firefighters were waiting for the temperature inside the building to drop, which they said would lessen the danger of collapse.

At their peak, temperatures reached 800 degrees Celsius (1,472 Fahrenheit), said Javier Sanz, head of Madrid's firefighters.
Click to expand...

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe...in.block.fire/

This link proves that not even a 800 degree fire that burned for 24hours can bring down a steel building

CHECKMATE.jpg



So it's safe to say that all the evidence I've laid out has yet to be disputed. I would like to commend all who have participated.

Checkmate!
 
Last edited:
Ganymede said:
More evidence to Contradict the Governments investigation. This proves that their were Thermal hotspots at WTC.

http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/911/911-maps.html

Checkmate
Click to expand...

Exactly as I said: local variance in temperature. And which could have been caused by anything.

Ganymede said:
So it's also a fact that steel buildings don't lose strength at 800 degree's farenheit.
Click to expand...

"Steel buildings"? Completely steel buildings? Like the ones on "Transformers"? Heh.

Anyway, steel loses 50% of its strength at 500 C. The core of WTC 1 and 2 was steel. Evidently the Spanish building had other supports, which explains their fear of a collapse...but I'm sure you've never investigated to find out. Kinda like you never posted the rest of that article, eh? :D

Anyway, I thought I was on ignore? What happened? :shrug:

So it's safe to say that all the evidence I've laid out has yet to be disputed. I would like to commend all who have participated.
Click to expand...

Thankyou, thankyou. To you I would like to say:

Checkmate!
 
So now that I've proven that the NIST was lying, by using a Government source. Lets move to the first responders. In order to establish a fact. We must have another party to corroborate the evidence. And the prosecution would like to present exibit A.

Testimony from the fire fighers themselves. They actually were there! And the said that molten steel was present. If the defense can present evidence to dispute what the prosecution has proven. Then i'm all ears.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8X5F5PttzJY

Checkmate!

CheckmateD.jpg
 
Ganymede said:
Ok ladies and Gentleman. I guess no one could provide any links to dispute the fact that molten steel was present at Ground Zero! Lets recap the updisputed facts.

1) The NIST lied about the presence of Molten Steel.

2) The NIST said Kerosense Fires don't burn hot enough to melt steel.

3) The Firefighters and Groundzero workers publicy stated that Molten steel was present. And the fires continued to burn for 3 weeks after 911.

This along with a plethora of other undisputed facts proves that the conspiracy theorists have won hands down. I have a link to back up every claim I'm making. I'm not interested in anyones opinion who can't offer a source to back it up. Now that I've proved that the NIST is fraud. Along with the entire official story.


Checkmate
Click to expand...

1. The story about so-called "molten" steel is unconfirmed. Glowing red steel was certainly possible and could have been interpreted as molten by a rescue worker.

2. The presence of molten steel would not confirm the theory of a bomb. Bombs work too quickly to cause such melting.

3. The fire is not limited to the ignition point of kerosene. Heat can build up quickly in a confined space, especially when fueled by office products, which are mostly petroleum based and paper.
 
spidergoat said:
1. The story about so-called "molten" steel is unconfirmed. Glowing red steel was certainly possible and could have been interpreted as molten by a rescue worker.
Click to expand...

The Firefighters said it was Molten Steel. I'm inclined to believe them over anyone. You believe the NIST. I believe the Fire Fighters. We'll leave it that.



2. The presence of molten steel would not confirm the theory of a bomb. Bombs work too quickly to cause such melting.
Click to expand...

No one ever said that Motlen steel was the result of a Bomb? But...

Prof. Jones, who conducted his PhD research at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center and post-doctoral research at Cornell University and the Los Alamos Meson Physics Facility, has analyised materials from WTC and has detected the existence of thermate , used for “cutting” the steel support columns, as evident in the photo below.

http://valis.gnn.tv/B15947

3. The fire is not limited to the ignition point of kerosene. Heat can build up quickly in a confined space, especially when fueled by office products, which are mostly petroleum based and paper.
Click to expand...

The melting point of steel is about 1,500 degrees Celsius (2,800 degrees Fahrenheit). Normal building fires and hydrocarbon (e.g., jet fuel) fires generate temperatures up to about 1,100 degrees Celsius (2,000 degrees Fahrenheit). NIST reported maximum upper layer air temperatures of about 1,000 degrees Celsius (1,800 degrees Fahrenheit) in the WTC towers (for example, see NCSTAR 1, Figure 6-36).

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
 
Last edited:
I'm suggesting the temperature NIST estimated for the fire were correct. (800-1200 degrees C)
 
Ganymede

The melting point of steel is about 1,500 degrees Celsius (2,800 degrees Fahrenheit). Normal building fires and hydrocarbon (e.g., jet fuel) fires generate temperatures up to about 1,100 degrees Celsius (2,000 degrees Fahrenheit). NIST reported maximum upper layer air temperatures of about 1,000 degrees Celsius (1,800 degrees Fahrenheit) in the WTC towers (for example, see NCSTAR 1, Figure 6-36).

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
Click to expand...

And at those temperatures steel becomes malleable and looses tensile strength.
 
Well, I checked up on Gany's source materials and - surprise, surprise - they're false. It wasn't melted steel, but melted aluminium:

NIST concluded that the source of the molten material was aluminum alloys from the aircraft, since these are known to melt between 475 degrees Celsius and 640 degrees Celsius (depending on the particular alloy), well below the expected temperatures (about 1,000 degrees Celsius) in the vicinity of the fires. Aluminum is not expected to ignite at normal fire temperatures and there is no visual indication that the material flowing from the tower was burning.

Pure liquid aluminum would be expected to appear silvery. However, the molten metal was very likely mixed with large amounts of hot, partially burned, solid organic materials (e.g., furniture, carpets, partitions and computers) which can display an orange glow, much like logs burning in a fireplace. The apparent color also would have been affected by slag formation on the surface.

http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
Click to expand...

Molten steel would be black.

So, an intermediate temp - around 1800 F (see NCSTAR 1, Figure 6-36; http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm) - would have been sufficient to both badly degrade the steel strength (about 50% of strength at 60% of melting temp, which is 1680 F or about 100 F less than the fire in the Towers), and melt the aluminium wreckage of the plane.

Curious - has anyone thought to account for the extra weight of the planes themselves in causing the collapse? An extra 170 tons sounds like a fair bit. Anyway...

Checkmate!
CheckmateD.jpg
 
More facts about the 911 cover-up.

According to New Scientist.

Almost 12 weeks after the terrorist atrocity at New York's World Trade Center, there is at least one fire still burning in the rubble - it is the longest-burning structural fire in history.

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn1634

Also, here's a quote from a John Hopkins University Scientist who attened ground zero.

"Fires are still actively burning and the smoke is very intense," reports Alison Geyh, PhD. "In some pockets now being uncovered, they are finding molten steel."
Click to expand...

http://www.jhsph.edu/Publications/Special/Welch.htm


Molten1.jpg


A report on the Government Computer News website quotes Greg Fuchek, vice president of sales for LinksPoint Inc. as stating:
"In the first few weeks, sometimes when a worker would pull a steel beam from the wreckage, the end of the beam would be dripping molten steel"


http://www.gcn.com/print/21_27a/19930-1.html


An article in The Newsletter of the Structural Engineers Association of Utah describing an speaking appearance by Leslie Robertson (structural engineer responsible for the design of the World Trade Center) contains this passage:
"As of 21 days after the attack, the fires were still burning and molten steel was still running"

http://www.seau.org/SEAUNews-2001-10.pdf (page 3)


So there you have it. I have more sources to back up my theory then you government apologists HA HA YOU LOSE

Checkmate!

Checkmate22.jpg
 
Let's pretend that we lose.

Could we discuss in some detail, how the amazing controlled demo was pulled off and why it showd no signs of a typical controlled demo?
 
the demolition inside WTC was not part of government conspiracy, it was there set all along for the purpose that if such an attack would indeed happen the building would collapse downward equally so it will not damage buildings around it that much. The bombs were integrated inside the two buildings for a purpose of equal demolition when time has come for the buildings to fall...from aging...
 
draqon said:
the demolition inside WTC was not part of government conspiracy, it was there set all along for the purpose that if such an attack would indeed happen the building would collapse downward equally so it will not damage buildings around it that much. The bombs were integrated inside the two buildings for a purpose of equal demolition when time has come for the buildings to fall...from aging...
Click to expand...

Interesting. Can you direct me to the source of your information so I learn more about it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top