Molten iron and/or steel. Lots of it. Under all three WTC buildings 1, 2, & 7. Brightly glowing and sometimes still dripping molten steel being recovered for not just shortly after but weeks even over a month after the event.
How did witnesses determine that it was, in fact, molten steel? Can anyone determine what such a thing is by eyeballing it at a distance (under such unprecedented circumstances, no less)?
Witnesses described what they saw
in the moment - which certainly might bring to mind what we popularly see as molten steel -
but that does not mean it is molten steel.
By orders of magnitude, the most likely scenario here is that the qualitative description of events in the panic of the moment have been seized upon by those wishing to create a narrative, who have, by sleight-of-hand, strong-armed a
witness comparison word into a
positive confirmation.
As for pools of molten steel, weeks after the collapse - since that violates any known physics ( indeed it violates the known physics of the "steel" explanation favoured by conspirators - so kinda shooting themselves in the foot there), not to mention your
own credulity - it is almost certainly inaccurate.
By far, it is more likely that several events have been conflated, and that "descriptions" have been manipulated to read like "positive identification by analysis".
I must say that molten metal pouring out of the building looks like molten steel but I guess folk will say its alluminium.
Indeed. you hit the nail on the head.
"
Folks would say"...
Under other circumstances, folks would say "
I saw a ghost!" - but that does not mean that what they saw was, in fact, confirmed a ghost.
Witnesses describe what they interpret they are seeing. Witnesses do not recount objective reality.
Notice also, the implicit false dichotomy you buy into without realizing it (we are all susceptible to it):
It doesn't look like steel,
so it must be aluminium. No mention at all of the most likely possibility - that it is something more mundane.