Real 9-11 Research

[IronMexican]

Seriously. 100 pages?

[mouse]

Actually I have only heard of their use in anti-armor bullets and artillery. Please tell us all about their use in missiles as a long-burning incendiary.

My point was there are many things out there that burn for a long time.

I was answering your quote.

Explosive materials explode. They don't burn for weeks. The jet fuel burned off fairly quickly; it was the other materials in the building that burned longer

How do people get from the ground floors to the upper floors of a building?

Easy according to you they use jet fuel to burn a hole though the steel beams.

If a plane flew into the third floor of a house and fuel and burning debris fell down the stairs -- or indeed the elevator shaft (my mom had a three floor condo with an elevator) -- it could very possibly ignite my couch.

Leaving the second floor untouched? Your starting to sound like me now.

I can tell you with great certainty that it is not molten.

Molten is like a soup how can a hydraulic excavator pick up a soup like liquid?

And besides I don't care if the steel was molten or not it was on fire and dripping and not from jet fuel, that's really all that counts.

[RandomGuy]

The explosives in the basement would not shoot glass miles out in the public.

Explosives in the basement also would have caused the ENTIRE building to have moved.

In NO video does any part of the building start collapsing until the debris started hitting it, exactly what one would expect from a simple gravity-caused collapse.

The first part of the building to start moving was the area above the impact zone. THAT was plenty high enough to send glass flying for miles, IF EXPLOSVES WERE USED.

If explosives were used, then glass would have been thrown for miles.

If glass was NOT thrown for miles, then explosives were NOT used.

QED

[ChumpDumper]

Ok if I agree that photo was doctored or miss used to prove another point then you have to do the same when I show you photos of something that looks fake also. And speaking of photos why would your boys from the cia/fbi not show any photos or videos of the pentagon?

They did -- even the Citgo and Doubletree camera shots that no one in the truth movement notice were released.

The explosives in the basement would not shoot glass miles out in the public.

The collapse did not initiate in the basement.

And besides this type of charge cuts through the metal its not like dynamite and just blows everything up like in a coal mine.

So now we are back to non-explosive thermite. You need to stick to one or the other.

According to the rescue workers they had to change out their boots every few days cause they would melt.

Rubber has a melting point that is quite low compared to other materials. It certainly wouldn't require the temperature needed to melt steel, so melted rubber is not an indicator of melted steel.

And what would you say made these sparks?

The best guesses have been aluminum from the plane or lead from a bank of backup batteries in the Fuji Bank offices on those floors. Of course, that has already been discussed at length on these boards, so you already know that.

Molten Steel...blah, blah

There was never any study made of the molten material's composition, so it can't be called molten steel with any authority.

[RandomGuy]

If it was non-explosive thermite, why was the rubble pile so cool?

According to the rescue workers they had to change out their boots every few days cause they would melt.

Molten steel = thousands of degrees fahrenheit.

Massive amounts of thermite, melting massive amounts of steel would mean really really massive amounts of residual heat.

Those boots would not have taken days to melt. You would not have been physically able to get close enough to that much heat without literally frying.

An office fire, followed by a gravity led collapse would still leave some hotspots and would fit the observed phenomenon.

The rubble pile, while not cool to the touch, was far too cool to have been a pile of recently melted steel from a massive thermite reaction.

The fact that humans got anywhere near the area within minutes dictates as much.

The fact that people survived the collapses in some of the stairwells, also says that there wasn't a massive thermite reaction cutting through tons of steel. If there was thermite melting that steel, they would have been incinerated.

If it were simple explosives (i.e nano-thermite), they would have been pulped.

[ChumpDumper]

My point was there are many things out there that burn for a long time.

So how much thermite would have to be used to bring down three skyscrapers AND burn for weeks?

Easy according to you they use jet fuel to burn a hole though the steel beams.

According to me they travel through elevator shafts.

Leaving the second floor untouched? Your starting to sound like me now.

In a three floor building it's lees likely than in a skyscraper of course, but yours was a ty comparison in the first place.

Molten is like a soup how can a hydraulic excavator pick up a soup like liquid?

Exactly my point. You might be catching on yet.

And besides I don't care if the steel was molten or not it was on fire and dripping and not from jet fuel, that's really all that counts.

You should care if it is molten because that is your entire argument. That's all that really counts.

But all you've proven in this thread is that fire is hot.

On that count, I agree.

[RandomGuy]

Source of pictures:

Stahl Centrum (Steel Center) German steel manufacturers association.

http://www.stahl-online.de/english/m...tion/start.asp

These workers are handling fairly small amounts of melted steel, and require thermal jackets.

What would be required to get near hundreds of tons of melted and near melted steel in a giant rubble pile?

[Galileo]

Journal of 9/11 Studies

Thank you for visiting The Journal of 9/11 Studies, a peer-reviewed, open-access, electronic-only journal, covering the whole of research related to the events of 11 September, 2001. Many fields of study are represented in the journal, including Engineering, Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics and Psychology.

52 Articles

The Missing Jolt: A Simple Refutation of the NIST-Bazant Collapse Hypothesis
Prof. Graeme MacQueen and Tony Szamboti

Obstacles to Persuasion: Lessons from the Classroom
Mark Vorobej

The Ghost in the Machines: Evidence of Foreknowledge in the WTC Hard Drive Recoveries
Michael Fury

Plausibility Of 9/11 Aircraft Attacks Generated By GPS-Guided Aircraft Autopilot Systems
Aidan Monaghan

The Top Ten Connections Between NIST and Nano-Thermites
Kevin Ryan

9/11 and Probability Theory
Dr. Frank M. Legge

The Impact of the 9/11 Terrorist Attacks on the US Economy
Prof. Olivia A. Jackson

Extremely high temperatures during the World Trade Center destruction
Dr. Steven E. Jones, Dr. Jeffrey Farrer, Dr. Gregory S. Jenkins, Dr. Frank Legge, James Gourley, Kevin Ryan, Daniel Farnsworth, and Dr. Crockett Grabbe

Waiting for Seven: WTC 7 Collapse Warnings in the FDNY Oral Histories
Prof. Graeme MacQueen

9/11 and the Twin Towers: Sudden Collapse Initiation was Impossible
Dr. Frank Legge and Tony Szamboti, ME

Analysis of the Mass and Potential Energy of World Trade Center Tower 1
Gregory H. Urich

Appeal Filed with NIST, Pursuant to Earlier Request for Correction
James Gourley, Bob McIlvaine, Bill Doyle, Steven Jones, Kevin Ryan, Richard Gage, Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice

Appendix: Sept. 2007 Response to April 2007 RFC, from NIST

Islam and the 9/11 Wars: Steven Jones Interviews Kevin Barrett
Dr. Kevin Barrett and Dr. Steven Jones

9/11, JFK, and War: Recurring Patterns in America’s Deep Events
Prof. Peter Dale Scott

Solving The Great Steel Caper: DEW-Demolition Contrary Evidence
Dr. Gregory S. Jenkins

Supplemental: DEW-Demolition Contrary Evidence
Dr. Gregory S. Jenkins

9/11 Commission Deception, Cheney’s Actions on 9/11, and Why He Should Testify Under Oath
Prof. Peter Dale Scott

9/11 – Proof of Explosive Demolition without Calculations
Frank Legge, Ph.D.

Conspiracy Theories, Myths, Skepticism, and 9/11: their Impact on Democracy
Frank Legge, Ph.D.

Faulty Towers of Belief: Part II. Rebuilding the Road to Freedom of Reason
Laurie A. Manwell, M.Sc.

Direct Evidence for Explosions: Flying Projectiles and Widespread Impact Damage
Dr. Crockett Grabbe

High Velocity Bursts of Debris From Point-Like Sources in the WTC Towers
Kevin Ryan

Why Did the World’s Most Advanced Electronics Warfare Plane Circle Over The White House on 9/11?
Mark H. Gaffney

Some Physical Chemistry Aspects of Thermite, Thermate, Iron-Aluminum-Rich Microspheres, the Eutectic, and the Iron-Sulfur System as Applied to the Demise of Three World Trade Center Buildings on 9/11/2001
Jerry Lobdill

Faulty Towers of Belief: Part I. Demolishing the Iconic Psychological Barriers to 9/11 Truth
Laurie A. Manwell, M.Sc.

9/11 Family Members and Scholars: Request for Correction Submitted to NIST
Bob McIlvaine, Bill Doyle, Steven Jones, Kevin Ryan, Richard Gage, Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice

Request for an Investigation by the Senate Subcommittee on Superfund and Environmental Health into the Falsification of pH Corrosivity Data for World Trade Center Dust
Dr. Cate Jenkins

Addendum: Request for an Investigation by the FBI into the Falsification of pH Corrosivity Data for World Trade Center Dust
Dr. Cate Jenkins

Revisiting 9/11/2001 --Applying the Scientific Method
Dr. Steven E. Jones

The Sustainability of the Controlled Demolition Hypothesis for the Destruction of the Twin Towers
Tony Szamboti, ME

NIST and Dr. Bazant - Simultaneous Failure
Gordon Ross, ME

The American Empire and 9/11
Prof. David Ray Griffin (Also published in March/April 2007 Issue of Tikkun; here: full-length version with notes)

Proof That The Thermal and Gravitational Energy Available Were Insufficient to Melt Steel in the Twin Towers and 7 World Trade Center on 9/11/01
Prof. Terry Morrone

Jones v. Robertson, A Physicist and a Structural Engineer Debate the Controlled Demolition of the World Trade Center
Gregg Roberts

A description of molten aluminum poured onto rusty steel
Wes Lifferth

The Overwhelming Implausibility of Using Directed Energy Beams to Demolish the World Trade Center
Dr. Gregory S. Jenkins

Statement Regarding Thermite, Part 1
Robert Moore, Esq.

The NIST WTC Investigation--How Real Was The Simulation?, Word version
Eric Douglas, R.A.

9/11 - Acceleration Study Proves Explosive Demolition
Dr. Frank Legge

A Critical Review of WTC 'No Plane' Theories
Eric Salter

Why Indeed Did the World Trade Center Buildings Completely Collapse?, Word Do ent, French Translation
Dr. Steven E. Jones

Seismic Proof - 9/11 Was An Inside Job (Updated Version III)
by Craig T. Furlong & Gordon Ross

What is 9/11 Truth? - The First Steps
Kevin Ryan

To whom it may concern
Dr. Frank R. Greening

Reply to Dr. Greening (See also How the Towers were Demolished)
Gordon Ross, ME

Intersecting Facts and Theories on 9/11
Joseph P. Firmage

118 Witnesses: The Firefighter's Testimony to Explosions in the Twin Towers
Prof. Graeme MacQueen

NIST Data Disproves Collapse Theories Based on Fire
Dr. Frank Legge

WTC 7: A Short Computation
Prof. Kenneth L. Kuttler

9/11 - Evidence for Controlled Demolition: a Short List of Observations
Dr. Frank Legge

9/11 - Evidence Suggests Complicity: Inferences from Actions
Dr. Frank Legge

Momentum Transfer Analysis of the Collapse of the Upper Storeys of WTC1
Gordon Ross, ME

http://www.journalof911studies.com/

[RandomGuy]

I guess I am not going to get my questions answered.

You know, you don't have to be married to the stupid controlled demolition bull to think or even prove there was an evil conspiracy.

It is possible that an evil government conspiracy did it, and just got lucky the buildings collapsed from the fire and damage killing so many people.

It is even possible that they duped the muslim hijackers into doing their dirty work for them through al Qaeda plants.

The whole fixation with the controlled demolition bit always astounds me, as so many in the "truth" movement seem married to the idea, instead of realizing that the mountain of evidence against it marries their whole evil government conspiracy to such an easily debunked idea.

IF I were truly a shill for that evil conspiracy, I would be doing everything in my power to push "controlled demolition" as part of a disinformation campaign, because it is so obviously stupid.

[Galileo]

I guess I am not going to get my questions answered.

You know, you don't have to be married to the stupid controlled demolition bull to think or even prove there was an evil conspiracy.

It is possible that an evil government conspiracy did it, and just got lucky the buildings collapsed from the fire and damage killing so many people.

It is even possible that they duped the muslim hijackers into doing their dirty work for them through al Qaeda plants.

The whole fixation with the controlled demolition bit always astounds me, as so many in the "truth" movement seem married to the idea, instead of realizing that the mountain of evidence against it marries their whole evil government conspiracy to such an easily debunked idea.

IF I were truly a shill for that evil conspiracy, I would be doing everything in my power to push "controlled demolition" as part of a disinformation campaign, because it is so obviously stupid.

if your questions were valid, they would be published by a real scientist in a peer reviewed journal.

You are just a crazed conspiracy theorist who posts paranoia on the Internet.

[mouse]

Explosives in the basement also would have caused the ENTIRE building to have moved.

In NO video does any part of the building start collapsing until the debris started hitting it, exactly what one would expect from a simple gravity-caused collapse.

Well if certain beams were cut then maybe it was just so the core columns would collapse, No one has brought up the core columns why would a so called collapse make solid beams break apart.

Many eye witnesses heard and felt bombs coming from the basement. As far as the building moving I don't know if that is 100% true I will have get back to you on that one.

I know there is a video showing white smoke at the bottom of the towers 20 seconds before collapse.

The first part of the building to start moving was the area above the impact zone. THAT was plenty high enough to send glass flying for miles, IF EXPLOSVES WERE USED.

Even if the explosives are deep inside the elevator shaft? And why would there be glass anywhere near the support beams?

If explosives were used, then glass would have been thrown for miles.

Miles? I think your over doing it. Besides the Oklahoma bombing didn't have glass miles away, blocks away maybe but a mile is a long way off brah!

If glass was NOT thrown for miles, then explosives were NOT used.

QED

Wow your really hung up on this glass thing , so if some old lady lives exactly one mile from the Wtc and found a sliver of glass on her car hood you would then say bombs brought down the towers and Bush knew about it?

You would be on my side?

I have this lady's laptop with about 60 different infections I will be on and off line so don't pani,I am not searching for more videos.

[mouse]

if your questions were valid, they would be published by a real scientist in a peer reviewed journal.

You are just a crazed conspiracy theorist who posts paranoia on the Internet.

I may disagree RandomGuy does bring up that even the folks from lose change find hard to dispute.

[RandomGuy]

Even if the explosives are deep inside the elevator shaft? And why would there be glass anywhere near the support beams?

Miles? I think your over doing it. Besides the Oklahoma bombing didn't have glass miles away, blocks away maybe but a mile is a long way off brah!

Wow your really hung up on this glass thing , so if some old lady lives exactly one mile from the Wtc and found a sliver of glass on her car hood you would then say bombs brought down the towers and Bush knew about it?

You would be on my side?

I have this lady's laptop with about 60 different infections I will be on and off line so don't pani,I am not searching for more videos.

Explosives large enough to destroy the massive steel columns holding a million tons of building up would create blast waves powerful enough to blow out exterior glass and propel debris from the exterior offices at a thousand+ of feet per second.

"free fall" from the top of the building, as you are aware, takes 9 seconds.

The collapse started a little ways down, call it 5-7 seconds for free fall.

What is 7 seconds to fall, times 1000 feet per second out?

That is, by a very simple calculation, 7000 feet, well over a mile.

Your own pictures used to say "here this is an explosion" show stuff falling more down than outwards, pretty much showing debris NOT moving outwards at 1000+ feet per second.

http://www.uxoinfo.com/uxoinfo/ordhazards.cfm

Detonation velocities of high explosives range from approximately 9,000 feet per second to more than 27,000 feet per second.

Riddle me this Galileo:

If something takes, say five seconds to fall vertically, and you propel it horizonatally at 9000 feet per second, how far away from the point of origin will that object hit the ground?

The debris field from demolishing a skyscraper using high explosives, even shaped charges that direct MOST of the energy towards the columns would have meant debris like shards of glass spread over ALL of manhattan.

[RandomGuy]

Miles? I think your over doing it. Besides the Oklahoma bombing didn't have glass miles away, blocks away maybe but a mile is a long way off brah!

The Oklahoma city bombing was done from the exterior of the building AND was as ground level.

Parts of the truck were found thousands of feet way by the investigators.

The blast destroyed or damaged 324 buildings in a sixteen-block radius,[37] destroyed or burned 86 cars around the site, and shattered glass in 258 nearby buildings[38] (the broken glass alone accounted for 5% of the death total and 69% of the injuries outside the Murrah Federal building).[39]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_City_bombing

[RandomGuy]

The effects of the blast were equivalent to over 5,000 pounds (2,300 kg) of TNT,[30][42] and could be heard and felt up to 55 miles (89 km) away

I believe I have made the point that if there were enough explosives present and detonated to bring down a skyscraper it would be heard for miles.

Thanks for brinnging up the Oklahoma city bombing. It is good to see what actual explosives will do.

[mouse]

The Oklahoma city bombing was done from the exterior of the building AND was as ground level.

Parts of the truck were found thousands of feet way by the investigators.

According to you the Ryder truck windshield should have landed one mile away.


And how do the folks in Vegas have the large crowds only 10 blocks away when they bring down a Casino?

And what about the bombings in Iraq of the UN the glass only traveled a few blocks.

[mouse]

I guess I am not going to get my questions answered.

You know, you don't have to be married to the stupid controlled demolition bull to think or even prove there was an evil conspiracy.

I am not sure if you should lump me in with others who are fixated on the demolition part, or the conspiracy part. I just don't buy the stories put out on the news when I can see with my own eyes those buildings had help in coming down.

It is possible that an evil government conspiracy did it, and just got lucky the buildings collapsed from the fire and damage killing so many people.

The hot metal pools in the basement suggest to me something down there had help in removing most of the main center support beams. If the middle columns of both towers had stayed some what erect and if there were no fires weeks later in the basement, I would maybe consider the pancake theory. But those elevator shafts were built with very thick and solid beams I just don't see floors coming down would make them disappear like they did.

Sorry but as much as I appreciate you presenting this evidence it goes beyond basic physics in my views.

It is even possible that they duped the muslim hijackers into doing their dirty work for them through al Qaeda plants.

The WTC had been a huge target already in 93 I think that's when someone tried to bring the towers down with a truck in the basement.

If the kids in my hood tried to steal my x box but didn't bring the right tools the first time you don't think I know they may try again? Only this time I ignore rumors they are coming back and I get insurance and leave the front door unlocked. It didn't take a rocket scientist to figure out WTC towers were going to get hit why else did they have military drills and paper work on the planes hitting the towers? Why did that vitamin efficiency old fart Larry Silverstein get that huge insurance policy weeks before the event?

All those stock options on the airlines a record day. Rice telling her friends not to use commercial flights a week before, The WTC which has never had a complete black out had the power turned off over the weekend?

Bomb sniffing dogs were removed the week of 9/11. come on brah you can't debunk everything but I am sure there is a website that will even debunk Jesus if you look hard enough.

The whole fixation with the controlled demolition bit always astounds me, as so many in the "truth" movement seem married to the idea, instead of realizing that the mountain of evidence against it marries their whole evil government conspiracy to such an easily debunked idea

There is a reason, when something collapses it falls in a not so uniform fashion. it may slow down when it hits certain floors, it may trap many office workers , and millions of paper work, it may look like this.



Instead it looked like this?




what is with all that debris flying outwards? why was the cement pulverized? Are you not curious?

Or is this an area you refused to budge in? I admitted that photo could be fake of the men around that glow in the ground. But yet you can't admit this photo doesn't look like a normal collapse?

I thought you said you was open to learning the facts? Do you not notice a difference from floors that are piled up on each other from floors that are powder?

IF I were truly a shill for that evil conspiracy, I would be doing everything in my power to push "controlled demolition" as part of a disinformation campaign, because it is so obviously stupid.

Well I am sorry you feel this way. I don't think any of it is stupid those people lost their lives and cant speak about what took place its up to us who are still alive to find the real meaning of it all.

To be honest I don't give a rats ass If Bush knew anything or if there were really bombs in the WTC towers. I just don't like all the lies and the way Bush and his people kept it so secretive. Bush had to go with someone else in order to be interviewed and questioned? The 9/11 commission is going to leave out WTC7? You and Chump of all people should be outraged about it. But you won't show any out rage, your afraid to be labeled a tin foil hat wearing conspiracy theorist.

[mouse]

[IMG]

These workers are handling fairly small amounts of melted steel, and require thermal jackets.

What would be required to get near hundreds of tons of melted and near melted steel in a giant rubble pile?

You don't think the jackets are used because of safety policies? That's like saying this man has to were this protective vest to work on the road so he doesn't get hurt.




This man has to wear his goofy hat to keep Ebola virus from soaking in his brain

[mouse]

This man here has what looks like a butcher coat on shouldn't he be liquid by now?

[RandomGuy]

According to you the Ryder truck windshield should have landed one mile away.


And how do the folks in Vegas have the large crowds only 10 blocks away when they bring down a Casino?

And what about the bombings in Iraq of the UN the glass only traveled a few blocks.

Ever notice that they remove most of the windows in those buildings before they demolish them? This is to keep the overpressure from the explosives from throwing the glass out.

Watch a do entary on how this stuff is done sometime.

Or just watch 30+ videos of actual demolitions here:

http://www.biggerblast.com/index.php/Table/Videos/

In every large building that they demolish, they remove every bit of the first 2 or 3 floors that isn't actual structural steel for the sole purpose of mimimizing debris and flying glass.

Read up on that Las Vegas casino and what it took to prep it for demolition.

[RandomGuy]

You don't think the jackets are used because of safety policies? That's like saying this man has to were this protective vest to work on the road so he doesn't get hurt.

People who get that close to large amounts of heat need equipment like this for things beyond "safety policies".

Molten steel = thousands of degrees fahrenheit.

Massive amounts of thermite, melting massive amounts of steel would mean really really massive amounts of residual heat.

The rubble pile, while not cool to the touch, was far too cool to have been a pile of recently melted steel from a massive thermite reaction.

The fact that humans got anywhere near the area within minutes dictates as much.

The fact that people survived the collapses in some of the stairwells, also says that there wasn't a massive thermite reaction cutting through tons of steel. If there was thermite melting that steel, they would have been incinerated.

If it were simple explosives (i.e nano-thermite), they would have been pulped.

[Wild Cobra]

Then you never heard of Depleted uranium missiles the heat can burn for days. The Military uses it.

You are talking about a very extreme reaction. DU is used for that intense heat, and it's triggered by a kinetic reaction upon a sold object also. It puts thermite and thermate to shame. I incorrectly marked the image as two piece when it's three piece:



This is what we are looking at:



What it looks like with the Sabot separated:

[Wild Cobra]

EDIT

Please note I made a serious mistake on the values. I discarded looking up emissivity, because I thought both in their molten state would be equal, therefore no ratio changes. I changed the posting, correcting for emissivity. Text changes are italicized and the graphs are changed.

------

Lets put a little perspective on the heat. Steel melts at about 1370 Celsius. We suspect the heat in the towers were anywhere from 1200 to 1800 Fahrenheit (if I recall) while burning and the extra kinetic energy added from falling. Aluminum melts at 660 Celsius. For the purpose of black body radiation calculations, converted to Kelvin, each are about:

Steel: 1643
Aluminum: 933
Heat min: 922
Heat max: 1255

Radiated heat from steel is very high at 52,612 w/m. Aluminum is much lower, about 1/32nd that of steel, at 1,641 w/m. The fires burned at 10,435 to 35,821 w/m. Point is, and from experience working in a aluminum smelter/foundry, you can get a few feet away from molten aluminum with minimal protection. Not steel. Using the inverse square law, you would need to be at more than five times farther from molten steel to molten aluminum for the same exposed volume.

Images from Spectral Calc:

[Jesus is my friend!]

^ one smart vato

[RandomGuy]

Lets put a little perspective on the heat. Steel melts at about 1370 Celsius. We suspect the heat in the towers were anywhere from 1200 to 1800 Fahrenheit (if I recall) while burning and the extra kinetic energy added from falling. Aluminum melts at 660 Celsius. For the purpose of black body radiation calculations, converted to Kelvin, each are about:

Steel: 1643
Aluminum: 933
Heat min: 922
Heat max: 1255

Radiated heat from steel is very high at 131,530 w/m. Aluminum is much lower, about 1/10th that of steel, at 13,677 w/m. The fires burned at 13,044 to 44,776 w/m. Point is, and from experience working in a aluminum smelter/foundry, you can get a few feet away from molten aluminum with minimal protection. Not steel. Using the inverse square law, you would need to be at more than three times farther from molten steel to molten aluminum for the same exposed volume.

Images from Spectral Calc:

Answer this question then:

Assume that 10 tons of steel were melted to a liquid form from a thermite reaction.

How much radiant heat would that give off if put into a big puddle?

How close could an uninsulated human being stand to that puddle?