Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * - - 6 votes

WTC 911 EyeWitness~Hoboken


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
3683 replies to this topic

#991    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,540 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 04 March 2013 - 01:07 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 04 March 2013 - 12:30 AM, said:

On the contrary, one of my jobs dictates knowledge in metals and among my speciaties: heat-treating and annealing of metals.
You are not a metallurgist and more importantly, you were never at GZ....lol

So keep deluding yourself that you know better....lol

View Postskyeagle409, on 04 March 2013 - 12:30 AM, said:

According to structural engineers who examined WTC steel, there was no evidence of motel steel at ground zero nor at the salvages yards.
Professor Astaneh would disagree....lol

View Postskyeagle409, on 04 March 2013 - 12:30 AM, said:

Add to the fact there are no temperature readings that indicated temperatures high enough to melt steel.
Patently false....lol

View Postskyeagle409, on 04 March 2013 - 12:30 AM, said:

Undeniable evidence supporting statements of structural engineer investigators at ground zero and at the salvage years that there was no evidence of molten steel at ground zero.
Sorry but you know that is untrue....Plenty of people saw molten steel...lol

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#992    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 29,596 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 04 March 2013 - 05:00 PM

View PostStundie, on 04 March 2013 - 01:07 PM, said:

You are not a metallurgist and more importantly, you were never at GZ....lol[/

On the contrary, I know enough about metals to know that you are incorrect.

Quote

So keep deluding yourself that you know better....lol
Professor Astaneh would disagree....lol
Patently false....lol

Considering that he left the team early on, and confirmed that fire, not explosives, was responsible for the collapse of the WTC buildings. There were no temperature reading even near the melting point of steel and structural experts from the Society of Civil Engineers and other investigators at ground  zero have confirmed they found no evidence of molten steel.

In that regard, you have been proven wrong once again and you cannot provide a source that can create temperatures needed to melt steel prior of the collapse of the WTC buildings.

Edited by skyeagle409, 04 March 2013 - 05:59 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#993    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 29,596 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 04 March 2013 - 05:00 PM

View PostStundie, on 04 March 2013 - 01:07 PM, said:

Sorry but you know that is untrue....Plenty of people saw molten steel...lol

They saw molten aluminum, not steel. No source, other than equipment used by clean-up crews, was ever found at ground zero to create such high temperatures needed to melt steel.

Quote

Sorry but the following are not qualified structural surveyors and therefore are not qualified to make that judgement.... :P

Nobody at GZ saw any holes or bulges...lol

Let's take a look.

In this video, you can clearly see where the WTC building buckled just before it collapsed. That was a clear indication that fire was responsible.



Debunking 9/11 exclusive! ~ World Trade Center 7 South Side Hole

Posted Image

Posted Image

http://www.debunking911.com/WTC7.htm

Quote

WTC Pre-Collapse Bowing Debunks 9/11 "Controlled Demolition" Theory

Scientists investigating the Sept. 11, 2001 collapse of the twin towers said, "the World Trade Center towers showed telltale signs they were about to collapse several minutes before each crumbled to the ground." There would not be telltale signs if it was explosives (Controlled Demolition) that caused the buildings to collapse.

"In the case of the north tower, police chopper pilots reported seeing the warning signs - an inward bowing of the building facade - at least eight minutes before it collapsed at 10:29 a.m." New York Daily News reporter Paul Shin wrote in his June 19th, 2004 article 9/11 cops saw collapse coming.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

9/11 cops saw collapse coming

n the case of the north tower, police chopper pilots reported seeing the warning signs - an inward bowing of the building facade - at least eight minutes before it collapsed at 10:29 a.m. But emergency responders inside the tower never got the order to evacuate due to faulty communications equipment and garbled lines of command, investigators with the National Institute of Standards and Technology said in its second interim report on the collapse's causes.

"The NYPD aviation unit reported critical information about the impending collapse of the buildings," lead investigator Shyam Sunder said at a presentation in midtown.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

June 18 (Bloomberg) -- Federal engineering investigators studying the destruction of the World Trade Center's twin towers on Sept. 11 said New York Police Department aviation units reported an inward bowing of the buildings' columns in the minutes before they collapsed, a signal they were about to fall.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Buckling Steel

Dr. Shyam Sunder, lead investigator for NIST's building and fire safety investigation into the WTC disaster, said, "While the buildings were able to withstand the initial impact of the aircraft, the resulting fires that spread through the towers weakened support columns and floors that had fireproofing dislodged by the impacts. This eventually led to collapse as the perimeter columns were pulled inward by the sagging floors and buckled."

"The reason the towers collapsed is because the fireproofing was dislodged," according to Sunder. If the fireproofing had remained in place, Sunder said, the fires would have burned out and moved on without weakening key elements to the point of structural collapse."

http://www.represent...Explosives.html


Edited by skyeagle409, 04 March 2013 - 05:56 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#994    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 29,596 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 04 March 2013 - 06:18 PM

View PostStundie, on 04 March 2013 - 01:07 PM, said:

Sorry but you know that is untrue....Plenty of people saw molten steel...lol

They saw molten aluminum, not molten steel and here is another reason why they did not see molten steel.

Quote

The temperature at the core of "the pile," is near 2000 degrees Fahrenheit, according to fire officials, who add that the fires are too deep for firefighters to get to. As the rubble is peeled away, oxygen causes the fires still smoldering to strengthen, making the task more difficult.

http://web.archive.o...very010918.html

In other words, temperatures were not high enough to create molten steel, but more than high enough to create molten aluminum for which there are photos to support the fact that molten aluminum was flowing but none for molten steel.

Edited by skyeagle409, 04 March 2013 - 06:19 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#995    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,540 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 05 March 2013 - 04:16 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 04 March 2013 - 06:18 PM, said:

They saw molten aluminum, not molten steel and here is another reason why they did not see molten steel.
In other words, temperatures were not high enough to create molten steel, but more than high enough to create molten aluminum for which there are photos to support the fact that molten aluminum was flowing but none for molten steel.
It doesn't matter what you post, there were no accurate temperatures of the pile at GZ. These Firefighter said they were near 2000F and that the fires are too deep to get too, which of course strengthen when there is oxygen.

But they also said they saw molten steel, along with professors and ironworkers and many others, you have no evidence they are wrong or disproves it.

Continue on spamming the forum with the stuff we have been over time and time again, doesn't change the facts, they saw molten steel...not aluminium.

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#996    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,540 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 05 March 2013 - 04:23 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 04 March 2013 - 05:00 PM, said:

On the contrary, I know enough about metals to know that you are incorrect.
You are not saying I am incorrect, you are saying that those at GZ who claimed they saw steel are incorrect. lol

And for all your knowledge of metals, you were not at GZ therefore what you present is your opinion, which you have foolishly mistaken as evidence and controversial proof they are wrong. lol

Pure delusions...

View Postskyeagle409, on 04 March 2013 - 05:00 PM, said:

Considering that he left the team early on, and confirmed that fire, not explosives, was responsible for the collapse of the WTC buildings. There were no temperature reading even near the melting point of steel and structural experts from the Society of Civil Engineers and other investigators at ground  zero have confirmed they found no evidence of molten steel.
What has he leaving the team early on got to do whether he saw molten steel at GZ?? lol

You keep invoking the temperature as some sort of argument and no one has confirmed there was no evidence of molten steel, when there is evidence of molten steel......lol

View Postskyeagle409, on 04 March 2013 - 05:00 PM, said:

In that regard, you have been proven wrong once again and you cannot provide a source that can create temperatures needed to melt steel prior of the collapse of the WTC buildings.
I do not know how the temperatures were created and even if I have no idea how the temperatures were created, doesn't disprove that those people saw molten steel, beams and girders and neither does it prove that it was aluminium.......lol

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#997    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,540 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 05 March 2013 - 04:24 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 04 March 2013 - 05:00 PM, said:

They saw molten aluminum, not steel. No source, other than equipment used by clean-up crews, was ever found at ground zero to create such high temperatures needed to melt steel.

Let's take a look.

In this video, you can clearly see where the WTC building buckled just before it collapsed. That was a clear indication that fire was responsible.

Debunking 9/11 exclusive! ~ World Trade Center 7 South Side Hole

Posted Image

Posted Image

http://www.debunking911.com/WTC7.htm
I guess the irony of my statement......

"Sorry but the following are not qualified structural surveyors and therefore are not qualified to make that judgement.... :P
Nobody at GZ saw any holes or bulges...lol"


Flew right above your head didn't it..... :yes:

Edited by Stundie, 05 March 2013 - 04:24 PM.

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#998    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 29,596 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 05 March 2013 - 04:32 PM

View PostStundie, on 05 March 2013 - 04:24 PM, said:

I guess the irony of my statement......

"Sorry but the following are not qualified structural surveyors and therefore are not qualified to make that judgement.... :P
Nobody at GZ saw any holes or bulges...lol"


Flew right above your head didn't it..... :yes:

Nope! In addition to eyewitness accounts there are videos and photos supporting their accounts as well, whereas, there are none supporting molten steel at ground zero.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#999    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 29,596 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 05 March 2013 - 04:42 PM

View PostStundie, on 05 March 2013 - 04:16 PM, said:

It doesn't matter what you post, there were no accurate temperatures of the pile at GZ.

Prove it! Evidence please, because temperature readings and data did not depict temperatures needed to melt steel.

Quote

These Firefighter said they were near 2000F and that the fires are too deep to get too, which of course strengthen when there is oxygen.

A temperature of 2000 degrees is nowhere near the melting point of steel. It was evident that temperatures did not reach the melting point of steel because none of the steel beams that were pulled from deep within the rubble did not exhibited the characteristics that the steel beams were ever in a molten state. In fact, they described the steel beams at "red hot" or "Cherry red" in color, which would simple mean the temperature of the steel beams were far below the melting point of steel.

Quote

But they also said they saw molten steel, along with professors and ironworkers and many others, you have no evidence they are wrong or disproves it.

They are not qualified to determine whether molten metal is steel or not, and in the absence of temperature readings at the melting point of steel, the molten metal they saw was aluminum because temperatures reached the melting point of aluminum.

Edited by skyeagle409, 05 March 2013 - 04:44 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#1000    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 29,596 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 05 March 2013 - 04:50 PM

View PostStundie, on 05 March 2013 - 04:23 PM, said:

You are not saying I am incorrect, you are saying that those at GZ who claimed they saw steel are incorrect. lol

If they have said they saw molten steel, then they are incorrect,and rightly so! Were you aware that photos of steel from ground zero was actually presented as molten steel? How silly can they get??? It proved that they did not have the knowledge to differentiate between molten steel and molten aluminum.

Quote



Was molten metal in the basements caused by demolitions materials?


There is anecdotal evidence of molten metal in the basements of WTC buildings 1, 2, 6, and perhaps 7 in the days and weeks after 9/11. CTs often call this “molten steel,” although the metal in question was never tested and its composition is unknown. Infrared spectrometer readings taken shortly after the collapses showed temperatures near the surface of the piles of up to 1375 F: hot enough to melt aluminum.

It was at least that hot at points within the pile that were away from the hottest zones. William Langewiesche, the only journalist who was allowed to go with the engineers in their explorations beneath the debris, writes in “American Ground: Unbuilding the World Trade Center” of a subterranean parking lot:

"Along the north side, where the basement structure remained strong and intact (and was ultimately preserved), the fire had been so intense in places that it had consumed the tires and interiors, and had left hulks sitting on axles above hardened pools of aluminum wheels."

I don’t think the terrorists were placing thermate on car wheels. It was simply that hot. The presence of molten metals is not an indication of planned demolition work. Explosives do not produce pools of molten metal, and incendiaries like thermite burn themselves out in seconds even in the absence of oxygen and would not be available for weeks as fuel.
https://sites.google...teelcolumnsandb


Edited by skyeagle409, 05 March 2013 - 04:52 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#1001    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,540 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 05 March 2013 - 05:10 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 05 March 2013 - 04:32 PM, said:

Nope! In addition to eyewitness accounts there are videos and photos supporting their accounts as well, whereas, there are none supporting molten steel at ground zero.
No, it clearly flew above your head...and do you know why there were no videos of photos at GZ?? lol

See if you can read the sign....
Posted Image

Edited by Stundie, 05 March 2013 - 05:11 PM.

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#1002    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,540 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 05 March 2013 - 05:15 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 05 March 2013 - 04:42 PM, said:

Prove it! Evidence please, because temperature readings and data did not depict temperatures needed to melt steel.
I do not need to prove a negative.....lol

You are the one who is claiming that the temperatures were not hot enough, therefore your burden of proof, I do not need to prove you are wrong when you can't even prove you are right...lol

View Postskyeagle409, on 05 March 2013 - 04:42 PM, said:

A temperature of 2000 degrees is nowhere near the melting point of steel. It was evident that temperatures did not reach the melting point of steel because none of the steel beams that were pulled from deep within the rubble did not exhibited the characteristics that the steel beams were ever in a molten state. In fact, they described the steel beams at "red hot" or "Cherry red" in color, which would simple mean the temperature of the steel beams were far below the melting point of steel.
And some of them describe molten steel.

View Postskyeagle409, on 05 March 2013 - 04:42 PM, said:

They are not qualified to determine whether molten metal is steel or not, and in the absence of temperature readings at the melting point of steel, the molten metal they saw was aluminum because temperatures reached the melting point of aluminium.
You do not need to be qualified to determine whether there was molten steel or not....lol

And there were plenty of people more than qualified anyway, including iron workers......lol

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#1003    Stundie

Stundie

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,540 posts
  • Joined:03 Oct 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 05 March 2013 - 05:19 PM

View Postskyeagle409, on 05 March 2013 - 04:50 PM, said:

If they have said they saw molten steel, then they are incorrect,and rightly so!
No, you are wrong, you have no evidence they are wrong and they are people who are more qualified than you at GZ who said they saw molten steel.

View Postskyeagle409, on 05 March 2013 - 04:42 PM, said:

Were you aware that photos of steel from ground zero was actually presented as molten steel? How silly can they get??? It proved that they did not have the knowledge to differentiate between molten steel and molten aluminum.
You have proved that you are an internet warrior who thinks he knows better than people who are more quailed than himself and who were actually at GZ and not sitting behind a keyboard....lol

There is no such thing as magic, just magicians and fools.

#1004    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 29,596 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 05 March 2013 - 05:26 PM

View PostStundie, on 05 March 2013 - 05:10 PM, said:

No, it clearly flew above your head...and do you know why there were no videos of photos at GZ?? lol

See if you can read the sign....
Posted Image

Still no molten steel.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX

#1005    skyeagle409

skyeagle409

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 29,596 posts
  • Joined:14 Apr 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Keep Your Mach Up and Check Six

Posted 05 March 2013 - 05:28 PM

View PostStundie, on 05 March 2013 - 05:15 PM, said:

I do not need to prove a negative.....lol

It is all very simple. You are in error! After all, I have supplied temperature data proving my point, which proved you in error.

View PostStundie, on 05 March 2013 - 05:19 PM, said:

No, you are wrong, you have no evidence they are wrong and they are people who are more qualified than you at GZ who said they saw molten steel.

On the contrary, given the fact that investigators found no evidence of molten steel and the temperatures readings did not depict temperatures reaching the melting point of steel, you are in serious error.

Popular Tecnology. net

http://www.popularte...y-theories.html

And remember this:

"NIST investigators and experts from the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) and the Structural Engineers Association of New York (SEONY) – who inspected the WTC steel at the WTC site and the salvage yards – found no evidence that would support the melting of steel in a jet-fuel ignited fire in the towers prior to collapse."

In other words, the real experts who were at ground zero as they examined WTC steel and others who were at the salvage yards examining WTC steel, have stated for the record they found on evidence of molten steel, which jives with temperature readings taken at ground zero and that brings us back as to why investigators found ZERO evidence for molten steel.

Edited by skyeagle409, 05 March 2013 - 06:15 PM.

KEEP YOUR MACH UP AND CHECK SIX