1834 replies to this topic

[flyingswan]

Babe Ruth, on 23 January 2013 - 02:40 PM, said:

Swan

Actually, Peter Tully of Tully Construction told Christopher Bollyn in the summer of 2002 that he had seen pools of "literally molten steel".  Mark Loizeaux confirmed Tully's reports, and reported that there was molten steel at WTC7.

Further, in September 2001, Robert Leifer of DOE in New York, contacted Thomas Cahill of the DELTA Group at University of California.  By October they had placed a device known as a 8 stage rotating drum impactor to collect air samples.  It was placed at the edge of the "exclusion zone" monitoring the air.  While they were monitoring the air, the EPA was doing nothing except telling everybody everything was fine.

The air samples show large presence of iron rich and silicate spheres.

Thus, your claim that molten metal (iron) was not present is wrong.  It is mere regurgitation of the official story.

How can anyone, even a construction professional, tell if a molten metal is steel or something else?  The only way is to wait for it to cool and examine it, though measuring the temperature will rule out some possibilities.  However, none of the accounts I've seen include this verification, it is all just based on eyeing pools of molten metal.

Microspheres are another matter.  They are metal that has been briefly molten, but cooled rapidly due to their small size giving a high surface to volume ratio.  They are nothing unusual, and are found wherever metal is worked since the energy of the working can be concentrated into small volumes to raise the temperature to melting point.  Welding fume and the sparks from an angle-grinder are common examples.  At WTC they would have been produced in the construction of the buildings, subsequent maintenance, in the violent grinding together of building components during the collapse and in the clear-up.

[Babe Ruth]

OK Swan, what's your opinion of the type of metal that was molten?

And why are you more qualified to judge that than Tully or Loizeaux?  And were you actually there, or are you like me--just reading about it?

[skyeagle409]

Babe Ruth, on 23 January 2013 - 09:48 PM, said:

OK Swan, what's your opinion of the type of metal that was molten?

What metal was abundant in the construction of the B-767s and of in the facade of the WTB buildings? Aluminum, which has a melting point around 1200 degrees F. and well within the temperature range of the WTC fires.

[flyingswan]

Babe Ruth, on 23 January 2013 - 09:48 PM, said:

OK Swan, what's your opinion of the type of metal that was molten?

And why are you more qualified to judge that than Tully or Loizeaux?  And were you actually there, or are you like me--just reading about it?

As Sky says, there was plenty of aluminium present and no problem with conditions at which it would be molten.

I asked you how anyone could tell by eye which metal it was, and I haven't had an answer.  If there's no way to tell, then Tully and Loizeaux were just guessing.

[Babe Ruth]

flyingswan, on 24 January 2013 - 10:56 AM, said:

As Sky says, there was plenty of aluminium present and no problem with conditions at which it would be molten.

I asked you how anyone could tell by eye which metal it was, and I haven't had an answer.  If there's no way to tell, then Tully and Loizeaux were just guessing.

If it were molten aluminum in the bowels of the buildings for weeks, then the samples collected by the DELTA Groups 8 stage rotating drum impactor would have shown aluminum.  Those samples showed microparticles of iron and silicate, NOT aluminum.

I'm not sure how much aluminum was used in the construction of the towers, but I know that one helluva lot of steel was used.  It was called a steel and concrete structure, just like all the buildings around them.

As for the aluminum in the airplanes being the source of your theoretical aluminum, that's ridiculous.  Upon penetration, the aluminum was shredded and thrown to the four winds.  It could not possibly have collected in the bowels of the building and remained molten for weeks.

Unless, of course, some of Sky's leprechauns were working there that day.

Edited by Babe Ruth, 24 January 2013 - 02:22 PM.

[flyingswan]

Babe Ruth, on 24 January 2013 - 02:18 PM, said:

If it were molten aluminum in the bowels of the buildings for weeks, then the samples collected by the DELTA Groups 8 stage rotating drum impactor would have shown aluminum.  Those samples showed microparticles of iron and silicate, NOT aluminum.

There's not much point replying to you if you don't read my replies.  The microspheres have nothing to do with pools of molten metal.

Quote

I'm not sure how much aluminum was used in the construction of the towers, but I know that one helluva lot of steel was used.  It was called a steel and concrete structure, just like all the buildings around them.

You didn't read Sky's reply, either.  The entire facade of both towers was aluminium.  That's about 2000 tons per tower.

Quote

As for the aluminum in the airplanes being the source of your theoretical aluminum, that's ridiculous.  Upon penetration, the aluminum was shredded and thrown to the four winds.  It could not possibly have collected in the bowels of the building and remained molten for weeks.

Shredded aluminium is still aluminium.  There's dozens of tons in an airliner.  It doesn't just vanish.

[Czero 101]

Babe Ruth, on 24 January 2013 - 02:18 PM, said:

I'm not sure how much aluminum was used in the construction of the towers, but I know that one helluva lot of steel was used.  It was called a steel and concrete structure, just like all the buildings around them.

As for the aluminum in the airplanes being the source of your theoretical aluminum, that's ridiculous.  Upon penetration, the aluminum was shredded and thrown to the four winds.  It could not possibly have collected in the bowels of the building and remained molten for weeks.

Way to show how willfully ignorant you truly are of the basics of this topic!...





Cz

[skyeagle409]

Babe Ruth, on 24 January 2013 - 02:18 PM, said:

If it were molten aluminum in the bowels of the buildings for weeks, then the samples collected by the DELTA Groups 8 stage rotating drum impactor would have shown aluminum.  Those samples showed microparticles of iron and silicate, NOT aluminum.

I'm not sure how much aluminum was used in the construction of the towers, but I know that one helluva lot of steel was used.

Apparently you were not aware that 43,600 aluminum panels were used to cover the facade of the WTC buildings. How many tons of aluminum does that make?. How many tons of aluminum was used in the construction of each B-767?

https://docs.google....4sP1628V5zrlDyA

Quote

As for the aluminum in the airplanes being the source of your theoretical aluminum, that's ridiculous.  Upon penetration, the aluminum was shredded and thrown to the four winds.[It could not possibly have collected in the bowels of the building and remained molten for weeks. Unless, of course, some of Sky's leprechauns were working there that day. :tu:

[DONTEATUS]

I wonder  just how many Idiots still really believe that the towers were actually a Conspricey ?

[Babe Ruth]

flyingswan, on 24 January 2013 - 03:00 PM, said:

There's not much point replying to you if you don't read my replies.  The microspheres have nothing to do with pools of molten metal.

You didn't read Sky's reply, either.  The entire facade of both towers was aluminium.  That's about 2000 tons per tower.

Shredded aluminium is still aluminium.  There's dozens of tons in an airliner.  It doesn't just vanish.

I do read your replies Swan, and they defy common sense and logic.  IF aluminum were boiling down below, AND air samples were being collected, THEN the air samples would have had particles of aluminum in them.  There were no aluminum particles found, THEREFORE aluminum in sufficient quantity was not present.  How much more simple can it be?

The microparticles have EVERYTHING to do with whatever metal was giving them off.  Indeed, the metal down below created the particles.  Either you completely do not understand what happened, or you are simply in denial about it.

I don't believe a word Sky says here, or a picture he posts, because he has already deceived me once, and I won't be fooled again.

Many years ago I took the Public Tour of the towers, and the tour guide said the exoskeleton was made of stainless steel of some sort.  Now Sky says they were aluminum.  Who to believe? (Hint: it's not a tough decision)  The exoskeleton, as the word implies, was part of the structure.  What advantage would there be to using aluminum over steel in such an application?

You never did answer my question earlier as to why YOUR judgement in such matters is greater than, superior to, the judgment of Tully and Loizeaux?  Were you there?

[Sweetpumper]

DONTEATUS, on 24 January 2013 - 10:02 PM, said:

I wonder  just how many Idiots still really believe that the towers were actually a Conspricey ?

There were never really any towers.

[skyeagle409]

Babe Ruth, on 25 January 2013 - 07:21 PM, said:

I don't believe a word Sky says here, or a picture he posts, because he has already deceived me once, and I won't be fooled again.

You have deceived yourself because those photos have been authenticated and you are just using an excuse to cover up an attempt to deceive people but there are those who are hip to your tricks.

Quote

Many years ago I took the Public Tour of the towers, and the tour guide said the exoskeleton was made of stainless steel of some sort.  Now Sky says they were aluminum.

The B-767s were not constructed with tons of steel, they were constructed mostly of aluminum. The facade of the WTC buildings were constructed with aluminum. Check it out.

Quote

The Facades of the WTC Buildings

The buildings were designed with narrow office windows 18 inches (46 cm) wide, which reflected Yamasaki's fear of heights as well as his desire to make building occupants feel secure. Yamasaki's design included building facades sheathed in aluminum-alloy

http://www.design-la...ter-16pics.html


Historic Twin Tower "Tridents" Installed into 9/11 Memorial Museum

A layer of aluminum originally covered most of the structural steel that formed the façade of the World Trade Center Towers.

http://www.wtc.com/n...memorial-museum


World Trade Center Facade Fragment - Aluminum

Photo
http://www.flickr.co...liz/6707513011/

http://architecture....orldtrade_2.htm

Edited by skyeagle409, 25 January 2013 - 08:05 PM.

[joc]

DONTEATUS, on 24 January 2013 - 10:02 PM, said:

I wonder  just how many Idiots still really believe that the towers were actually a Conspricey ?

I don't think it is really appropriate to call people 'idiots' about their beliefs, especially when you can't even spell it correctly!
A lot of people, myself included, were led to believe certain things, not because we are 'idiots' but mostly because of our ignorance on the subject.  I give kudos to SkyEagle because he throws down the gauntlet of truth about whatever the 'theory' of the moment is.

[DONTEATUS]

skyeagle409, on 23 January 2013 - 09:52 PM, said:

What metal was abundant in the construction of the B-767s and of in the facade of the WTB buildings? Aluminum, which has a melting point around 1200 degrees F. and well within the temperature range of the WTC fires.

Like talking to a Brick wall ,eah Skyeagle ! A Brick made of ALUMINUM  LoL !

[DONTEATUS]

Sweetpumper, on 25 January 2013 - 07:23 PM, said:

There were never really any towers.

I taught I saw a Hologram Tower ! Silly Rabbit !