Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6
redhen

911 inside job - for what?

4,447 posts in this topic

If that were true, you would simply point them out in paint like I have done in my previous post.

That doesn't work for you. :no:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That doesn't work for you. :no:

So are these droplets silver as you claim or grey as your debunking article states? lol

Cause I can't see any silver droplets? lol

Edited by Stundie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ISo we have worked out that you are delusional and you see things which clearly aren't there as they droplets emitting from 1200c source are orange.

Are you colour blind?? lolpost-94025-0-00627100-1364406990_thumb.j

Are they grey as your debunking article states or are they silver??

I said "silvery" in appearance. So once again, you got caught trying to deceive readers and the counting has already begun.

As I'm sure you are clever enough to work out that Grey and silver are two different colours..... :blink:

Read my message again, Now, since you want to add a little color to the argument, let's take a look here.

Aluminum

U99P200T1D239838F12DT20090508031212.jpg

Now compare the aluminum in the above photo with the aluminum droplets at the bottom of the next photo.

Moltenal.jpg

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aluminum and the World Trade Center Disaster

Aluminum was present in two significant forms at the World Trade Center on 9-11

Based on the calculated trajectory of UA Flight 175 inside WTC 2, the forward cabin area of the aircraft ploughed into floors 80 to 82 of the northeast corner of the building. Thus the 3200-liter oxygen cylinder carried in the crew compartment of Flight 175 came to rest precisely in the area where the bright yellow glow was to later appear.

As many videos show, about 50 minutes after impact, fires were well established in localized areas of the northeast corner of WTC 2 – these fires would have gradually heated the entire forward fuselage to temperatures in excess of 200 C. We therefore suggest that the intense yellow glow seen moments before the collapse of WTC 2 was caused by the discharge of the onboard oxygen cylinder and the subsequent enhancement of the pre-existing fires.

http://www.911myths.com/WTCTHERM.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I said "silvery" in appearance. So once again, you got caught trying to deceive readers and the counting has already begun.
You said silvery and the article says grey?? Which one is it?? lol They are different colours.

However the colour of droplets are bright orange and fade to grey, proving that it is indeed steel.

Read my message again, Now, since you want to add a little color to the argument, let's take a look here.

Aluminum

U99P200T1D239838F12DT20090508031212.jpg

Now compare the aluminum in the above photo with the aluminum droplets at the bottom of the next photo.

Moltenal.jpg

They look nothing a like and it doesn't behave like aluminium.

  • We can tell from the fact that it is still glowing after leaving the heat source dropping many floors before cooling down, that it is not aluminium as aluminium looses it's heat very quickly and would change colour moments after leaving the heat source. (See the NIST video trying to recreate the molten aluminium)
  • We can also tell that it is not aluminium because it's glowing bright orange in daylight conditions.
  • We can also tell it's not aluminium because at the source which is over 1200C, the drips are clearly gloopy and where as aluminium at that temperature is very watery in it's consistency.

So therefore it is molten steel...lol

Aluminum and the World Trade Center Disaster

Aluminum was present in two significant forms at the World Trade Center on 9-11

Based on the calculated trajectory of UA Flight 175 inside WTC 2, the forward cabin area of the aircraft ploughed into floors 80 to 82 of the northeast corner of the building. Thus the 3200-liter oxygen cylinder carried in the crew compartment of Flight 175 came to rest precisely in the area where the bright yellow glow was to later appear.

As many videos show, about 50 minutes after impact, fires were well established in localized areas of the northeast corner of WTC 2 – these fires would have gradually heated the entire forward fuselage to temperatures in excess of 200 C. We therefore suggest that the intense yellow glow seen moments before the collapse of WTC 2 was caused by the discharge of the onboard oxygen cylinder and the subsequent enhancement of the pre-existing fires.

http://www.911myths.com/WTCTHERM.pdf

Nobody is doubt that aluminium was not in the towers, but so was steel and steel fits the visual evidence better than aluminium...lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You said silvery and the article says grey?? Which one is it?? lol They are different colours.

That doesn't work! :no: You are still trying to deceive readers. :yes: You still think that the readers were born yesterday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody is doubt that aluminium was not in the towers, but so was steel and steel fits the visual evidence better than aluminium...

False!! The silvery droplets are by no means, steel. And, there is nothing at that location of WTC2 that was capable of producing molten steel, but it is very clear the temperatures are high enough to melt aluminum, but not steel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That doesn't work! :no: You are still trying to deceive readers. :yes: You still think that the readers were born yesterday.

I think the readers would be well aware if I was trying to deceive them...lol

However, you on the other hand are only deceiving yourself, which you continue to do in the belief you are creating a convincing argument or case.

There are no silvery looking droplets, the orange droplets fade to grey and based on the resolution of the image, you have no way of knowing that they are aluminium as it is impossible to detect on a pixel basis. When you add together that it shows none of the characteristics of aluminium, you have nothing more than beliefs. lol

Faith beliefs of course...lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

False!! The silvery droplets are by no means, steel. And, there is nothing at that location of WTC2 that was capable of producing molten steel, but it is very clear the temperatures are high enough to melt aluminum, but not steel.

The temperature of the metal according to the colour chart you produced, shows that the temperatures were at the very minimum 1200c.

Much higher than the temperature of a hydrocarbon fire....lol

Therefore possibly steel as it looks nothing like aluminium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the readers would be well aware if I was trying to deceive them..

As I have correctly asserted, that doesn't work for you.

The temperature of the metal according to the colour chart you produced, shows that the temperatures were at the very minimum 1200c.

That doesn't work for you either. You have to understand that you cannot change reality from the comfort of your keyboard.

Much higher than the temperature of a hydrocarbon fire...

Therefore possibly steel as it looks nothing like aluminium.

Wrong again! The evidence does not support your case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I have correctly asserted, that doesn't work for you.

Oh it works fine thanks!

That doesn't work for you either. You have to understand that you cannot change reality from the comfort of your keyboard.

I am not changing reality, I leave that up to you. Let me explain.

You are the one who wants to change all the eyewitness accounts who said they saw molten steel and say they didn't. Changing the reality...lol

You are the one who wants to change all the eyewitness accounts who said they saw/felt/heard explosions and say they didn't. Changing the reality....lol

You are the one who posted the temperature chart, did you not? You can't ignore or dismiss it now because it doesn't support your case any more. You posted it, you have to own it and wear it with egg on your face...lol In other words...Changing the reality...lol

Wrong again! The evidence does not support your case.

Yes it does...lol

post-94025-0-07616200-1365082731_thumb.j

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh it works fine thanks!

Mr. Reality doesn't agree.

You are the one who wants to change all the eyewitness accounts who said they saw molten steel and say they didn't. Changing the reality..

Facts and evidence refute claims of molten steel.

1. No source found at ground zero to produce molten steel, other than torches and wands used by clean-up crews.

2. There was no evidence of molten steel at ground zero, but there is evidence of molten aluminum at ground zero from videos and photos.

3. Temperature readings were far too low to melt steel, but high enough to melt aluminum

4. The witnesses were not trained nor knowledgeable to identify molten steel. To underline that point, 911 Truthers claimed that a photo depicted molten steel at ground zero, and here is that photo.

171106fireWTC.jpg

911 Truthers misidentified the reflection from a flashlight as molten steel. To sum it up, other than that produced by clean-up crews, there was no molten steel at ground zero.

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. Reality doesn't agree.

But you are not Mr Reality, you are Mr Changing Reality...lol

Or shall we just call you Mr Delusional...lol

Facts and evidence refute claims of molten steel.

1. No source found at ground zero to produce molten steel, other than torches and wands used by clean-up crews.

No source gives an accurate temperatures as they are guesses and surface temperatures. A few estimates actually give us the temps needed for molten steel.

2. There was no evidence of molten steel at ground zero, but there is evidence of molten aluminum at ground zero from videos and photos.

Not a single eyewitness account says it was molten aluminium and there is no photographic evidence for it either...lol

3. Temperature readings were far too low to melt steel, but high enough to melt aluminium

Wrong and repeating the same thing by rewording it doesn't support your case...lol

4. The witnesses were not trained nor knowledgeable to identify molten steel. To underline that point, 911 Truthers claimed that a photo depicted molten steel at ground zero, and here is that photo.

You do not need to be trained and more importantly, there were Ironworkers who no doubt have seen molten steel in their line of work identified it as molten steel.

Ignoring them doesn't mean they do not exist and prove you wrong.

171106fireWTC.jpg

911 Truthers misidentified the reflection from a flashlight as molten steel. To sum it up, other than that produced by clean-up crews, there was no molten steel at ground zero.

9/11 Official story worshippers love nothing more than strawmen and think they are better than those who were at GZ to declare that everyone is wrong from behind their keyboards when they were not there at GZ.

Meaning there was molten steel at GZ.

I think you need to have a look at the picture I posted and temperature chart you posted to highlight how wrong you are...lol

Oh well....debunking fail!! lol

Edited by Stundie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But you are not Mr Reality, you are Mr Changing Reality...

Has evidence been presented that implicated government employees in the 911 attacks?

Answer: No!

That is reality.

171106fireWTC.jpg

Meaning there was molten steel at GZ.

Apparently, that reflection has slammed 911 Truther claims of molten steel. Check out the video.

[media=]

[/media]

source gives an accurate temperatures as they are guesses and surface temperatures. A few estimates actually give us the temps needed for molten steel.

Not one temperature reading depicted temperatures even near the melting point of steel.

I think you need to have a look at the picture I posted and temperature chart you posted to highlight how wrong you are...lol

The temperature chart and the aluminum droplets proved my case that temperatures did not reach the melting point of steel and there was no source to produce molten steel.

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has evidence been presented that implicated government employees in the 911 attacks?

Answer: No!

That is reality.

Lots of evidence pointing towards elements within the government may have allowed or even planned the attacks.
Apparently, that reflection has slammed 911 Truther claims of molten steel. Check out the video.

Not one temperature reading depicted temperatures even near the melting point of steel.

That is because you can't tell the difference between estimates and surface temperatures....lol
The temperature chart and the aluminum droplets proved my case that temperatures did not reach the melting point of steel and there was no source to produce molten steel.

Sorry but they do nothing of a sort as we know that aluminium doesn't glow in daylight conditions at temperature over 1200C as you chart shows us and is rubbish at holding it's temperature unlike the stuff pouting our of the WTC, which holds it's temperature and stays hot and glows for many floors. Edited by Stundie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lots of evidence pointing towards elements within the government may have allowed or even planned the attacks.

Then, where is the evidence that can implicate government exployees in the 911 attacks? Post it here for all to see and read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then, where is the evidence that can implicate government exployees in the 911 attacks? Post it here for all to see and read.

You can find it just by doing a google search....lol

Just take a look at General Myers, he's a liar just like you. Although he's a little bit smarter though....lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can find it just by doing a google search...

In other words, you cannot show us the money Now once again, how many government employees have been implicated in the 911 attacks?

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In other words, you cannot show us the money Now once again, how many government employees have been implicated in the 911 attacks?

I do not know exactly how many people would be involved but an investigation would answer that question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not know exactly how many people would be involved but an investigation would answer that question.

If you can't show it here, then you have no money to show us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you can't show it here, then you have no money to show us.

There is no point in showing you anything with your delusions and massive amounts of bareface lying...lol

I mean someone who can't admit they said they would have found thermite, to a year later denying all existence of it, is hardly someone worth trying to prove anything too.

I'm sure even a confession from Dick Cheney himself would be dismissed on the grounds that Cheney his not as qualified as you...lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no point in showing you anything with your delusions and massive amounts of bareface lying..

Then, let me lend you some money since you are broke.

911 Conspiracy Theories Debunked

The twin towers were destroyed by controlled explosion

Truthers say video footage of the buildings falling points to demolition due to the way the towers bend before collapsing. Also, there appear to be explosions as the windows blow out, floor by floor, from the top downwards. One US academic claims to have tested samples from the wrecked towers which show the presence of chemical residue, suggesting explosives had been used.

But in controlled explosion demolition experts collapse a building from the bottom not the top. Experts say the windows were blown out as each floor collapsed on to the one below, sending debris and office equipment flying out.

It would also have taken considerable work, which would not have gone unnoticed, to plant sufficient explosives the length of the buildings to bring them down.

The Pentagon was hit by a missile, not a plane

The evidence for this, say sceptics, is that the major damage to the building comprised a roundish blast hole, not the more extended destruction some say would be caused by aeroplane wings. Truthers claim parts of a scrapped plane, including the tail, were moved to the Pentagon as part of the fabrication.

This theory ignores the considerable evidence of the bodies of passengers and crew at the site which were photographed. Thousands of people saw the plane circle then fly into the Pentagon. Some quickly photographed the scene. Anyone planting plane debris at the site afterwards would surely have been seen.

World Trade Centre building 7, adjacent to the twin towers, must have been was destroyed by controlled demolition because it was not hit by a plane

This theory is partly based on a remark by the owner of the building who, fearing it was about to collapse, said firefighters inside should be brought out immediately. He used the words: "Pull it". This remark has been interpreted as slang for demolishing the building. In fact, the collapse was caused by intense fires in one of the neighbouring twin towers that spread to WTC 7, causing its steel beams to buckle and the building to come down.

The hijacked planes were packed with explosives and flown by remote control

Some conspiracy theorists believe the passengers supposedly on board were either killed elsewhere and their bodies dumped at sea, or were part of the conspiracy and are now in hiding with new identities. A key piece of evidence claimed for this theory is that the mobile phone calls the victims are recorded as having made to loved ones from the doomed planes were not possible because of the altitude of the aircraft and therefore faked using "voice morphing technology".

However, phone records show the calls were made from satellite phones fitted to the back of the aircraft seats.

Israel was behind the attacks in order to draw America into a conflict with Arab nations

The evidence claimed for this theory is that 4,000 Jews who supposedly worked at the WTC failed to report for work on 11 September because they had been forewarned by the Israeli intelligence service, Mossad.

However, the figure appears to be based on a statement made by the Israeli foreign minister that about 4,000 Israelis were in the cities under attack at the time. More than one in ten of those who died on 9/11 were Jewish.

The fourth plane, apparently headed for the White House, was shot down by a missile

An order had gone out from President Bush for the flight to be shot down if necessary, but before this could be carried out passengers attempted to charge the hijackers, who flew the plane into the ground in Pennsylvania.

There was insider trading in the stocks of the two airlines whose planes were hijacked,...suggesting powerful people knew the attacks were coming

The trading has been tracked to other causes

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

That helps explain why the U.S. government has not been implicated in the 911 attacks and why 911 Truthers have been unable to come up with evidence implicating the U.S. government in the 911 attacks. In other words, no evidence.

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then, let me lend you some money since you are broke.

911 Conspiracy Theories Debunked

The twin towers were destroyed by controlled explosion

Truthers say video footage of the buildings falling points to demolition due to the way the towers bend before collapsing. Also, there appear to be explosions as the windows blow out, floor by floor, from the top downwards. One US academic claims to have tested samples from the wrecked towers which show the presence of chemical residue, suggesting explosives had been used.

But in controlled explosion demolition experts collapse a building from the bottom not the top. Experts say the windows were blown out as each floor collapsed on to the one below, sending debris and office equipment flying out.

It would also have taken considerable work, which would not have gone unnoticed, to plant sufficient explosives the length of the buildings to bring them down.

The Pentagon was hit by a missile, not a plane

The evidence for this, say sceptics, is that the major damage to the building comprised a roundish blast hole, not the more extended destruction some say would be caused by aeroplane wings. Truthers claim parts of a scrapped plane, including the tail, were moved to the Pentagon as part of the fabrication.

This theory ignores the considerable evidence of the bodies of passengers and crew at the site which were photographed. Thousands of people saw the plane circle then fly into the Pentagon. Some quickly photographed the scene. Anyone planting plane debris at the site afterwards would surely have been seen.

World Trade Centre building 7, adjacent to the twin towers, must have been was destroyed by controlled demolition because it was not hit by a plane

This theory is partly based on a remark by the owner of the building who, fearing it was about to collapse, said firefighters inside should be brought out immediately. He used the words: "Pull it". This remark has been interpreted as slang for demolishing the building. In fact, the collapse was caused by intense fires in one of the neighbouring twin towers that spread to WTC 7, causing its steel beams to buckle and the building to come down.

The hijacked planes were packed with explosives and flown by remote control

Some conspiracy theorists believe the passengers supposedly on board were either killed elsewhere and their bodies dumped at sea, or were part of the conspiracy and are now in hiding with new identities. A key piece of evidence claimed for this theory is that the mobile phone calls the victims are recorded as having made to loved ones from the doomed planes were not possible because of the altitude of the aircraft and therefore faked using "voice morphing technology".

However, phone records show the calls were made from satellite phones fitted to the back of the aircraft seats.

Israel was behind the attacks in order to draw America into a conflict with Arab nations

The evidence claimed for this theory is that 4,000 Jews who supposedly worked at the WTC failed to report for work on 11 September because they had been forewarned by the Israeli intelligence service, Mossad.

However, the figure appears to be based on a statement made by the Israeli foreign minister that about 4,000 Israelis were in the cities under attack at the time. More than one in ten of those who died on 9/11 were Jewish.

The fourth plane, apparently headed for the White House, was shot down by a missile

An order had gone out from President Bush for the flight to be shot down if necessary, but before this could be carried out passengers attempted to charge the hijackers, who flew the plane into the ground in Pennsylvania.

There was insider trading in the stocks of the two airlines whose planes were hijacked,...suggesting powerful people knew the attacks were coming

The trading has been tracked to other causes

Not broke, just not in the habit of burning down your strawman arguments.

You know arguments that I have not made....lol

I mean I don't ever recall saying that Israel was behind the attack...lol

And I love how you post that, which you have fooled yourself into thinking that its actually evidence.

You are cracking up mate, ranting and raving about any ole crapola about 9/11 truthers, when I know you are going to find this hard to swallow, but I'm not a 9/11 truther...lol

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its why we still have Short Busses in the formative years for our childern! 9/11 C.T`s and the like really need help.

As do the Sandy Hook peeps ! It is what it Is ! mankind is a bit Off a vrey good part of the time !

It would be nice to think that some day we really could evolve ! :tu:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not broke, ...

Then, where's the money???

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.