"Eyes Wide Shut: Gross Negligence with NIST Denial of Molten Metal on 9/11"

[spooked911]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fs_ogSbQFbM

It's only 2:15, but pretty good.

[Bonobo]

1. kick

[Theobald]

2. Gross Distortion

The headlines states that there is 'Gross' negligence with the NIST denial of molten metal on 9/11. Since the video is about John Gross who worked for NIST and he is the main subject of the video we can assume the video and headline are directed about his claims. To prove this point they offer a video quote from John Gross where he states " First of all let's go back to your basic premise that there was a pool of molten steel" So the video has Gross talking about a question being raised about molten steel, not molten metal, therefore the headline is wrong.

Gross then goes on to state that "I know of absolutely nobody, no eyewitnesses that said so, nobody whose produced it" So the question to Gross is about 'Pools of Molten Steel" and Gross answers that he knows of no eyewitnesses that saw pools of molten steel and nobody who has produced evidence of pools of molten steel. Does anyone question this assertion and if so why?

[janedoe]

3. Where is the physical evidence?

That video also promotes the myth that airplanes hit the towers. That doesn't make it true, either. Check out the logo for ae911truth at the start of the video. Promoting propaganda may sway public opinion, but it does not change scientific evidence. Rumors are not facts. The physical facts contradict the existence of molten metal in the remains of the WTC on 9/11 and in the weeks that follow. Additionally, I know of no one who would swear under oath, in a court of law, they have seen molten metal.

Even if someone in the audience of a magic show believes they saw the magician pull a full-size rabbit out of his cufflink, it cannot be assumed as true if it contradicts the physical evidence. One must first contend with the problem of whether a full-size rabbit can fit in a cufflink.

If molten steel or molten metal "was still running after 21 days," where is the physical evidence for this? Where did it run to, the Atlantic Ocean? If it "was still running after 21 days," it must have accumulated somewhere. Why are there no photographs of a large solid block of previously molten metal/steel?

Religion is not science just as beliefs are not scientific evidence. The scientific evidence must be explained.