6 mins..... Molten steel at groung zero...8 Weeks LATER!!!

[Twist_U_Up]

dont be a douche.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3SLIzSCt_cg

[LARED]

1. So what? nt

[SDuderstadt]

2. And where are the metallurgical tests that prove your claim?

Oh, you don't have any? Figures.

[Subdivisions]

4. That's a good question...

Where are the metallurgical tests?

There are several people on that video that were at Ground Zero who said it was molten metal or steel. Some of them were firemen. Do you dispute those FDNY firefighters' accounts of what they saw? Why did NIST engineer John Gross say that no one that he knows of reported any molten steel at Ground Zero even though it seemed to be a common topic of conversation among the workers and firefighters clearing the site for weeks after 9/11?

[SDuderstadt]

5. Do you think firemen can just tell something is molten steel by looking at it?

Or, do you think it's far more likely that they used the term imprecisely not knowing exactly what they were looking at?


And, since no metallurgical testing appears to have been done, "truthers" can just falsely claim it was "molten steel" without fear of being contradicted by anyone. What a racket.

[whatchamacallit]

6. Sure, lets call 9/11 firefighters simple and naive to discredit their observations

The guys standing there know a lot better what they were looking at than any airbag-armchair-debunker.

[hack89]

8. So are you saying that molten metal is common at fires

and that firefighters have the experience to look at it and tell what kind of metal it was? But I thought it never happened before - what an interesting development.

[lovepg]

46. No but by that logic if they see something they have no experience seeing..

At a fire that might be cause for investigation? Instead of being ignored and denied!

[Realityhack]

49. Why?

What is it that you expect to find out by investigating molten metal in the rubble pile? Does it matter what hodge podge of compounds are present? If so why?

[SDuderstadt]

10. No one called them ''simple and naive'', dude..

that's just your strawman/red herring combo. I'd love for you to show how ANYONE could identify a molten substance simply by sight. If they could, metallurgical tests wouldn't be necessary to begin with. You're pretending that I'm insulting fireman when I'm doing nothing of the sort. This is just more bullshit by the so-called ''truth movement''.

[whatchamacallit]

44. What a dumb-ass fucking post!

Wow, this statement is idiotic:

"I'd love for you to show how ANYONE could identify a molten substance simply by sight. If they could, metallurgical tests wouldn't be necessary to begin with."

I don't know about you but I can identify what's in these pictures





I don't need a metallurgical test to know these substances are molten. Forensic techniques like Metallography are used to determine the properties of metals when they are cool. You know, if you weren't around to see it and you wanted to know for sure. :crazy:

[SDuderstadt]

45. Read it again, dude...

the issue isn't testing to determine if it's molten. The testing is needed to dertermine molten what. I love the way "truthers" read part of a post, then jump in without the slightest idea what the thread is really about. Thanks for not disappointing.

[Realityhack]

15. "who said it was..."

"...molten metal or steel"

This is exactly what everyone has been trying to get you to understand. There is a vast difference between molten METAL and molten STEEL.
When the truth movement claims there was molten steel they are making an unfunded claim. Nobody knows if it was steel and it would be very very unlikely to be pure steel.
As such it would have different properties than pure steel including melting point.

So we can discuss the presence of molten METAL but if you claim there was molten STEEL you are going to have to back that up with the proper metallurgical tests to show it was pure steel.

[Subdivisions]

16. Nobody said it was "pure" steel. The question here is what could

generate such heat as to melt metal?

Aluminum's melting point is 1220.666 °F. Steels melting point is ~2400 °F. So, it figures that if there was molten steel present, as the FIREFIGHTERS described, then it also figures that there was molten aluminum and any other metal present that melts at temperatures below ~2400 °F.

What was under all that debris that caused metal (or steel, as described by FDNY firefighters) to exist in a molten state 6 to 8 weeks after the collapses?

[SDuderstadt]

17. Since you can't establish that molten steel was in the mix...

you're basically screwed here, dude.

[Realityhack]

19. I disagree.

The issue isn't that molten steel might be in the mix. A mixed metal might actually contain some molten steel, the issue is he assumes PURE molten steel to get his temperature figures. And that is an unfounded assumption.

Of course all this also misses the point of how hot the continuing underground fires could get.

[SDuderstadt]

20. Let me clarify....

I'm not saying steel could not be in the mix. I'm saying there are sources of plenty of materials that melt at far lower temperatures than steel, so I don't see how it would be possible that the mix is pure anything. Thus, I don't think the claim that it is "molten steel" is remotely tenable.

[Realityhack]

21. Oh I absolutely agree on that. n/t

[Subdivisions]

22. The FIREFIGHTERS said it was melted steel. Watch the fucking video, dude. n/t

[SDuderstadt]

24. Think this through, dude...

Can you tell me what training ANYONE (let alone a firefighter) might receive by which they could identify a molten metal merely by sight? And, if you were one of the firefighters, do you think your description could be slightly inaccurate (molten metal would have been more accurate) simply because you don't have the training (if it even exists) to identify molten steel by sight?

[Subdivisions]

26. I have't had training to recognize molten steel. But I assure you,

I do know what it looks like.

[SDuderstadt]

28. And the operative phrase there is "looks like"

Lots of things "look like" something else. For example, Pepsi looks like Boke. Does that mean Pepsi IS Coke?

No one is doubting the firefighters' honesty, dude. What I doubt is that the firefighters can tell molten steel apart from all other molten metals or combinations thereof. This is getting silly.

BTW, if you "take their word" that it was molten steel, do you also take the word of other firefighters that WTC 7 was not stable and was going to collapse as proof it was not a controlled demolition?

[wildbilln864]

60. can you provide an...

example of anything that looks like molten steel but isn't? :popcorn;

[SDuderstadt]

61. Yeah, dude....

can you tell me precisely what this is without looking at the source I got it from? I mean, after all, it should be quite easy since anyone can tell something is molten steel simply by looking at it, right?

[SDuderstadt]

103. I noticed that not a single person who claims...

you can tell precisely what a molten material is simply by looking at it, can tell me what this is:



So much for THAT claim!

[SDuderstadt]

62. Jesus, Bill...

thanks for giving me a GREAT idea. I'm going to put together a quiz with numerous pictures of various molten metals and combinations thereof, then we can see how many of them "truthers" can correctly ID. After all, the witnesses KNEW what they were looking at was "molten steel" simply by sight, so the average truther should get what percentage right? I'm going to take an educated guess up front and predict the average "truther" won't get any of them right. Would you like to make a little bet, Bill?

[lovepg]

47. AHHHHH but where is the oxygen that this underground fire is feeding on to

get it so hot. They have bellows in foundries to take care of that. Are you suggesting something equal to that feeding this fire under the towers debris?

[Realityhack]

48. "to get it so hot"

How hot?
Hot enough to melt aluminum? Hot enough to melt steel in the aluminum? Hot enough to melt pure steel?

[lovepg]

51. Hot enough to melt workers rubber boots weeks after the Towers came down! Nt

[Realityhack]

55. So how hot is that in degrees?

Use whatever units you want, just specify them.

[lovepg]

66. 100 gazillion boot melting units! and dats hot!

[AZCat]

50. You do realize that underground coal fires can get this hot, and hotter?

IIRC Australia's Burning Mountain gets up over 2000 degrees F.

[lovepg]

52. Yeah its called a VOLCANO and its MOLTEN! Jeeesh! Nt

[AZCat]

53. Hmmm... No.

"Underground coal fire" does not equal "volcano".

[lovepg]

54. No but a fire underground in the earth does not equate to a man produced fire..

With only pulverized concrete office equipment and large steel girders with little to no oxygen to fuel it.
Or are you claiming it does?

[Realityhack]

56. The are not identical.

Why don't you go ahead and lay out what you think the key differences are and why. It would be a good starting point for discussion.

[lovepg]

65. Why? I KNOW the differences its you who seem confused.

[Realityhack]

57. I nominate this a as the ultimate example...

of how you need to slow down and read what you are responding to before you start yelling at others.

[Realityhack]

18. Actually you just implied it in that post

PURE steel melts at ~2400 degrees F. Aluminum steel mixtures have very different properties.

You are assuming a temperature around 2400 degrees and then saying aluminum would melt at that point as well. But the way you get that figure is to assume that somewhere in the pile there was 100% pure steel in a molten state. That is an unfounded assumption. There is no metallurgical tests to back it up and I seriously doubt that you can demonstrate a method by which the firefighters could distinguish between molten pure steel and some other alloy or mixture.

Are you claiming that firefighters can tell what metal they are looking at in a molten state by sight?
Would you like to suggest where they got that training?

[Subdivisions]

23. They were there. They (more than one) said it was molten steel. I'll take

their word any day over yours or anyone else's in this forum.

[SDuderstadt]

25. Ask them where they got their metallurgy degrees, dude. n/t

[Subdivisions]

27. I don't have a metalurgy degree but I do know what molten steel looks like. n/t

[SDuderstadt]

30. Maybe you could get a job at the Texas State Fair, then...

just like that guy that guesses people's weights, maybe you could have a barker announce, "Step right up and Subdivisions will guess what your molten metal is".

[Subdivisions]

32. I would expect no more useful commentary from you than that. As usual. n/t

[SDuderstadt]

33. And I would expect no more reasoning ability...

from you. As usual.

[hack89]

43. Molten steel mixed with concrete, ash, gypsum, etc, etc

all that shit mixed together - you really think you could look at it and say "that pool's steel - that one's aluminum."? Pull the other one!

[Realityhack]

29. Fair enough... sort of.

We can take their word for it that they saw something that looked like molten steel.
Fine.
Now what percentage of that molten metal was AL?

You think the firefighters could tell that by looking at it?

Again are you claiming that the firefighters saw ANY pure melted steel or are we talking strictly about molten METAL that may have contained steel?

[Subdivisions]

31. *sigh*

I DID NOT SAY THERE WAS "PURE" MOLTEN STEEL.

BUT, if there was molten steel (as described by PEOPLE ON THE SCENE and not some keyboard jockeys in San Diego or Dallas) then it stands to reason that any other meltable substance, like glass, plastic, or aluminum, which has lower melting point could, and most likely would, also be present.

[Realityhack]

35. So...

if non-pure molten steel was present rather than pure steel...
What exactly would it's melting point be?

[lovepg]

67. Yes why didn't they pull out there Ronco pocket chemist set and figure out the ratio

of aluminum to steel to melted pepsi cans! You see when you see something that is odd such as underground fires or molten steel or little green men running around.
Whatever... Thats why you have people who are experts (and not self appointed chat forum experts like many here) INVESTIGATE.
Mr Nist claims to have been unaware of the fact this stuff was there. Since I KNEW that many of you should have your faith shaken by Mr. Nists claims of ignorance.

[wildbilln864]

100. exactly! nt

[AZCat]

34. This is not true.

Steel can melt in aluminum at much lower temperatures than 2400 degrees F. See, for example, the Fe-Al eutectic diagram.

[Realityhack]

36. No fair...

I was building up to that... sort of.
But somehow I have the feeling it won't matter.

[AZCat]

37. Sorry.

I didn't mean to kill your point. Usually jberryhill steps in by now...

[SDuderstadt]

38. Yeah, where is JB, anyway? n/t

[Realityhack]

39. I was kidding.

I was expecting Kberryhill.

[SDuderstadt]

40. Who is KBerryhill?

Is that JB's evil twin? Did I miss something?

[Realityhack]

41. DOH!!

This computer can't keep up with my typing so I am making more errors than usual.
My apologies to JB

[SDuderstadt]

42. The hell with JB!

What are you going to say to KB? How will you explain yourself to him (or her, depending on whether or not they are identical twins)?

[jberryhill]

109. I was enjoying the buildup, actually...

Since it is clear that our friend never put salt on ice.

[biermeister]

111. this might help the conversation

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2001/ofr-01-0429/thermal.r09.html

it shows ground temps around ground zero after 9-11.

[Twist_U_Up]

7. why dont you ask your hero Johnny from nist? oh wait....

hes a douche.

[SDuderstadt]

11. It's more than clear that you're twisting his words...

your dishonesty is stunning. Under the circumstances, we have to ask who the real ''douche'' is. I don't believe it's John Gross who's the ''douche'', dude. If the shoe fits and all that

[lovepg]

68. Yes by all means if the shoe fits Douche it!

[Ohio Joe]

3. But...

I like being a douche... it's one of my best qualities.

[hack89]

9. Molten aluminum you mean. nt

[wildbilln864]

63. it is definitely not melted Al...

as it is silvery like quicksilver. And even if it were heated to the point of being red the fringes which are cooler would be silver colored! nice try.

[biermeister]

12. I can't speak to the molten steel but I am curious

about the 1000 plus degree temperatures measured weeks later on the site in this report

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2001/ofr-01-0429/thermal.r09.html

[AZCat]

13. Make sure you pay attention to units.

1000 Kelvin is about 1340 degrees Fahrenheit, which is pretty damn hot.

[hack89]

14. What temperature would you expect large fires to produce? nt

[wildbilln864]

64. max temps any hydrocarbon fire around 1800 degrees F.! nt

[hack89]

69. Which explains the hot spots. Thank you wildbill. nt

[wildbilln864]

74. and iron melts @ 2700 degrees F.

steel?
"... The melting point of steel is about 1,500 degrees Celsius (2,800 degrees Fahrenheit). Normal building fires and hydrocarbon (e.g., jet fuel) fires generate temperatures up to about 1,100 degrees Celsius (2,000 degrees Fahrenheit). NIST reported maximum upper layer air temperatures of about 1,000 degrees Celsius (1,800 degrees Fahrenheit) in the WTC towers (for example, see NCSTAR 1, Figure 6-36). "

[hack89]

75. Let me know when you can actually prove there was steel. nt

[AZCat]

101. No bill, it isn't.

If you summed up the time you've spent pushing this particular piece of ignorance in this forum and spent an equivalent amount of time learning about heat transfer you wouldn't still believe garbage like this.

[Twist_U_Up]

58. watch the video, first responders and news reporters speak of it.

[SDuderstadt]

59. Which means what, exactly?

Do you honestly claim laymen (or anyone for that matter) can ID molten steel simply by looking at it? Do you realize how stupid that sounds? Oh, wait...you probably don't.

[Twist_U_Up]

70. big mouth behind the screen ay dude?

I bet you were "that kid" on the school bus. ay dude?

[BuddyBoy]

71. Good to see good people stepping up to the plate and ...

giving some of these twits the bitch-slapping they've been begging for all these years. And I agree with your perceptive
analogy to the "that kid" on the school bus. I just have one question: how much longer til the bus gets to his STOP?

[Raster]

72. He lives on the bus. He NEVER gets off. He just rides around and around....

...and around and around. It's almost like it's his job or something. Go figure.

[SDuderstadt]

73. Well, if you can't debate on the facts...

feel free to snipe from the sidelines if it makes you feel better, dude.

[BuddyBoy]

77. Well, if YOU could debate "on the facts" ... you would.

But you can't, and that is why you can only respond to facts with insults and other flame bait. In my opinion, it's a pathetic way for a self-proclaimed progressive and DU member to act, but others may disagree.

[SDuderstadt]

78. Dude...something is not a fact merely because you...

proclaim it to be. You've been challenged for proof of your 'facts'' repeatedly and you fold everytime. What's worse is you merely repeat your goofy claim (again, without any proof whatsoever) then demand your opponent disprove it or else it must be true. That goofy tactic would get you kicked out of even a junior high school debate.

What's really funny is how you have the nerve to accuse anyone of insults when, all the while, you hurl names and accuse others of lying. You're really a hoot, dude, but it's time to invoke ''Lared''s rule''. From here on out, responding to anything you post is an invitation to discuss it with anyone other than yourself.

[SDuderstadt]

76. Yeah, I was "that kid" on the bus that...

you stupidly taunted, then got your ass kicked, dude.

[Twist_U_Up]

106. yep big mouth behind the screen...

[SDuderstadt]

107. Talking about yourself again, dude? n/t

[snooper2]

83. And you were the kid on the bus

wondering how in the hell you could see right through that object to the outside, but when you banged your head on it you felt pain...





for years...

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[spooked911]

79. even more shocking-- there was intense heat even six months later

http://covertoperations.blogspot.com/2007/07/further-revelations-on-molten-steel-and.html

[SDuderstadt]

80. Why is that "shocking", Spooked? n/t

[spooked911]

81. well, it's not shocking if you know about the nuclear China Syndrome at Ground Zero

But according to the official story, the fires should have been put out after a few weeks, and not lasted months.

[SDuderstadt]

82. Please prove that, Spooked...

BTW, will it ever sink into your brain that the reason you're not gaining traction with your goofy theories is because, well, they're goofy?

[spooked911]

84. please see

http://wtcdemolition.blogspot.com/2008/10/brief-new-summary-wtc-destruction-high.html

http://wtcdemolition.blogspot.com/2009/07/35-reasons-for-many-small-fission-nukes.html

[SDuderstadt]

85. Spooked, I asked for proof, not more of...

your babbling. Do you understand the concept of "proof"? Why don't we try this. Could you please explain how your theory could be falsified, then explain the role that falsification plays in the scientific' method without more of your incessant babbling?

[spooked911]

96. when will you realize that this is a crime--

not a scientific experiment we can repeat?

all we need for legal purposes is proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

though obviously reasonable means different things for you and me-- there is plenty of proof for legal purposes.

Obviously, we have competing theories for what happened, but if you stack up the evidence, I think my theory best fits the evidence.

[SDuderstadt]

97. Dude....why aren't hordes of peope flocking to....

your cause, then? And it's laughable for you to think you have evidence ''beyond a reasonable doubt'.. You couldn't even meet the lesser standard of a ''preponderence of the evidence'' required in mere civil cases, dude.

I implore you to quit embarrassing DU, dude.

[spooked911]

95. funny how you typically call what I say "goofy"

rarely do you say I am wrong...

[SDuderstadt]

98. You're always wrong, too...

happy now?

[HamdenRice]

86. Another astonishing Dungeon thread spectacularly derails

It starts with an interesting observation. There was molten something for 8 weeks at ground zero. I have no idea what it was, but it certainly was a strange phenomenon that the fires lasted so long. I have no idea what it means, nor do I think it's evidence of any particular theory. It's just one of those bizarre things about 9/11. If I had to hazard a guess, I would say it had something to do with the layout of the transportation system under the WTC. The WTC was a major transit hub, with subway and Path train lines converging below the towers. It seems to me that it would have created a nearly perfect convection flow with clean air being sucked in from all those train lines to feed the fire.

Certainly at the time, everyone was surprised at how difficult it was to put out the fires, and how badly the whole smoldering mess smelled all across lower Manhattan. We now know that it was also extremely unhealthy for the rescue and recovery workers and everyone who was urged to return to lower Manhattan to live and work.

But this thread is oddly about whether it was steel, aluminum or a mix, and once again the temperature at which various metals melt. How you guys can repeat the same arguments over and over is like some sort of negative miracle.

[BuddyBoy]

87. Certainly not anything that might contradict the OCT.

Or even call it into question. But, it could be anything else. Most likely one of those puzzles that can't be solved...without
an independent investigation, and who has time for that.

"nor do I think it's evidence of any particular theory."

[LARED]

88. It likely derailed becasue it is not a real interesting

observation. The underground fires have been discussed and explained perhaps dozens of times.

[HamdenRice]

89. I assume you didn't spend a year or so coughing up crap from working in lower Manhattan

I find it extremely interesting.

[hack89]

90. Why would it be puzzling that the fires burned for so long?

How many tons of combustible material do you think was in that pile? Fuel, air and heat - that's all you need to start a fire and it was all there at ground zero.

The reason the thread derailed is that the "molten steel" is "proof" of thermite to the truthers. Which is absolute nonsense.

[HamdenRice]

91. Most people found it puzzling. It was the longest burning structural fire in history.

When you experience the longest, or biggest anything it tends to be puzzling.

Of course, you have to have intellectual or professional curiosity to find an anomaly "puzzling."

I can just imagine the fire chiefs organizing the fighting of the fire into the 3rd month and not being a little intrigued that the fire lasted longer than any other structural fire in history -- not.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn1634-ground-zeros-fires-still-burning.html

Ground Zero's fires still burning

Almost 12 weeks after the terrorist atrocity at New York's World Trade Center, there is at least one fire still burning in the rubble - it is the longest-burning structural fire in history.

Deputy Chief Charles Blaich of the New York City Fire Department would not predict when the last fire might be extinguished. But compared to the situation at the end of September, when aerial thermal images showed the whole of Ground Zero to be a hot spot, conditions today are much safer for the workers clearing the rubble.

[hack89]

92. I don't think they were puzzled

unlike a building fire, most parts of the rubble pile were unreachable by firefighters. That hole was six stories deep and filled with tons of combustible materials. The debris also insulated the pile to keep heat from escaping.

They were professionally interested, I am sure, because it was a unique event. But I don't think they puzzled as to why it burned so long. And I am certain that they knew what was burning.

[HamdenRice]

93. Let's put it this way...

You are the sort of Dungeon dweller who is uniquely "unpuzzled" about just about everything having to do with 9/11.

Most of New York, including the fire department which was pouring water in for months, was puzzled -- puzzled enough to experiment with new firefighting agents and techniques.

[hack89]

94. But they weren't puzzled about what was burning

it was not proof of thermite. That's why I don't give it much mind.

[wildbilln864]

99. kick! nt

[Twist_U_Up]

102. Kick

[rj5690]

104. What do you really expect

[SDuderstadt]

105. Well, thanks for being one anyhow....

TUP!

[Twist_U_Up]

108. More evidence......

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/moltensteel.html

[Subdivisions]

110. From the moment I woke up that Tuesday morning and saw

WTC 1 burning, and before the second plane hit, I became obsessed with what had happened. For weeks afterward I watch the news every single waking hour. I saw the reports in newspapers and on TV weeks after the attacks of molten metal running and pooling under the rubble. It's not like there's any secret about whether it actually happened because it did.

I don't know what kind of metal it was. That was for the investigation to determine. So, what did the investigation determine the metal was under that rubble? What did the investigation determine was causing temperatures that was able to melt metal? Where can I find the forensic investigation report on this incident? Has it been made public yet?