IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags thermate

Reply
Old 12th November 2010, 07:34 AM   #121
WTC Dust
Illuminator
 
WTC Dust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,529
Originally Posted by excaza View Post
Your article spam states that the towers could withstand the impact of an airliner. This point is not in dispute, because they did.
Can any of you show steel shattering when gently heated to far below its melting point?
__________________
The World Trade Center did not collapse. It was turned into dust while it was standing there, and then the dust fell to the ground.
WTC Dust is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 07:35 AM   #122
ergo
Illuminator
 
ergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,339
Originally Posted by Sunstealer View Post
There isn't any corrosion taking place in that video nor is there the "swiss cheese" effect as previously observed in the (fema?) paper.

What he has done is burnt a hole by melting the steel. The effect he has produced has not been observed in any of the steel recovered from ground zero. It's as simple as that.
He produced a hole in structural steel exactly like the kinds of holes found in the swiss cheese steel. It was the closest comparison to the swiss cheese steel that we've yet seen. Bee dunkers certainly haven't produced anything except pictures of rusted-out barbeques.

You want him to exactly replicate that one sample? OK, throw the steel piece into a hot debris pile and let it rust for a few weeks or months. At the same time, throw another piece of steel that has no holes into the same debris pile -- see which one ends up looking more like the FEMA sample. As you yourself mention, the swiss cheese effect was not exactly a common observation.

Your statement about the steel recovered seems to suggest that all the steel recovered from the site was analyzed, when in fact both FEMA and NIST acknowledged that they had little evidence to work with. Tony mentions less than 0.5%. You're trying to draw these broad conclusions from a sample of less than 1%. If we found one piece of swiss cheese steel in 0.5% of all the steel, how much would we find in the other 95.5%?
ergo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 07:36 AM   #123
excaza
Illuminator
 
excaza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,593
Originally Posted by WTC Dust View Post
Can any of you show steel shattering when gently heated to far below its melting point?
When did this happen?
__________________
excaza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 07:39 AM   #124
ergo
Illuminator
 
ergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,339
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Verinage demolitions are designed so that the upper block remains level as it falls, thus striking the lower block in a single impact. Both towers fell such that the upper block had rotated before striking the lower block, resulting in an impact spread out over time. This is the reason the towers do not show such a strong deceleration on striking the lower block, although some deceleration is visible.
Yes, because things impacting other things at an angle get to bypass Newton's Third Law. But only on 9/11.
ergo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 07:39 AM   #125
WTC Dust
Illuminator
 
WTC Dust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,529
Originally Posted by excaza View Post
When did this happen?
I don't think it ever happened.
__________________
The World Trade Center did not collapse. It was turned into dust while it was standing there, and then the dust fell to the ground.
WTC Dust is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 07:42 AM   #126
excaza
Illuminator
 
excaza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,593
Originally Posted by WTC Dust View Post
I don't think it ever happened.
Nobody does, so I don't know why you asked the question.
__________________
excaza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 07:44 AM   #127
excaza
Illuminator
 
excaza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,593
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
Yes, because things impacting other things at an angle get to bypass Newton's Third Law. But only on 9/11.
Did you just ignore this?
Quote:
Both towers fell such that the upper block had rotated before striking the lower block, resulting in an impact spread out over time.
__________________
excaza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 07:44 AM   #128
ElMondoHummus
0.25 short of being half-witted
 
ElMondoHummus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Somewhere north of the South Pole
Posts: 12,279
A few snippets isolated from your cut & paste:

Originally Posted by Michal View Post
I don't know if we considered the fire damage that would cause. ."

"Of course, when Yamaski was designing the buildings he was aware that steel, when it reaches an inherent temperature of 1200 degrees, will stretch at the rate of 9 1/2 inches per 100 feet. He undoubtedly took into account the possibility of a plane's hitting the building and causing the steel to stretch in a resulting fire. There might even be a collapse, but only on the side of the building that was 'hit. Partial collapses often happen in burning buildings."

... The new technologies he had installed after the motion experiments and wind-tunnel work had created a structure more than strong enough to withstand such a blow.

...The second problem was that no one thought to take into account the fires that would inevitably break out when the jetliner's fuel exploded, exactly as the B-25's had."
Guess what? Your own quotes supports what Tri said, which was:
Originally Posted by triforcharity View Post
Correct. The buildings survived the plane crash. It was the combination of the plane, the fires, and the damage that caused the crash.
... and are in contradiction to what you said in response to him.
Originally Posted by Michal View Post
Apparenlty Leslie Robertson, says different. Make some research !!!
Triforcharity is saying exactly what Robertson said: It was a combination of impact damage and fires that caused the Twin Towers to collapse. Your pull quotes show exactly that too, that Robertson said they designed for the impact damage, but badly underestimated the effects a fire could have. As shown by the quotes you yourself posted:

Quote:
...The second problem was that no one thought to take into account the fires that would inevitably break out when the jetliner's fuel exploded, exactly as the B-25's had."

... But, and with the 767 the fuel load was enormous compared to that of the 707, it was a fully fuelled airplane compared to the 707 which was a landing aircraft. Just absolutely no comparison between the two."
Quote:
"John Skilling was the head structural engineer for the World Trade Center. In a 1993 interview, Skilling stated that the Towers were designed to withstand the impact and fires resulting from the collision of a large jetliner such as Boeing 707 or Douglas DC-8."
"... the Towers were designed to withstand the impact and fires resulting from the collision of a large jetliner...". And "... with the 767 the fuel load was enormous compared to that of the 707, it was a fully fuelled airplane compared to the 707 which was a landing aircraft. Just absolutely no comparison between the two."

Every single one of these quotes you listed support Tri's statement and contradicts yours.

Here's the other quote you yourself cited where Skilling comes out and directly contradicts you:
Quote:
"The buildings were designed specifically to withstand the impact of a Boeing 707—the largest plane flying in 1966, the year they broke ground on the project—and Robertson says it could have survived even the larger 767s that crashed into the towers on Tuesday morning. But the thousands of gallons of burning jet fuel finally brought down the noble structures. “As the fire raged it got hotter and hotter and the steel got weaker and weaker,” he says, adding that building a skyscraper able to handle such a blaze would not have been viable, financially and functionally. “You could always prepare for more and more extreme events, but there has to be a risk analysis of what’s reasonable.”
Again, what Tri said:
Originally Posted by triforcharity View Post
The buildings survived the plane crash. It was the combination of the plane, the fires, and the damage that caused the crash.
What you said in response:
Originally Posted by Michal View Post
Apparenlty Leslie Robertson, says different. Make some research !!!
Which of those quotes contradicts Tri's statement that the combination of plane damage and fires caused the collapse?

The fact of the matter is, Tri got it right, and you got it wrong. Your own post contains quotes that undoes your argument, not his. You did not do better research than I or anyone else here did; all you did was fail to read the very quotes you yourself posted. Again: Robertson fully agrees that it was the combination of impact damage and fires that led to the towers collapses. Which is exactly what Triforcharity said. And exactly what you claimed Robertson didn't say.

Next time, read your own material before posting it.
__________________
"AND ZEPPELINS!!! We haven't even begun to talk about Zeppelins yet! Marauding inflatable Teutonic johnsons waggling their way across the sky! Indecent and flammable all at once."
ElMondoHummus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 07:45 AM   #129
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 32,810
Originally Posted by Michal View Post
@ excaza - please read patiently and you patience will be fruitful
Michal, please answer the following hypothetical question honestly.

A series of calculations performed manually by a single person in 1964, covering three pages of longhand script, indicates that a certain highly complex series of events is not expected to happen. A second series of calculations performed by state-of-the-art numerical simulations in 2005, taking several weeks to run each calculation on a cluster of high-end workstations, disagrees with the 1964 analysis and indicates that the series of events is, in fact, expected to happen. Which result would you consider the more reliable?

While considering this question, consider the situation where the series of events involves the responses of many thousands of separate components, as well as the behaviour of a highly complex moving debris field and a series of fires, whose simulation was completely impossible in 1964.

Dave
__________________
There is truth and there are lies.

- President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 07:46 AM   #130
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 32,810
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
Yes, because things impacting other things at an angle get to bypass Newton's Third Law. But only on 9/11.
Wrong Newton's Law. You're thinking of a different stupid argument.

Dave
__________________
There is truth and there are lies.

- President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 07:48 AM   #131
Alferd_Packer
Philosopher
 
Alferd_Packer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,746
Originally Posted by sheeplesnshills View Post
how does he think they gained access to all those hundreds of bolt tightening holes?
Originally Posted by Michal View Post
at the nearest stripping and new fit-out
You've never work construction in a hight rise building before, have you?

Why would they demo the perimeter column enclosures?
__________________
No laws of physics were broken in the writing of this post
Alferd_Packer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 07:51 AM   #132
WTC Dust
Illuminator
 
WTC Dust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,529
Originally Posted by excaza View Post
Nobody does, so I don't know why you asked the question.
fine
__________________
The World Trade Center did not collapse. It was turned into dust while it was standing there, and then the dust fell to the ground.
WTC Dust is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 07:57 AM   #133
Alferd_Packer
Philosopher
 
Alferd_Packer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,746
Originally Posted by sheeplesnshills View Post
and finally, why bother with thermite when aircraft impact and fire will do the same thing?
Originally Posted by Michal View Post


no it could not. Plane a size of B767 can not collapse the very building, even if at high speed and fully fueled
Not that old claim again.

Let me direct you attention to what Leslie Robertson said:

Quote:
One of my jobs was to look at all of the possible events that might take place in a highrise building. And of course there had been in New York two incidences of aircraft impact, the most famous one of course being on the Empire State Building. Now, we were looking at an aircraft not unlike the Mitchell bomber that ran into the Empire State Building. We were looking at aircraft that was lost in the fog, trying to land. It was a low-flying, slow-flying 707, which was the largest aircraft of its time. And so we made calculations, not anywhere near the level of sophistication that we could today. But inside of our ability, we made calculations of what happened when the airplane goes in and it takes out a huge section of the outside wall of the building. And we concluded that it would stand. It would suffer but it would stand. And the outside wall would have a big hole in it, and the building would be in place. What we didn't look at is what happens to all that fuel. And perhaps we could be faulted for that, for not doing so. But for whatever reason we didn't look at that question of what would happen to the fuel.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/newyork/filmmore/pt.html
__________________
No laws of physics were broken in the writing of this post

Last edited by Alferd_Packer; 12th November 2010 at 08:00 AM.
Alferd_Packer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 08:12 AM   #134
Alferd_Packer
Philosopher
 
Alferd_Packer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,746
Originally Posted by sheeplesnshills View Post
He made one hole.....to bring down the towers (without plane and fire) would have taken hundreds of devices and yet only one piece of CORRODED steel was found.....how come? There should have been hundreds of these......



Looking similar and being the same are not the same thing thing
The corroded steel was pulled from the WTC 7 wreckage several weeks after the collapse and while some of the fuel oil fires in that wreckage were still burning. Hot corrosion is a well understood phenomena.
__________________
No laws of physics were broken in the writing of this post
Alferd_Packer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 08:13 AM   #135
Sunstealer
Illuminator
 
Sunstealer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,128
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
He produced a hole in structural steel exactly like the kinds of holes found in the swiss cheese steel. It was the closest comparison to the swiss cheese steel that we've yet seen.
No - it's not remotely like that observed.

Look I'm a materials engineer/metallurgist by profession, I've performed dozens of failure investigations in the last 15 years and I know what I'm looking at.

You can clearly see plastic deformation of the steel around the hole. You can also see that there is plenty of spent thermite (which will contain lots of aluminium) adhered to the steel around the hole. There is no thinning of the material in adjacent parts of the steel and no multiple holes.

If thermite had been used in 911 we would see tonnes of waste product from the thermite and large single holes in specific parts of the structure replicated many times. It would look extremely unusual to anyone recovering steel.

A temperature of 2400°C is going to destroy any FeS-FeO eutectic and you certainly aren't going to see a solidified eutectic upon cooling nor the type of intergranular oxidation and sulphidation as per the fema report. High temperature corrosion has occurred in the rubble pile after the collapses.

Last edited by Sunstealer; 12th November 2010 at 08:15 AM.
Sunstealer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 08:24 AM   #136
ergo
Illuminator
 
ergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,339
Originally Posted by Sunstealer View Post

If thermite had been used in 911 we would see tonnes of waste product from the thermite and large single holes in specific parts of the structure replicated many times. It would look extremely unusual to anyone recovering steel.
And 0.5% of the steel was studied. No analysis has yet been done on how many columns and at what intervals would need to be severed in this fashion. Your claim of "tonnes" of waste product seems to be a guess based on an unspecified model. We also have not yet seen the effects of nanothermite or what byproducts would be produced by this substance.
ergo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 08:25 AM   #137
excaza
Illuminator
 
excaza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,593
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
And 0.5% of the steel was studied. No analysis has yet been done on how many columns and at what intervals would need to be severed in this fashion.
Why not? You've had 9 years.

Quote:
We also have not yet seen the effects of nanothermite or what byproducts would be produced by this substance.
How would the products of that chemical reaction be any different than thermite?
__________________

Last edited by excaza; 12th November 2010 at 08:26 AM.
excaza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 08:25 AM   #138
ergo
Illuminator
 
ergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,339
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Wrong Newton's Law. You're thinking of a different stupid argument.

Right, because Newton's Third Law doesn't describe impacts.
ergo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 08:26 AM   #139
TjW
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 11,097
Originally Posted by ElMondoHummus View Post
The "swiss cheese" eroded steel was studied by the Worcester group, and found to have been due to a sulfidation attack, not thermite. Their experimentation showed reaction kinetics on the order of hours to days; that right there eliminates thermate from consideration.

The supposed "thermatic" material from Jones's crew was anything but. This was demonstrated using Jones's and Harrit's own data, and shown to be material that was hardly "thermitic" at all.

This gets pointed out time and time again. You truthers cannot keep beating the drum of disproven proposals.
I'll bet you a dollar they will.
TjW is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 08:27 AM   #140
excaza
Illuminator
 
excaza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,593
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
Right, because Newton's Third Law doesn't describe impacts.
For someone who doesn't understand physics, you're awfully snarky about it.

This question was asked of you before: According to your physics, what happens when you drop an anvil on a sandcastle?
__________________
excaza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 08:32 AM   #141
ergo
Illuminator
 
ergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,339
Excaza, we've already gone over that territory several other times.

If you don't understand that the sand castle cannot apply the same force against the anvil, I can't help you.
ergo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 08:33 AM   #142
excaza
Illuminator
 
excaza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,593
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
Excaza, we've already gone over that territory several other times.

If you don't understand that the sand castle cannot apply the same force against the anvil, I can't help you.
Except it does, so it seems you're the one beyond help.
__________________
excaza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 08:35 AM   #143
ergo
Illuminator
 
ergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,339
Okay, then.
ergo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 08:37 AM   #144
excaza
Illuminator
 
excaza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,593
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
Okay, then.
Since you're not going to listen to anyone here, might I suggest an introductory physics course at your local high school or university?
__________________
excaza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 08:38 AM   #145
ElMondoHummus
0.25 short of being half-witted
 
ElMondoHummus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Somewhere north of the South Pole
Posts: 12,279
Originally Posted by TjW View Post
I'll bet you a dollar they will.
Ok, fine, "should not". Yeah, we all know they will...
__________________
"AND ZEPPELINS!!! We haven't even begun to talk about Zeppelins yet! Marauding inflatable Teutonic johnsons waggling their way across the sky! Indecent and flammable all at once."
ElMondoHummus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 08:39 AM   #146
ergo
Illuminator
 
ergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 4,339
We're discussing the thermate experiments here, excaza.
ergo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 08:42 AM   #147
BasqueArch
Graduate Poster
 
BasqueArch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,871
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunstealer View Post

If thermite had been used in 911 we would see tonnes of waste product from the thermite and large single holes in specific parts of the structure replicated many times. It would look extremely unusual to anyone recovering steel.
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
And 0.5% of the steel was studied. No analysis has yet been done on how many columns and at what intervals would need to be severed in this fashion. Your claim of "tonnes" of waste product seems to be a guess based on an unspecified model. We also have not yet seen the effects of nanothermite or what byproducts would be produced by this substance.
Wrong


Astaneh-Asl
“One week after the collapse of the World Trade Center, the author, armed with a research grant from the National Science Foundation, arrived in New york and started collection of perishable data and investigating the remains of structural steel from the World Trade Center buildings. The main goals of the author’s field investigations were:
a. To visit the site and map the collapsed structure and the debris.
b. Inspect quality of construction
c. Collect samples of material for further studies
d. Collect drawings and information on design, construction and maintenance
e. Establish failure modes and formulate a hypothesis for causes of collapse.

Figures 6 shows views of various components of the World Trade Center Towers after collapse. By inspecting the remains of the steel structure visually, it appeared that the construction and fabrication of the steel structure was of high quality and no apparent flaws could be observed. Several components of the steel structure appeared to be from the impact areas although at the time of inspection it was not possible to identify the location of these pieces. Such pieces were preserved and later were turned over to the National Institute of Standards and Technology for testing and identification.”

http://www.crono911.net/docs/AstanehWTC.pdf

“World Trade Center Post-Disaster Reconnaisance and Perishable Structural Engineering Data Collection
Project Participants
Senior Personnel
Name: Astaneh-Asl, Abolhassan
Worked for more than 160 Hours: Yes

Contribution to Project:
A. Astaneh was PI for this Small Grant for Exploratory Research (SGER) of NSF. One week after the tragic collapse of the World
Trade Center, supported by this GSER, he traveled to New York and stayed for two weeks in Hotel Tribeca which was few blocks from Ground Zero. First he met with Mr. Leslie Robertson and visited Ground Zero with him. Mr. Robertson is the structural designer of the collapsed World Trade Center Towers.

The project was a Small Grant for Exploratory Research. The main goal was to conduct reconnaissance of collapsed WTC towers and to collect perishable data. Dr. Astaneh, P.I. has traveled to New York City twice to conduct investigation of structure of WTC. Early investigation was done near Ground Zero as steel was being transported to recycling plants. Later investigations were conducted at the recycling plant where steel is being recycled. Some data on drawings and structures of WTC were obtained, and continues to be obtained from design offices of the structural firms who have designed the original structures. Photos taken during or immediately after the collapse have been purchased.

Findings To Date: During the 1st ten days of stay, most of the investigation was on the structure of Building 7 of the WTC. The 47-story structure was burning for almost 7 hours before it collapsed. During the 2nd 10 days of his stay in NYC, Dr. Astaneh has been able to establish contact with one of the recycling plants in New Jersey recycling the majority of steel from the WTC. He has conducted more systematic part of his investigation there. He has been able to investigate and document a large number of steel structural members. Some of his most striking achievements have been to identify and save at least four members (columns and beams) from the WTC Towers that appear to be important pieces perhaps from the floors that were subjected to intense heat. “

http://www.nistreview.org/WTC-ASTANEH.pdf

http://www.historycommons.org/events...1722-21407.jpg
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FEMA/SEAoNY/ASCE engineers:

As of March 15, 2002, a total of 131 engineer visits had been made to these yards on 57 separate days. An engineer visit typically ranged from a few hours to an entire day at a salvage yard. The duration of the visits, number of visits per yard, and the dates the yards were visited varied, depending on the volume of steel being processed, the potential significance of the steel pieces being found, salvage yard activities, weather, and other factors. Sixty-two engineer trips were made to Jersey City, 38 to Keasbey, 15 to Fresh Kills, and 16 to Newark.

Three trips made in October included several ASCE engineers. Eleven engineer trips were made in November, 41 in December, 43 in January, 28 in February, and 5 through March 15, 2002.

D.3.1 Identifying and Saving Pieces
As shown in Figure D-4, the engineers searched through unsorted piles of steel for pieces from WTC 1 and WTC 2 impact areas and from WTC 5 and WTC 7. They also checked for pieces of steel exposed to fire.
Specifically, the engineers looked for the following types of steel members:
• Exterior column trees and interior core columns from WTC 1 and WTC 2 that were exposed to fire and/or impacted by the aircraft.
• Exterior column trees and interior core columns from WTC 1 and WTC 2 that were above the impact zone.
• Badly burnt pieces from WTC 7.
• Connections from WTC 1, 2, and 7, such as seat connections, single shear plates, and column splices.
• Bolts from WTC 1, 2, and 7 that were exposed to fire, fractured, and/or that appeared undamaged.
• Floor trusses, including stiffeners, seats, and other components.
• Any piece that, in the engineer’s professional opinion, might be useful for evaluation. When there was any doubt about a particular piece, the piece was kept while more information was gathered. A conservative approach was taken to avoid having important pieces processed in salvage yard operations.

WTC 1&2 Core column recovery and identificaton

Index of steel saved for analysis is at NCSTAR 1-A, Appendix E. Index is on page 275. (page 61 of the PDF) FEMA Steel collected spreadsheet (PDF)
• Most of the core columns recovered were significantly deformed, which made it difficult to select undeformed regions to harvest test specimens from. Even the relatively straight sections were often slightly bent. NIST NCSTAR 1-3D "Mechanical properties of structural steel," page 48 (82 in the PDF).
• Out of the 55 wide flange sections and built-up box sections recovered, 12 core columns were positively identified from WTC 1 and 2, including:
– Two columns from the fire floors of WTC 1,
– Two columns from the impact zone of WTC 2. NIST NCSTAR 1-3B Steel inventory and ID, page xxv (page 27 in the PDF).
• 12 columns were unambiguously identified as core columns with their as-build locations known, 12 wide flange sections were found to have markings that were not interpretable, and 31 columns were without any markings at all. Due to the ambiguous nature of the last two groups, only the first group of samples were analyzed. NCSTAR 1-3C Damage and Failure modes of structural steel components, page 197 (247 of PDF)
• In the two buildings, there were 329 core columns (each three stories tall) traversing floors involved in fires. NIST has portions of four of these columns, and on average about half of each column was recovered. While these pieces allow some comparison of metal and paint condition with the predications of the fire model, the recovered steel represents less than one percent of all the core columns intersecting floors with fire. Thus, the forensic analysis indicating moderate temperature excursions in the recovered core columns does not, and cannot, give a picture of temperatures seen by the vast majority of the core columns. NCSTAR 1-3C, page xivi (PDF page 48)
• Core columns C-88a and C-88b, from WTC 2, were unique among the recovered core elements in that the columns were still connected at the welded column splice, Fig. 4-2. Both columns were 42 ksi built-up box columns with their shared splice in the 80th floor level. NCSTAR 1-3C, page 198 (page 248 of PDF).”

http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apd.pdf

More at FEMA “World Trade Center Performance Study”
http://www.fema.gov/rebuild/mat/wtcstudy.shtm
http://www.wtc7.net/docs/fig_d_7_s.jpg

Engineers performed a thorough, not cursory, unhindered forensic inspection of the WTC1,2,7 steel before it was shipped off. They found no evidence of explosives.
__________________
In Your Guts You Know They're Nuts. "There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true." -Kierkegaard . "The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. "- Marcus Aurelius
A Truther is a True Believer convinced by lies. You can't reason someone out of a thing they weren't reasoned into.There's a sucker born every minute-Barnum

Last edited by BasqueArch; 12th November 2010 at 08:56 AM. Reason: added sunsteales quote
BasqueArch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 09:17 AM   #148
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 32,810
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
Right, because Newton's Third Law doesn't describe impacts.
No, because Newton's Third Law only specifies that the upper and lower blocks experience equal and opposite forces at any instant; it doesn't specify the magnitude or duration of those forces, which is what determines whether or not there's a jolt.

Dave
__________________
There is truth and there are lies.

- President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 09:44 AM   #149
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
Originally Posted by Grizzly Bear View Post
Original article source which was not provided earlier: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/20/nyregion/20towers.htm

Apparently he didn't read what he TLDR'd
I doubt if anyone else read it either since it's all regurgitated bilge-water.
tsig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 09:46 AM   #150
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
Originally Posted by WTC Dust View Post
Can any of you show steel shattering when gently heated to far below its melting point?

I thought it turned to dust?
tsig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 09:48 AM   #151
Sunstealer
Illuminator
 
Sunstealer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,128
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
And 0.5% of the steel was studied. No analysis has yet been done on how many columns and at what intervals would need to be severed in this fashion. Your claim of "tonnes" of waste product seems to be a guess based on an unspecified model.
I suggest that you get your calculator out and show how many beams/columns would need to be severed, how much steel is required to be melted and how much thermite would be needed then. Something no truther has managed. Get back to me when you've shown that I'm not around the ballpark figure.

How do I know you won't do this eh? Got maths/physics/chemistry? No - thought not.

Originally Posted by ergo View Post
We also have not yet seen the effects of nanothermite or what byproducts would be produced by this substance.
Nanothermite is only using a smaller particle size. Nano does not mean magic or super-duper mmmkay.

Fe2O3 + 2Al → 2Fe + Al2O3 + heat

The waste product is Fe and Al2O3 - I suggest you learn some basic chemistry.
Sunstealer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 09:50 AM   #152
alienentity
Illuminator
 
alienentity's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 4,325
Originally Posted by Michal View Post
Apparenlty Leslie Robertson, says different. Make some research !!!
' The Boeing 707 was the largest in use when the towers were designed. Robertson conducted a study in late 1964, to calculate the effect of a 707 weighing 263,000 pounds and traveling at 180 mph crashing into one of the towers. He concluded that the tower would remain standing. However, no official report of his study has ever surfaced publicly'
[GLANZ AND LIPTON, 2004, PP. 138-139, 366]

Robertson says 180 mph. He was responsible for the calculations. The energy of the actual impacts was far greater....

Read on Michal:

' To the best of our knowledge, little was known about the effects of a fire from such an aircraft, and no designs were prepared for that circumstance.'

'Leslie Robertson:] I support the general conclusions of the NIST report… The [WTC] was designed for the impact of a low flying slow flying Boeing 707. We envisioned it [to be like] the aircraft that struck the Empire State building [during] WW II. It was not designed for a high speed impact from the jets that actually hit it'
KGNU radio, 2006


Sorry Michal, YOU LOOSE!(sic)
__________________
Heiwa - 'Anyone suggesting that part C structure can one-way crush down part A structure is complicit to mass murder!'
000063 - 'Problem with the Truthers' theories is that anyone with enough power to pull it off doesn't need to in the first place.'
mrkinnies 'I'm not a no-planer' 'I don't believe Flight 77 hit the Pentagon'

Last edited by alienentity; 12th November 2010 at 10:04 AM.
alienentity is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 09:58 AM   #153
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
We're discussing the thermate experiments here, excaza.
Since you claim that nanothermite was used and that it has different properties than thermite, these experiments are meaningless.
tsig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 10:36 AM   #154
NutCracker
Muse
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 654
Originally Posted by Quiproquo View Post
Explaining to antitruthers the concept of CD is like trying to demonstrate the concept of gravity to a sceptic. The inevitable questions will be:

How does gravity pull us down to earth?

Where are the strings? (an antitruther constant)

Do you mean to say that it pulls me just as much with or without a ten-foot-thick slab of concrete between me and the earth?

How does the stuff 4,000 miles down know how hard to pull me?

Dear Quiproqu,

You are wrong. We do understand the concept of CD. What we do not understand is 1) how this could possibly have worked using thermite or some variant thereof particularly in the light of the fact that 2) any evidence supporting the CD hypothesis is absent.
NutCracker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 10:38 AM   #155
TruthersLie
This space for rent.
 
TruthersLie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,715
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
Um, maybe because they were looking at how that could have happened over days and weeks in a hot debris pile? Obviously, as is pointed out, sulfidation could also occur through thermate.



Where is your peer-reviewed paper on it?
Where is yours?

Oh you mean the BENTHAM craptacular pile o fail.

really? Snort. Snicker.

But then again from someone who doesn't understand how "loose particles" can manage to damage something as simple as a car, I can understand how you could be fooled.
__________________
"There are submissions to the Journal of 9/11 Studies, but that's about as convincing as submissions to the Journal of Intelligent Design Studies." –Noam Chomsky (and this can be said of ANY and all twoof papers)
TruthersLie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 10:41 AM   #156
TruthersLie
This space for rent.
 
TruthersLie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,715
Originally Posted by Reactor drone View Post
Well I have to congratulate this truther for actually doing something, I do wish though that they'd finish their work before they present it.

I wasn't keen on the number of ... in the ... quotes used in the ...video.

Independant verification of the results would be nice, or at least better documentation of the experiments.

He got a swiss cheese effect which is great. Now he just needs to have it tested to see if it matches the eutectic corrosion on the couple of WTC samples that had a similar appearance.

His bolt burners were nice but lets have a look at some numbers. There's 4 bolts per column and you have access holes/joints on 1/3 of the columns on any 1 level, so that's 336 bolt burners to weaken 1/3 of a floors perimeter columns and 84 igniters (assuming 1 igniter can set off the 4 within a column).You'd probably also want to weaken the top and bottom of any particular panel so that would double your numbers and hitting more than 1/3 of the panels means more again. So we have the remains of potentially thousands of these things in the debris pile clanging around inside the perimeter columns........I wonder why none were found?

So, while this was an interesting experiment for him, it doesn't even begin to form a coherent demolition theory that matches observed features.
Not to mention that the outer perimeter columns were box columns, and he was cutting through an I beam...
__________________
"There are submissions to the Journal of 9/11 Studies, but that's about as convincing as submissions to the Journal of Intelligent Design Studies." –Noam Chomsky (and this can be said of ANY and all twoof papers)
TruthersLie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 10:43 AM   #157
TruthersLie
This space for rent.
 
TruthersLie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,715
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
So, how do you explain the holes and corrosion that Jon Cole was able to produce in the steel at 10:38?
The holes were burned through by the thermate he was able to force against the steel column. (good job him)

What corrosion? There was no corrosion in the video. Please support that claim or retract it.
__________________
"There are submissions to the Journal of 9/11 Studies, but that's about as convincing as submissions to the Journal of Intelligent Design Studies." –Noam Chomsky (and this can be said of ANY and all twoof papers)
TruthersLie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 10:45 AM   #158
funk de fino
Dreaming of unicorns
 
funk de fino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 11,938
Originally Posted by ergo View Post
Yes, because things impacting other things at an angle get to bypass Newton's Third Law. But only on 9/11.
Complete and utter humiliation by your own words.
__________________

Stundie - Avoided like the plaque, its a scottish turn of phrase.
funk de fino is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 10:49 AM   #159
TruthersLie
This space for rent.
 
TruthersLie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,715
Originally Posted by excaza View Post
You can't deny that it's not possible Romulans did it either.
MOTHRA
MOTHRA
MOTHRA

Not the romulans, not GWB, not super sekret hushaboom.

MOTHRA
__________________
"There are submissions to the Journal of 9/11 Studies, but that's about as convincing as submissions to the Journal of Intelligent Design Studies." –Noam Chomsky (and this can be said of ANY and all twoof papers)
TruthersLie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th November 2010, 10:50 AM   #160
WildCat
NWO Master Conspirator
 
WildCat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 59,856
Originally Posted by Michal View Post
so now we are sure YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT RF CD

you loose




typical empty skepticism, do some research yourself before taking any voice. You loose again.
I don't think the word "loose" means what you think it means.
__________________
Vive la liberté!
WildCat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracies and Conspiracy Theories » 9/11 Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:49 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.