|
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. |
8th April 2013, 03:18 AM | #681 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,046
|
Thanks for your reply Chris. I personally do not claim to be an expert, I have no website forcing the "Truth" on anyone, I also have no financial interest in 911.
As far as the "Meterorite" goes, if the concrete is molten why isn't the steel ? The whole truth argument evolves around thermite. Can you provide a link non 911 related which shows how to melt concrete with thermite? If you are going to use the plasma route please show how it was used during 911 and provide any evidence you have. These are simple questions which the truth movement should be able to answer without changing the subject. |
8th April 2013, 03:39 AM | #682 |
Loggerheaded, earth-vexing fustilarian
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wales
Posts: 31,398
|
Rubbish. The article is about the water/cement ratio used in concrete:
"In these days of an ever increasing demand for improvements in concrete performance, it is easy for specifiers to continually decrease the maximum allowable water/cement ratio for concrete they specify. " And it's in this context that they note incomplete hydration. |
8th April 2013, 04:03 AM | #683 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,128
|
What's worse is the idea that temperatures high enough to melt concrete seem to have zero effect on the steel made gun which would melt at a considerably lower temperature.
Any truther who claims that this concrete was in liquid form and solidified around the gun must believe something stupid like the gun melted, but then solidified into the exact same gun shape or that thermodynamics such as conduction don't apply between different materials or the concrete miraculously cooled rapidly and solidified in seconds around the gun. It's one of the most ludicrous beliefs in the whole truth movement. Any rational truther would drop this like a hot potato and say it's obvious that the museum made a mistake. However, truthers never drop anything no matter how ludicrous. Anything to do with 9/11 they will look for some anomaly to the detriment of all reason. |
8th April 2013, 04:38 AM | #684 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,128
|
Source? Citation? Have you contacted them?
Any competent person would not have cited molten concrete just as any competent person would not state that 1+1=3. Someone made a mistake based most likely on ignorance. You are arguing from a point of ignorance and when it's pointed out to you that you are wrong you continue to be ignorant wilfully simply because you believe it supports your position. All you are doing is showing the world that you will throw all rationality out of the window in order to indulge in fantasy. If you believe that concrete can melt then cite a source for melting. Sources telling you it doesn't melt: http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasc.../mats05054.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concret...Thermal_damage If you understood what concrete is, what it's made from and it's reaction to heat as well as the temperature required to melt it's constituents then you would understand that it is impossible for the gun to remain solid if it came into contact with such a high temperature material. What has likely happened is the material that encases the gun has been produced from the collapse of the building. So they'll be a range of particle sizes from building material such as concrete (and it's constituents, gypsum (from dry wall) etc that has covered the gun. (That material may have been heated sufficiently to remove the water). Subsequently this material has been exposed to water which has then bonded all those particles together in just the same way that water does when mixed with cement and aggregate to form solid concrete. If you want to see this for yourself then it's simple to do. Get a steel rod (or other steel material), smash up a load of concrete, add crushed drywall and surround the steel with it. Now add water and leave it to dry. Come back in a week. Voila! A steel rod encased in molten concrete! |
8th April 2013, 10:13 AM | #685 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
|
There was no thermite, no melted concrete, no melted steel. When will you back up your nonsense with evidence? Never.
The museum made a mistake, there was no melted concrete. Your posts on this subject amount to nonsense, opinions and BS. Yankee451 thinks missiles did 911, he knows the concrete was not melted. It is the only thing he got right on 911. Did you read his original OP? It is a BS filled bigoted attack on police. Yet. Yankee451 knows the concrete did not melt because in his fantasy 911 world of nonsense, the police are spreading lies to cover-up 911, so they have to have HIGH temperatures to support the plot, the fantasy plot Yankee451 has in his head. Another failed conspiracy theory. Here is your big problem - Yankee451 says no high temperatures, only missiles and some silly plot - You say there were high temperatures. What we have here is the two sides of a failed movement of lies, 911 truth. Two silly takes on the same event, as if you could change history to fit your fantasy, one you can't define or prove; like Yankee451. Next time read the OP, it is this web page http://yankee451.com/2012/07/15/963/... Now comment on this - http://yankee451.com/2012/07/15/963/ - the original OP, a cut and paste of this web page. You and Yankee451 are two opposing sides to a failed anti-intellectual movement of woo. |
8th April 2013, 08:26 PM | #686 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,538
|
The thermite reaction produces molten iron at 4500 degrees F. There is an abundance of evidence that there was molten steel and two cases of molten concrete. There is no reason to doubt the NYPD or Voorsanger. Both no doubt got their information from a qualified person. Thermite is the only known possibility to explain the molten steel and concrete.
A steel gun would not melt instantly, it takes time to heat the steel. As the heat was transferred from the flowing molten concrete to the steel gun, the temperature of the concrete was reduced to less that the melting point of the steel in the gun before the gun was completely melted. |
8th April 2013, 08:35 PM | #687 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,296
|
|
__________________
What do Narwhals, Magnets and Apollo 13 have in common? Think about it.... |
|
8th April 2013, 08:56 PM | #688 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,538
|
I contacted the curator at the NYPD and he said he would get back to me but never did. There is no reason to doubt the NYPD Museum or Voorsanger other than not wanting to believe them.
Quote:
Quote:
I am simply presenting evidence that, at very least, collectively makes a prima facie case for the presence of molten steel/iron and molten concrete.
Quote:
http://www.weldcare.co.uk/app10.htm
Quote:
Originally Posted by C7
Quote:
|
8th April 2013, 08:59 PM | #689 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,538
|
|
8th April 2013, 09:08 PM | #690 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,538
|
|
8th April 2013, 09:39 PM | #691 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
|
When will 911 truth produce evidence of melted concrete, and melted steel?
Remember, this web page is the OP... http://yankee451.com/2012/07/15/963/
Read it? No thermite was used on 911. Why bring up a 911 truth fantasy? So? It was not used at the WTC, and no molten iron was found on 911. Abundance for 911 truth is zero. You have no evidence of melted steel, no evidence of melted concrete. This is a lie. Ironically, Yankee451 says no melted steel, no melted concrete while he rants against police. NYPD did not say there was melted steel, or melted concrete. Where is your source? Name the person. lol Now the termite melted concrete, but left no iron. good one. Oh, a gun in melted concrete would not melt? What heated up the concrete? lol, thermite that left no iron? And how long to heat the concrete. Got some numbers to go with your fantasy? Anything other than silly claims? Got some numbers for this? This is science, put up some numbers with your silly fantasy. Flowing concrete, melted by thermite? Was it the ceiling tiles? What a fantasy? Yankee451 is the other-side of this fantasy. Where are your numbers? Your fantasy, thermite melted concrete. It can't melt a pot, how does it melt concrete? A gun melts at 1416C, and the concrete melts at 1750C. The gun does not melt as much as the concrete? What are the coeficients, or will you skip science and keep a silly fantasy? Not sure how Yankee451 got this one right, and he has the silly 3800 mph missile crater theory... and rants about police, as seen in the OP (aka his web page)... |
8th April 2013, 10:31 PM | #692 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 7,296
|
Pure absence of evidence of molten iron. Take another look at the concrete block allegedly melted by thermite as per your claim. Where's the melted iron that you claim melted the block? Was the block coated in Teflon??????
Not even a nice try - you invalidate your own assertion. |
__________________
What do Narwhals, Magnets and Apollo 13 have in common? Think about it.... |
|
8th April 2013, 10:33 PM | #693 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,046
|
You have ignored my question twice now.
If your going to make claims you need to provide evidence. Thermite was around before 911, so you should be able to provide a link to thermite melting concrete. Lol, I have just seen your thermal lance link above. Are you saying a thermal lance was used on 911. |
9th April 2013, 12:05 AM | #694 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,538
|
You are just looking for a reason to deny the facts. The concrete melted and the only known explanation is thermite.
You cant tell what the composition is by looking at the photo and we don't know what the conditions were other that the temperature was enough to melt the concrete. |
9th April 2013, 12:10 AM | #695 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
|
Nope, the temperature would have melted the gun first. You lost this round because you failed to look up the melting point of everything involved. Why not present some science instead of words? I already debunked your claim. So did Yankee451, and he thinks missiles did 911. Are you supporting Yankee451? Do you know what the real topic is?
http://yankee451.com/2012/07/15/963/ This is the topic; have you commented on the topic? Do you see the irony yet? Anything? |
9th April 2013, 12:16 AM | #696 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,538
|
I do not know of one but there is no need to cite a case of thermite melting concrete. The fact that thermite produces molten iron at 4500 degrees F is enough to establish that it could melt concrete. There is no other known possibility. This is self evident to anyone not looking for a reason to deny the obvious.
Quote:
|
9th April 2013, 12:20 AM | #697 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
|
No iron from thermite found at the WTC. Concrete melts after the gun. oops
Wait, which as the higher melting point, the gun or the concrete? How much thermite will melt how much concrete? Where is the iron from the thermite? Is the gun plastic?
How does it melt concrete? Show the math. You can't? Why not? Is thermite off topic? Yes, kind of. http://yankee451.com/2012/07/15/963/ This is the topic, not thermite. Notice how the topic is about how the police faked stuff? Did you read the OP? The web page? |
9th April 2013, 12:23 AM | #698 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,538
|
A steel gun would not melt instantly, it takes time to heat the steel. As the heat was transferred from the flowing molten concrete to the steel gun, the temperature of the concrete was reduced to less that the melting point of the steel in the gun before the gun was completely melted.
Quote:
Quote:
I say his logic is flawed. ETA: He also says that concrete doesn't melt - which is wrong. |
9th April 2013, 12:43 AM | #699 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,046
|
There is a good reason for not finding information about thermite melting concrete. If it was common for thermite to melt concrete you can bet your life 911 "truth" would have it spammed all over the net.
You claim to preach the truth but it is obvious you have no such intentions. You are lazy and only ever look at the first page you google because it fits in with your interpretation of the truth. You claim to be an expert yet you have done no research. I am happy for you to prove me wrong if you find a link to thermite melting concrete that is not 911 related. I am no expert but I am willing to learn. I am not prepared to take your word for it just because you want me to. |
9th April 2013, 01:10 AM | #700 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,538
|
It is not necessary to cite a case. Your asking for one is just a denial technique.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Thermite is the only known explanation for the melted steel/iron and melted concrete. |
9th April 2013, 01:18 AM | #701 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,046
|
|
9th April 2013, 01:31 AM | #702 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
|
The gun in the WTC debris is not in melted concrete. No temperatures hot enough on 911 to melt steel, or concrete. You have not produced evidence. You never will.
A gun would melt first, before the concrete. There is no iron found from thermite on 911, or after 911. Sorry, you have a fantasy, and have not produce the science of how your fantasy thermite can melt concrete, or steel. Why is no steel damaged by thermite? How much thermite is needed to melt a pound of concrete? |
9th April 2013, 03:02 AM | #703 |
Loggerheaded, earth-vexing fustilarian
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wales
Posts: 31,398
|
|
9th April 2013, 04:46 AM | #704 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,128
|
Thermite v concrete and brick.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a9oM1yCaqPI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LUXFI60bLQ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvgbIoF24t0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9EWaJCva1ys http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MEKpCmzAnw Where's the molten concrete C7? None of those videos show thermite melting concrete or brick. The problem you have is you automatically equate the temperature thermite can produce with it's ability to melt something else with a lower melting point. |
9th April 2013, 05:20 AM | #705 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 2,097
|
|
9th April 2013, 05:42 AM | #706 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 12,374
|
so it takes time to heat steel, but concrete can melt instantly?
|
__________________
You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your INFORMED opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -- Harlan Ellison |
|
9th April 2013, 05:48 AM | #707 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Republic of Ireland
Posts: 23,499
|
|
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive? ...love and buttercakes... |
|
9th April 2013, 05:52 AM | #708 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,696
|
|
9th April 2013, 05:52 AM | #709 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 3,128
|
|
9th April 2013, 02:44 PM | #710 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
|
Heat flow in concrete is slower than it is in steel thus if an enviroment contains enough heat to supposedly melt both steel and concrete then the steel should deform and melt BEFORE the concrete.
As pointed out before however, concrete is a nonhomogeneous substance, an aggragate held together by chemical bonds Furthermore an extrodinary claim has been made, that thermite can turn this bonded aggragate through a phase change to liquid and yet this process not only cannot be demonstrated by the claimant, the request for such demonstration has been utterly refused. 911t once again proving insincerity of their stated purpose? or just C7? |
9th April 2013, 03:04 PM | #711 |
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,862
|
|
9th April 2013, 06:15 PM | #712 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,557
|
Before anyone tries melting some concrete, I'd advise a small test first. Put on a full safety mask and protective clothing, then heat a piece of concrete with an oxy-acetylene torch. You may just get a spectacular bang from the water in the concrete expanding to steam.
This is why ceramic kiln temperatures are raised slowly. "Sophomore dies in kiln explosion" is not an absurd fantasy. Keep in mind that heat transfer by air, as in a kiln, is much less efficient than by liquid, as with thermite. Now consider what would happen if you tried to melt concrete with thermite! |
9th April 2013, 06:21 PM | #713 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 40 miles north of the border
Posts: 20,849
|
crack, spall, sputter
|
9th April 2013, 10:46 PM | #714 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,538
|
As always, the imagination of the denoir choir only works in one direction - thinking up scenarios that won't work.
Keeping in mind that the "claim" is made by the NYPD Museum. "Fire temperatures were so intense that concrete melted like lava around everything in it's path." And considering that no one here has even seen the guns encased in concrete, nor is anyone here qualified to say the NYPD Museum is wrong. The "claim" (by someone who thinks concrete cannot melt), that the NYPD Museum is wrong - is Stundie worthy. The melting point of concrete varies between 1800-2500 °C -- 3272-4532 °F http://www.weldcare.co.uk/app10.htm Melting point of silica sand 1600-1725 °C -- 2912-3137 °F http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silicon_dioxide Melting point of granite 1215-1260 °C. -- 2219-2300 °F http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Granite Portland cement (mostly limestone) does not melt http://www.anchsand.com/Portals/3/po...ement_msds.pdf Melting point of limestone Melting Point: 1517 to 2442 °F (Decomposes) http://cameochemicals.noaa.gov/chemical/25038 |
9th April 2013, 11:11 PM | #715 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Dog House
Posts: 26,122
|
Concrete can't melt until chemical reactions take place - what are they and how much energy does it take?
You clearly show the gun will melt first. Please list the energy required to melt concrete, and then state the amount per pound of melted concrete is required from thermite. How much thermite is required to melt a pound of concrete? A gun melts at 1416C, and the concrete melts at 1750C. The gun does not melt as much as the concrete? What are the coefficients, or will you skip science and keep a silly fantasy?' I am qualified to say the museum is wrong, and you can't prove otherwise, as you proved the gun would be gone, melted by the melted concrete, in fact, the gun would melt before the concrete. Darn, you don't do chemistry, or understand liquid and solid, and the energy required to change states. Wait, you say cement can't melt... does it melt or not? Guess what? You don't know how to read, or what MSDS is for. This is funny. Does not melt? Or it does melt? Make up your mind. You are googling your way to more woo. It is funny, Yankee451 is a 911 truther, and you are too. But you believe in melted concrete and steel, and Yankee451 does not. You both have fantasies about 911, but they don't match. What else can you make up about the melted mistake made by a museum; Yankee says evil police are spreading lies to support melted stuff and high temperatures, you say high temperatures are real. What is next? |
9th April 2013, 11:31 PM | #716 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,046
|
Ok Chris,
You asked me to do some research and I came up with this http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasc.../mats05054.htm Is this something I should believe ? |
10th April 2013, 01:06 AM | #717 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 6,538
|
Yes, it says that you can't melt concrete in your kitchen because it takes several thousand degrees. That's what the link I posted says.
"The sand and gravel will melt, but you will not be doing it in your kitchen oven! A temperature of several thousand degrees* is needed, and the result will be much the same as the lava that comes out of volcanos." *3200-4500oF The NYPD Museum said "like lava" The second guy is wrong. Portland cement will decompose rather than melt but concrete is mostly rock and sand that do melt so the result is molten rock and sand containing some decomposed cement. |
10th April 2013, 02:27 AM | #718 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 47,040
|
How many pounds of Thermite does it take to melt one pound of Concrete?
|
10th April 2013, 05:48 AM | #719 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 2,046
|
So all that's needed now is, you doing some research and showing me a link for thermite melting concrete.
Don't worry I'm not going to argue the toss about the fact both people in the link say that concrete does not melt. If thermite melting concrete is as common as you say, it shouldn't be hard to find. The NYPD Museum said "like lava" so can we work along the lines that the meteorite just fell out of the sky and is nothing to do with 911 |
10th April 2013, 05:51 AM | #720 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: SE Michigan
Posts: 2,097
|
We all know that Museums NEVER make mistakes.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/0...s_n_94865.html http://abcnews.go.com/US/video/teen-...ection=1206833 http://www.nytimes.com/1981/10/26/ny...t-at-last.html |
Thread Tools | |
|
|