|
![]() ![]() ![]() |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 |
![]() |
paulthompson
![]() |
Tue Dec-06-05 08:01 PM Original message |
The WTC molten steel question |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
hack89
![]() |
Tue Dec-06-05 08:15 PM Response to Original message |
1. The only thing that will melt steel weeks after the collapse.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
paulthompson
![]() |
Tue Dec-06-05 08:30 PM Response to Reply #1 |
2. yes |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
hack89
![]() |
Tue Dec-06-05 09:28 PM Response to Reply #2 |
5. Here is a good discussion ... look at the temperatures they measured. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 04:01 AM Response to Reply #5 |
14. Pray tell, what is the melting point of steel? (nt) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
philb
![]() |
Tue Dec-06-05 10:21 PM Response to Reply #1 |
7. Neither paper fires nor gasoline fires melt steel, so ... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed
![]() |
Tue Dec-06-05 10:23 PM Response to Reply #7 |
8. Deleted message |
Rich Hunt
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 10:12 AM Response to Reply #8 |
18. my impression has always been... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 11:26 AM Response to Reply #18 |
19. Thank you for saying the above |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 03:53 PM Response to Reply #19 |
29. "in no way shape or form were they thinking... " |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 04:02 PM Response to Reply #29 |
31. Yes. (n/t) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 02:13 PM Response to Reply #18 |
23. Yes, metal BENDS into pools. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
paulthompson
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 02:36 PM Response to Reply #18 |
25. nice rant, except... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
vincent_vega_lives
![]() |
Mon Dec-12-05 06:52 PM Response to Reply #25 |
119. Perfect example |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
philb
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 08:02 PM Response to Reply #18 |
58. some of the witnesses quoted aren't lay people |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Snivi Yllom
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 04:33 PM Response to Reply #1 |
32. best analogy is a coal fire |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 04:57 PM Response to Reply #32 |
35. And, pray tell, what temperature is this coal file? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Snivi Yllom
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 05:53 PM Response to Reply #35 |
40. 1700 centigrade |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 06:00 PM Response to Reply #40 |
42. "Deep beneath the ground" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Snivi Yllom
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 06:06 PM Response to Reply #42 |
43. not sure of your point |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 06:18 PM Response to Reply #43 |
45. My point is that your point is full of it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Snivi Yllom
![]() |
Fri Dec-09-05 12:19 PM Response to Reply #45 |
97. here's a documented report of fire producing glowing metal |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Fri Dec-09-05 05:49 PM Response to Reply #97 |
101. GLOWING is not MOLTEN. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
philb
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 08:08 PM Response to Reply #32 |
59. would it melt steel? don't think so |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
spooked911
![]() |
Tue Dec-06-05 08:36 PM Response to Original message |
3. I don't think there is an official explanation and you're right-- |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Tue Dec-06-05 08:37 PM Response to Original message |
4. A few comments |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dazinith
![]() |
Tue Dec-06-05 10:46 PM Response to Reply #4 |
10. how does fire burn without oxygen? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 05:49 AM Response to Reply #10 |
16. Why would oxy not be able to get to the fires? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 02:10 PM Response to Reply #16 |
22. Less oxygen = cooler fire. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 04:03 AM Response to Reply #4 |
15. What combustibles burn hot enough to melt steel? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 07:27 AM Response to Reply #15 |
17. Ok Stickdog, let put it on the table |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 02:08 PM Response to Reply #17 |
21. Yes. let's put it on the table. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 02:35 PM Response to Reply #21 |
24. I'll repeat myself in hopes you will actually provide an answer |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 02:46 PM Response to Reply #24 |
27. I agree that you keep dodging my original question. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 04:01 PM Response to Reply #27 |
30. You fail to grasp the difference between the |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 04:55 PM Response to Reply #30 |
34. How many hundreds of years did humanity "fail to grasp" this difference? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
hack89
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 05:28 PM Response to Reply #34 |
36. Since no one has an answer, I guess it is a mystery.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 05:55 PM Response to Reply #36 |
41. I can think of nothing to explain it occurring naturally. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 05:32 PM Response to Reply #34 |
37. Humanity does not have the problem, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 05:49 PM Response to Reply #37 |
39. If the process of getting a fire to sustain temperatures well above 2000 F |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 06:07 PM Response to Reply #39 |
44. Maybe this will help you |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 06:19 PM Response to Reply #44 |
46. So there's a volcanic intrusion under the WTC towers? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 06:25 PM Response to Reply #46 |
47. No, and there isn't one at this coal seam either. (nice try) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 06:34 PM Response to Reply #47 |
48. OK, so there was a vein of coal burning under the WTC tower? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 06:53 PM Response to Reply #48 |
50. Back for more? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 06:58 PM Response to Reply #50 |
52. How do you make an underground fire hot enough to melt steel? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 07:27 PM Response to Reply #52 |
55. I suggest you research yourself. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 08:32 PM Response to Reply #55 |
63. The REALITY is that an underground fire burning hot enough to |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 08:49 PM Response to Reply #63 |
65. In case you have not noticed, I am hardly concerned |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 09:03 PM Response to Reply #65 |
68. Really? What combustibles can sustain temperatures over 2000 F? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 09:06 PM Response to Reply #68 |
69. If you answer this perhaps you will get it. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 09:37 PM Response to Reply #69 |
71. Short answer: Under almost ANY conceivable conditions, coal fires |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 09:56 PM Response to Reply #71 |
72. So how did the coal fire I referenced get hot enough to |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 10:02 PM Response to Reply #72 |
73. It didn't. As I said, the temperature was not measured directly, but |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 10:14 PM Response to Reply #73 |
74. The article I posted said 1700 C. It said nothing about |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 10:50 PM Response to Reply #74 |
75. The article you posted doesn't know its head from its ass. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Thu Dec-08-05 05:40 AM Response to Reply #75 |
76. Again you are avoiding the point. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Thu Dec-08-05 02:33 PM Response to Reply #76 |
78. 1000 C ain't 1300 C. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Thu Dec-08-05 03:55 PM Response to Reply #78 |
84. I have already explained it a number of times, yet you cannot |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Thu Dec-08-05 04:09 PM Response to Reply #84 |
87. OK, "thermodynamics" boy. What's the maximum directly measured |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Thu Dec-08-05 07:14 PM Response to Reply #87 |
89. Actually it's quite a complicated question |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Thu Dec-08-05 10:08 PM Response to Reply #89 |
91. That's NOT the temperature of a fire, but of a flame. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Thu Dec-08-05 10:32 PM Response to Reply #91 |
94. I've explained why three times already. Sorry if you don't understand (n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ROH
![]() |
Fri Dec-09-05 06:10 PM Response to Reply #94 |
102. Well, no, you have not explained even once. (n/t) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AZCat
![]() |
Thu Dec-08-05 07:50 PM Response to Reply #71 |
90. I know I'm hopping in the middle of this discussion... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Thu Dec-08-05 10:14 PM Response to Reply #90 |
92. Yes, a cyclone fired wet boiler can do the trick. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Snivi Yllom
![]() |
Thu Dec-08-05 03:08 PM Response to Reply #55 |
79. i dont think there was any melted steel at all |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Thu Dec-08-05 03:11 PM Response to Reply #79 |
81. Yes, it was probably pools of molten wood. (nt) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Christophera
![]() |
Fri Dec-09-05 02:15 AM Response to Reply #81 |
95. Newcasts & Remodel After The Bombing, Special Fire Proof Coating |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rman
![]() |
Fri Dec-09-05 01:20 PM Response to Reply #79 |
98. People are amazingly creative in coming up with assumptions |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Christophera
![]() |
Fri Dec-09-05 11:33 PM Response to Reply #98 |
105. Assumptions Like: If You Tell Me Jet Fuel Melts Steel, I Assume It's True. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rman
![]() |
Sat Dec-10-05 07:19 AM Response to Reply #105 |
107. or in this case: "there was no molten steel" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AlienSpaceBat
![]() |
Sun Dec-11-05 08:01 AM Response to Reply #55 |
110. Biggest underground fire in transportation history |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Sun Dec-11-05 08:47 AM Response to Reply #110 |
111. Actually it raises a far more interesting question |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Make7
![]() |
Sun Dec-11-05 10:14 AM Response to Reply #110 |
112. ...melts metal. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AlienSpaceBat
![]() |
Sun Dec-11-05 11:10 AM Response to Reply #112 |
113. Its the rolling stock I was referring to ... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Make7
![]() |
Sun Dec-11-05 12:09 PM Response to Reply #113 |
114. There was plenty of aluminum at the WTC site. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AlienSpaceBat
![]() |
Sun Dec-11-05 12:14 PM Response to Reply #114 |
115. Fair point ..! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Make7
![]() |
Sun Dec-11-05 12:53 PM Response to Reply #115 |
116. I usually see it claimed as steel, however... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 06:39 PM Response to Reply #47 |
49. More |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 06:54 PM Response to Reply #49 |
51. above 1000C? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 07:00 PM Response to Reply #51 |
53. It's the internal temperature of the glowing blackbody that is a coal |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 07:30 PM Response to Reply #53 |
57. I dunno, I sort of read it as the actual temp of the coal inside was |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 08:36 PM Response to Reply #57 |
64. Yes, the surface temp ranged from 350 to 900 C, SUGGESTING that |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 08:51 PM Response to Reply #64 |
66. Why don't you explain why coal |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 09:24 PM Response to Reply #66 |
70. A coal fire is a good approximation of a blackbody. A blackbody |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 05:34 PM Response to Reply #30 |
38. I need to edit this |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Thu Dec-08-05 03:15 PM Response to Reply #38 |
82. The coal point is moot unless you're going to maintain that |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rumpel
![]() |
Tue Dec-06-05 10:01 PM Response to Original message |
6. Have you seen my post on the Tritium readings by UC Berkeley? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
hack89
![]() |
Tue Dec-06-05 10:43 PM Response to Reply #6 |
9. The Berkley report says that... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
philb
![]() |
Tue Dec-06-05 10:47 PM Response to Reply #9 |
11. was there a test for other fission products? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rumpel
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 01:08 AM Response to Reply #11 |
13. I found an ongoing database of air contaminants. It is a little bothersome |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rumpel
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 12:52 AM Response to Original message |
12. Here is an interesting pdf analysis of the temperature inside the building |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 12:28 PM Response to Reply #12 |
20. I found an interesting comment in the report |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
paulthompson
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 02:37 PM Response to Original message |
26. Important question no one has addressed yet |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 02:48 PM Response to Reply #26 |
28. I haven't seen a single one. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 04:41 PM Response to Original message |
33. A related issue is the FEMA Appendix C Report |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bouvet_Island
![]() |
Fri Dec-09-05 09:56 PM Response to Reply #33 |
104. I noticed this, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 07:22 PM Response to Original message |
54. For Paul Thompson |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dailykoff
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 07:28 PM Response to Original message |
56. A couple of points about thermite: |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
philb
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 08:24 PM Response to Reply #56 |
60. they sprayed a foam product on the pile but still it burned a while |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 08:25 PM Response to Reply #56 |
61. Mind if I ask a question |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
philb
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 08:32 PM Response to Reply #61 |
62. I'm not aware of any evidence that rules out your hypothesis of paper or |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LARED
![]() |
Wed Dec-07-05 09:00 PM Response to Reply #62 |
67. I'm not suggesting any sort of cap |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JackRiddler
![]() |
Thu Dec-08-05 10:41 AM Response to Original message |
77. Come on people, red herring |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Thu Dec-08-05 03:10 PM Response to Reply #77 |
80. Yes, it's a comparative red herring. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JackRiddler
![]() |
Thu Dec-08-05 03:39 PM Response to Reply #80 |
83. What's typical of underground fires? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Thu Dec-08-05 04:05 PM Response to Reply #83 |
86. 2400 F is NOT typical of ANY fire caused by combustibles. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JackRiddler
![]() |
Thu Dec-08-05 06:03 PM Response to Reply #86 |
88. yes but |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Thu Dec-08-05 10:16 PM Response to Reply #88 |
93. What makes the WTC basement different from a huge firepit? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Make7
![]() |
Fri Dec-09-05 07:17 AM Response to Reply #86 |
96. Nobody? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Fri Dec-09-05 05:48 PM Response to Reply #96 |
100. And what is the melting point of iron, pray tell? (nt) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Make7
![]() |
Sat Dec-10-05 05:19 AM Response to Reply #100 |
106. 1538 degrees Centigrade |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
philb
![]() |
Tue Dec-13-05 06:38 AM Response to Reply #100 |
120. melting point of iron and steel are extremely different |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
stickdog
![]() |
Tue Dec-13-05 07:55 AM Response to Reply #120 |
121. My point was simply that there's no evidence that the ancient |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
petgoat
![]() |
Thu Dec-08-05 03:56 PM Response to Reply #77 |
85. Jack, I would appreciate the long-timers' thoughts on the question |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed
![]() |
Fri Dec-09-05 01:35 PM Response to Reply #77 |
99. Deleted message |
hack89
![]() |
Sat Dec-10-05 09:30 AM Response to Reply #99 |
108. But how much molten steel would thermite create.. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Snivi Yllom
![]() |
Fri Dec-09-05 06:30 PM Response to Original message |
103. dunno if this photo is real or photoshopped |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
k-robjoe
![]() |
Sat Dec-10-05 10:52 AM Response to Original message |
109. Update |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Clarkent
![]() |
Mon Dec-12-05 12:34 AM Response to Original message |
117. Photo |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rumpel
![]() |
Mon Dec-12-05 03:17 AM Response to Reply #117 |
118. The second photo reminds me of the building remnant in Hiroshima. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MrSammo1
![]() |
Wed Dec-14-05 05:10 AM Response to Reply #118 |
123. Bingo! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bouvet_Island
![]() |
Tue Dec-13-05 09:41 PM Response to Reply #117 |
122. I'd like to welcome you to the debate as well, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
paulthompson
![]() |
Thu Dec-15-05 10:20 PM Response to Reply #117 |
124. Photo |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Thu Jun 20th 2024, 10:51 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 |
![]() |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC