...
And question #2 is a discussion of semantics and seems argumentative - which is the nature of almost all these discussions here.
Yes, exactly, this is about semantics. Semantics is the study of the
meaning of words. The AE911Truth brochure quotes an Iranian news source as evidence - they parse meaning from it. It is, in my opinion, justifiable to question the meaning they draw from the source.
To refresh your memory, my question was:
Question 2: Page 12/13 contains the news quote: "
As the ruins removal process reaches final steps, excavators and mechanical equipment pull out a layer of molten iron from the rubble. The volume of molten metal underneath goes beyond imagination…." Is it at all possible to literally "
pull out" a layer of literally "
molten" (liquid) iron from rubble?
This is a yes/no question.
What do they mean by "
pull out", and what do they mean by "
molten"? It seems obvious to
me that both words must not
both be taken literally at the same time: "
To pull out" means "to remove by means of tension", and the first meaning of "
molten" is "made liquid through heating". It seems perfectly impossible that you can't literally "
pull out" any literally "
molten" (i.e. liquid) metal.
Therefore my question: Do you agree with me? Is it at all possible to literally "
pull out" a layer of literally "
molten" (liquid) iron from rubble? Do you agree that NO, this is NOT possible at all?
AE911Truth made a
semantic choice that "
pull out" be interpreted loosely,
not literally, while they chose that "
molten" can only be understood as, liteally, "liquid". This appears arbitary, especially when you consider that various dictionaries know of another meaning of the word molten. For example
- Merriam-Webster: "3: having warmth or brilliance : glowing <the molten sunlight of warm skies — T. B. Costain>"
- Wiktionary: "3. Glowing red-hot."
AE911truth did not consider the possibility that the correct meaning of the quoted news item might parse the "
pull out" as literally true (removing steel by making use of its tensile strength), while the intended meaning of "
molten" was NOT literally "liquid" but merely "red-hot, glowing". Steel that's glowing red hot is solid and very far below its melting point, as you surely know, if you are really so advanced in your knowledge of steel properties.
I notice that you ignored my first question. This is not about semantics. This is looking at AE911Truth's brochure, a photo they disseminate, and telling what you actually see. Let me repeat:
Question 1: Look at Figure 13 in the AE911Truth brochure - "
An excavator scooping up molten metal from the scene of the Plasco Building incident". In your opinion, does it
actually show an excavator scooping up molten,
liquid iron? You might want to consider the amount of glowing material in that scoop, and what it might do to the equipment if it were in fact molten iron at >1500 °C. Also, how this much molten iron would radiate heat, and how it might affect the workers looking on.
This is a yes/no question.