Debunked: AE911Truth's WTC7 Explosive Demolition Hypothesis

Status
Not open for further replies.

Keith Beachy

Senior Member
Actually, this photo makes it obvious that the other debris described in this thread by "debunkers" as being "north" or "south" came from other building damage.

All videos show WTC 7 dropping straight down, and this post-demolition photo shows clearly that WTC 7 was left in a neat pile, in the EXACT MANNER of a controlled demolition: http://rememberbuilding7.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/wtc-building-7-map_22.jpg
Yes, WTC 7 did fall kind of off to one side, yet, gravity aciting on bodies does favor the z-axiz. Is kind of off to the side straight down. Which way would a gravity collapse fall? Gravity is working straight down, why would a gravity collapse no appear to be going straight down; gravity is what is used in CD to destroy the building, a tiny bit of explosives is used to start the collapse, then gravity does the bulk of the work. Gravity should get paid for doing the CD.

The majority of energy in high-rise CD is E=mgh released. This is why buildings that collapse from CD or from fire looks like a gravity collapse. CDs don't look like CD, CDs looks like gravity collapse; logically 911 truth is failing to understand what drives the destruction in CD, not explosives, the building is destroyed by releasing E=mgh; explosives cost money and are a hazard for thousands of feet. Check it out, the energy due to E=mgh is many times more than energy from explosives or removal of sections to start the collapse; simple math. On 911 we have 3 gravity collapse due to phenomena driven by fires not fought. I don't recall any building making it past fires not fought. In fact I know of two large high rises which were totaled by fires fought, never used again.
Explosives make distinct sounds not found on 911, and thermite leaves so much evidence even 911 truth followers could find the evidence. It is simple evidence. Draw the gravity vector, and learn where everything is under acceleration of gravity, I feel one g right now, it is pulling me "straight" down... Where is the Boom in 911 truth's CD claims.
The big reason you can't get supporting evidence for CD on 911, there were no explosives, and no thermite.

Dan Rather missed a big chance on 911 to show knowledge, and explain WTC 7 did not look like CD, CDs looked like WTC 7's gravity collapse. But I doubt physics is required for reading the news and making off the wall comments on stuff they don't understand.
 

Efftup

Senior Member.
I Rather suspect Dan never imagined for one minute the amount of conspiracy theories that would later surround this event.
 
A good job at nitpicking but everything is completely consistent with controlled demolition, because the interior columns failed first is because the thermite removed the interior columns first causing the kink.Duh
No evidence of thermite ? yea right, like is molten molybdenum ? Vaporised Steel ? Further tests on the Steel are needed as there was evidence of vaporised ends of the steel
If thermite was used you would expect Iron Spheres with the chemical signature of thermite. Yet somehow you ''debunkers'' twist this evidence around to say that thermite was not used because iron spheres were found it could have been caused by steel scraping yet totally ignore the chemical signature and the vast amount of spheres which is something you would expect from the use of thermite. "debunked?'' I don't think so.
No one has clearly scientifically reproduced the ''corrosion'' theory to explain the melting and sulphidization of steel found by Fema , yet it shouldn't be hard to do if its caused by office fire . Do an experiment prove it .
With Thermate it can be easily reproduced.

"The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified. The rate of corrosion is also unknown. It is possible that this is the result of long-term heating in the ground following the collapse of the buildings. It is also possible that the phenomenon started prior to collapse and accelerated the weakening of the steel structure."

No further investigation was conducted to test the steel but yet it potentially weekend the structure of the building.
NIST investigation was criminally negligent for this reason and their WTC 7 report is therefore irrelevant.


no eyewitness of pools of molten steel is another lie
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=firefighters+molten+steel
 

Heather S.

Member
A good job at nitpicking but everything is completely consistent with controlled demolition, because the interior columns failed first is because the thermite removed the interior columns first causing the kink.Duh
No evidence of thermite ? yea right, like is molten molybdenum ? Vaporised Steel ? Further tests on the Steel are needed as there was evidence of vaporised ends of the steel
If thermite was used you would expect Iron Spheres with the chemical signature of thermite. Yet somehow you ''debunkers'' twist this evidence around to say that thermite was not used because iron spheres were found it could have been caused by steel scraping yet totally ignore the chemical signature and the vast amount of spheres which is something you would expect from the use of thermite. "debunked?'' I don't think so.
No one has clearly scientifically reproduced the ''corrosion'' theory to explain the melting and sulphidization of steel found by Fema , yet it shouldn't be hard to do if its caused by office fire . Do an experiment prove it .
With Thermate it can be easily reproduced.

"The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified. The rate of corrosion is also unknown. It is possible that this is the result of long-term heating in the ground following the collapse of the buildings. It is also possible that the phenomenon started prior to collapse and accelerated the weakening of the steel structure."
Using the FEMA report isn't going to prove thermite for you. Perhaps you also missed the following quote:

"The eutectuic temperature for the mixture suggest the temperatures in this region of the steel beam approached 1,000°C (1,800°F) which is subsequently lower than would be expected for melting this steel."

This is well below the temperature for thermite.

There is no "twisting" of the evidence, expect to try to prove thermite was found in the dust samples.
 

Keith Beachy

Senior Member
... Vaporised Steel ? ...
"The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 2 are a very unusual event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified. The rate of corrosion is also unknown. It is possible that this is the result of long-term heating in the ground following the collapse of the buildings. It is also possible that the phenomenon started prior to collapse and accelerated the weakening of the steel structure."

No further investigation was conducted to test the steel but yet it potentially weekend the structure of the building.
NIST investigation was criminally negligent for this reason and their WTC 7 report is therefore irrelevant.


no eyewitness of pools of molten steel is another lie
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=firefighters molten steel
Vaporized Steel? The steel was corroded, at temperatures 1000 C and below. The steel was studied, and yes, they know the sulfur came from stuff in the WTC, they don't know the exact source for the corrosion. To call steel vaporized is a simile, and the reality is, it was corrosion at high temperature, 1000 C and below.
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apc.pdf
Stick with science, not quote mining. The people you quote ruled out thermite, it burns hotter than 1000 C. You talk about steel being corroded, and the scientist working on it say no thermite. You can ask them why.
Sorry, but the study done rules out thermite, read the paper again, and quote mining the paper does not make the fantasy of thermite real.

Show me a pond of melted steel. No melted steel was recovered, the molybdenum is from lights, computers, lubricant and other molybdenum bearing substance burned and crushed in the WTC collapse. Thermite does not get hot enough to do moly, and why would moly be in thermite?

Thermite can't make the eutectic seen, and thermite/thermate leaves iron fused to the steel as seen in 911 truth experiments. Don't look, it will ruin the thermite fantasy made up by Jones. Where is the proof for thermite, a Pulitzer Prize event on 911, yet there is no evidence for the fantasy version of 911 - 13 years is a long time to ignore the fact no steel was attacked by thermite. I don't get it, with all the evidence what is stopping 911 truth from making progress? In 911 truth, evidence = failed opinions based on nothing.

No steel showed any signs of thermite being used on 911.

Where are the pools of melted steel? How close were witnesses to the melted steel? Why was no pool of melted steel recycled from 911? Where did it go? You are joking right? Are you doing a parody of 911 truth? You can't be serious; okay you got me. Thermite is a quick reaction, there would be no pools of melted steel from thermite if it was used for the collapse. Where are the studies of melted steel? Scientist and engineers were there, they picked out pieces which were different, and the only "mystery" stuff was corrosion in fire 1000 C and less. ... makes thermite a lie, a failed fantasy of 911 truth. Where is the evidence for melted steel? You have proof of corroded steel not by thermite, and try to quote mine it into the failed thermite fantasy.

You could ask the engineer in who did the paper, Barnett, he will say something like this when you ask him...
You will ask Barnett if the eutectic in the steel was not caused by thermate, what caused it; he will say battery acid, acid rain. Gypsum wallboard released sulfur dioxide at high temperatures. Thermate would cause all kinds of traces of residue caused by 4000+ degree heating. Not found on 911. oops - give him a call, and stop quote mining to support a fantasy.

Why moly, what super secret new device would cause your simplistic fantasy of moly being melted? Why was it not from lights, lubricant, computer stuff, monitors, etc; what is moly used in? What phenomena caused your moly event fantasy? I would like great detail how it fits with thermate? Does thermite get hot enough to melt moly? Got some numbers to go with the moly stuff? The moly, was it pure moly spheres, or what?
 

Redwood

Active Member
No evidence of thermite ? yea right, like is molten molybdenum ? Vaporised Steel ? Further tests on the Steel are needed as there was evidence of vaporised ends of the steel
"MOLTEN molybdenum"? WOW! Molybdenum is one of the highest melting of all the elements: 2,896 Kelvins (4,753 deg. F). I'm sure someone at the site got photos of this, and verified it was molybdenum by having it analyzed chemically! And I'm sure you have a citation for this! Right?

If thermite was used you would expect Iron Spheres with the chemical signature of thermite. Yet somehow you ''debunkers'' twist this evidence around to say that thermite was not used because iron spheres were found it could have been caused by steel scraping yet totally ignore the chemical signature and the vast amount of spheres which is something you would expect from the use of thermite.
VAPORIZED? WOW! The boiling point of iron is 3134 Kelvins (5182 deg. F). How do you suppose they developed that high a temperature? Not even a molybdenum-based thermite will generate that high a temperature! And the vaporization would cause an explosion you'd hear from Jersey to Brooklyn! I'm sure you have a citation for that, too.!

Note also your classic logical fallacy of "affirming the consequent". "Thermite produces microspheres. We found microspheres. Therefore, there was thermite."

Just like: "Your dog produces doo-doo." Therefore, the doo-doo on my lawn was made by your dog."
 
1. Sulphur reduces the melting temperature of steel in the eutectic mixture to 1000 c LOL , go do a chemistry class.
Thus as Fema says the ''liquid mixture of iron sulphur and oxygen'' , there is a reason why they put sulphur in thermate not just for cool smells.
Sure the temperature of the thermate reaction is higher than 1000c but it reduces the melting point of the steel so the reaction is quicker.
2. Do an experiment to show sulphur can be released by Gypsum and corrode steel , good luck just add gypsum steel and office fires, battery acid if you want.
3. Molten molybdenum, vaporised lead etc all found along time ago and ignored by 'debunkers'
http://www.journalof911studies.com/articles/WTCHighTemp2.pdf
4.Vaporize steel by directing super heated gas from a thermite reaction
http://techportal.eere.energy.gov/technology.do/techID=764

And Do not make much sound so perfect for the job.
 

jaydeehess

Senior Member.
1. Sulphur reduces the melting temperature of steel in the eutectic mixture to 1000 c LOL , go do a chemistry class.
Thus as Fema says the ''liquid mixture of iron sulphur and oxygen'' , there is a reason why they put sulphur in thermate not just for cool smells.
Sure the temperature of the thermate reaction is higher than 1000c but it reduces the melting point of the steel so the reaction is quicker.
If the temp reached was higher than 1000 C then that would be reflected in the microscopy of the steel. That temp was not seen therefore no thermite temps therefore no thermite. try again

3. Molten molybdenum, vaporised lead etc all found along time ago and ignored by 'debunkers'
http://www.journalof911studies.com/articles/WTCHighTemp2.pdf
lead could be vapourised on a bench, with a propane torch, in your garage.

And Do not make much sound so perfect for the job.
Except for that pesky timing problem.
 

Hama Neggs

Senior Member.
A brief sampling of the flawed arguments presented by metabunk:

1) The collapse DOES begin at the bottom, not at the top:
I got as far a this and had to wonder if that is really what you meant to say. Is that the argument you claim is presented by Metabunk?
 
The observations of Barnett, Biederman, and Sisson describe

sulfidation of some structural steel from WTC 7. They say:

“Rapid deterioration of the steel was a result of heating with oxidation in combination

with intergranular melting due to the presence of sulfur. The formation of the eutectic

mixture of iron oxide and iron sulfide lowers the temperature at which liquid can form in

this steel. This strongly suggests that the temperatures in this region of the steel beam

approached ~1000 C, forming the eutectic liquid by a process similar to making a

“blacksmith’s weld” in a hand forge.”9

And they conclude:

“The severe corrosion and subsequent erosion of Samples 1 and 210 are a very unusual

event. No clear explanation for the source of the sulfur has been identified. The rate of

corrosion is also unknown. It is possible that this is the result of long-term heating in the

ground following the collapse of the buildings. It is also possible that the phenomenon

started prior to collapse and accelerated the weakening of the steel structure.”

We should take note of the fact that they are saying they have no idea of the rapidity of the

sulfidation and oxidation processes or when they began. They also seem to be aware of the fact

that there were large volumes of red hot metal below the rubble piles. (This is rather interesting

since NIST, their sponsor, claims they are unaware of any such thing. )11

Now consider the problem of the molten metal flowing from the 82nd floor of WTC 2. Some

have suggested that this metal was the eutectic mixture of Fe and S. Let’s discuss that possibility.

We assume that the steel that is cut from the columns is essentially pure Fe. It is melted and

mixes with the thermate reaction products and then flows away by gravity. As the mixture cools,

if the original molten mix was at S < 31.4%, Fe begins to crystallize out. This increases the S%

in the remaining mix. As the cooling continues, the S% increases until it reaches 31.4%, and this

remaining molten eutectic mixture solidifies at 994 C (or 988 C, depending on which

measurement you believe). So unless the original S% was 31.4%, the molten mass is

crystallizing out solidified Fe as it flows downhill and cools. When, in the cooling process, the

molten mass reaches the eutectic composition, it also reaches the eutectic temperature. At that

temperature the remaining liquid gives up its latent heat of fusion and crystallizes as a

9 See Footnote 2.

10 From WTC 7 and WTC 1 or 2, respectively.

11 John Gross, Video presentation at UT Austin, http://www.pnacitizen.org/john_gross_nist_pnac.php

7

microscopically heterogeneous solid with a (macroscopically) 31.4% S, 68.6% Fe composition.

Once all the material has solidified the entire mass resumes cooling. We thus have a plausible

explanation of why the material flowing from WTC 2 was orange-hot liquid (~1000 C).

However, if the thermate contained only 2% S by weight (as specified for Thermate-TH3)12, that

would not be enough to even produce a eutectic mixture using all the Fe produced in the

thermate reaction, let alone all the added Fe from the cut column. It is not likely that the amount

of sulfur used would have produced a product close to the eutectic mixture; however any

substantial amount of sulfur will usefully lower the melting point of the attacked steel by

sulfidation.
 
Last edited:

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
This thread has diverged into minutia. If someone want to argue a specific point in depth, then please start a new thread, or continue in PM.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Related Articles Forum Replies Date
Oystein Debunked: AE911T: CNBC Anchor Ron Insana claims Building 7 a Controlled Implosion 9/11 13
Oystein Debunked: "WTC7 Sound Evidence of Explosions" by Chandler/AE911T 9/11 31
Mick West Debunked: AE911Truth's Analysis of Slag Residue from WTC Debris 9/11 20
Mick West Debunked: Pentagon has Evidence of "Off-World Vehicles Not Made on this Earth" UFO Videos and Reports from the US Navy 14
derrick06 Debunked: United Nations creates a "NWO" website Conspiracy Theories 2
N Debunked: Google Mail icon shows linkage to Freemasons Conspiracy Theories 4
Mendel Debunked: The WHO did not take the Taiwan CDC seriously Coronavirus COVID-19 0
A Why 9/11 Truthers Are Wrong About The Facts | (Part 1 w/ Mick West) 9/11 1
Mendel Debunked: Radar Waves Affect Clouds General Discussion 0
Pumpernickel Need Debunking: Foucault's Pendulum debunked through Mach's principle (the Earth is a static object in the center of the Universe) Science and Pseudoscience 16
M Ufos arrive to the central zone of Chile. (Debunked). Skydentify - What is that Thing in the Sky? 0
Jesse3959 FE Debunked with water tube level - 187 foot building 21.2 miles away below eye level Flat Earth 0
H Debunked: Cadillac Mountain from 220 miles Flat Earth 7
Jesse3959 FE Claim Debunked: JTolan Epic Gravity Experiment - Flat earther disproves Perspective! (or his instruments.) Flat Earth 0
Mick West Debunked: DoD prepares for martial law in CONUS: Conspiracy Theories 0
A Debunked: NASA tampered with the original television audio of the Apollo 11 moon landing Conspiracy Theories 1
Greylandra Debunked: media headline "Judea declares war on Germany" [boycott] Conspiracy Theories 20
Mick West Discovery Channel's "Contact: Declassified Breakthrough" was debunked 2.5 years ago UFOs, Aliens, Monsters, and the Paranormal 8
Joe Hill Debunked: "The North Face of Building 7 Was Pulled Inward" 9/11 66
A Debunked : Fake Set Moon Landing with TV Camera and Stairs Conspiracy Theories 3
Mick West Debunked: Photo with Sun Rays at Odd Angles Flat Earth 0
Staffan Debunked: Wikileaks releases unused footage of moon landing (Capricorn One movie scenes) Conspiracy Theories 2
Mick West Debunked: Neil deGrasse Tyson : "That Stuff is Flat" Flat Earth 10
Mendel Debunked: Air Map of the World 1945 is a flat Earth map Flat Earth 0
Trailblazer Debunked: Trees being cut down "because they block 5G" (tree replacement in Belgium) 5G and Other EMF Health Concerns 44
deirdre Debunked: Exemption from military service doc proves Jews had foreknowledge of WW2 (fake leaflet) General Discussion 0
Trailblazer Debunked: Obama called Michelle "Michael" in a speech. (Referring to Michael Mullen Jr) Quotes Debunked 0
Rory Debunked: 120-mile shot of San Jacinto proves flat earth Flat Earth 39
Rory Debunked: The Lunar Cycle affects birth rates Health and Quackery 26
Rory Debunked: Study shows link between menstrual cycle and the moon Health and Quackery 30
novatron Debunked: California Wildfires Match the Exactly Path of the Proposed Rail System Wildfires 3
Rory Debunked: "You must love yourself before you love another" - fake Buddha quote Quotes Debunked 7
W Debunked: Qanon claims there have been 51k sealed indictments filed this year. Current Events 11
K Debunked: Audio of David Rockefeller "leaked" speech in 1991 [Audio Simulation] General Discussion 2
tadaaa Debunked: Fake photos-Novichok attack Russian 'agents' (side by side gates) General Discussion 34
Mick West Debunked: XYO Device Replacing GPS, Saving $2 Million a Day General Discussion 23
Mick West Debunked: "Tip Top" as a QAnon Clue from Trump [He's said it before] Conspiracy Theories 3
Whitebeard Debunked: Nibiru FOUND? Mysterious gigantic rogue planet spotted lurking outside our solar system Science and Pseudoscience 1
Mick West Debunked: "There Exists a Shadowy Government" — Daniel Inouye Quotes Debunked 0
Mick West Debunked: Delta Lambda Compression General Discussion 16
MisterB Debunked: Isle of Man from Blackpool at water level proves flat earth [refraction] Flat Earth 19
JFDee Debunked: Wernher von Braun confirmed that rockets can't leave earth Conspiracy Theories 23
Mick West Debunked: Missing $21 Trillion / $6.5 Trillion / $2.3 Trillion - Journal Vouchers Conspiracy Theories 33
MikeG Debunked: Obamacare Article 54 (Satire FB Page) General Discussion 2
Mick West Debunked: "Deadly Ultraviolet UV-C and UV-B Penetration to Earth’s Surface:" [Stray Light] Contrails and Chemtrails 30
Astro Debunked: Apollo Lunar Module Hatch Too Small for Spacesuit Science and Pseudoscience 0
Mick West Debunked: NIST's Lack of Explanation for WTC7 Freefall [They Have One - Column Buckling] 9/11 38
Jedo Debunked: WTC7 was the only building not on the WTC block that had a fire on 9/11 9/11 0
Mick West Debunked: Thermite Slag on WTC beams [Oxy Cutting Slag] 9/11 2
Mick West Debunked: The WTC 9/11 Angle Cut Column. [Not Thermite, Cut Later] 9/11 137
Related Articles


















































Related Articles

Top