FEMA appendix C [unusually corroded steel]

Cairenn

Senior Member.
It was caused by corrosion at the temps that were there. Forget the melted steel nonsense.

Even if thermite had been used, the metal would have cooled long before it was uncovered. There is no evidence for thermite. It is not used in building demos, never has been.
 

Oystein

Senior Member
asking leading questions that establish false dichotomies?
W-w-whhhat??? How are these questions leading? How is "yes or no" a false dichotomy for a "is A a B" question? Please provide the third possibility!
Remember, these are the questions you are dodging:
  1. "Is slag = steel? YES or NO?"
  2. "When Sisson says "a liquid that contained iron, oxygen and sulfur" (note: I added a comma that you left out), does he mean elemental iron, elemental oxygen and elemental sulfur, or does he mean chemical compounds containing Fe, O and S - such as FeO and FeS?"
See what I did there that's why I simply answered your leading question with one of my own.
No, FALSE, you did not "answer", you dodged and retorted. Please answer!

Notice that I then went onto quote:

Prof Richard Sisson Worcester Polytechnic Institute.
"Well it was attacked by what we determined was a liquid slag. When we did the analysis we actually identified it as
a liquid that contained iron oxygen and sulfur."

Which naturally answered your question
I asked you to answer STRAIGHT! Your retort is indirect and really does NOT answer any of my questions. Remember, the questions were:
  1. "Is slag = steel? YES or NO?"
  2. "When Sisson says "a liquid that contained iron, oxygen and sulfur" (note: I added a comma that you left out), does he mean elemental iron, elemental oxygen and elemental sulfur, or does he mean chemical compounds containing Fe, O and S - such as FeO and FeS?"
Please give me two straight and honest answers! "Straight" would mean that your answer begins either with the word "yes" or with the word "no". Stop the evasions, everyone can see your tactics, they are lame and annoying and make you look bad.

then you had to wriggle and squiggle around the word 'slag'. Slag is a common term used in a variety of metal smelting processes wherein floating waste and impurities are skimmed off the top of molten metal.
Correct. No need to go to such lengths. Since this clearly shows that slag is unequal to metal, why did you not simply answer my question "is slag = steel" with a straight NO?

In regards to steel production it is skimmed off the top of crucibles full of, guess what, molten steel!
Correct. No need to go to such lengths. Since this clearly shows that slag is unequal to metal, why did you not simply answer my question "is slag = steel" with a straight NO?

Slag as a waste byproduct of commercial steel production usually contains some molten steel
Correct. No need to go to such lengths. Since this clearly shows that slag is unequal to metal, why did you not simply answer my question "is slag = steel" with a straight NO?

however what prof Sisson is referring to is the agent which FEMA stated 'liquefied' 9/11 WTC steel, not industrial steel production waste. What Prof Sisson is referring to has no reason to have been present within the official 9/11 conspiracy narrative, however it sure does fit within the proposition that thermitic reactions occurred in the WTC buildings on 9/11.
The use of the word "slag" is not limited to the byproducts of metal production. It more generally refers to liquefied (and re-solidified) metal compounds. Which natually brings us back to my other question which you are still to answer straight and honestly:

When Sisson says "a liquid that contained iron, oxygen and sulfur" (note: I added a comma that you left out), does he mean elemental iron, elemental oxygen and elemental sulfur, or does he mean chemical compounds containing Fe, O and S - such as FeO and FeS?
Finally my own humble request please stop using ad-hominems such as 'truther' it makes it seem as if you've been reduced to school yard taunts.
Since when is "truther" an ad-hominem??
  1. "Is slag = steel? YES or NO?"
  2. "When Sisson says "a liquid that contained iron, oxygen and sulfur" (note: I added a comma that you left out), does he mean elemental iron, elemental oxygen and elemental sulfur, or does he mean chemical compounds containing Fe, O and S - such as FeO and FeS?"
 

Heather S.

Member
In this case it's like NIST's 'No explosive forensics to do here because their just wasn't any booms', nonsense.

Do you know why they didn't do any forensics testing because of no booms'? Being in the forensics field, it is because we wouldn't test to see if any explosive had been used. There would have been plenty of other evidence to support that. Yes, even in a collapsed building. Testing would have come in to help figure out which kind of explosive had been used.

Also, I think you need to figure out terms being used in the reports you keep quoting from. Melting at a microscopic level means corrosion, not molten steel.
 

Related Articles

Top