Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
9/11 Weekend - New hypothesis to Explain 9/11 - Part I
#26
[URL="http://wtc7.net/articles/WhyIndeed09.pdf"]URL HERE
[/URL]
This and much much more in a 47 page report/scientific paper with references and photos, videos at url above...no hot zippers of Mr. Orling who cries spamming when anyone refutes his nonsense and when he tries to silence the critics of the official version he sanctifies it his egocentric and self-serving 'you wouldn't understand, because are not an architect. Funny how most architects who have looked at this are not inclined to believe in his 'theory' [really a cover for the official pancake theory], but join or support the ideas found in AE-For911Truth. And, one does NOT have to be an architect nor a scientist, physicist, chemist or anything special to understand the general principles here - and which evidence is in accord with 1] the evidence and 2] physical laws of the universe. The official version is not...and IMO the unzip theory of Orling is also NOT.

1. Molten Metal: Flowing and in Pools
There are several published observations of molten metal in the basements of all three
buildings, WTC 1, 2 ("Twin Towers") and 7. For example, Dr. Keith Eaton toured Ground Zero
and stated in The Structural Engineer,
They showed us many fascinating slides' [Eaton] continued, ranging from molten
metal which was still red hot weeks after the event, to 4-inch thick steel plates sheared
and bent in the disaster'. (Structural Engineer, September 3, 2002, p. 6; emphasis added.)
The existence of molten metal at Ground Zero was reported by several observers (see first
photograph above), including Greg Fuchek:
For six months after Sept. 11, the ground temperature varied between 600 degrees
Fahrenheit and 1,500 degrees, sometimes higher. "In the first few weeks, sometimes
when a worker would pull a steel beam from the wreckage, the end of the beam would be
dripping molten steel," Fuchek said. (Walsh, 2002)
Sarah Atlas was part of New Jersey's Task Force One Urban Search and Rescue and
was one of the first on the scene at Ground Zero with her canine partner Anna. She reported in
Penn Arts and Sciences, summer 2002,
Nobody's going to be alive.' Fires burned and molten steel flowed in the pile of ruins
still settling beneath her feet. (Penn, 2002; emphasis added.)
Notice that the molten metal (probably not steel alone; see discussion below) was flowing down
in the rubble pile early on; so it is not the case that the molten metal pools formed due to
subterranean fires after the collapses.
Video clips provide further eyewitness evidence regarding this extremely hot metal at
ground zero: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=...3573302287 and
http://plaguepuppy.net/public_html/video...uality.wmv .
The observer (second video) notes that the observed surface of this metal is still reddishorange
some six weeks after 9-11. This implies a large quantity of a metal with fairly low heat
conductivity and a relatively large heat capacity (e.g., iron is more likely than aluminum) even in
an underground location. Like magma in a volcanic cone, such metal might remain hot and
molten for a long time -- once the metal is sufficiently hot to melt in large quantities and then
kept in a fairly-well insulated underground location. Moreover, as hypothesized below, thermite
reactions may well have resulted in substantial quantities (observed in pools) of molten iron at
very high temperatures initially above 2,000 °C (3,632 °F). At these temperatures, various
materials entrained in the molten metal pools will continue to undergo exothermic reactions
which would tend to keep the pools hot for weeks despite radiative and conductive losses. Any
thermite cutter charges which did not ignite during the collapse could also contribute to the
prolonged heating.
Thus, molten metal was repeatedly observed and formally reported in the rubble piles of
the WTC Towers and WTC 7, metal that looked like molten steel or perhaps iron. Scientific
analysis would be needed to conclusively ascertain the composition of the molten metal in detail.
I maintain that these observations are consistent with the use of high-temperature cuttercharges
such as thermite, HMX or RDX or some combination thereof, routinely used to
melt/cut/demolish steel. [See Grimmer, 2004] Thermite is a mixture of iron oxide and aluminum
powder. The end products of the thermite reaction are aluminum oxide and molten iron. So the
thermite reaction generates molten iron directly, and is hot enough to melt and even evaporate
steel which it contacts while reacting. Here is the thermite-reaction equation for a typical
mixture of aluminum powder iron oxide powder:
2Al + Fe2O3 = Al2O3 + 2Fe (molten iron), DH = − 853.5 kJ/mole.
Thermite contains its own supply of oxygen and so the reaction cannot be smothered,
even with water. Use of sulfur in conjunction with the thermite, which we call "thermate," will
accelerate the destructive effect on steel, and sulfidation of structural steel was indeed observed
in some of the few recovered members from the WTC rubble, as reported in Appendix C of the
FEMA report. (FEMA, 2002; see also,
http://www.911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evid...index.html.) On the other hand,
falling buildings (absent incendiaries such as thermite) have insufficient directed energy to result
in melting of large quantities of metal; any particles of molten metal somehow formed during
collapse will not coalesce into molten pools of metal!
The government reports admit that the building fires were insufficient to melt steel beams
-- then where did the molten metal pools come from? Metals expert Dr. Frank Gayle (working
with NIST) stated:
Your gut reaction would be the jet fuel is what made the fire so very intense, a lot of
people figured that's what melted the steel. Indeed it did not, the steel did not melt.
(Field, 2005; emphasis added.)
And in an a fact sheet released in August, 2006, NIST states: "In no instance did NIST report
that steel in the WTC towers melted due to the fires."
http://wtc.nist.gov/pubs/factsheets/faqs_8_2006.htm
None of the official reports tackles the mystery of the molten metal pools. Yet this is clearly
a significant clue to what caused the Towers and WTC 7 to collapse. So an analysis of the
composition of the previously-molten metal is required by a qualified scientific panel. This
could well become an experiment crucis.
Prof. Thomas Eagar explained in 2001 that the WTC fires would NOT melt
steel:
"The fire is the most misunderstood part of the WTC collapse. Even today, the media
report (and many scientists believe) that the steel melted. It is argued that the jet fuel
burns very hot, especially with so much fuel present. This is not true.... The
temperature of the fire at the WTC was not unusual, and it was most definitely not
capable of melting steel.
In combustion science, there are three basic types of flames, namely, a jet burner, a premixed
flame, and a diffuse flame.... In a diffuse flame, the fuel and the oxidant are not
mixed before ignition, but flow together in an uncontrolled manner and combust when
the fuel/oxidant ratios reach values within the flammable range. A fireplace is a diffuse
flame burning in air, as was the WTC fire. Diffuse flames generate the lowest heat
intensities of the three flame types... The maximum flame temperature increase for
burning hydrocarbons (jet fuel) in air is, thus, about 1000 °C -- hardly sufficient to melt
steel at 1500 °C."
"But it is very difficult to reach [even] this maximum temperature with a diffuse
flame. There is nothing to ensure that the fuel and air in a diffuse flame are mixed in the
best ratio... This is why the temperatures in a residential fire are usually in the 500 °C to
650 °C range [Cote, 1992]. It is known that the WTC fire was a fuel-rich, diffuse
flame as evidenced by the copious black smoke.... It is known that structural steel
begins to soften around 425 °C and loses about half of its strength at 650 °C [Cote,
1992]. This is why steel is stress relieved in this temperature range. But even a 50% loss
of strength is still insufficient, by itself, to explain the WTC collapse... The WTC, on this
low-wind day, was likely not stressed more than a third of the design allowable... Even
with its strength halved, the steel could still support two to three times the stresses
imposed by a 650 °C fire." (Eagar and Musso, 2001; emphasis added.)
We will return to the question of fire-induced stresses and WTC collapses later.
Even without a direct elemental analysis, we can rule out some metals based on
available data. The photograph in the introduction shows a chunk of hot metal being extracted at
ground zero. The hottest portion of the chunk is the lower portion, which was deepest down in
the slag, and the metal is seen to be yellow-hot, certainly above cherry-red hot. The following
table (see http://www.processassociates.com/process...tcolor.htm ) provides data regarding
the melting temperatures of lead, aluminum, structural steel and iron, along with approximate
metal temperatures by color. Note that the approximate temperature of a hot metal is given by its
color, quite independent of the composition of the metal. (A notable exception is falling liquid
aluminum, which due to low emissivity and high reflectivity appears silvery-gray in daylight
conditions, after falling through air 1-2 meters, regardless of the temperature at which the
poured-out aluminum left the vessel. Aluminum does incandesce (glow) like other metals, but
faintly, so that with the conditions described in the previous sentence (which prevailed at the
WTC on 9/11), falling liquid aluminum will appear silvery-gray. Rapid oxidation of the hot
flowing aluminum will contribute to the observed appearance. [Experiments: Jones, 2006])

continues for about another 40 pages...see url above.
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
Reply


Messages In This Thread
9/11 Weekend - New hypothesis to Explain 9/11 - Part I - by Peter Lemkin - 14-10-2012, 10:50 AM

Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  What A Coincidence......Boeing aircraft part found three blocks from WTC - yesterday! Peter Lemkin 5 6,209 30-04-2013, 09:38 AM
Last Post: Magda Hassan
  World Trade Center Buildings (and Others?) Pre-Rigged for Controlled Demolition: A Hypothesis Charles Drago 42 19,959 26-03-2013, 07:07 PM
Last Post: Jeffrey Orling
  How Demolition Charges Were Placed in WTC 1 AND 2: A Hypothesis Charles Drago 37 20,418 17-08-2011, 06:26 AM
Last Post: James Lewis
  WTC Employee Talks About Pre-911 Power Outages All Weekend! Peter Lemkin 1 3,516 16-11-2010, 10:25 PM
Last Post: Myra Bronstein
  A Little Known Coincidence [or Part of Conspiracy] Peter Lemkin 0 3,144 25-09-2010, 12:09 PM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  Jack Abramoff released from prison early ... for his part in the 9/11 cover up? Ed Jewett 2 3,802 10-06-2010, 07:09 AM
Last Post: Carsten Wiethoff
  Good 12 Part Video Lecture On 911 Nanothermite! Peter Lemkin 4 4,058 20-08-2009, 05:49 PM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  Wheels Within Wheels - And a Bit-Part Walk-On! Peter Lemkin 1 3,077 23-04-2009, 08:33 PM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  Anthrax Attacks Were Part & Parcel Of 911 Peter Lemkin 4 4,115 24-03-2009, 07:03 AM
Last Post: Peter Lemkin
  SHADOWPLAY: Part 1, 9/11 PUPPETMASTERS Paul Rigby 0 3,864 17-10-2008, 11:37 AM
Last Post: Paul Rigby

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)