official 9-11 story continues to unravel...

[mhgaffney]

Official 9-11 Story Continues to Unravel...

by
Mark H Gaffney

Today in America we are witness to a great unraveling, the likes of which we have never seen before. For many months now the official narrative about the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack on America has been coming apart, and I mean: at the seams. The official story about that terrible day is disintegrating. The trend shows no sign of abating and in recent weeks it even appears to have accelerated. At the present rate, soon there will be nothing left of the official version of events but a discordant echo and a series of extremely rude after shocks.

Is our nation prepared to face those rude shocks?

For the full article, go to:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article19413.htm

[mhgaffney]

Notice:
My article has a typo in the paragraph about Steven Jones. The phrase "the announcement went reported in the US media" should read "the announcement went UNreported in the US media"

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Good work, Mark.

Amazing how many people continue to believe the bullsh*t story from the WH in spite of the facts.

[orinjkrush]

Only thing I got out of this was: the CIA is out of control.
NEWSFLASH: everybody in the Fed Govt knows this.
Other NEWSFLASH: so is the DoD, the FBI, the SS, the State Dept and the IRS.
But given how pathetic our amateur politicos are, maybe its for the best.

9/11 is transmogrifying into the "grassy knoll" of this generation.

[Kaylore]

Nothing like bad fiction to bore the senses.

[TexanBob]

Wow. I didn't know there were black helicopters circling the WTC on 9-11 or that space aliens were directing planes directly into the buildings! I guess I need to listen to George Norey more often. I'm so out of touch.

[enjolras]

Good work, Mark.

Amazing how many people continue to believe the bullsh*t story from the WH in spite of the facts.

You can't possibly be serious.

[Taco John]

It amazes me that Kean and Hamilton, both co-chairs of the 911 Commission would come out in the way that they have and in essense, tell America that the report is incomplete and was obstructed at several levels along the way... And there be absolutely no news coverage about it... And when these facts are brought up to otherwise intelligent people, they completely dismiss it without so much as considering the implications of it.

Apparently the only thing that's real to Americans is Lindsay Lohan, Paris Hilton, and whatever else the media is willing to give scrutiny to.

I mean, I get that people just don't want to believe in conspiracy theories out of hand. That's smart. But what I don't get is why people have just completely turned off their brains to the subject entirely, rather than raising an eyebrow when these key figures start throwing up red flags. I just can't understand it.

[Florida_Bronco]

It amazes me that Kean and Hamilton, both co-chairs of the 911 Commission would come out in the way that they have and in essense, tell America that the report is incomplete and was obstructed at several levels along the way... And there be absolutely no news coverage about it... And when these facts are brought up to otherwise intelligent people, they completely dismiss it without so much as considering the implications of it.

Apparently the only thing that's real to Americans is Lindsay Lohan, Paris Hilton, and whatever else the media is willing to give scrutiny to.

I mean, I get that people just don't want to believe in conspiracy theories out of hand. That's smart. But what I don't get is why people have just completely turned off their brains to the subject entirely, rather than raising an eyebrow when these key figures start throwing up red flags. I just can't understand it.

Here's my problem with it.

I truely believe our government knew something was going to happen and they were extremely negligent, allowing something to happen that was ultimately preventable.

But you got Gaff here, who has been crowing about mini-nukes and an inside job and all that...sorry, no way I'm buying that...especially with a lack of credible evidence. You're talking about a conspiracy of such epic proportions it defies logic.

[TDmvp]

Good work, Mark.

Amazing how many people continue to believe the bullsh*t story from the WH in spite of the facts.

you 2 should just %uck and get it over with ...

[Taco John]

Here's my problem with it.

I truely believe our government knew something was going to happen and they were extremely negligent, allowing something to happen that was ultimately preventable.

But you got Gaff here, who has been crowing about mini-nukes and an inside job and all that...sorry, no way I'm buying that...especially with a lack of credible evidence. You're talking about a conspiracy of such epic proportions it defies logic.


I don't know anything about mini-nukes. But what I just saw was people knee jerking to a post that is not only convincingly written, but also well sourced with a string of references -- and not one person bothers to challenge a single point of the story.

What difference does Gaff's theory about mini nikes make if the bostruction is true (and it appears that it is) that there was so much obstruction in the 911 investigation to make the conclusions meaningless?

Here we have the greatest unsolved mystery in the history of the united states, and people aren't willing to so much as question whether we need to get to the bottom of it. And why? Because they disagree with a guy on a theory about what might have happened? So how does that work? "I disagree with your theory, and therefore, it doesn't matter that there was so much obstruction in the 911 investigation to make the two lead co-chairs pretty much admit the entire thing was a sham. What's going on with Prince Harry?"

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I don't know anything about mini-nukes. But what I just saw was people knee jerking to a post that is not only convincingly written, but also well sourced with a string of references -- and not one person bothers to challenge a single point of the story.

What difference does Gaff's theory about mini nikes make if it's true (and it appears that it is) that there was so much obstruction in the 911 investigation to make the conclusions meaningless?

Here we have the greatest unsolved mystery in the history of the united states, and people aren't willing to so much as question whether we need to get to the bottom of it. And why? Because they disagree with a guy on a theory about what might have happened? So how does that work? "I disagree with your theory, and therefore, it doesn't matter that there was so much obstruction in the 911 investigation to make the two lead co-chairs pretty much admit the entire thing was a sham. What's going on with Prince Harry?"Oh geeezus!! Talk about drinking the Net airhead, conspiracy dreamers koolaid. :spit:

[Taco John]

Hmm... That came out wrong. I meant the obstruction appears that it's true. I don't know anything about Mini nukes. Literally nothing.

[Taco John]

But you kind of prove my point... Here we have the biggest crime ever committed on US soil, and yu sho abolutely zero intellectual curiosity about any of the very legitimate questions raised by the obstruction of the investigation into it.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Hmm... That came out wrong. I meant the obstruction appears that it's true. I don't know anything about Mini nukes. Literally nothing.That's good to know and I agree there is every possibility of some type of coverup of the actual events for whatever purpose.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

But you kind of prove my point... Here we have the biggest crime ever committed on US soil, and yu sho abolutely zero intellectual curiosity about any of the very legitimate questions raised by the obstruction of the investigation into it.
You're wrong, I just don't trade conversation with someone who thinks we shot mininukes into the Trade Center buildings.

[TexanBob]

if it's true (and it appears that it is) that there was so much obstruction in the 911 investigation to make the conclusions meaningless?

There's the flaw in your thinking right there, TJ. All the obstruction in the 911 investigation is simple.

The incident happened on George Bush's watch and the Republicans don't want to take the official blame for what happened. Likewise, a lot of the preparation for 9-11 took place (and the roadblocks to effectively thwarting the mission took place) on Bill Clinton's watch and the Democrats don't want to take the official blame for what happened either. So, what results is a commission where both sides care more about covering their own asses than getting at any actual truth.

It's really no more complicated than that. There doesn't need to be some evil conspiracy behind all this to believe there would be obstructionism. All you need are two political parties that, first and foremost, want to avoid getting blamed by the electorate.

In fact, I know of no bi-partisan commission ever assembled by Congress that has ever concluded otherwise than that neither the Democrats or the Republicans are to be blamed. It's just politics as usual.

[Taco John]

You're wrong, I just don't trade conversation with someone who thinks we shot mininukes into the Trade Center buildings.


I can understand that. But do you have any theories of your own on why there was molten metal at the heart of the carnage for weeks after the fact? I don't know what a mini-nuke even is. But I do know that jet fuel isn't going to cause molten metal, let alone a perpetual molten metal that lasts for weeks on end.

So what would cause such a thing? Beats me. I don't have the bredth of knowledge to answer such a question. As a citizen curious about this aspect, where in the 911 report can I go to get an answer on this? I just want to go where the evidence leads. Don't you?

[TDmvp]

like if someone who knows something about science explained those two would even understand ....

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I can understand that. But do you have any theories of your own on why there was molten metal at the heart of the carnage for weeks after the fact? I don't know what a mini-nuke even is. But I do know that jet fuel isn't going to cause molten metal, let alone a perpetual molten metal that lasts for weeks on end.

So what would cause such a thing? Beats me. I don't have the bredth of knowledge to answer such a question. As a citizen curious about this aspect, where in the 911 report can I go to get an answer on this?The heart of carnage was basically where the impacts occurred. Iron workers, Boilermakers and Pipefitters all went into the rubble cutting structural steel with oxygen lances and cutting torches looking for survivors. Eutectic reaction from various possible sources is one possibilty, mininukes are not.

[TDmvp]

The heart of carnage was basically where the impacts occurred. Iron workers, Boilermakers and Pipefitters all went into the rubble cutting structural steel with oxygen lances and cutting torches looking for survivors. Eutectic reaction from various possible sources is one possibilty, mininukes are not.

/agree and there is this thing called friction from during the fall of the towers their own friction can make molten steel .... jeez the 9/11 nuts are to simple try harder ..... you should see these fools in cincinnati that do weekly protest calling them selfs cincy911 for truth or some $hit .... ill post the youtube stuff with them later ... and they are actually talking about molten metal ... and listen to these morons .... it like listing to little kids/teenagers trying to get you to think wrestling is real or some crap like that .... maybe you 911 nuts should read/watch the guys from popular mechanics vs the loose change kids ... and watch your heroes fold like a house of cards under the pressure of facts and science ...

if anyone with a brain in the media / science world found fact supporting they would be everywhere and you dont see it ..... you see 21 year old punks with loose change and crap like Michael Moore

and i like mysteries there just aint one here ....

[W*GS]

But do you have any theories of your own on why there was molten metal at the heart of the carnage for weeks after the fact?

Was there?

[Taco John]

Was there?


This is the kind of thing I'm talking about. This has been pretty well documented. There are plenty of scientists who have asked questions about this. I guess they're just supposed to accept Beerslug's explination of it, rather than expect any sort of official review of the questions that these scientists have.

The worst crime ever committed on American soil, and Americans have completely turned their brains off to the permeating questions that still remain years after the fact. And here we have the two co-chairs literally telling us that the thing was a sham, and people aren't the least bit interested in seeing any accountability over the matter. It just blows my mind.

[W*GS]

What is the documentation for "molten" metal weeks after 9/11?

Dig a little, and you'll find it's really quite sparse and a lot of hearsay.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

This is the kind of thing I'm talking about. This has been pretty well documented. There are plenty of scientists who have asked questions about this. I guess they're just supposed to accept Beerslug's explination of it, rather than expect any sort of official review of the questions that these scientists have.

The worst crime ever committed on American soil, and Americans have completely turned their brains off to the permeating questions that still remain years after the fact. And here we have the two co-chairs literally telling us that the thing was a sham, and people aren't the least bit interested in seeing any accountability over the matter. It just blows my mind.What scientists? I've never seen any proof (pictures or "scientists") pointing out piles of molten metal. There were slag piles (pockets) that came from were I told you they did.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

It amazes me that Kean and Hamilton, both co-chairs of the 911 Commission would come out in the way that they have and in essense, tell America that the report is incomplete and was obstructed at several levels along the way... And there be absolutely no news coverage about it... And when these facts are brought up to otherwise intelligent people, they completely dismiss it without so much as considering the implications of it.


Ding ding ding! :yep:

They completely skirt the issue of Kean's and Hamilton's statements (not to mention all the other evidence mentioned in the article) and go straight into ad hominem/attack the messenger mode.

It's probably psychological - they can't deal with such grim realities because the prospect of having to do something about them seems too much.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

you 2 should just %uck and get it over with ...

You sound like a man of experience.

[TDmvp]

You sound like a man of experience.

:O) i have never had sex with either of you 2 heheh...

[mhgaffney]

The heart of carnage was basically where the impacts occurred. Iron workers, Boilermakers and Pipefitters all went into the rubble cutting structural steel with oxygen lances and cutting torches looking for survivors. Eutectic reaction from various possible sources is one possibilty, mininukes are not.

No one -- and certainly not Beerslugger -- has explained how enough heat was generated in the rubble pile to melt steel. His above claim about "eutectic" reactions is more looney than even the wildest 911 theories -- and I agree that some of them are wacky.

I challenge Beerslugger to produce even one explanation for a eutectic reaction in the rubble pile. He won't be able to do it. No one has.

There is also a major problem with Beerslugger's slag argument. We have hard evidence -- photographic and video evidence from 9/11 -- showing molten metal pouring out of the side of WTC 2 -- even before the tower fell.

I'm posting a photo of this -- below -- and there are many other even better shots available on the web. If you try looking - you will find them easily. As you can see -- with your own eyes this molten metal was created BEFORE the collapse and therefor cannot possibly be slag produced after the fact by metal workers using cutting torches.

Nor can the metal in the photo be aluminum -- though many debunkers have claimed this. The reason has to do with basic physics. The color of metal is an accurate indication of its temperature. This is why molten aluminum is silver -- in keeping with its low melting point (1100 F). Metal does not incandesce until you get up into the 1800 F range -- so this rules out any possibility that the metal in this photo is aluminum. So what is it?

Steven Jones (a world class physicist) concluded that this molten metal was in all likelihood molten iron -- from the steel columns. In subsequent research, Jones proved it. A woman from NYC who on 9/11 lived 400 feet from the south tower sent Jones a sample of the WTC dust. Jone analyzed it and found an abundance of iron rich spheres -- which proves that the steel in the WTC did indeed melt. Jone was not alone in this. The US geolocical survey and other labs also discovered these tiny iron rich spheres in the WTC dust -- and photos of these molten spheres are on the web. I have posted links on this board -- but the knee jerks on this board are so disconnected from physical reality they cannot connect even the simplest of dots. I'll put the link up again -- so the curious can see what these tiny spheres look like.

Then Jones further analyzed the spheres and found residues of thermate, a high temperature explosive.

The thermate signature includes the presence of sulfur, which is added to thermite to make thermate because sulfur greatly speeds up the cutting effect. This is a true eutectic reaction -- and it is a planned reaction -- not some incidental physical effect AFTER the fact. The presence of sulfur lowers the melting point of iron by as much as 1000 F --- which probably explains how the molten iron in the photo can be in a molten state at a lower temperature -- in the 1800 F range.

Beerslugger and others who knock the mini nuke theory -- are missing the point. We already have proof of explosives -- which can only mean that 911 was an inside job.

The signature of thermate is hard evidence -- like a finger print -- that can stand up in court. It is not just somebody's opinion.

I personally believe that other types of explosives were also used -- in addition to thermate -- because in my opinion it took more than thermate to cut the 7 inch thick columns at the base of the WTC. We are talking about monster box columns. Only a real investigation, however, can finally answer some of these questions.

I agree with Taco. I am shocked and outraged by the degree of absolute apathy -- on this board. What a bunch of losers. Your country has been stolen from you --- and you don't even care.

[mhgaffney]

Here's another photo of the molten iron from the south tower -- BEFORE the collapse.

[mhgaffney]

Here is what an iron rich sphere looks like. These were fund in the WTC dust in great abundance. The presence of iron has been confirmed by several different labs. The spherical shape indicates the iron had melted -- then cooled. To do this required temperatures of 2800 F -- which is way way above any temperature you can get with jet fuel or any other hydro carbon fuel.

The presence of these iron spheres in the WTC dust is hard evidence for the use of explosives.

The proof, however, is the additional evidence for thermate residue.

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1165/images/IRON-04-IMAGE.TIF

[mhgaffney]

Check out Steven Jones' paper about the thermate residues at

http://www.journalof911studies.com/

Scroll down to his paper from May 2007 --

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

:O) i have never had sex with either of you 2 heheh...

I was talking about you playing for the pink team.

[Tom H.]

When it comes to steel, looks can be deceiving:

"A study of the 1991 Oakland fire that burned 3,000 homes revealed the presence of melted copper in over 80% of the burned structures, and what appeared to be melted steel in over 90% of the burned structures. With respect to steel, looks can be deceiving. What appears to be melted may be merely oxidized. Interpret melted metals, particularly steel, with caution, and interpret the temperatures you infer from these melted metals with extreme caution." http://www.atslab.com/fire/PDF/IndicatorsOfTrouble.pdf

"NIST investigators and experts from the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) and the Structural Engineers Association of New York (SEONY)—who inspected the WTC steel at the WTC site and the salvage yards—found no evidence that would support the melting of steel in a jet-fuel ignited fire in the towers prior to collapse. The condition of the steel in the wreckage of the WTC towers (i.e., whether it was in a molten state or not) was irrelevant to the investigation of the collapse since it does not provide any conclusive information on the condition of the steel when the WTC towers were standing.
NIST considered the damage to the steel structure and its fireproofing caused by the aircraft impact and the subsequent fires when the buildings were still standing since that damage was responsible for initiating the collapse of the WTC towers.

Under certain circumstances it is conceivable for some of the steel in the wreckage to have melted after the buildings collapsed. Any molten steel in the wreckage was more likely due to the high temperature resulting from long exposure to combustion within the pile than to short exposure to fires or explosions while the buildings were standing."http://tinyurl.com/pqrxt

"It is no mystery why the fire has burned for so long. Mangled steel and concrete, plastics from office furniture and equipment, fuels from elevator hydraulics, cars and other sources are all in great supply in the six-story basement area where the two towers collapsed.

Water alone rarely can quench this kind of fire, which will burn as long as there is adequate fuel and oxygen and as long as heat cannot escape, fire experts said." With Water and Sweat, Fighting the Most Stubborn Fire (http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/fightingthefiresinthewtcdebrispiles)

[W*GS]

gaffney, as usual, is full of ****.

[alkemical]

Wow. I didn't know there were black helicopters circling the WTC on 9-11 or that space aliens were directing planes directly into the buildings! I guess I need to listen to George Norey more often. I'm so out of touch.

It's Norry. ;)

[orangeatheist]

gaffney, as usual, is full of ****.

Of course he is. He's doing nothing but spewing a bukkakke of stupid and LABF's right there getting a face full of it. I, for one, would like gaffe to prove that what he says is in those pictures is really what he says it is. Rule out everything else first (but, of course, he can't do that).

Besides, mini-nukes, thermite, etc...what nonsense! Everyone knows Satan pulled those towers down. And, unlike gaffe, I have the proof!!!

http://www.christianmedia.us/images2/FacesSmokeNewMThomas.jpg

http://www.christianmedia.us/images2/devilface.jpg

http://www.christianmedia.us/images2/devil-face.jpg

http://www.christianmedia.us/images2/demon3.jpg

[alkemical]

You know though OA, maybe - just maybe Satan was present on such a "horrible" act.... ;) (Just sayin) ;)

[orangeatheist]

You know though OA, maybe - just maybe Satan was present on such a "horrible" act.... ;) (Just sayin) ;)

You got your quotation marks wrong. Here's how it should have been written:

You know though OA, maybe - just maybe "Satan" was present on such a horrible act....

Then, I'd agree with ya without the winkies.

[alkemical]

You got your quotation marks wrong. Here's how it should have been written:

You know though OA, maybe - just maybe "Satan" was present on such a horrible act....

Then, I'd agree with ya without the winkies.


So basically - we both agree that in some way.... "Satan" showed up on an "evil" act.


Editors note:

"don't you know there ain't no devil, there's just god when he's drunk" - Tom Waits

It's not like you have to "believe" in anything per say, other than something "evil" and something "horrible" happened. Maybe in such events, evil shows it's face. (Since i suspect that..people are more or less no different in ways of any deity, we'd have penchant for as great a good as we do evil - we can "embody" such diety and that's how it "becomes alive".)

[Bronco Bob]

No one -- and certainly not Beerslugger -- has explained how enough heat was generated in the rubble pile to melt steel.

You are a liar. I have shown you several times how rusting iron in a
confined space can generate enough heat over time to melt steel.


The thermate signature includes the presence of sulfur, which is added to thermite to make thermate because sulfur greatly speeds up the cutting effect. This is a true eutectic reaction -- and it is a planned reaction -- not some incidental physical effect AFTER the fact. The presence of sulfur lowers the melting point of iron by as much as 1000 F --- which probably explains how the molten iron in the photo can be in a molten state at a lower temperature -- in the 1800 F range.

Wallboard is made of gypsum. which contains sulfur. This is where your
sulfur came from. This sulfur is also reacts with rusting steel to help
the rust melt the steel.

[alkemical]

Lawyer Says Bin Laden Did Not Orchestrate 9/11 During Terror Trial

http://prisonplanet.com/articles/february2008/022808_bin_laden.htm

[Taco John]

So I ask the question again...


Where in the 911 commission report can I get official answers to these questions? Or is the answer "just make fun of people who bring it up, and call it a day. There's no need to have answers to the biggest crime ever committed on US soil. Shhhhh... Idol is on!"

[W*GS]

http://911myths.com/html/traces_of_thermate_at_the_wtc.html

[W*GS]

Have you read the 9/11 Commission Report, TJ?

[mhgaffney]

When it comes to steel, looks can be deceiving:

"A study of the 1991 Oakland fire that burned 3,000 homes revealed the presence of melted copper in over 80% of the burned structures, and what appeared to be melted steel in over 90% of the burned structures. With respect to steel, looks can be deceiving. What appears to be melted may be merely oxidized. Interpret melted metals, particularly steel, with caution, and interpret the temperatures you infer from these melted metals with extreme caution." http://www.atslab.com/fire/PDF/IndicatorsOfTrouble.pdf

"NIST investigators and experts from the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) and the Structural Engineers Association of New York (SEONY)—who inspected the WTC steel at the WTC site and the salvage yards—found no evidence that would support the melting of steel in a jet-fuel ignited fire in the towers prior to collapse. The condition of the steel in the wreckage of the WTC towers (i.e., whether it was in a molten state or not) was irrelevant to the investigation of the collapse since it does not provide any conclusive information on the condition of the steel when the WTC towers were standing.
NIST considered the damage to the steel structure and its fireproofing caused by the aircraft impact and the subsequent fires when the buildings were still standing since that damage was responsible for initiating the collapse of the WTC towers.

Under certain circumstances it is conceivable for some of the steel in the wreckage to have melted after the buildings collapsed. Any molten steel in the wreckage was more likely due to the high temperature resulting from long exposure to combustion within the pile than to short exposure to fires or explosions while the buildings were standing."http://tinyurl.com/pqrxt

"It is no mystery why the fire has burned for so long. Mangled steel and concrete, plastics from office furniture and equipment, fuels from elevator hydraulics, cars and other sources are all in great supply in the six-story basement area where the two towers collapsed.

Water alone rarely can quench this kind of fire, which will burn as long as there is adequate fuel and oxygen and as long as heat cannot escape, fire experts said." With Water and Sweat, Fighting the Most Stubborn Fire (http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/fightingthefiresinthewtcdebrispiles)

Tom,

You must be kidding? Obviously you didn't major in physics -- or even study science in college.

The color of the molten metal in the photos above is not in the least bit deceiving. It is straightforward. This bright incandescent color indicates a temperature of at least 1800 F -- and above. I will post the temperature chart so you can see for yourself.

The statements I have bolded in your post are well known -- no surprise. The NIST posted this nonsense as an afterthought to their report -- which BTW completely ignored the evidence of molten steel. Some of the early evidence had even appeared as an appendix to the previous FEMA study.

These statements by NIST are an insult to our intelligence -- since it is obvious that "the condition of the steel in the wreckage" was absolutely and totally relevant to the collapse. Of course it was! An honest forensic study would have scrutinized the steel in the pile to determine what caused the collapse! This is a no brainer. Ground Zero was a crime scene. In cases of fires it is also standard procedure to test for residues -- especially given the many reports of explosions.

Was this done? Of course not! Instead, the evidence was destroyed. The debris was carted away and sold ASAP. Even the FEMA experts were prevented from studying the site -- except for one scheduled and chaperoned walk through. Destruction of evidence is itself a crime. For Chris sake -- this is sophomoric -- not rocket science. Any moderately intelligent high school kid could figure this out.

The other statement is also an insult. "Under certain circumstances it is conceivable for some of the steel to have melted..." This is total hogwash. It might happen in the world of fantasy -- but not on planet earth. Not in the physical world we inhabit. Does anyone here speak the language of science?

Bronco Bob continues to rave on with looney ideas about rust melting steel, which is more hogwash. Come on, people. Oxygen is required for rust -- yet there was very little oxygen under the pile. This is why the fires flared up many times as they removed debris -- which allowed oxygen to reach the smoldering fires.

Yes there were fuels in the pile -- but nothing capable of reaching temperatures of 2700 F. Not even close. This is basic science -- nothing fancy.

Whatever caused the fires happened before and during the collapse -- not after.

Tom and many others on this board are simply in denial -- end of story. You won't or can't face the truth because it's uncomfortable. Golly Gee -- how lame can you get?! MHG

[mhgaffney]

When it comes to steel, looks can be deceiving:

"A study of the 1991 Oakland fire that burned 3,000 homes revealed the presence of melted copper in over 80% of the burned structures, and what appeared to be melted steel in over 90% of the burned structures. With respect to steel, looks can be deceiving. What appears to be melted may be merely oxidized. Interpret melted metals, particularly steel, with caution, and interpret the temperatures you infer from these melted metals with extreme caution." http://www.atslab.com/fire/PDF/IndicatorsOfTrouble.pdf

"NIST investigators and experts from the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) and the Structural Engineers Association of New York (SEONY)—who inspected the WTC steel at the WTC site and the salvage yards—found no evidence that would support the melting of steel in a jet-fuel ignited fire in the towers prior to collapse. The condition of the steel in the wreckage of the WTC towers (i.e., whether it was in a molten state or not) was irrelevant to the investigation of the collapse since it does not provide any conclusive information on the condition of the steel when the WTC towers were standing.
NIST considered the damage to the steel structure and its fireproofing caused by the aircraft impact and the subsequent fires when the buildings were still standing since that damage was responsible for initiating the collapse of the WTC towers.

Under certain circumstances it is conceivable for some of the steel in the wreckage to have melted after the buildings collapsed. Any molten steel in the wreckage was more likely due to the high temperature resulting from long exposure to combustion within the pile than to short exposure to fires or explosions while the buildings were standing."http://tinyurl.com/pqrxt

"It is no mystery why the fire has burned for so long. Mangled steel and concrete, plastics from office furniture and equipment, fuels from elevator hydraulics, cars and other sources are all in great supply in the six-story basement area where the two towers collapsed.

Water alone rarely can quench this kind of fire, which will burn as long as there is adequate fuel and oxygen and as long as heat cannot escape, fire experts said." With Water and Sweat, Fighting the Most Stubborn Fire (http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/fightingthefiresinthewtcdebrispiles)

Tom,

You must be kidding? Obviously you didn't major in physics -- or even study science in college.

The color of the molten metal in the photos above is not in the least bit deceiving. It is straightforward. This bright incandescent color indicates a temperature of at least 1800 F -- and above. I will post the temperature chart so you can see for yourself.

The statements I have bolded in your post are well known -- no surprise. The NIST posted this nonsense as an afterthought to their report -- which BTW completely ignored the evidence of molten steel. Some of the early evidence had even appeared as an appendix to the previous FEMA study.

These statements by NIST are an insult to our intelligence -- since it is obvious that "the condition of the steel in the wreckage" was absolutely and totally relevant to the collapse. Of course it was! An honest forensic study would have scrutinized the steel in the pile to determine what caused the collapse! This is a no brainer. Ground Zero was a crime scene. In cases of fires it is also standard procedure to test for residues -- especially given the many reports of explosions.

Was this done? Of course not! Instead, the evidence was destroyed. The debris was carted away and sold ASAP. Even the FEMA experts were prevented from studying the site -- except for one scheduled and chaperoned walk through. Destruction of evidence is itself a crime. For Chris sake -- this is sophomoric -- not rocket science. Any moderately intelligent high school kid could figure this out.

The other statement is also an insult. "Under certain circumstances it is conceivable for some of the steel to have melted..." This is total hogwash. It might happen in the world of fantasy -- but not on planet earth. Not in the physical world we inhabit. Does anyone here speak the language of science?

Bronco Bob continues to rave on with looney ideas about rust melting steel, which is more hogwash. Come on, people. Oxygen is required for rust -- yet there was very little oxygen under the pile. This is why the fires flared up many times as they removed debris -- which allowed oxygen to reach the smoldering fires.

Yes there were fuels in the pile -- but nothing capable of reaching temperatures of 2700 F. Not even close. This is basic science -- nothing fancy.

Whatever caused the fires happened before and during the collapse -- not after.

Tom and many others on this board are simply in denial -- end of story. You won't or can't face the truth because it's uncomfortable. Golly Gee -- how lame can you get?! MHG

[mhgaffney]

my apologies for the double post -- my computer moves like a snail.

Bronco Bob:

Your claim that the sulfur from the gypsum caused the eutectic reaction in the pile and melted the steel cannot be correct -- because this reaction requires a lot of oxygen. Which was lacking in the pile.

One of the ingredients of thermate is aluminum oxide -- which provides the oxygen for the cutting reaction.

Aluminum smoke is one of the by products - which explains why we saw white smoke trailing from many of the falling pieces of steel on 9/11. In short, the videos of the collapse offer further support for the use of thermate.

[mhgaffney]

Here is the temperature color chart:

http://i18.photobucket.com/albums/b108/janedoe444/trouble/34_Jones_Temp.jpg

[alkemical]

You can delete a double post

[W*GS]

Does anyone here speak the language of science?

You certainly don't.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

So I ask the question again...
Or is the answer "just make fun of people who bring it up, and call it a day.

At the end of the day, this is the only arrow they have left in their quiver.

[Tom H.]

How do you know that the melted metal is in fact iron in this picture. Couldn't it be something else?

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/attachment.php?attachmentid=21168&stc=1&d=1204543468

You might look into who wrote those things I posted earlier. Hint, it wasn't me.

John J. Lentini, CFEI, F-ABC - B.A. in the Natural Sciences (Chemistry, Biology, Physics), New College, Sarasota, FL, June 1973.
Postgraduate courses in Chemistry and Criminal Investigation at the University of Akron, OH, 1973-74.
Twenty credit hours Graduate Level Chemistry, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, 1979-80.
Short Course in Instrumental Analysis, F.B.I. Academy, Quantico, VA, 1976.
Seminar on Arson and Fraud Investigation, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 1979.
Seminar on Gas Fires and Explosions, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 1980.
33rd, 35th, 37th, 39th, 40th and 42nd International Association of Arson Investigators Seminars, 1982-91.
Southeast Arson Seminar, University of Georgia, 1979-84, 1996, 2002.
1st, 2nd and 3rd Int’l Symposia on Recent Advances in Arson Analysis and Detection, 1982, 88, 90.
American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS), Annual Meetings, 1988-2005.
National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Life Safety Code Seminar, Nashville, TN, 1991.
IAAI Electrical Fire Investigation Seminar, Atlanta, GA 1991.
AAFS Workshop on Contemporary Issues of Fire Investigation and Analysis (Panelist) Seattle, WA, 1995.
FBI International Symposium on the Forensic Aspects of Arson Investigations, Fairfax, VA, 1995.
Georgia Fire Investigators Association (GFIA) Seminar on Appliance Fires, Decatur, GA, 1997.
Workshop on Fire Investigations, Forensic Science Society, Harrogate, England, 1997.
Anglo-American Fire Investigation Conference, Brunel University, Uxbridge, England, 1997.
Forensic Fire Engineering and Failure Analysis, Society of Fire Protection Engineers (SFPE), 1998.
International Fire Investigation Conference, Brunel University, Uxbridge, England, 1999.
Fire Litigation Seminar, National Association of Fire Investigators (NAFI)/NFPA, Sarasota, FL, 2000.
Lightning 101, Global Atmospherics, Inc., Atlanta, GA, 2000.
Technical Working Group on Fire and Explosion Investigations, 2nd, 3rd and 4th Annual Symposia,
Orlando, FL, 2002 -2004.
Fire Dynamics Seminar, NFPA Technical Committee on Fire Investigations, Baltimore, MD, 2003.
International Symposium on Fire Investigation, Fire Service College, Moreton, England, 2004.
10th International Fire Science & Engineering Conference (Interflam), Edinburgh, Scotland, 2004.
Introduction to Fire Dynamics Simulator and Smokeview, SFPE, Chicago, IL, 2004.
International Fire Investigation Conference, Brunel University, Uxbridge, England, 2005.

NIST investigators and experts from the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) and the Structural Engineers Association of New York (SEONY)—who inspected the WTC steel at the WTC site and the salvage yards

[W*GS]

At the end of the day, this is the only arrow they have left in their quiver.

Bull****.

[The Lone Bolt]

How do you know that the melted metal is in fact iron in this picture. Couldn't it be something else?

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/attachment.php?attachmentid=21168&stc=1&d=1204543468

You might look into who wrote those things I posted earlier. Hint, it wasn't me.

John J. Lentini, CFEI, F-ABC - B.A. in the Natural Sciences (Chemistry, Biology, Physics), New College, Sarasota, FL, June 1973.
Postgraduate courses in Chemistry and Criminal Investigation at the University of Akron, OH, 1973-74.
Twenty credit hours Graduate Level Chemistry, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, 1979-80.
Short Course in Instrumental Analysis, F.B.I. Academy, Quantico, VA, 1976.
Seminar on Arson and Fraud Investigation, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 1979.
Seminar on Gas Fires and Explosions, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 1980.
33rd, 35th, 37th, 39th, 40th and 42nd International Association of Arson Investigators Seminars, 1982-91.
Southeast Arson Seminar, University of Georgia, 1979-84, 1996, 2002.
1st, 2nd and 3rd Int’l Symposia on Recent Advances in Arson Analysis and Detection, 1982, 88, 90.
American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS), Annual Meetings, 1988-2005.
National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Life Safety Code Seminar, Nashville, TN, 1991.
IAAI Electrical Fire Investigation Seminar, Atlanta, GA 1991.
AAFS Workshop on Contemporary Issues of Fire Investigation and Analysis (Panelist) Seattle, WA, 1995.
FBI International Symposium on the Forensic Aspects of Arson Investigations, Fairfax, VA, 1995.
Georgia Fire Investigators Association (GFIA) Seminar on Appliance Fires, Decatur, GA, 1997.
Workshop on Fire Investigations, Forensic Science Society, Harrogate, England, 1997.
Anglo-American Fire Investigation Conference, Brunel University, Uxbridge, England, 1997.
Forensic Fire Engineering and Failure Analysis, Society of Fire Protection Engineers (SFPE), 1998.
International Fire Investigation Conference, Brunel University, Uxbridge, England, 1999.
Fire Litigation Seminar, National Association of Fire Investigators (NAFI)/NFPA, Sarasota, FL, 2000.
Lightning 101, Global Atmospherics, Inc., Atlanta, GA, 2000.
Technical Working Group on Fire and Explosion Investigations, 2nd, 3rd and 4th Annual Symposia,
Orlando, FL, 2002 -2004.
Fire Dynamics Seminar, NFPA Technical Committee on Fire Investigations, Baltimore, MD, 2003.
International Symposium on Fire Investigation, Fire Service College, Moreton, England, 2004.
10th International Fire Science & Engineering Conference (Interflam), Edinburgh, Scotland, 2004.
Introduction to Fire Dynamics Simulator and Smokeview, SFPE, Chicago, IL, 2004.
International Fire Investigation Conference, Brunel University, Uxbridge, England, 2005.

NIST investigators and experts from the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) and the Structural Engineers Association of New York (SEONY)—who inspected the WTC steel at the WTC site and the salvage yards



Forget it. Gaff's standard answer is that all of these folks are either in on the conspiracy or "too afraid to tell the truth."

Of course Gaff has consistently demonstrated that he is afraid to debate such authorities.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

No one -- and certainly not Beerslugger -- has explained how enough heat was generated in the rubble pile to melt steel. His above claim about "eutectic" reactions is more looney than even the wildest 911 theories -- and I agree that some of them are wacky.

I challenge Beerslugger to produce even one explanation for a eutectic reaction in the rubble pile. He won't be able to do it. No one has.

There is also a major problem with Beerslugger's slag argument. We have hard evidence -- photographic and video evidence from 9/11 -- showing molten metal pouring out of the side of WTC 2 -- even before the tower fell.

I'm posting a photo of this -- below -- and there are many other even better shots available on the web. If you try looking - you will find them easily. As you can see -- with your own eyes this molten metal I deal with molten metal and you most certainly don't considering the closest you ever have gotten to it is some out of focus picture that one of your loony Net conspiracy nuts told you it was so.

It's also obvious you have absolutely no training or education whatsoever in metallurgy, none.

There is absolutely no proof of any piles of molten metal (pictures, scientists who were on scene, etc...) in the rubble of the towers. There is however, page after page of proof that you've been indoctrinated into the most unbelievable fantasy imaginable (the U.S. government attacking the trade centers with nuclear weapons) by your compadres in wacko land.

[Florida_Bronco]

You know Slug, me and you don't agree on much, but I'm definetly in your corner on this one.

Of course he is. He's doing nothing but spewing a bukkakke of stupid and LABF's right there getting a face full of it.

That mental picture is gross and funny all at the same time. ROFL! Ha! LOL Hilarious!

[mhgaffney]

How do you know that the melted metal is in fact iron in this picture. Couldn't it be something else?

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/attachment.php?attachmentid=21168&stc=1&d=1204543468

You might look into who wrote those things I posted earlier. Hint, it wasn't me.

John J. Lentini, CFEI, F-ABC - B.A. in the Natural Sciences (Chemistry, Biology, Physics), New College, Sarasota, FL, June 1973.
Postgraduate courses in Chemistry and Criminal Investigation at the University of Akron, OH, 1973-74.
Twenty credit hours Graduate Level Chemistry, Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, 1979-80.
Short Course in Instrumental Analysis, F.B.I. Academy, Quantico, VA, 1976.
Seminar on Arson and Fraud Investigation, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 1979.
Seminar on Gas Fires and Explosions, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 1980.
33rd, 35th, 37th, 39th, 40th and 42nd International Association of Arson Investigators Seminars, 1982-91.
Southeast Arson Seminar, University of Georgia, 1979-84, 1996, 2002.
1st, 2nd and 3rd Int’l Symposia on Recent Advances in Arson Analysis and Detection, 1982, 88, 90.
American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS), Annual Meetings, 1988-2005.
National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Life Safety Code Seminar, Nashville, TN, 1991.
IAAI Electrical Fire Investigation Seminar, Atlanta, GA 1991.
AAFS Workshop on Contemporary Issues of Fire Investigation and Analysis (Panelist) Seattle, WA, 1995.
FBI International Symposium on the Forensic Aspects of Arson Investigations, Fairfax, VA, 1995.
Georgia Fire Investigators Association (GFIA) Seminar on Appliance Fires, Decatur, GA, 1997.
Workshop on Fire Investigations, Forensic Science Society, Harrogate, England, 1997.
Anglo-American Fire Investigation Conference, Brunel University, Uxbridge, England, 1997.
Forensic Fire Engineering and Failure Analysis, Society of Fire Protection Engineers (SFPE), 1998.
International Fire Investigation Conference, Brunel University, Uxbridge, England, 1999.
Fire Litigation Seminar, National Association of Fire Investigators (NAFI)/NFPA, Sarasota, FL, 2000.
Lightning 101, Global Atmospherics, Inc., Atlanta, GA, 2000.
Technical Working Group on Fire and Explosion Investigations, 2nd, 3rd and 4th Annual Symposia,
Orlando, FL, 2002 -2004.
Fire Dynamics Seminar, NFPA Technical Committee on Fire Investigations, Baltimore, MD, 2003.
International Symposium on Fire Investigation, Fire Service College, Moreton, England, 2004.
10th International Fire Science & Engineering Conference (Interflam), Edinburgh, Scotland, 2004.
Introduction to Fire Dynamics Simulator and Smokeview, SFPE, Chicago, IL, 2004.
International Fire Investigation Conference, Brunel University, Uxbridge, England, 2005.

NIST investigators and experts from the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) and the Structural Engineers Association of New York (SEONY)—who inspected the WTC steel at the WTC site and the salvage yards

Could the incandescent metal be something else?

I am open to all suggestions -- but given that each of the WTC towers contained 90,000 tons of steel -- don't you think we should consider the possibility that the molten metal was from the superstructure, i.e was melted steel?

In fact, Steel was the primary structural metal used in the WTC.

We are also impelled to consider this because of the iron - rich spheres. Surely you know --that iron is the principal constituent of steel. So why are you so reluctant to consider this?

BTW, it was not only Jones who found the spheres -- at least two other studies of the WTC dust also found them -- and they also confirmed the presence of iron. The method was X-ray energy dispersive spectroscopy (X-EDS).

Many of the spheres were found to be hollow, and their spherical shape was clearly the result of surface tension, indicating that the iron had been in a molten state. This means the iron had been heated to 2800 F+


So what caused this? remember, the dust was created during the collapse -- not afterward. So the iron rich spheres were NOT the result of some eutectic process that happened later, in the pile. No, the spheres were created before/during the collapse.

This hard evidence in the dust -- points like an arrow to high temperature explosives. Having come this far -- after confirming the presence of iron -- Jones took the X-ray analysis one step further -- using the X-ray method -- and found the exact signature of thermate.

He found all of the elements in the exact proportions. This is what is known as a signature.

I'd like to hear some comment from you, or Bronco Bob, or Beerslugger -- about this empirical evidence. The picture could not be more complete.

Instead of attacking me, how about dealing with the evidence?

[TDmvp]

Originally Posted by orangeatheist View Post
Of course he is. He's doing nothing but spewing a bukkakke of stupid and LABF's right there getting a face full of it.


RoF / Gala awards worthy .... great line orange...

[mhgaffney]

Tom H:

I don't recall seeing you on here before. I suggest you check out my critique of the NIST report -- if you haven't seen it:

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18999.htm

[W*GS]

Snort.

Obviously, gaffney has abandoned his "mini-nukes" crap - because in his desperate attempts to find something that doesn't have the fatal flaws of the thermate theory, he managed to come up with something even more laughable. So, now he's back to thermate.

He cannot answer

http://911myths.com/html/traces_of_thermate_at_the_wtc.html

Particularly:

Conclusion

It seems we can’t be completely sure that these samples are from the WTC, and there’s no way to accurately assess whether they might have been contaminated.

The elements that Professor Jones reports finding have already been discovered by other WTC dust surveys, who for the most part don’t seem surprised by their presence. It seems likely that, in all cases, there are other WTC sources that can deliver far more of these elements than you would ever see from thermite/ thermate.

There’s also no clear evidence that the suspect elements are available in proportions that match what you’d expect from a thermite/ thermate reaction. And some products you might imagine would be produced, aren’t reported at all.

Proof of thermite/ thermate, then? No. Just assumptions, and avoidance of alternative explanations for the presence of these elements. That’s just fine when you’re telling an audience what they want to believe, but convincing the rest of the world is going to take considerably more evidence than is displayed here.

[Bronco Bob]

my apologies for the double post -- my computer moves like a snail.

Bronco Bob:

Your claim that the sulfur from the gypsum caused the eutectic reaction in the pile and melted the steel cannot be correct -- because this reaction requires a lot of oxygen. Which was lacking in the pile.



No, what I was saying in that wallboard is made of gypsum, which is calcium
sulphate, CaSO4.2H2O. There would be wallboard down in the rubble pile
along with the steel. As the steel began to rust, it would generate heat,
any combustion process generates heat - even a slow one like rusting.
As the steel is in a confined space and insulated the heat would not
escape. This is similar to a compost heap where rotting vegetation
generates heat. As the heat in the rubble pile increases the gypsum
would break down and the sulfur would mix would the steel, which would
lower the melting point of the steel. Unlike a carbon based fire, where
CO2 is a gas and displaces oxygen, rust, Fe2O3, is a solid and does
not displace the air. As oxygen contact the iron and combines with the
iron it actually creates a vacuum, drawing in more air. Thus it is a self
sustaining process and as the iron heats up, the reaction proceeds
faster and even more heat is generated and more air is drawn in.
This is how a rubble pile containing steel and gypsum can self ignite
and how there could be molten steel in the rubble pile. And that is
how there would be oxygen in the rubble pile, the rusting steel
is pulling it in.




One of the ingredients of thermate is aluminum oxide -- which provides the oxygen for the cutting reaction.


You have it backwards. Thermite consists of iron oxide, Fe3O4 or Fe2O3,
and powdered metallic aluminum. When the thermite ignites, the oxygen
in the iron oxide combines with the aluminum to form aluminum oxide,
Al2O3, and metallic iron.



Aluminum smoke is one of the by products - which explains why we saw white smoke trailing from many of the falling pieces of steel on 9/11. In short, the videos of the collapse offer further support for the use of thermate.

Any number of things could produce a white trail on a falling piece of debris.
There is no proof that this was even smoke.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Of course he is. He's doing nothing but spewing a bukkakke of stupid and LABF's right there getting a face full of it.

You win the blue ribbon for most clueless right-wing handjob on the Internet.

[W*GS]

He's doing nothing but spewing a bukkakke of stupid and LABF's right there getting a face full of it.

Rep. And word!

[Florida_Bronco]

You win the blue ribbon for most clueless right-wing handjob on the Internet.

Is this your SOP for anytime that you are challenged on your takes?

Seriously dude, this **** gets old, plus it's a cop out and you know it.

I went back and checked through some of OrangeAtheist's posts and didn't find anything that would lead me to believe his a "right wing handjob." Hell, not only did I see a couple attacks on Bush from him, but his spiritual views (or lack thereof) would seem to lend a very serious conflict of interests with "right wing handjobs."

But regardless it was just another bull**** attack on your part. You did the same to me, couldn't provide any proof when challenged, and I've seen you do the same to other people, even newbies who have very little posts in the WRP room.

I hope you realize just how much credibility you lose everytime you pull this stunt. That, and I hope you know that you aren't fooling anyone either.

[/rant]

[DBruleU]

Is this your SOP for anytime that you are challenged on your takes?

Seriously dude, this **** gets old, plus it's a cop out and you know it.

I went back and checked through some of OrangeAtheist's posts and didn't find anything that would lead me to believe his a "right wing handjob." Hell, not only did I see a couple attacks on Bush from him, but his spiritual views (or lack thereof) would seem to lend a very serious conflict of interests with "right wing handjobs."

But regardless it was just another bull**** attack on your part. You did the same to me, couldn't provide any proof when challenged, and I've seen you do the same to other people, even newbies who have very little posts in the WRP room.

I hope you realize just how much credibility you lose everytime you pull this stunt. That, and I hope you know that you aren't fooling anyone either.

[/rant]

Rep.

It's pretty scary how hypocritical he really is...especially when he runs around here calling everyone else a hypocrit. The irony never ends with LABF's daily crap.

[The Lone Bolt]

Rep.

It's pretty scary how hypocritical he really is...especially when he runs around here calling everyone else a hypocrit. The irony never ends with LABF's daily crap.

Well as a hard-core political extremist who only perceives people in rigid, black-and-white stereotypes, anyone who deviates even slightly from LABF's radical views automatically becomes a "bush supporter" or a "neo-con."

[24champ]

You win the blue ribbon for most clueless right-wing handjob on the Internet.

That Smirkingchimp.com kool aid must be good...

[orangeatheist]

Well as a hard-core political extremist who only perceives people in rigid, black-and-white stereotypes, anyone who deviates even slightly from LABF's radical views automatically becomes a "bush supporter" or a "neo-con."

I've got the bugger on "ignore" so I didn't know I stepped on one of his corns with my post. Easy to do. Not surprising. But I didn't know he'd responded until I saw his reply quoted in another person's post.

The day I take ANYTHING printed by LABF seriously (including his evaluations of my political leanings) is the day you can take my rationality and skepticism and throw them out with the garbage. It'll be the same day that I'll join the Gaffe bandwagon and believe mininukes were used on 9/11 and that aliens from outerspace helped bring the towers down with a laser.

[goldengopher1976]

Only thing I got out of this was: the CIA is out of control.
NEWSFLASH: everybody in the Fed Govt knows this.
Other NEWSFLASH: so is the DoD, the FBI, the SS, the State Dept and the IRS.
But given how pathetic our amateur politicos are, maybe its for the best.

9/11 is transmogrifying into the "grassy knoll" of this generation.

Can't help but think of Calvin's box...he and Hobbes got into so much trouble with that thing. Do you think the conspiracy theorists somehow managed to get Calvin's box? Is that what they're using? A little bit of grassy knoll...a little bit of the molten metal from the WTC...turn the dial, and VOILA!

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Is this your SOP for anytime that you are challenged on your takes?

Nope.

My last post wasn't intended to be a response to his "challenge" - it was a response to his little classless ad hominem attack.

Funny how wingnuts like him (and LoneBolt, DBruleU, 24Champ and the rest of the right-wing circle jerk crew) can dish it out but they can't take it when it gets personal.



I went back and checked through some of OrangeAtheist's posts and didn't find anything that would lead me to believe his a "right wing handjob." Hell, not only did I see a couple attacks on Bush from him, but his spiritual views (or lack thereof) would seem to lend a very serious conflict of interests with "right wing handjobs."

Then you didn't check far back enough. He is/was a Bush supporter and a supporter of the war.

But regardless it was just another bull**** attack on your part. You did the same to me, couldn't provide any proof when challenged, and I've seen you do the same to other people, even newbies who have very little posts in the WRP room.

:bs:

I know I'm not the only one here who has "mistaken" you for a right-winger.

I hope you realize just how much credibility you lose everytime you pull this stunt. That, and I hope you know that you aren't fooling anyone either.

[/rant]

Ha!

Credibility with whom?

A bunch of right-wing half-wits who lost whatever credibility they might have had when they voted for Bush in 2004?

That's a knee slapper. ROFL!

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

I've got the bugger on "ignore" so I didn't know I stepped on one of his corns with my post. Easy to do. Not surprising. But I didn't know he'd responded until I saw his reply quoted in another person's post.

The day I take ANYTHING printed by LABF seriously (including his evaluations of my political leanings) is the day you can take my rationality and skepticism and throw them out with the garbage. It'll be the same day that I'll join the Gaffe bandwagon and believe mininukes were used on 9/11 and that aliens from outerspace helped bring the towers down with a laser.

You have me on ignore because I challenged you re: the real reasons for your obsession with religion, and because I exposed the false claims re: "plagiarism" and "altering sources" you were throwing against the wall in the hope that something might stick.

I have to LMAO @ your belief that the foregoing ad hominem drivel about space aliens amounts to some sort of actual rebuttal to the article Gaffney posted.

You are probably the most intellectual dishonest bullsh*tter I have ever encountered on this board - and that's saying a lot, given the other contestants.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Rep.

It's pretty scary how hypocritical he really is...especially when he runs around here calling everyone else a hypocrit.(sic) The irony never ends with LABF's daily crap.

You make your hero GeeDubya sound like a MENSA member by comparison.

Giving your buddy OA a dose of his own medicine isn't "hypocrisy."

Had I personally attacked him first, then you would have a valid point, but such was not the case.

You right-wingers can always dish it out, but you can't take it.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

That Smirkingchimp.com kool aid must be good...

http://www.bartcop.com/gop-kool-aid06.jpg

[Florida_Bronco]

Then you didn't check far back enough. He is/was a Bush supporter and a supporter of the war.

Got some proof?

:bs:

I know I'm not the only one here who has "mistaken" you for a right-winger.

Yeah, actually you are. You've been the only one I can recall trying to spin any of my posts into support for Bush, especially when there is nothing on this forum to back up your assertion that I am "pro-Bush."

Ha!

Credibility with whom?

A bunch of right-wing half-wits who lost whatever credibility they might have had when they voted for Bush in 2004?

That's a knee slapper. ROFL!

Just who here takes you seriously?

[24champ]

Funny how wingnuts like him (and LoneBolt, DBruleU, 24Champ and the rest of the right-wing circle jerk crew) can dish it out but they can't take it when it gets personal.


Saying that you drink kool-aid from smirkingchimp.com is getting personal?Ha!

WOW.

[The Lone Bolt]

Funny how wingnuts like him (and LoneBolt, DBruleU, 24Champ and the rest of the right-wing circle jerk crew) can dish it out but they can't take it when it gets personal.

"Personal"? When did I ever call you (or anyone else here for that matter) any names?

I think my observation that you see people in stereotypic terms is fair and not meant as an insult. And you certainly do have extreme political views. Is that your idea of "personal?"

BTW suggesting that I can "dish it out but can't take it" is absurd. I've been called every name in the book on this forum and I've yet to respond in kind.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Yeah, actually you are. You've been the only one I can recall trying to spin any of my posts into support for Bush, especially when there is nothing on this forum to back up your assertion that I am "pro-Bush."

You must have borrowed W*GS' playbook.

Are you now denying you voted for Bush?

Just who here takes you seriously?

People with more than two brain cells to rub together, generally (for example, people who were able to see that going into Iraq and giving Dim Son a second term were bad ideas.)

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

"Personal"? When did I ever call you (or anyone else here for that matter) any names?


I was referring to the pivot man in the right-wing circle jerk going on here, viz., OrangeAtheist.

[Florida_Bronco]

You must have borrowed W*GS' playbook.

Are you now denying you voted for Bush?

Absolutely.

Prove otherwise.

[RocBronc]

One thing I just don't get...

Without getting into the scientific stuff, what you're saying when you put forth these alternate theories about 9/11 is that somehow Bush and others secretly plotted to kill 3,000 of their own citizens. Do you realize how evil a person would have to be to do this???
Look, I understand that many of you don't like, and probably hate Bush... (Heck, I'm a conservative and I don't really like him--- because he really isn't that conservative) and think he's damaged our country a great deal. I get it, but do you honestly think that Bush was capable of doing this ?

As I alluded to earlier, I'm a very conservative person politically... (I'm listening to Rush Limbaugh as I'm typing) and I didn't like Bill Clinton at ALL as president. However, there is NO way I could ever imagine that Bill Clinton or any other Liberal politician, could deliberately do what your claiming Bush did on 9/11...

Like I said at the beginning of my post... I just don't get it...

[W*GS]

Welcome to the world of the 9/11 "Truth" Movement...

A bunch of twisted dorks...

[DBruleU]

It's amazing how they can claim Bush is the dumbest president we have ever had, yet he somehow has orchastrated, and kept quiet thousands of people remotely involved in this plot. He's a dumbass of epic proportions according to you guys...yet he's outsmarted everyone...

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

It's amazing how they can claim Bush is the dumbest president we have ever had, yet he somehow has orchastrated,(sic) and kept quiet thousands of people remotely involved in this plot. He's a dumbass of epic proportions according to you guys...yet he's outsmarted everyone...

It's amazing how you keep trying to work this same straw man argument.

No one has said that Bush himself orchestrated anything.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Absolutely.

Prove otherwise.

Did you vote for Dubya? Be honest!


No I did not, in either year. Now I was supporting him in 2000, but in 2004 I was not too keen on either him or Kerry.

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpost.php?p=1847738&postcount=111

Hmmm...."supporting" him but not voting for him?

Sounds kinda fishy.

[Florida_Bronco]

http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpost.php?p=1847738&postcount=111

Hmmm...."supporting" him but not voting for him?

Sounds kinda fishy.

Real fishy, considering I wasn't old enough to cast a ballot in 2000. Ha!

Funny that you also cut out the second part of the post stating I did NOT vote or support him in 2004.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Real fishy, considering I wasn't old enough to cast a ballot in 2000. Ha!

Now you tell me.

Funny that you also cut out the second part of the post stating I did NOT vote or support him in 2004.

Your admission that you 'supported' him in 2000 is enough to call your claims about not being a Bush supporter into question.

[mhgaffney]

It's amazing how they can claim Bush is the dumbest president we have ever had, yet he somehow has orchastrated, and kept quiet thousands of people remotely involved in this plot. He's a dumbass of epic proportions according to you guys...yet he's outsmarted everyone...

As LABF pointed out -- no one has claimed this. GW Bush is only a puppet. The people who run America prefer to operate out of the spotlight.

In fact, this is the only way they can operate. They cannot survive the light of day -- which is our cause for hope -- in fact it's the only hope left for our nation.

[mhgaffney]

One thing I just don't get...

Without getting into the scientific stuff, what you're saying when you put forth these alternate theories about 9/11 is that somehow Bush and others secretly plotted to kill 3,000 of their own citizens. Do you realize how evil a person would have to be to do this???
Look, I understand that many of you don't like, and probably hate Bush... (Heck, I'm a conservative and I don't really like him--- because he really isn't that conservative) and think he's damaged our country a great deal. I get it, but do you honestly think that Bush was capable of doing this ?

As I alluded to earlier, I'm a very conservative person politically... (I'm listening to Rush Limbaugh as I'm typing) and I didn't like Bill Clinton at ALL as president. However, there is NO way I could ever imagine that Bill Clinton or any other Liberal politician, could deliberately do what your claiming Bush did on 9/11...

Like I said at the beginning of my post... I just don't get it...

I am very sympathetic to Americans who find it hard to believe our leaders could do this. It's so diabolical that the mind of a normal person rebels at the very thought.

Are you willing to read? Check out this paper I did last year -- about how the US is using radiological weapons -- destroying the planet with poisons that will remain active for billions of years. Our leaders have scared us with warnings that terrorists will one day use similar radiological weapons against America -- yet our own leaders used them in the first and second Gulf War -- and also in Afghanistan. And they continue to do so.

The depleted uranium we have already released into the environment is killing our own troops -- in addition to people in the Mideast -- and before it's over will probably kill millions of innocent people -- including many children.

This paper has been vetted and endorsed by several DU experts. It will make your flesh crawl. If our leaders could do this -- they would not even hesitate to murder 3,000 Americans to further their political agenda for the world.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18242.htm

[W*GS]

And here comes gaffney with his delusions of saving us from the evil, dark forces that truly rule the world.

You're one pathetic ****, gaffney.

[Florida_Bronco]

Now you tell me.



Your admission that you 'supported' him in 2000 is enough to call your claims about not being a Bush supporter into question.

You can call into question whatever you like, but the fact remains you can't prove it.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

You can call into question whatever you like, but the fact remains you can't prove it.

I just provided the proof.

You claimed you were not a Bush supporter, and I have you on record saying you supported him in 2000.

[Florida_Bronco]

I just provided the proof.

You claimed you were not a Bush supporter, and I have you on record saying you supported him in 2000.

Supporting him prior to his election is not proof of current support. You cannot prove current support.

[mhgaffney]

No, what I was saying in that wallboard is made of gypsum, which is calcium
sulphate, CaSO4.2H2O. There would be wallboard down in the rubble pile
along with the steel. As the steel began to rust, it would generate heat,
any combustion process generates heat - even a slow one like rusting.
As the steel is in a confined space and insulated the heat would not
escape. This is similar to a compost heap where rotting vegetation
generates heat. As the heat in the rubble pile increases the gypsum
would break down and the sulfur would mix would the steel, which would
lower the melting point of the steel.

You have it backwards. Thermite consists of iron oxide, Fe3O4 or Fe2O3,
and powdered metallic aluminum. When the thermite ignites, the oxygen
in the iron oxide combines with the aluminum to form aluminum oxide,
Al2O3, and metallic iron.


Any number of things could produce a white trail on a falling piece of debris. There is no proof that this was even smoke.

Yes, I mis spoke. Sorry. The aluminum oxide is the by-product.

As for the sulfate in the gypsum -- thermate uses sulfur -- not sulfate.

Jones found elemental sulfur in the WTC dust sample -- not sulfate. These are distinctly different -- but as I'm not a chemist I will have to research this further and get back.

Your theory that rust in the WTC rubble pile produced heat sufficient to melt steel does not withstand scrutiny. The presence of iron rich spheres in the WT dust indicate iron was melted during the collapse -- not afterward.

Another study of the WTC dust by RJ Lee Laboratory also found evidence that lead had boiled -- and then condensed on rock wool fibers -- used in insulation.

The boiling point of lead is 3,180°F. So did rust also cause this? No way. The lead melted during the collapse -- not after.

Jones also submitted a FOIA to the US Gelogical Survey -- and received the unpublished data from their WTC dust study. The Geological Survey found tiny spheres of molybdenum -- in the dust. Which also had been melted during the collapse.

Molybdenum is an extremely hard metal -- with a high melting point of 4700 F. So are you saying rust also melted this? How? Remember the tiny molybdenum spheres were in the dust -- hence the moly melted during the collapse -- not later in the pile.

For more details check out the latest Jones paper (January 08) at

http://www.journalof911studies.com/

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Are you willing to read? Check out this paper I did last year -- about how the US is using radiological weapons -- destroying the planet with poisons that will remain active for billions of years. You are completely wacked.

[mhgaffney]

So "Wacked" is the limit of your vocabulary?

You'll have to do a lot better than that.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

So "Wacked" is the limit of your vocabulary?

You'll have to do a lot better than that.Do better than what? Anyone who claims that something will be here BILLIONS of years later is wacked, plain and simple.

[mhgaffney]

I was stating a simple fact -- not exaggerating.

If you run a quick google search using key words "depleted uranium" and "half life" you can confirm that the depleted uranium poison we have spread over the Mideast will be with us for all of time.

Certainly for the entire future of the human race -- and of life on this earth.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

I was stating a simple fact -- not exaggerating.

If you run a quick google search using key words "depleted uranium" and "half life" you can confirm that the depleted uranium poison we have spread over the Mideast will be with us for all of time.

Certainly for the entire future of the human race -- and of life on this earth.I posted a thread about depleted uranium (Iraq) here probably two years ago with specifics. No science I know of says the world will be poisoned by depleted uranium 4.5 billion years from now (not like anyone could know anyway).

[mhgaffney]

I posted a thread about depleted uranium (Iraq) here probably two years ago with specifics. No science I know of says the world will be poisoned by depleted uranium 4.5 billion years from now (not like anyone could know anyway).

Here is a description of depleted uranium from the federation of American Scientists. Are they credible enough for you?

Notice the final line.

So why, Beerslugger, couldn't take the time to run a simple google on this? That takes what? All of six seconds?

Answer: because you are a lazy slob.

MHG


Depleted Uranium

In military applications, when alloyed, Depleted Uranium [DU] is ideal for use in armor penetrators. These solid metal projectiles have the speed, mass and physical properties to perform exceptionally well against armored targets. DU provides a substantial performance advantage, well above other competing materials. This allows DU penetrators to defeat an armored target at a significantly greater distance. Also, DU's density and physical properties make it ideal for use as armor plate. DU has been used in weapon systems for many years in both applications.
Depleted uranium results from the enriching of natural uranium for use in nuclear reactors. Natural uranium is a slightly radioactive metal that is present in most rocks and soils as well as in many rivers and sea water. Natural uranium consists primarily of a mixture of two isotopes (forms) of uranium, Uranium-235 (U235) and Uranium-238 (U238), in the proportion of about 0.7 and 99.3 percent, respectively. Nuclear reactors require U235 to produce energy, therefore, the natural uranium has to be enriched to obtain the isotope U235 by removing a large part of the U238. Uranium-238 becomes DU, which is 0.7 times as radioactive as natural uranium. Since DU has a half-life of 4.5 billion years, there is very little decay of those DU materials.


http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/du.htm

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Here is a description of depleted uranium from the federation of American Scientists. Are they credible enough for you?

Notice the final line.

So why, Beerslugger, couldn't take the time to run a simple google on this? That takes what? All of six seconds?

Answer: because you are a lazy slob.

MHG


Depleted Uranium

In military applications, when alloyed, Depleted Uranium [DU] is ideal for use in armor penetrators. These solid metal projectiles have the speed, mass and physical properties to perform exceptionally well against armored targets. DU provides a substantial performance advantage, well above other competing materials. This allows DU penetrators to defeat an armored target at a significantly greater distance. Also, DU's density and physical properties make it ideal for use as armor plate. DU has been used in weapon systems for many years in both applications.
Depleted uranium results from the enriching of natural uranium for use in nuclear reactors. Natural uranium is a slightly radioactive metal that is present in most rocks and soils as well as in many rivers and sea water. Natural uranium consists primarily of a mixture of two isotopes (forms) of uranium, Uranium-235 (U235) and Uranium-238 (U238), in the proportion of about 0.7 and 99.3 percent, respectively. Nuclear reactors require U235 to produce energy, therefore, the natural uranium has to be enriched to obtain the isotope U235 by removing a large part of the U238. Uranium-238 becomes DU, which is 0.7 times as radioactive as natural uranium. Since DU has a half-life of 4.5 billion years, there is very little decay of those DU materials.


http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/du.htm

I posted these facts long ago. Nowhere does any of them or anyone say the earth will be poisoned by depleted uranium 4.5 billion years from now. You just take a number and proclaim BS based on your "the U.S. government is Satan" hole you seem to live in.

To even pretend to know what would happen to DU or anything else billions of years from now is assnine.

All you had to say was DU has a half life of 4.5 billion years (without the fantasy world embellishments).

[mhgaffney]

Embellishments?

If you read my paper (which you didn't) you would know that the cancer rates in Iraq went off the charts -- after the first Gulf War -- and the situation has only gotten worse in the years since -- given the US sanctions that killed a half million Iraqi children -- not to mention Clinton's massive bombing of the country -- and attempts (after 1995) to kill Saddam Hussein.

I was no fan of Saddam -- but the policy of regime change that started under Clinton in 1995 greatly hampered the efforts of UNSCOM, the team led by Scott Ritter that was seeking out and destroying all WMD in the country.

Despite the fact that Clinton ordered out the inspectors in 1998 before Operaton Desert Fox -- a bombing campaign aimed at killing Saddam -- -- UNSCOM, according to Ritter, still found and destroyed 99% of Iraq's WMD programs.

We also know that later Saddam deconstructed the rest. In 2003 he had zip -- as was confirmed by Mr Duelfer -- who headed up the WMD search program for the US CIA. (Don't believe me? Check Tenet's memoir.)

The present issue is this: So why if we went to war in 2003 to destroy imaginary non existent WMDs in Iraq did we ourselves use radiological weapons? And why are we still using them?

These are the questions I have been trying to raise -- but apparently you, Beerslugger, are too simple minded -- or perhaps too intoxicated -- to "get it."

Ths is not my problem --it's your problem -- so deal with it.

The issue is here and now -- not 4.5 billion years into the future. At issue are the dead and dying Iraqi children, the galloping cases of cancer in the country and region, and the damage we are also inflicting on our own troops -- not to mention the environment.

If you are too stupid to underdstand this straight ahead reality -- then better get used to my ignoring you in the coming days -- 'cause I have more important things to do than try to lead a mule to the well.

MHG

[Bronco_Beerslug]

Embellishments?

If you read my paper (which you didn't) you would know that the cancer rates in Iraq went off the charts -- after the first Gulf War -- and the situation has only gotten worse in the years since -- given the US sanctions that killed a half million Iraqi children -- not to mention Clinton's massive bombing of the country -- and attempts (after 1995) to kill Saddam Hussein.

I was no fan of Saddam -- but the policy of regime change that started under Clinton in 1995 greatly hampered the efforts of UNSCOM, the team led by Scott Ritter that was seeking out and destroying all WMD in the country.

Despite the fact that Clinton ordered out the inspectors in 1998 before Operaton Desert Fox -- a bombing campaign aimed at killing Saddam -- -- UNSCOM, according to Ritter, still found and destroyed 99% of Iraq's WMD programs.

We also know that later Saddam deconstructed the rest. In 2003 he had zip -- as was confirmed by Mr Duelfer -- who headed up the WMD search program for the US CIA. (Don't believe me? Check Tenet's memoir.)

The present issue is this: So why if we went to war in 2003 to destroy imaginary non existent WMDs in Iraq did we ourselves use radiological weapons? And why are we still using them?

These are the questions I have been trying to raise -- but apparently you, Beerslugger, are too simple minded -- or perhaps too intoxicated -- to "get it."

Ths is not my problem --it's your problem -- so deal with it.

The issue is here and now -- not 4.5 billion years into the future. At issue are the dead and dying Iraqi children, the galloping cases of cancer in the country and region, and the damage we are also inflicting on our own troops -- not to mention the environment.

If you are too stupid to underdstand this straight ahead reality -- then better get used to my ignoring you in the coming days -- 'cause I have more important things to do than try to lead a mule to the well.

MHGOK, I'll try.

And remember, when you mention people are "dumb, simple minded, intoxicated, etc..." think............................................. .mininukes.

[Spider]

seeing those picture brought back some bad memories ....
I asked alot of these questions along time ago ........ I found out it was all about egg cartons ..... still dont understand it ;D