re: New York Area Fire Commissioners Make History, Call for New 9/11 Investigation

My grill is burning at 2300+ btu's....jet fuel at 800 to 1500btu's....

Steel melts at above 2300btu's....

So, you are saying burning at 800 to 1500btu's for just an hour weaken EVERY floor on the second tower so it pancaked on floor after floor...

OK, even if I buy that then explain the 3rd smaller tower to me. No fire...just collapsed.

quote:

---

It didn't melt the fricking beams.

---

It melted something.

quote:

---

Dr. Thomas W. Eagar, a professor of materials engineering and engineering systems at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and his graduate research student, Christopher Musso, pointed out that the theoretical maximum temperature of a building fire (maximum 1000°C/1800°F) is not even close to the melting point of steel (approximately 1500°C/2750°F). And they noted that the observed black smoke emanating from the Twin Towers was consistent with a typical oxygen-starved building fire.

Eagar and Musso concluded that the actual temperature most likely remained below 650°C/1200°F. In so doing, they dispelled the myth that the jet fuel could have made the fires unusually hot, noting that it was "highly unlikely" that the temperature rose above 800°C/1470°F.

---

So, there wasn't a lot of oxygen that would have been needed to increase the temperature of the fire. I have to think that a doctor that teaches materials engineering and engineering systems at MIT would know what he is talking about.

quote:

---

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) did document the flow of molten metal pouring out of the South Tower during the final seven minutes before its collapse, noting the accompanying "unusual bright flame" and "plume of white smoke." However, NIST failed to investigate the phenomenon, dismissing it as molten aluminum from the crashed jet, which melts at only 660°C/1220°F.

---

Why wasn't this investigated? Why should I believe a report to be true when information is missing?

quote:

---

Dr. Jones' paper reveals that the initial bright yellow-white glow of the expelled liquid was consistent with a glowing stream of molten iron from "a nearby thermite reaction zone," and the expected white smoke (aluminum oxide off-gassing) supports that conclusion. NIST must rely on its claim of molten aluminum in order to validate its official fire-based explanation, because office fires cannot generate the extreme temperature required to melt steel or iron. The fundamental flaw of the aluminum hypothesis, though, is that the implied temperature of the white glow remains above 1200°C/2200°F, regardless of the metal involved. An independent researcher suggested that the molten substance could be lead from storage batteries, but this explanation fails — as do all hypotheses based on alternative metals — because the temperature required for the yellow-white glow of the metal is beyond the capability of the building fire.

---

quote:

---

Dr. Jones (Physicist and Archaeometrist) et al confirmed the finding of molten iron in a 2008 paper, "Extremely high temperatures during the World Trade Center destruction," which documents their discovery of iron-rich microspheres in WTC dust samples from two independent sources.

---

The evidence points to the liquified metal as being iron, not aluminum. What exactly was the source that caused the melted iron? Even if it was aluminum, what caused the fire to be over 700°F higher than it should have been? It obviously wasn't the jet fuel burning in an open, oxygen-starved fire.

quote:

---

The official explanation also fails to account for the plenitude of iron-rich spheres, which happen to be yet another signature marker for a thermite reaction. Since thermitic materials can actually cut and melt steel beams, evidence of this type of material in the dust provides a plausible explanation for the observed liquid iron and steel: Thermitic cutting charges melt a slit through the steel beams via a directed blast of molten iron, leaving behind the expected residues of molten iron from the charges and molten steel from the beams.

a team of nine scientists has investigated samples of dust from the collapsed Twin Towers and has documented the discovery of microscopic-but-intact remnants of nano-thermite.

Ryan concludes that the evidence is "extensive and compelling," and that the suspected controlled demolition of the WTC buildings via thermitic materials is now "a tested and proven theory." And, as demonstrated above, thermite remains the only viable theory that provides a logical explanation for the liquefied iron and steel found in the World Trade Center rubble.

---

Thermite is the most logical explanation, and thermite particles were found. Interesting...

quote:

---

Chemist Kevin Ryan notes that NIST violated the NFPA 921 investigative standard by denying the evidence of molten iron and molten steel, and by refusing to look for pyrotechnic and explosive materials.

---

Why should I believe the official report again? What caused the temperature to be higher than it should have been, and why was it not investigated?

If you further read the reports of Dr. Eagar, he verifies that the fire was not hot enough to melt iron, but he does say, "[the steel] was likely not stressed more than a third of the design allowable, which is roughly one-fifth of the yield strength of the steel. Even with its strength halved, the steel could still support two to three times the stresses imposed by a 650°C fire." He then goes on to explain how the uneven fire could cause steel distortion which led to the collapse. So, the collapse is plausible, but it does not explain what caused the molten iron or the fused steel found in the rubble.

LINK