Jet fuel can't melt steel beams
115 2015-07-15 by Greg_Roberts_0985
Jet fuel can't melt steel beams, so why was there molten metal at the WTC collapse sites?
NIST claims that WTC 1&2 collapsed due to jet fueled fires (just normal offices fires for WTC7) which were not hot enough to produce molten steel or iron, but also claim that if there had been molten steel or iron in the debris afterwards, it would have been irrelevant to the cause of the collapses. The evidence of molten steel or iron cannot be called “irrelevant,” given the fact that the building fires, as NIST pointed out, cannot explain it.
Physical Evidence
- Early in 2002, Barnett and two WPI colleagues published an analysis of a section of steel from one of the Twin Towers, along with sections from WTC 7, as an appendix to FEMA’s 2002 World Trade Center Building Performance Study
- Their discoveries were also reported in a WPI article entitled “The ‘Deep Mystery’ of Melted Steel,” which said:
Steel – which has a melting point of 2,800 degrees Fahrenheit – may weaken and bend, but does not melt during an ordinary office fire. Yet metallurgical studies on WTC steel brought back to WPI reveal that a novel phenomenon – called a eutectic reaction – occurred at the surface, causing intergranular melting capable of turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese.
A one-inch column has been reduced to half-inch thickness. Its edges – which are curled like a paper scroll – have been thinned to almost razor sharpness. Gaping holes – some larger than a silver dollar – let light shine through a formerly solid steel flange. This Swiss cheese appearance shocked all of the fire-wise professors, who expected to see distortion and bending – but not holes.
In May 2004, the RJ Lee Group issued a report, entitled “WTC Dust Signature,” at the request of the Deutsche Bank, in order to prove (to its insurance company) that the building was “pervasively contaminated with WTC Dust The report listed five elements in this signature, one of which was: “Spherical iron and spherical or vesicular silicate particles that result from exposure to high temperature
Extremely high temperatures during the World Trade Center destruction
Journal of the American Society of Safety Engineers
The debris pile at Ground Zero was always tremendously hot. Thermal measurements taken by helicopter each day showed underground temperatures ranging from 400ºF to more than 2,800ºF
Sources related to exceptionally high temperatures, and/or to persistent heat at Ground Zero
FEMA documents in their Appendix C of its May 2002 WTC Building Performance Assessment Team study, for sample 1, “evidence of a severe high temperature corrosion attack on the steel, including oxidation and sulfidation with subsequent intergranular melting.” A “sulfur-rich liquid” containing “primarily iron, oxygen, and sulfur” “penetrated” into the steel.
Testimonial Evidence
Testimony from Firefighters:
- New York Fire Department Captain Philip Ruvolo said: “You’d get down below and you’d see molten steel, molten steel, running down the channel rails, like you’re in a foundry, like lava.
- Joe O’Toole, a Bronx firefighter who worked on the rescue and cleanup efforts, reported that one beam lifted from deep below the surface months later, in February 2002, “was dripping from the molten steel.”
- New York firefighters recalled in the documentary film Collateral Damages, “heat so intense they encountered rivers of molten steel.”
Testimony from Other Professionals:
- Leslie Robertson, a member of the engineering firm that designed the World Trade Center, said 21 days after the attack: “When we were down at the B1 level, one of the firefighters said, ‘I think you’d be interested in this,’ and they pulled up a big block of concrete and there was a, like a little river of steel, flowing.”
- Ron Burger, a public health advisor at the National Center for Environmental Health who arrived at Ground Zero September 12, 2001, said: “Feeling the heat, seeing the molten steel, the layers upon layers of ash, like lava, it reminded me of Mt. St. Helen’s and the thousands who fled that disaster.”
- In late fall 2001, Dr. Alison Geyh of the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health reported: “Fires are still actively burning and the smoke is very intense. In some pockets now being uncovered, they are finding molten steel.”
- Joe Allbaugh, the Director of FEMA, said in an October 2001 interview on CBS: “It’s just too hot for rescuers to get into [some] areas. So we do not know yet what’s in those areas, other than very hot, molten material.”
- Dr. Keith Eaton reported in Structural Engineer: “They showed us many fascinating slides . . . 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.”
- Don Carson, a hazardous materials expert from the National Operating Engineers Union, said six weeks after 9/11: “There are pieces of steel being pulled out from as far as six stories underground that are still cherry red.”
- OSHA respond to the underground fires and potential steam explosions
Underground fires burned at temperatures up to 2,000 degrees. As the huge cranes pulled steel beams from the pile, safety experts worried about the effects of the extreme heat on the crane rigging and the hazards of contact with the hot steel. And they were concerned that applying water to cool the steel could cause a steam explosion that would propel nearby objects with deadly force. Special expertise was needed. OSHA called in Mohammad Ayub and Scott Jin, structural engineers from its national office, to assess the situation. They recommended a special handling procedure, including the use of specialized rigging and instruments.
Testimony from Other Credible Witnesses:
- Greg Fuchek, vice president of a company that supplied computer equipment used to identify human remains, reported that “sometimes when a worker would pull a steel beam from the wreckage, the end of the beam would be dripping molten steel.”
- Sarah Atlas, of New Jersey’s Task Force One Urban Search and Rescue, arrived at Ground Zero on September 11 and reported that “fires burned and molten steel flowed in the pile of ruins still settling beneath her feet.”
- Tom Arterburn, writing in Waste Age, reported that the New York Department of Sanitation removed “everything from molten steel beams to human remains
Videos
WTC2 South Tower, Molten Metal pouring out the North-East Corner
Pouring molten aluminum into a pool
Molten aluminum into cold water
Evidence of fused molten metal and concrete of extreme heat.
Thermite cutting steel - Validated experimentally
The fact that the rubble contained steel or iron that had been melted shows that the buildings were destroyed by something other than fire and airplane impact.
When all of this physical evidence is combined with the testimony about explosions from many types of professionals, the claim that the Twin Towers were brought down by nothing other than the airplane impacts and resulting fires is simply not credible
47 comments
30 meat_for_the_beast 2015-07-15
So many people are quite uninformed of all the details of the events that day... Most people still don't even realize WTC 7 also fell that day... and the way that particular building fell is the by far the biggest giveaway that maybe... just maybe, we're being lied to.
You've got explosions in the lower floors, squibs, ejecta, diagonal cuts, thermite residue, molten steel, molten concrete, pulverization, victims vaporized, free-fall speed, symmetric fall... which all fit within a controlled demolition scenario... It gets to be pretty obvious!
12 stillbatting1000 2015-07-15
But... the government said it was the jet fuel. Would they lie to you?
4 sapiosex 2015-07-15
Why would you believe them?
3 stillbatting1000 2015-07-15
Well... you know, they're like, elected representatives, and stuff...
13 gary_oaks_bud_garden 2015-07-15
My favorite part is when someone claims that in jest, and then you simply ask them, "well, can it?" and they fucking freeze up like deer in the head lights, it's so bad sometimes the little tin foil hat inside me believes their brains are literally about to explode out of their eye sockets. Sadly this only works in person though, online you just get useful idiots and shills to troll you or if they realize their fuck up they dissappear.
Oh and for the record, No kerosene fire can burn hot enough to melt steel." The posting is entitled "Proof Of Controlled Demolition At The WTC." FACT: Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F).Apr 7, 2010
With a mainstream media link to boot, in case anyone comes to claim counter.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/a6384/debunking-911-myths-world-trade-center/
8 SilverbackRibs 2015-07-15
It is by far my most hated meme
-9 rhynodegreat 2015-07-15
No one seriously claims that jet fuel can melt steel. The argument is that jet fuel, combined with the other materials in the buildings, burns hot enough to seriously weaken steel.
9 RandoKillrizian 2015-07-15
Other things in an office setting are designed to not burn very good.
http://www.intertek.com/building/fire-testing/
-5 rhynodegreat 2015-07-15
The point is that you don't need to melt steel for it to collapse.
8 fml-421 2015-07-15
Fine, so why did the government report it that way?
7 Ziroshi 2015-07-15
No ones claiming that jet fuel fires cant weaken steal beams. Their saying they cant melt them, and their is plenty of proof that they have melted.
6 Cats_Love_Me_ 2015-07-15
Do you have a source that a steel framed skyscraper can collapse due to fires?
2 PhrygianMode 2015-07-15
Surely there must be other examples of skyscrapers globally collapsing due to fire....
2 Cats_Love_Me_ 2015-07-15
Don't call me Surely :) Ha!
But yes, there must be a forth example from the hundred+ years of steel framed buildings.
1 PhrygianMode 2015-07-15
If only someone could provide one! .......
3 RandoKillrizian 2015-07-15
It's takes more than what kerosene and office furniture. To even weaken steel. Nist lies, every time they have been caught every time. Then we have the demolishtions expert destroying his own theory in the BBC interview.
3 [deleted] 2015-07-15
the jet fuel burned off in the impact fireball outside the building. faithers have to keep tha faith by believing office fires and only office fires weakened
bothall 3 of those buildings enough for them to collapse to dust at near freefall speed into their own footprint.3 Cats_Love_Me_ 2015-07-15
So where did all the molten metal and molten concrete come from then?
1 Akareyon 2015-07-15
Construction manager for the World Trade Center, University of Colorado civil engineering professor Hyman Brown, did.
Richard Ebeltoft, a structural engineer and University of Arizona architecture lecturer, did.
Lee Hamilton, 9/11 Commission co-chair, did.
New Scientist did on September 12th, 2001.
Structural engineer Chris Wise did.
Professor of Structural Engineering at the University of Newcastle, John Knapton, did.
Sources
12 Feverdog87 2015-07-15
I honestly think that this phrase's new found dank meme-hood is a product of social engineering to discredit the steam skeptics have been gaining on this subject.
It was funny at first but now it seems pretty obvious that its designed to discredit this argument.
2 Mumblerur 2015-07-15
I don't think this is a social engineering thing. I don't think any one is controlling the process. I think the meme has arisen because it helps people relieve the internal stress that arises from cognitive dissonance.
1 lono12 2015-07-15
I think it might be a sort of under the cover mass awakening. Some of them are downright hilarious
http://www.kappit.com/img/pics/201506_1151_fgcei_sm.jpg
http://cdn.meme.am/instances/500x/59724914.jpg
http://static.fjcdn.com/pictures/Careful+what+you+wish+for_bbd595_5449664.jpg
1 Feverdog87 2015-07-15
HAHA i mean these ARE hilarious. That last one is actually the first one i saw.
1 Greg_Roberts_0985 2015-07-15
Not really, they are literally making a mockery of thousands of deaths, how is that funny?
10 KnightBeforeTomorrow 2015-07-15
Here's John L. Gross of NIST who declared that there was no molten metal at the WTC, with some of the steel beams, above ground, that had previously melted areas .
Molten metal 9_11 WTC Melted Steel Samples NIST https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvYIUYzSanA
11 Greg_Roberts_0985 2015-07-15
Me and a few others, have tried to get an indictment against this guy, it just isn't possible, he is a protected government source
8 WTCMolybdenum4753 2015-07-15
Does Misprision of felony apply to NIST?
4 gameoverplayer1 2015-07-15
Keep up the good work. Much appreciated.
-1 rhynodegreat 2015-07-15
All of that steel looks twisted and warped, not melted.
4 KnightBeforeTomorrow 2015-07-15
There is lots of re solidified but previously melted steel in that video.
Here are just three screen shots so as not to waste Imgurs storage on something you'll just ignore.
http://i.imgur.com/uxrMrAA.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/jQhmq2C.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/wcYHpEe.jpg
1 bhjit 2015-07-15
Friction due to falling debris? Honest question.
5 iamagod_____ 2015-07-15
It doesn't work like that. Go find molten steel in any controlled demolition. Good luck.
-4 [deleted] 2015-07-15
[deleted]
6 iamagod_____ 2015-07-15
Find big ones then. There isn't exclusive magic in the world trade controlled demolitions. Friction hasn't ever create pools of molten steel in any other controlled demolition.
-11 [deleted] 2015-07-15
[deleted]
8 Cats_Love_Me_ 2015-07-15
There are controlled demolitions on youtube similar in size to WTC7, so your argument is refuted, it wasn't backed by any known science anyway, but hey.
-6 [deleted] 2015-07-15
[deleted]
3 iamagod_____ 2015-07-15
Learn some history friend. You could not be more incorrect.
http://911blogger.com/news/2007-12-17/fema-report-confirms-molten-steel-found-wtc-7
1 Greg_Roberts_0985 2015-07-15
You are joking, right?
4 [deleted] 2015-07-15
no chance friction melts steel, none, zero, nada. nor does it keep it hot for weeks or months underground.
1 Renal_Toothpaste 2015-07-15
I saw a response to a similar thread about this a bit ago on reddit. The person stated that jet fuel cannot melt steel beams, but it can make it hot enough to the point where they are too weak to withstand the weight of the building and make it collapse. It was a huge ass post with sources and much more detailed information, but I'm on mobile and can't do that now. I also forget where to find it. There definitely is a ton of major fuckery that happened that day, and the third building is the one I think is the biggest issue.
7 Cats_Love_Me_ 2015-07-15
So where did all the molten metal come from then?
3 Renal_Toothpaste 2015-07-15
Idk man...I really don't know who to believe about all this.
3 JaM0k3 2015-07-15
Well start off by analyzing who has the most to gain by lying. We can all agree there that there are lies galore about the events of that day. So who would put this great effort of deceit in? Someone with a fuck ton to gain, or hide, or both. That's typically when people or groups of people lie. So, does the "internet conspiracy theorist" who gets 6 likes on his 9/11 truth post or video have much to gain from what would be an exhausting lie? Or do the financiers and politicians and most importantly the corporate interests have more to gain from the events of the day and the world we were left with afterwards?
There is so much fuckery with this day. Is hard because as much info that is out there, there is an equal if not greater amount of disinformation.
1 Akareyon 2015-07-15
How can you disagree with these EXPERTS?
1 Greg_Roberts_0985 2015-07-15
I am glad you disagree with the US governments version of events and thus the official reports.
The problem with your theory, is that it is not backed up by evidence and so it can not be considered science.
0 5triangles1pentagon 2015-07-15
Keep fixating on the past like a pack of obsessives, while the people behind 9/11 craft a future for themselves without your input.
-2 rollthedice92 2015-07-15
Jesus. Read a materials science book for me one time, Reddit.
3 dirkdeagler 2015-07-15
Addressing a site with 9 digit unique users as a contiguous whole is a dank meme and makes you look like a smart poster. Bonus points for not elaborating at all on your comment or providing any evidence for a different claim.
1 Greg_Roberts_0985 2015-07-15
Go on, educate us all, what did your materials science book say?
1 lono12 2015-07-15
I think it might be a sort of under the cover mass awakening. Some of them are downright hilarious
http://www.kappit.com/img/pics/201506_1151_fgcei_sm.jpg
http://cdn.meme.am/instances/500x/59724914.jpg
http://static.fjcdn.com/pictures/Careful+what+you+wish+for_bbd595_5449664.jpg
2 Mumblerur 2015-07-15
I don't think this is a social engineering thing. I don't think any one is controlling the process. I think the meme has arisen because it helps people relieve the internal stress that arises from cognitive dissonance.
1 Greg_Roberts_0985 2015-07-15
I am glad you disagree with the US governments version of events and thus the official reports.
The problem with your theory, is that it is not backed up by evidence and so it can not be considered science.