Also you heated up what, a pound or 2 of aluminum, and your trying to compare it to tons of aluminum, obviously the bigger the amount the longer it takes to cool... Take some college physics courses bro.
@bubbasteve8 if that was true, then the Aluminum in the videos would have cooled and turned silver as it was dispersed into small amounts, as observed in the many videos of the tower's fall.
ha, it was still glowing yellow as it fell from your tube...Plus have you tried melting different aluminum alloys? was that the same type of aluminum that is used to make 767's?
Great little experiment. The shills/ liars try to use your vid as proof that alumium CAN glow bright yellowy orange as it's poured. Gotta laugh at these clowns eh!
We all know it wasn't aluminium that poured from WTC2 just prior to its collapse, but the liars out there MUST stick to their story or all is lost for them. No normal office fire could melt steel or iron, yet we've all seen the vids where iron or steel WAS pouring out of the window. It's the smoking gun!
In all honesty, if you just read a few comments before making the comment "-- looks to me as though it poured out orange, but quickly turned silver as it cooled down." You would have probably never made your comment.
@8real In all honesty, you're expecting people to believe that the molten aluminum is still 1800 degrees F even after it is poured onto a room-temperature pan. It seems the aluminum is glowing orange until it is cooled off by the pan. The experiment needs to be modified so that the molten aluminum is maintained at 1800 degrees after it leaves the crucible.
Did you read anything that was previously said? You just said the same thing....again. You just elaborated a little more this time. Fact is, aluminum is silvery at 1800F. NIST even states this FACT. They just speculate and say that "debris" and "organic materials" mixed in to make it look bright orange. If you pause the video at the right spot, you will see silvery molten aluminum hanging from the lip of a "bright red" crucible. Why isn't the aluminum bright red?
Furthermore, you suggested that it cooled very quickly, right? Just from leaving the heat source and pouring onto a cool, room temperature pan. Well, in the context of the actual subject, wouldn't the molten aluminum have cooled off once it melted and flowed away from the heat source and then out the window? Go start a huge fire and melt a bunch of aluminum. You will soon find out that after it melts, you need a container to keep it hot. Do me a favor and just skim over the comments.
@8real The thermal conductance through air is much lower than the transfer rate through- what looks like- a solid iron skillet. Air has one of the lowest thermal conductivities of all materials: 0.024 W/(m*K), and iron one of the highest: 80 W/(m*K). To create a more useful experiment, you should film the molten aluminum being dropped several meters through air, maybe off of a building or ledge.
You are forgetting the context of the situation we are discussing here. You are suggesting that I drop it through the air because wind would be the only thing cooling the molten aluminum. I am trying to explain (multiple times) that there is no reason to believe that the molten metal that flowed from the WTC was inside a container and then poured out of the window. In fact, I am suggesting that the molten metal had to flow to and out of the window.
Also, 1800F is just a number that most experts agree that is the hottest a open air "uncontrolled" office fire will get(Yes, even with jet fuel). There is no reason to believe that those fires where 1800F at the time we saw the molten metal flowing from the WTC. On top of all this, we have eyewitnesses of molten metal that looked like "lava". Lots of descriptions of "molten iron" and "molten steel" during the rescue and cleanup. Molten aluminum at 1800F is silvery. It's a fact.
@8real All I'm suggesting is that the aluminum in the pan is not even close to 1800 degrees. I think there are too many flaws in your experiment for you to try to make the case that aluminum is a silvery color at 1800 degrees F, namely (as I already explained), you are pouring the molten aluminum into a cool container with high thermal conductance. My suggestion is that you remove the factor of the iron skillet from your experiment.
Listen, I am not trying to deceive anybody. Molten aluminum at 1800 F is silvery. So long as there is light for it to reflect. That is "daylight conditions". Go tell NIST that molten aluminum isn't silvery. They have directly responded to this within the CONTEXT of the discussion. They say "Pure liquid aluminum would be expected to appear silvery. However, the molten metal was very likely mixed with large amounts of hot, partially burned, solid organic materials"
@8real I can only find his solo stuff, which is great also, but I really like this jam with the guitar. I was hoping there was more of this collaboration, or even some place to get the specific song in this video. Maybe you have to be lucky enough to be a personal friend and get jam tapes?
stop with that bullshit about daylight conditions, it CAN glows at daylight conditions.
about 1:42 : aluminium glows only at higher temperatures than crucible with red color. Border of that crucible was cooled down by metal wire around it...
GO ARGUE WITH NIST. THEY HAVE EVEN STATED THAT MOLTEN ALUMINUM IS SILVER.
To suggest that aluminum glows bright orange at 1800F is not a debate any longer. I am sorry to break it to you, but the debate has moved on to - HOW CAN WE GET MOLTEN ALUMINUM @ 1800F TO LOOK LIKE WHAT FLOWED OUT OF THE WTC? By mixing in debris? Maybe, but it has yet to be proven. But, for crying out loud, stop trying to suggest that molten aluminum at 1800F resembles ANYTHING like what flowed out of the WTC.
Let me break this down kindergarten style for you and anybody else that shares your opinion.
Pause it at 1:42. What do you see? A bright orange crucible with silver molten aluminum hanging from the lip. How is that possible? Ill tell you how. It's because molten aluminum is SILVERY and highly reflective in its molten state. Other metals - steel, iron, copper, bronze - appear bright orange at 1800F. The crucible is a clear example of what steel looks like at 1800F as well!
8real: sorry but if yout really think that it was the reflection from the crucible, you're retarded or blind or both. But you know what ? I think you know you're wrong ! and that's sad ...
Listen smartass, it is the reflection that you are seeing during the pour. Molten alumin is SILVERY at 1800F in daylight conditions. It is not a debate. As I have already stated, NIST even admits this FACT.What is sad is that you can't comprehend what you are watching in the context of the discussion.
Wait wait wait, watch it again. What color is it coming out of the cup? Red, it cools quickly. Come on you can't see this. It's red at 1800 degrees. This proves it.
That is a reflection...I think it's comical to read comments along the lines of "It was red for a split second!" In the context of this subject, a split second is irrelevant anyways. The "aluminum" that flowed out of the WTC had to flow TO the window and then out. Was the floor supposedly 1800F? Context, context, context.
@8real it was orange all the way to the pan. Lets see that experiment again with a couple tons of 1800 degree aluminum. Won't cool as quick, and will be orange its simple science
Again, it was the reflection from the crucible. You are blowing stuff way out of context. 1800F was the hottest the fires would have got. There is no evidence that shows it was 1800 F the whole time or right before the collapse. As a matter of fact, according to NIST, it was hottest at about the 41 minute mark. What makes you think the whole plane melted and reached 1800F? Do you have any evidence of any plane crashing and melting?You can not and will not answer those questions.
@8real yup watch the twin towers plane crashes. Pretty good evidence that a plane can crash and that some aluminum can melt and run out of a window. Check it out. Just search "twin towers" Youll find alot of evidence of crashing planes and melting aluminum running out of a building
Being a smartass isn't going to accomplish anything. I have the video posted on my channel that you are referencing. How about you go watch it? Then, go start a fire with jet fuel(kerosene), furniture, paper, wood and melt some aluminum(if it even fully melts, lol). See what it looks like...If it does melt, it will FLOW away from the heat source. Are you suggesting that it was inside of some container that was 1800F and then somehow dumped out of the window or what?
Really? That easy to dismiss it, huh? I am just pointing out that it doesn't look anything like molten aluminum. Yet, people like you wonder onto my channel and try to tell me otherwise. NIST even admits that molten aluminum is "silvery". Have you tried to argue with them? They just suggest that other materials mixed in and magically made it uniformly glow bright orange. Which, I have another video explaining that hypothesis false.
What is ignorant is someone suggesting that they know it is aluminum. NIST hypothesized that it was aluminum mixed with other organic materials. I have a video that disproves that hypothesis. If you have evidence that shows it is definitely aluminum, I suggest that you share it with NIST.
Just google "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe". That is the name of the peer reviewed paper that was in Bentham Open Chemical Physics Journal.
Why would you comment about a paper that you have never read? I suggest that you go read it and then come back and explain why it is wrong. If you accomplish that much, I suggest that you write a paper that disputes it, contact the journal and have your paper peer reviewed.
molten metal aside...the only 2 studies done on the rubble of the WTC turned up nanothermite......and NIST refused to test for thermite/sulfer compounds because "it would have required too much to demolish the towers"-- a theory that was easily debunked. So once i can get an explanation for the nanothermite- maybe ill shut up. Or when the govt. releases one of the hundreds of pentagon videos in their posession...that show a plane hitting it.....?
They have dust samples. They can debunk it if they wanted/could. The also have a hangar full of steal beams. I think my point about molten metal is that NIST denies it, even after we have videos of all the rescue workers talking about it. NIST denies it because they have no explanation as to how it got there! Well, sometimes the truth hurts. Keep up the good fight!
Finally, someone that understands! Even though NIST admits as much, people that have never melted a drop of aluminum will tell me that aluminum at 1800F is bright orange or bright red because a color chart says so...
It is people like you that I shouldn't respond to. It is a waist of time. I am going to respond in the hopes that someone else reads it. A 9 year old knows what context means. Do you? It is something that you have to apply to everyday life. It helps you understand the conversation. You are the guy that walks up to a group of people and hear one sentence and think you have it all figured out. Nobody said "Aluminum can NOT be red hot"...Learn the debate and what has already been said
@Denierbud11 watch?v=jm1QvcynetU flir footage of 9/11 - the fires were not that hot - what do you think made aluminum glow orange and fall thru air away from the towers?
@Denierbud11" Pure liquid aluminum would be expected to appear silvery. However, the molten metal was very likely mixed with large amounts of hot, partially burned, solid organic materials (e.g., furniture, carpets, partitions and computers) which can display an orange glow, much like logs burning in a fireplace. The apparent color also would have been affected by slag formation on the surface." quoted From NIST - and disproved by Jones in experiment - fail
the aluminum was bright orange, it turned gray because you poured on a cold non heated pan causing it to solidify. Heat the pan to 1800 degrees first then show this.
And, the aluminum that flowed from the 80th floor magically floated to the window? And to be honest, this isn't even a debate anymore in my eyes. Aluminum at 1800F appears silvery in daylight conditions. Post a video showing me otherwise...
@8real well as we all know there were fires in the buildings, These fires burning at 1800 degrees would keep the steel hot and the aluminum melted, you just poured on a non heated pan causing it to cool and turn gray, when you poured it out it was bright orange.
Go show me something that said the whole floor was 1800F the whole duration up until it collapsed. You can't. I am starting to get tired of having to say the same thing, over and over. But, here it goes. Read "NIST NCSTAR 1-5: Reconstruction of the Fires in the World Trade Center Towers". You will learn that during NIST tests, the fires reached 1100C at the 33 minute mark then decreased rapidly. Once the fuel burned off, the fires dropped down to around 400C at the 41 minute mark.
Do me a favor and watch the video and tell me what color the aluminum is that is hanging from the lip of the crucible. It's silvery. What color is the steel crucible? Bright orange! Again, this isn't even a debate in my eyes anymore. Aluminum that gets poured out in daylight conditions appears silvery at 1800F.
I will also add one more thing to help some people out. NIST states very clearly
"Pure liquid aluminum would be expected to appear SILVERY. However, the molten metal was very likely mixed with large amounts of hot, partially burned, solid organic materials." For the source, google "nist 911 fact sheet". Check out my other video "Molten Aluminum Experiment" to see what happens when you mix organic materials into molten aluminum.
I believe it would be the other way around. You would have to do a experiment to convince yourself. I know what aluminum looks like at 1800F. It doesn't look ANYTHING like what flowed out of the WTC. I have stated very obvious facts. 1. The aluminum had to flow to and out the window 2. The WTC fires where not 1800F the whole duration. 3. Silvery molten aluminum is hanging from the lip of a bright orange crucible. 4. Even NIST admits aluminum is silvery at 1800-2000F.
If you have read my comments directed at you, you would have seen that I already quoted NIST and directed you to watch another video. You are going to have to move along now. This isn't a debate anymore. Go tell NIST to fix their FAQ sheet on 9/11/2001. They even stated that pure molten aluminum at the expected temperatures would appear...SILVERY. Not bright orange, red or purple, but SILVERY. They went on to explain why they thought it could have turned bright orange.
I like the requests for pouring it from a higher spot... if you can figure out a way to get all that stuff on your roof. without burning down your house, I would be very greatful, lol. Oh also, you should try the same time of morning as 9/11. So we can see if sunlight plays any roll in reducing the glow, or adding to it.
Awesome experiment none the less, I appreciate your effort, sir.
I am not sure if that would help to be honest. Either you believe what we observed flow from the WTC's 80th floor is aluminum or not. I believe there is mountains of evidence to prove NIST's theory wrong about aluminum mixed with organics. People have to understand, aluminum does glow, but when you put it in the context of the actual debate, it doesn't look ANYTHING like what we saw flowing out of the WTC's 80th floor. I have yet to see a video specifically heating aluminum to 1800F
@bweazel wait, even though he just "proved" molten aluminum doesnt glow orange at 1800 F why are you questioning it more? Doesnt that help prove your point, seriously, im curious...
@bweazel@bweazel wait, even though he just "proved" molten aluminum doesnt glow orange at 1800 F why are you questioning it more? Doesnt that help prove your point, seriously, im curious...
Okay! Here we go again! You said the aluminum is 2000 series. Any Alloy that is a pure series pours " More Silver". Pour a more common alloy at 1800 and you will never get silver. I can tell you now any building that is constructed with aluminum is not going to be an X series. I don't have to argue......................or debate, I work with it daily. I know the alloys and what happens, flat out! It can glow at 1800 especially with an ignition source!!!!
Make a video and understand what you are trying to recreate...I am tired of telling you that you need to learn what this debate is about. It can glow, right? At 1800F, right? OK, will it look like what we observed flowing out of the WTC? After rolling to the window and falling 10s of stores? Will it look like that? If you say it can, then make a video and convince me!
just check the video at 1:33.... it's glowing red as it falls toward the pan. For the record, I do not buy the official 9/11 story, but evidence is evidence!
Molten aluminum is highly reflective. You are seeing the reflection from the crucible. Instead of telling people that it is red at 1:33, try heating aluminum up to 1800F yourself AND THEN tell people what you observe...
@8real please make it drip from a higher point to the ground next time.. the cold pan quickly absorbs the aluminums heat, so we have the actual fall of the molten aluminum on too few frames.. u have the owen!
@boughb excellent point. The point i would counter with is watch
watch?v=8OQWz7xlINA&lc=1v2tHha_-dl-WrLRNIDkIdgjzgTgXuQ9rhNaLqS9T8Q& go to 1:43.
there is yellow molten metal droplets that have fallen some 60? 70? stories. Alum in the 1800F video (on this page) was silver in 1/2 a second (even as a large blob) I'm quite certain molten alum drops would be silver after 10 seconds of free fall not bright yellow as the are in the video i pointed you to. All the best.
@boughb There is no point arguing with this guy! I work at an ALUMINUM recycling plant. I have been there over 13 years and know what it looks like at diff. temps. Depends on the alloy of aluminum and so many other factors. But yes it cannot only glow orange it can glow white! He's using 2000 series here.......takes a lot to glow. Not to mention he is measuring the total heat source....why didn't he take the temp out of the heat source??
The aluminum's temperature was measured, then it was poured. Why don't you enlighten us how fast aluminum cools away from its heat source outside of a container. With 13 years of experience, you should know that answer. I have already tried to tell you, read my profile and learn what this debate is about.
It is "silly" because the video that you claim as evidence (this one) shows aluminum at 1800f pouring orange and then cooling to 1200f and being silver and calling that proof that its always silver. Pause this video just as the aluminum starts to hit the pan and it is all orange. Just like the other videos of aluminum where it is not in contact with a heat sink, is still liquid, and is orange.
@DRAT311 This video shows silver aluminum, unless you refuse to look and see that the only glowing part is the smelting pot itself. Aluminum itself has orange reflections, but it's still silver, you can see it if you pause the video.
Even the video you dug up shows cherry-red aluminum, not orange, and that cools pretty quickly too. This is BETTER THAN IDEAL scenario, and it's still nowhere near... Well, actually "official story" says nothing like this. Only "debunking911dotcom" does.
@DRAT311 You can't arbitrarily pick and choose points of evidence and ignore others. Just because you can heat aluminum enough to faintly glow in ideal smelting conditions - and you can - doesn't mean an office fire will turn it into white-hot river.
I know it's hard to accept because it's very hard evidence and it makes official conspiracy theory irreparably crumble, but that's where the evidence lies. You just have to figure out whether you even want to know the truth.
@DRAT311 This is a complex issue, but I think if you look over that wall of text I typed below, you'll find there are many factors and data, and all of them point to impossibility of it being aluminum, confirming exactly what common sense and common knowledge suggests.
The only thing you can do is pick the most extreme temperature the hottest part of any fire can reach and assume this turns aluminum into lava... But if this were to be true, you'd freeze to death from going outside in summer.
Even though I don't agree with you...lets say that I do. What makes you think that the molten metal pouring out of the tower was in some sort of container? Wouldn't it cool as it flowed TO and then OUT of the window? Again, 1800F is a STRETCH....People make these extreme comparisons that blow stuff way out of proportion....It's pretty well accepted that the fires didn't get hotter than 1800F but what else that is also accepted, is that it wouldn't have been 1800F the WHOLE duration..
@VasbrosGames Why would it have to be in a container? It was pooled on the ground and then precisely when that side of the building began to bow inward(which means the floor had to become uneven, sloping down toward the outside) a liquid runs downhill and out the hole. It only needed to be 1800f in the corner where everything was bunched up. That is precisely where all the fuel(hydrocarbons, not jet fuel) was so that is where you would expect the highest temps.
@VasbrosGames It is common knowledge (I've linked multiple sources, there are dozens. And the only websites that disagree are CT websites that provide no math, experiments, or links) that office fires burn up to 1200c or over 2000f though 1800f is all that is required for this incident to occur just as I explained it. 1800f is not at all a stretch. It is a little below the average temps in a typical office fire.
@VasbrosGames Lets assume for a second that this was the steel of one of the many sections of outer column being melted by thermite? The thermite would have to be placed directly up against a significant portion of the columns between the windows. Why didn't we see the thermitic reaction through the windows? Why didn't steel leak from any of the other holes? Why did it just happen to only come from the corner where the plane was?
@VasbrosGames Just go here - wwwDOTdebunking911DOTcom/thermiteDOThtm and read the discussion on the amount of thermite necessary to cut through enough of the vertical columns in the WTC to make it collapse. And then explain why some of the trace elements found in thermite were NOT found in any samples of debris from the WTC. You're saying Aluminum required assumptions and can't be proven while failing to provide any evidence of thermite or a rational scenario involving it.
@Tary88 We can never know for sure. Just like we can never know for sure if OJ killed his wife. The evidence in both cases has been presented. You can read the arguments here and watch the video. You can see the color of the aluminum before it touches the heatsink. Basically at this point I think if you say its steel or you say he's innocent all the evidence in the world could never change your mind because your mind wasn't making the decision in the first place.
...And, quite frankly, everyone knows molten aluminum is silver anyway. Common sense, common knowledge. There's no magic fairy to help government's fairytales here.
Jones proposed this, NIST dismissed it with a silly explanation, Jones proved it wrong through experiment. Coming back with another baseless excuse is facetious at best. There's the evidence.
Speaking of NIST, not even they say it's aluminum alone, but "mixture of wood, plastic and aluminum". They know it doesn't glow, at least.
@SexyMelon No, all CT's "know." Just like all CT's "know" 911 was an inside job and "everyone" "knows" aliens landed at Roswell. Declaring something true doesn't make it so. I've shown you multiple videos of orange aluminum and its right before you in this very video. You say that if it was hard then it couldn't flow... exactly... and if you pause it as its flowing, before it's touched the pan... It's orange. After it touches the heatsink and becomes solid it returns to silver.
@DRAT311 Insult is not an argument. There's the evidence, either present something contrary, or it's end of the argument.
What you did is copy-paste baseless ignorance of basic metallurgy taken from a crummily-written personal that not even government's conspiracy story supports. This isn't research.
@DRAT311 I told you already it's not orange, it's the glow of the smelting pot reflecting off of it. Look close and you'll see it's still silver: 1800F isn't nearly enough temperature to get it to glow. More importantly, it DOES lose it's glow extremely quickly.
The video you have there shows you CAN get it to glow, as you can with any other substance. At its melting point, however, and at 1,000C, it does not glow orange, and it will lose the glow quickly in the air (as shown).
@SexyMelon Here is another video. I've shown this to you before. watch?v=NU956GwJDRQ Why does this aluminum continue to be orange after its poured into a mold that isn't a heat sink?
After doing further reading on the subject from a website who's domain i shall link on my page, I have concluded that the molten metal seen from the towers is Molten Lead from the UPS battery owned by Fuji Bank, a tenant of the 81st floor. It was either this or a combination of this and molten Slag from the aluminum, molten glass, and burning organic material.
Either way, it could not have been steel or iron, because there was no melting of the structure of the building face, (continued)
@burninrain1 (continued) despite it being subjected to, according to the conspiracy theorists, molten steel, for several minutes, which, according to those who say it was steel, had to be around 1400-1500 degrees C, which is the melting point of steel.
@burninrain1 "the molten metal seen from the towers is Molten Lead from the UPS battery owned by Fuji Bank, a tenant of the 81st floor."
I've seen this discussed before. Seems like a good possibility.
"and molten Slag from the aluminum"
which is most likely an aluminum alloy, not pure aluminum.
The curious thing is that the dripping stuff only occurs in one location, so that strengthens the argument that it's from a site specific substance like the UPS battery bank.
You mean after going to a debunking website and reading all the red herrings, lol....Do some real research. Your comments on batteries, temps, "could not have been", 1400-1500C, are all red herrings. If this happened, then that would have happened and if that happened, this would have happened, blah blah blah....Go heat lead up to 1800F, record it and post it as a response.
@burninrain1 Molten lead looks almost exactly like molten silver or aluminum (watch?v=sN5aMjTCfo4). Glass melts at 1500c or greater (wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_melting_point_of_glass)
"Either way, it could not have been steel or iron, because there was no melting of the structure of the building face,"
The building face was clad with aluminum. How then did you conclude the above? And who ever suggested that the molten metal MUST come from the building face?
It may have been from further within the structure and flowed over the concrete floor.
The metal from the WTC was most likely mixed in with other materials, such as glowing embers from burning organic material and molten glass, and chemical reactions from foreign materials also potentially added to the glow.
Also, there was much more aluminum pouring out of the WTC than from the crucible, and the ambient lighting likely added to the glow as well.
I'm not saying that I know for sure that it is aluminum, but it likely was not steel, because the metal flowed from (continued)
@burninrain1 (continued) the building face for several minutes, yet there was no evidence of melting of the supporting steel structure of the building face.
@burninrain1 Another possible cause were the many UPS (Uninterruptible Power Supply) batteries belonging to Fuji Bank, which was a tenant of the 81st floor. Lead from the batteries, as well as hydrogen generated during a short circuit, also likely added to the glow.
So, not only was the aluminum naturally slightly orange, but organic material, molten lead and glass, ambient lighting, and highly flammable hydrogen likely had an effect on the glow.
Drat311... I guess you can continue to split hairs that will defy all laws of science. The fact that 2 of the hijackers were trained on a military base seems to be overlooked too. The other hijackers who were trained at a public flight school were living with an FBI informant. I'm not going to talk till I'm blue in the face anymore with people who absolutely refuse to look at this for what it is.
@crazypaul34 The fact is, I'm the one addressing your points and explaining in detail why they are wrong and providing evidence. All you've done so far is accuse me of insults, respond to my evidence by literally saying "blah blah blah" and nothing else, and then said you have evidence but don't want to waste your time presenting it. You are wasting me time.
@DRAT311 Name me one steel only support structure that was hit by a plane and survived. Do you know the difference between steel and concrete? Concrete does not weaken in fire like steel. WTC7 was a very unique and very poorly designed structure. It had a giant open atrium in the first 10 floors so all of the weight was laterally distributed to 3 columns. The fire was caused by lateral transfers expanding from heat, not collapsing. It was unique in every way.
@DRAT311 ..... Go look at youtube footage of building 7 falling and not compare it to a demolition. Its an exact cabon copy. As for wasting time this is why I don't care anymore about disproving anyone with a theory that's never worked with steel or built anything. 2 of the hijackers trained on a military base in Pensacola. Two other hijackers that went to a commercial pilot school were living with an FBI infromant. The money trails that lead to our supposed allies..... this is why I don't care
@crazypaul34 The fact that it looks like a demolition means nothing! If it were a carbon copy there would be explosions heard like on EVERY demolition. If it were a demolition the building would have fallen into its own footprint, not into the verizon building across the street, causing so much damage it had to be demolished. If it were a demo the collapse would have started at the bottom, not with the penthouse sinking into the core several seconds before the facade collapsed.
@DRAT311 .... Well of course it didn't exactly fall like a construction demolition because that takes months of cutting to even get it to fall perfectly. As for falling in the footprint it damn near perfectly did. As for explosions, go check out more videos of witnesses reporting explosions. Not just office workers, but police and firemen who were also veterans. So they know what a bomb sounds like. As for the fact of dodging documented facts I presented keep clinging to that raft.
@crazypaul34 I could produce evidence for you all day but in the end you'll just continue not caring. The money you need to follow is the 100's of millions being made by all of the people who started the 911 conspiracy theory. They saw the market for paranoia and they met the demand perfectly. Every one of them is rich and none of them are using that money to finance an investigation into what happened. They could easily finance a new official investigation but thats not what they're after.
@DRAT311 .... Yeah no shit I wouldn't care. You're trying to compare the money of people selling books to the money of BP and Halliburton. Who has clearly more to gain financially ? Every investigation they have lobbied to get started have been shut down. Don't believe this country does some foul shit with terrorism ? Look into the history of how the United States commited terrorism, bombed mosques, killed women and children to overthrow the elected leader of Iran some time ago.
and what was all of the terrorism we commited over ? Their democraticaly elected leader wanted to socialize their country's oil fields cutting off BP. Sounds familiar to me. As for book sales... I'm sure Bush and Cheney's friends made allot more money (in the billions) and never lifted a pen. Start to read in to what this country has really done and don't write it off. Most countries hate us for a legitimate fucking reason.
@crazypaul34 ...Are you being serious? The US, terrorism?
I DARE you to give me ONE example of the US Military intentionally proforming a military operation to bomb a mosque with the intent of killing civilians.
I also dare you to name one operation who's intent was the murder of innocent women and children.
Compare that to the constant terrorism Muslims commit; all of the churches bombed or burned;the slavery the Berbers committed; all the things destroyed by Islam, such as (continued)
@burninrain1 (continued) The Library of Alexandria, and the outer casing of the Great Pyramid of Giza (although it was shaken loose during an earthquake, the Muslims removed the casing to build mosques and fortresses in Cairo).
Consider the fact that they have invaded Christian Lands all throughout history; The Moors conquering Spain and invading France; the Seljuks destroying the Byzantines and turning the Empire into the Ottoman Empire, which constantly invaded Europe; (continued)
@burninrain1 (continued) In fact, it was the Seljuk invasion which sparked the Crusades. Originally, The First Crusade was a cry for help from the Anatolians to the rest of Europe, which was answered through the first Crusade.
@burninrain1 ... For naming specific operations look into Operation Northwoods. And for some good research read into the CIA's involvement during the 1953 Iranian Coup De'etat. The more CIA documents declassified the more you will learn just how many terrorists this governmnet has had on a payroll. And the reason for overthrowing the democratically elected Iranian president...... He wanted to socialize the oil fields for the country and keep them away from BP.
@crazypaul34 Well, first of all, the socializing of any economic venture is immoral and wrong. Mohammed Mosaddegh wrongfully nationalized the British owned Anglo-Iranian Oil company, and this was Britain's largest overseas investment, so, while i do think that Britain and the CIA overreacted by putting Iran under dictatorship, you have to understand the background of the whole fiasco. Besides, this took place 58 years ago.
You watched it, and commented....How much time do you have on your hands? It is one of MANY examples that shows what aluminum looks like at 1800F. Go make a video to dispute that fact and post it!
@8real Here's another video that shows aluminum still glowing as its poured shortly before it starts to re-solidify (Which means its cooled back down to 1200). I think your video here already shows aluminum pouring at glow temp nicely. You're just mistakenly thinking that as its hardening and returning to a silver color that its still 1800f.
Here's a video of orange flowing aluminum. Clearest at 2:42. The video even states that the vessels have to be replaced because they reach up to 1742 degrees. /watch?v=DiQOMJvQTpg
I have repeated this so many times, but I will do it again. The debate is not whether aluminum can be orange. It is what does aluminum look like at 1800F. 1800F being the highest temp a uncontrolled fire can get. Yes, even with jet fuel....
@8real (1) Your aluminum does glow as it is poured but turns silver as its cooled by the air. Aluminum becomes solid again around 1200f and even the aluminum dripping from your container is starting to harden and won't pour. The aluminum in the following picture also cools that quickly - wwwDOTdebunking911DOTcom/capture7DOTjpg - note the spots along the very bottom are silver. (2) Fires can reach hotter than 1800 - wwwDOTdoctorfireDOTcom/flametmpDOThtml - enDOTwikipediaDOTorg/wiki/Flame
I don't know about YOU guys, but I sure CAN see the aluminum bright orange until it hits the FRYING PAN at room temperature. That's only about 1700 degrees cooler. My guess is that's what turned it silver, OBVIOUSLY
Take a look at 1:33 in this video, and the lick of orange hot aluminum is right there in front of you.
Well i've done construction work in core drilling holes for electrician's , plumbers etc. in some of the old high rise's in down town Los Angeles....
You'll notice as you'll cut threw there'll be concrete & then underneath can be anything from rebar down to when you reach the bottom an alluminum frame underneath has sort of a waffle look.
The only thing that comes up from the hole being made is concrete slurry & silver flakes from the alluminum.
@SexyMelon Yes, science works. This video demonstrates that when aluminum is 1800deg and is first poured it is bright orange (As its dripping but before it comes in contact with the giant heat sink). Then after its been exposed to the air and a metal surface designed to absorb heat it quickly cools and begins to harden. At what temp does it harden? <1200f. So At 1800 it glows. At 1200 it turns silver. Just like sparks at top vs bottom of this pic: wwwDOTdebunking911DOTcom/capture7DOTjpg
@DRAT311 "and is first poured it is bright orange"
This is an illusion given off by the orange glow of the smelting pot reflecting from the liquid metal: it's actually the same colour. You can make molten aluminum orange, but it'll require much higher temperatures (1,100C+, I think), and even then it'll still be silver when poured. Even super-heated molten aluminum will still cool very quickly in open air, however.
Your source is a baseless personal blog. Do your research.
@SexyMelon "You can make molten aluminum orange, but it'll require much higher temperatures (1,100C+, I think)" Yes, that is about right and those are the temps in an office fire. Office fires reach 1200c - wwwDOTmaceDOTmanchesterDOTacDOTuk/project/research/structures/strucfire/Design/performance/fireModelling/nominalFireCurves/defaultDOThtm && wwwDOTdoctorfireDOTcom/flametmpDOThtml
@DRAT311 1,200C is extremely optimistic, however this AIR temperature, not of any elements coming in contact with it - according to UL263 specifications WTC's steel members wouldn't reach even 250C, for example - and although they're quite enough to make weaker metals like aluminum melt, they don't - or rather, have never ever produced - flows of orange aluminum. Check for yourself against WTC4,5,6, etc. fires.
Your links give out an error, could you PM them?..
@DRAT311 In case you missed it earlier: this isn't really a good point of argument. Even NIST investigations never claimed it there to be glowing aluminum, they claimed that it was a mixture of burning wood and plastic that did mixed with it.
Like every other object aluminum will glow at certain point, however that point is beyond capacity of any kind of office fire, and that's why it has never happened. The biggest point isn't temperature, it's its bright-orange glow when falling through air.
@DRAT311 Oh yeah, that video earlier, that's "cherry red" glow, not "orange": orange one requires even higher temperatures, and the one to be visible at early hours in the morning during a bright day, falling through air, that's even higher. That's why it never happened. But anything can glow given right exposure.
Of course if you can find a video or writing of similar conditions producing something like that, that's another story. However you won't find it on "debunking" websites - I checked.
@SexyMelon Anytime a link cut from youtube doesn't appear to work its probably because youtube is adding formatting that doesn't show up until after you've entered it into the navigation bar and hit enter. Just look for and remove any %C2%AD in the address bar after you get the 404 and then try again.
@DRAT311 Oh, awesome, your source mentions ASTM tests.
"The time-temperature curve for the standard fire endurance test, ASTM E 119 goes up to 1260°C, but this is reached only in 8 hr."
These are standard, but NIST conducted them sans all fire-proofing on structural steel to test for capacity to collapse. You can't compare these things directly, but do note how long it takes to reach that temperature, and how hot the steel members got (absolute maximum of 250C, if I remember right).
@SexyMelon 1120c was reached after 40 minutes. That is sufficient to produce orange aluminum. What does it matter that it takes another 7 hours to reach 1260c?
Are you just setting aside the aluminum topic completely and talking about the weakening of the steel and collapse of the building? If so then specify if you want to dicuss the towers or WTC7 because they had different causes of collapse. The steel inside WTC1+2 was hot enough for failure. 7 was not but it collapsed from expansion
This is taken from one of NCSTARS, but it happens to be complete fabrication and - minding the aforementioned ASTM test results - egregious nonsense. These are actually the parameters NIST used for their simulations, not the actual data.
"That is sufficient to produce orange aluminum."
That's another issue that you have to prove. As it stands it's not enough in theory, and there's no proof in practice. Unless you can find any?..
@SexyMelon No, 1120 after 40 minutes was taken from the link I gave you that you said looked legit. 1120 was reached after 40 minutes but 1260 wasn't reached until 8 hours. And you yourself even said 1100 was enough to produce orange aluminum. No that I've proven office fires reach that temp you're changing the temp at which aluminum glows? So your beliefs change to fit your needs?
@DRAT311 "No, 1120 after 40 minutes was taken from the link I gave you that you said looked legit."
Neither figure is even mentioned. You're mistaken, here's the actual quote I brought up earlier: "The time-temperature curve for the standard fire endurance test, ASTM E 119 [13] goes up to 1260°C, but this is reached only in 8 hr. In actual fact, no jurisdiction demands fire endurance periods for over 4 hr, at which point the curve only reaches 1093°C."
@DRAT311 "And you yourself even said 1100 was enough to produce orange aluminum."
Temperature of metal, not air. As I mentioned earlier, 8 hours of violent burn-out and temperatures in excess of 1,200C still won't heat up steel members to anywhere higher than 250C.
Aluminum often melts in fires, but it never flows like a river, and never flows like lava. That is impossible.
@DRAT311 "Are you just setting aside the aluminum topic completely..."
No. Weakening of steel is a different topic, but I thought you'd be interested what effect fires actually have on metals. ASTM/UL tests aren't perfectly relevant, but neither is translating absolute highest temperature estimates to metal temperature estimates. It's a better comparison.
"The steel inside WTC1+2 was hot enough for failure. 7 was not but it collapsed from expansion"
Anybody ever seen the video of the molten glass pouring out of the corner of World Trade Center 2?
MegaYeshua33 14 hours ago
"a fellow on youtube said I should visit a foundry... I got one right here in my kitchen" - Classic!
thumbs up for this guy
ChazGoodAsItGets 1 week ago
Also you heated up what, a pound or 2 of aluminum, and your trying to compare it to tons of aluminum, obviously the bigger the amount the longer it takes to cool... Take some college physics courses bro.
bubbasteve8 2 months ago
@bubbasteve8 if that was true, then the Aluminum in the videos would have cooled and turned silver as it was dispersed into small amounts, as observed in the many videos of the tower's fall.
notSiD 1 month ago
ha, it was still glowing yellow as it fell from your tube...Plus have you tried melting different aluminum alloys? was that the same type of aluminum that is used to make 767's?
bubbasteve8 2 months ago
Great little experiment. The shills/ liars try to use your vid as proof that alumium CAN glow bright yellowy orange as it's poured. Gotta laugh at these clowns eh!
We all know it wasn't aluminium that poured from WTC2 just prior to its collapse, but the liars out there MUST stick to their story or all is lost for them. No normal office fire could melt steel or iron, yet we've all seen the vids where iron or steel WAS pouring out of the window. It's the smoking gun!
ShillBasher 4 months ago
I love how conversation with 9/11 truthers is always very civil.
jfeucht82 4 months ago
I love you 8real
Seigu007 4 months ago
1:33 -- looks to me as though it poured out orange, but quickly turned silver as it cooled down.
jfeucht82 4 months ago
@jfeucht82 wow, another color blind fucktard
Seigu007 4 months ago
@Seigu007 I would assume you're referring to yourself?
jfeucht82 4 months ago
@jfeucht82
In all honesty, if you just read a few comments before making the comment "-- looks to me as though it poured out orange, but quickly turned silver as it cooled down." You would have probably never made your comment.
8real 4 months ago
@8real In all honesty, you're expecting people to believe that the molten aluminum is still 1800 degrees F even after it is poured onto a room-temperature pan. It seems the aluminum is glowing orange until it is cooled off by the pan. The experiment needs to be modified so that the molten aluminum is maintained at 1800 degrees after it leaves the crucible.
jfeucht82 4 months ago
@jfeucht82
Did you read anything that was previously said? You just said the same thing....again. You just elaborated a little more this time. Fact is, aluminum is silvery at 1800F. NIST even states this FACT. They just speculate and say that "debris" and "organic materials" mixed in to make it look bright orange. If you pause the video at the right spot, you will see silvery molten aluminum hanging from the lip of a "bright red" crucible. Why isn't the aluminum bright red?
8real 4 months ago
@jfeucht82
Furthermore, you suggested that it cooled very quickly, right? Just from leaving the heat source and pouring onto a cool, room temperature pan. Well, in the context of the actual subject, wouldn't the molten aluminum have cooled off once it melted and flowed away from the heat source and then out the window? Go start a huge fire and melt a bunch of aluminum. You will soon find out that after it melts, you need a container to keep it hot. Do me a favor and just skim over the comments.
8real 4 months ago
@8real The thermal conductance through air is much lower than the transfer rate through- what looks like- a solid iron skillet. Air has one of the lowest thermal conductivities of all materials: 0.024 W/(m*K), and iron one of the highest: 80 W/(m*K). To create a more useful experiment, you should film the molten aluminum being dropped several meters through air, maybe off of a building or ledge.
jfeucht82 4 months ago
@jfeucht82
You are forgetting the context of the situation we are discussing here. You are suggesting that I drop it through the air because wind would be the only thing cooling the molten aluminum. I am trying to explain (multiple times) that there is no reason to believe that the molten metal that flowed from the WTC was inside a container and then poured out of the window. In fact, I am suggesting that the molten metal had to flow to and out of the window.
8real 4 months ago
@jfeucht82
Also, 1800F is just a number that most experts agree that is the hottest a open air "uncontrolled" office fire will get(Yes, even with jet fuel). There is no reason to believe that those fires where 1800F at the time we saw the molten metal flowing from the WTC. On top of all this, we have eyewitnesses of molten metal that looked like "lava". Lots of descriptions of "molten iron" and "molten steel" during the rescue and cleanup. Molten aluminum at 1800F is silvery. It's a fact.
8real 4 months ago
@8real All I'm suggesting is that the aluminum in the pan is not even close to 1800 degrees. I think there are too many flaws in your experiment for you to try to make the case that aluminum is a silvery color at 1800 degrees F, namely (as I already explained), you are pouring the molten aluminum into a cool container with high thermal conductance. My suggestion is that you remove the factor of the iron skillet from your experiment.
jfeucht82 4 months ago
@jfeucht82
Listen, I am not trying to deceive anybody. Molten aluminum at 1800 F is silvery. So long as there is light for it to reflect. That is "daylight conditions". Go tell NIST that molten aluminum isn't silvery. They have directly responded to this within the CONTEXT of the discussion. They say "Pure liquid aluminum would be expected to appear silvery. However, the molten metal was very likely mixed with large amounts of hot, partially burned, solid organic materials"
8real 4 months ago
@jfeucht82 youre an idiot. Ponder that
Seigu007 4 months ago
@Seigu007 hahahahahahahaha
inhuman0id 4 months ago
Where can I find this music???
AtomicSuntan1 4 months ago
@AtomicSuntan1
jamalbass(dot)com
8real 4 months ago
@8real I can only find his solo stuff, which is great also, but I really like this jam with the guitar. I was hoping there was more of this collaboration, or even some place to get the specific song in this video. Maybe you have to be lucky enough to be a personal friend and get jam tapes?
AtomicSuntan1 4 months ago
stop with that bullshit about daylight conditions, it CAN glows at daylight conditions.
about 1:42 : aluminium glows only at higher temperatures than crucible with red color. Border of that crucible was cooled down by metal wire around it...
911NTC 5 months ago
@911NTC
GO ARGUE WITH NIST. THEY HAVE EVEN STATED THAT MOLTEN ALUMINUM IS SILVER.
To suggest that aluminum glows bright orange at 1800F is not a debate any longer. I am sorry to break it to you, but the debate has moved on to - HOW CAN WE GET MOLTEN ALUMINUM @ 1800F TO LOOK LIKE WHAT FLOWED OUT OF THE WTC? By mixing in debris? Maybe, but it has yet to be proven. But, for crying out loud, stop trying to suggest that molten aluminum at 1800F resembles ANYTHING like what flowed out of the WTC.
8real 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@911NTC ROFL you are an idiot
Seigu007 4 months ago
is.*gd/vKl9EC
911NTC 5 months ago
@911NTC
Let me break this down kindergarten style for you and anybody else that shares your opinion.
Pause it at 1:42. What do you see? A bright orange crucible with silver molten aluminum hanging from the lip. How is that possible? Ill tell you how. It's because molten aluminum is SILVERY and highly reflective in its molten state. Other metals - steel, iron, copper, bronze - appear bright orange at 1800F. The crucible is a clear example of what steel looks like at 1800F as well!
8real 5 months ago
8real: sorry but if yout really think that it was the reflection from the crucible, you're retarded or blind or both. But you know what ? I think you know you're wrong ! and that's sad ...
911NTC 5 months ago
@911NTC
Listen smartass, it is the reflection that you are seeing during the pour. Molten alumin is SILVERY at 1800F in daylight conditions. It is not a debate. As I have already stated, NIST even admits this FACT.What is sad is that you can't comprehend what you are watching in the context of the discussion.
8real 5 months ago
This vid rocks, so does the guitar work.
blite13 5 months ago
Wait wait wait, watch it again. What color is it coming out of the cup? Red, it cools quickly. Come on you can't see this. It's red at 1800 degrees. This proves it.
zeppelin67637 5 months ago
@zeppelin67637
That is a reflection...I think it's comical to read comments along the lines of "It was red for a split second!" In the context of this subject, a split second is irrelevant anyways. The "aluminum" that flowed out of the WTC had to flow TO the window and then out. Was the floor supposedly 1800F? Context, context, context.
8real 5 months ago
@8real it was orange all the way to the pan. Lets see that experiment again with a couple tons of 1800 degree aluminum. Won't cool as quick, and will be orange its simple science
zeppelin67637 5 months ago
@zeppelin67637
Again, it was the reflection from the crucible. You are blowing stuff way out of context. 1800F was the hottest the fires would have got. There is no evidence that shows it was 1800 F the whole time or right before the collapse. As a matter of fact, according to NIST, it was hottest at about the 41 minute mark. What makes you think the whole plane melted and reached 1800F? Do you have any evidence of any plane crashing and melting?You can not and will not answer those questions.
8real 5 months ago
@8real yup watch the twin towers plane crashes. Pretty good evidence that a plane can crash and that some aluminum can melt and run out of a window. Check it out. Just search "twin towers" Youll find alot of evidence of crashing planes and melting aluminum running out of a building
zeppelin67637 5 months ago
@zeppelin67637
Being a smartass isn't going to accomplish anything. I have the video posted on my channel that you are referencing. How about you go watch it? Then, go start a fire with jet fuel(kerosene), furniture, paper, wood and melt some aluminum(if it even fully melts, lol). See what it looks like...If it does melt, it will FLOW away from the heat source. Are you suggesting that it was inside of some container that was 1800F and then somehow dumped out of the window or what?
8real 5 months ago
@8real if not aluminum then what was it? Don't say iron from thermite, anyone with a brain knows thats just ignorant.
zeppelin67637 5 months ago
@zeppelin67637
Really? That easy to dismiss it, huh? I am just pointing out that it doesn't look anything like molten aluminum. Yet, people like you wonder onto my channel and try to tell me otherwise. NIST even admits that molten aluminum is "silvery". Have you tried to argue with them? They just suggest that other materials mixed in and magically made it uniformly glow bright orange. Which, I have another video explaining that hypothesis false.
8real 5 months ago
@8real So what is it then? Don't say iron from thermite cause thats just ignorant. Till someone has a better idea..........
zeppelin67637 5 months ago
What is ignorant is someone suggesting that they know it is aluminum. NIST hypothesized that it was aluminum mixed with other organic materials. I have a video that disproves that hypothesis. If you have evidence that shows it is definitely aluminum, I suggest that you share it with NIST.
8real 5 months ago
Could someone link me to the report of a study that found any kind of thermite at the WTC?
violencerunsunabated 6 months ago
@violencerunsunabated
Just google "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe". That is the name of the peer reviewed paper that was in Bentham Open Chemical Physics Journal.
8real 6 months ago
@8real Oh you mean the rust proofing paint/coating? Yeah that wasn't thermite
zeppelin67637 5 months ago
@zeppelin67637
Why would you comment about a paper that you have never read? I suggest that you go read it and then come back and explain why it is wrong. If you accomplish that much, I suggest that you write a paper that disputes it, contact the journal and have your paper peer reviewed.
8real 5 months ago 2
molten metal aside...the only 2 studies done on the rubble of the WTC turned up nanothermite......and NIST refused to test for thermite/sulfer compounds because "it would have required too much to demolish the towers"-- a theory that was easily debunked. So once i can get an explanation for the nanothermite- maybe ill shut up. Or when the govt. releases one of the hundreds of pentagon videos in their posession...that show a plane hitting it.....?
1buckdawg 7 months ago
@1buckdawg
They have dust samples. They can debunk it if they wanted/could. The also have a hangar full of steal beams. I think my point about molten metal is that NIST denies it, even after we have videos of all the rescue workers talking about it. NIST denies it because they have no explanation as to how it got there! Well, sometimes the truth hurts. Keep up the good fight!
8real 7 months ago
and silver reflects - like in all mirrors - it reflects the orange glow of the container
mooners40 8 months ago 4
@mooners40
Finally, someone that understands! Even though NIST admits as much, people that have never melted a drop of aluminum will tell me that aluminum at 1800F is bright orange or bright red because a color chart says so...
8real 8 months ago
It was red as it poured
Denierbud11 8 months ago
@Denierbud11
Read the comments section, then respond.
8real 8 months ago
@8real
respond to what? aluminum can be red hot
Denierbud11 8 months ago
@Denierbud11
It is people like you that I shouldn't respond to. It is a waist of time. I am going to respond in the hopes that someone else reads it. A 9 year old knows what context means. Do you? It is something that you have to apply to everyday life. It helps you understand the conversation. You are the guy that walks up to a group of people and hear one sentence and think you have it all figured out. Nobody said "Aluminum can NOT be red hot"...Learn the debate and what has already been said
8real 8 months ago
@Denierbud11
Yeah -- I'll read nine pages of comments and get back to you
Denierbud11 8 months ago
@Denierbud11 watch?v=jm1QvcynetU flir footage of 9/11 - the fires were not that hot - what do you think made aluminum glow orange and fall thru air away from the towers?
mooners40 8 months ago
@Denierbud11" Pure liquid aluminum would be expected to appear silvery. However, the molten metal was very likely mixed with large amounts of hot, partially burned, solid organic materials (e.g., furniture, carpets, partitions and computers) which can display an orange glow, much like logs burning in a fireplace. The apparent color also would have been affected by slag formation on the surface." quoted From NIST - and disproved by Jones in experiment - fail
mooners40 8 months ago 6
@mooners40 it was clearly molten stell... clearlyyyy... nist lied
zelenko2 5 months ago
the aluminum was bright orange, it turned gray because you poured on a cold non heated pan causing it to solidify. Heat the pan to 1800 degrees first then show this.
RBAWilcox 8 months ago
@RBAWilcox
And, the aluminum that flowed from the 80th floor magically floated to the window? And to be honest, this isn't even a debate anymore in my eyes. Aluminum at 1800F appears silvery in daylight conditions. Post a video showing me otherwise...
8real 8 months ago
@8real well as we all know there were fires in the buildings, These fires burning at 1800 degrees would keep the steel hot and the aluminum melted, you just poured on a non heated pan causing it to cool and turn gray, when you poured it out it was bright orange.
RBAWilcox 8 months ago
@RBAWilcox
Go show me something that said the whole floor was 1800F the whole duration up until it collapsed. You can't. I am starting to get tired of having to say the same thing, over and over. But, here it goes. Read "NIST NCSTAR 1-5: Reconstruction of the Fires in the World Trade Center Towers". You will learn that during NIST tests, the fires reached 1100C at the 33 minute mark then decreased rapidly. Once the fuel burned off, the fires dropped down to around 400C at the 41 minute mark.
8real 8 months ago
@RBAWilcox
Do me a favor and watch the video and tell me what color the aluminum is that is hanging from the lip of the crucible. It's silvery. What color is the steel crucible? Bright orange! Again, this isn't even a debate in my eyes anymore. Aluminum that gets poured out in daylight conditions appears silvery at 1800F.
8real 8 months ago
@RBAWilcox
I will also add one more thing to help some people out. NIST states very clearly
"Pure liquid aluminum would be expected to appear SILVERY. However, the molten metal was very likely mixed with large amounts of hot, partially burned, solid organic materials." For the source, google "nist 911 fact sheet". Check out my other video "Molten Aluminum Experiment" to see what happens when you mix organic materials into molten aluminum.
8real 8 months ago
@8real I guess that means if I want to prove myself right, I need to do my own experiment to convince you, am I correct?
RBAWilcox 8 months ago
@RBAWilcox
I believe it would be the other way around. You would have to do a experiment to convince yourself. I know what aluminum looks like at 1800F. It doesn't look ANYTHING like what flowed out of the WTC. I have stated very obvious facts. 1. The aluminum had to flow to and out the window 2. The WTC fires where not 1800F the whole duration. 3. Silvery molten aluminum is hanging from the lip of a bright orange crucible. 4. Even NIST admits aluminum is silvery at 1800-2000F.
8real 8 months ago
@8real NIST also reports that their was a mixture of burning organic materials in the Aluminum, did you do that in this experiment
RBAWilcox 8 months ago
@RBAWilcox
Have you read any of my comments?
8real 8 months ago
@8real yes I have, What type of Aluminum are you using anyways
RBAWilcox 8 months ago
@RBAWilcox
If you have read my comments directed at you, you would have seen that I already quoted NIST and directed you to watch another video. You are going to have to move along now. This isn't a debate anymore. Go tell NIST to fix their FAQ sheet on 9/11/2001. They even stated that pure molten aluminum at the expected temperatures would appear...SILVERY. Not bright orange, red or purple, but SILVERY. They went on to explain why they thought it could have turned bright orange.
8real 8 months ago
How come it is so clumpy?
I like the requests for pouring it from a higher spot... if you can figure out a way to get all that stuff on your roof. without burning down your house, I would be very greatful, lol. Oh also, you should try the same time of morning as 9/11. So we can see if sunlight plays any roll in reducing the glow, or adding to it.
Awesome experiment none the less, I appreciate your effort, sir.
bweazel 8 months ago
@bweazel
I am not sure if that would help to be honest. Either you believe what we observed flow from the WTC's 80th floor is aluminum or not. I believe there is mountains of evidence to prove NIST's theory wrong about aluminum mixed with organics. People have to understand, aluminum does glow, but when you put it in the context of the actual debate, it doesn't look ANYTHING like what we saw flowing out of the WTC's 80th floor. I have yet to see a video specifically heating aluminum to 1800F
8real 8 months ago
@bweazel wait, even though he just "proved" molten aluminum doesnt glow orange at 1800 F why are you questioning it more? Doesnt that help prove your point, seriously, im curious...
KeepingItObvious 8 months ago
@bweazel @bweazel wait, even though he just "proved" molten aluminum doesnt glow orange at 1800 F why are you questioning it more? Doesnt that help prove your point, seriously, im curious...
KeepingItObvious 8 months ago
Okay! Here we go again! You said the aluminum is 2000 series. Any Alloy that is a pure series pours " More Silver". Pour a more common alloy at 1800 and you will never get silver. I can tell you now any building that is constructed with aluminum is not going to be an X series. I don't have to argue......................or debate, I work with it daily. I know the alloys and what happens, flat out! It can glow at 1800 especially with an ignition source!!!!
hryptr123 8 months ago
@hryptr123
Make a video and understand what you are trying to recreate...I am tired of telling you that you need to learn what this debate is about. It can glow, right? At 1800F, right? OK, will it look like what we observed flowing out of the WTC? After rolling to the window and falling 10s of stores? Will it look like that? If you say it can, then make a video and convince me!
8real 8 months ago
Excellent video. I was 99.999999% that even at 1800 degs Al would be silver before it hit the ground (60+ stories). Thanks for putting this together.
dapperdan623 11 months ago
just check the video at 1:33.... it's glowing red as it falls toward the pan. For the record, I do not buy the official 9/11 story, but evidence is evidence!
boughb 11 months ago
@boughb
Molten aluminum is highly reflective. You are seeing the reflection from the crucible. Instead of telling people that it is red at 1:33, try heating aluminum up to 1800F yourself AND THEN tell people what you observe...
8real 11 months ago
@8real please make it drip from a higher point to the ground next time.. the cold pan quickly absorbs the aluminums heat, so we have the actual fall of the molten aluminum on too few frames.. u have the owen!
dickobrazz01 9 months ago
@8real Not to mention you are taking the heat from the whole source...............not the aluminum only!
hryptr123 8 months ago
@boughb excellent point. The point i would counter with is watch
watch?v=8OQWz7xlINA&lc=1v2tHha_-dl-WrLRNIDkIdgjzgTgXuQ9rhNaLqS9T8Q& go to 1:43.
there is yellow molten metal droplets that have fallen some 60? 70? stories. Alum in the 1800F video (on this page) was silver in 1/2 a second (even as a large blob) I'm quite certain molten alum drops would be silver after 10 seconds of free fall not bright yellow as the are in the video i pointed you to. All the best.
dapperdan623 9 months ago
@boughb There is no point arguing with this guy! I work at an ALUMINUM recycling plant. I have been there over 13 years and know what it looks like at diff. temps. Depends on the alloy of aluminum and so many other factors. But yes it cannot only glow orange it can glow white! He's using 2000 series here.......takes a lot to glow. Not to mention he is measuring the total heat source....why didn't he take the temp out of the heat source??
hryptr123 8 months ago
@hryptr123
The aluminum's temperature was measured, then it was poured. Why don't you enlighten us how fast aluminum cools away from its heat source outside of a container. With 13 years of experience, you should know that answer. I have already tried to tell you, read my profile and learn what this debate is about.
8real 8 months ago
Pause at 1:33 and you'll see that it is glowing red
boughb 11 months ago
@boughb Reflection, Ive melted aluminum with a torch its silver (nothing to do with debunking anything use to be welders helper).
Tary88 11 months ago
It is "silly" because the video that you claim as evidence (this one) shows aluminum at 1800f pouring orange and then cooling to 1200f and being silver and calling that proof that its always silver. Pause this video just as the aluminum starts to hit the pan and it is all orange. Just like the other videos of aluminum where it is not in contact with a heat sink, is still liquid, and is orange.
DRAT311 1 year ago
@DRAT311 This video shows silver aluminum, unless you refuse to look and see that the only glowing part is the smelting pot itself. Aluminum itself has orange reflections, but it's still silver, you can see it if you pause the video.
Even the video you dug up shows cherry-red aluminum, not orange, and that cools pretty quickly too. This is BETTER THAN IDEAL scenario, and it's still nowhere near... Well, actually "official story" says nothing like this. Only "debunking911dotcom" does.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@DRAT311 You can't arbitrarily pick and choose points of evidence and ignore others. Just because you can heat aluminum enough to faintly glow in ideal smelting conditions - and you can - doesn't mean an office fire will turn it into white-hot river.
I know it's hard to accept because it's very hard evidence and it makes official conspiracy theory irreparably crumble, but that's where the evidence lies. You just have to figure out whether you even want to know the truth.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@DRAT311 This is a complex issue, but I think if you look over that wall of text I typed below, you'll find there are many factors and data, and all of them point to impossibility of it being aluminum, confirming exactly what common sense and common knowledge suggests.
The only thing you can do is pick the most extreme temperature the hottest part of any fire can reach and assume this turns aluminum into lava... But if this were to be true, you'd freeze to death from going outside in summer.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon ...Well, actually it's kind of an easy issue. Here's the video. It's silver.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@DRAT311
Even though I don't agree with you...lets say that I do. What makes you think that the molten metal pouring out of the tower was in some sort of container? Wouldn't it cool as it flowed TO and then OUT of the window? Again, 1800F is a STRETCH....People make these extreme comparisons that blow stuff way out of proportion....It's pretty well accepted that the fires didn't get hotter than 1800F but what else that is also accepted, is that it wouldn't have been 1800F the WHOLE duration..
VasbrosGames 11 months ago
@VasbrosGames Why would it have to be in a container? It was pooled on the ground and then precisely when that side of the building began to bow inward(which means the floor had to become uneven, sloping down toward the outside) a liquid runs downhill and out the hole. It only needed to be 1800f in the corner where everything was bunched up. That is precisely where all the fuel(hydrocarbons, not jet fuel) was so that is where you would expect the highest temps.
DRAT311 11 months ago
@VasbrosGames It is common knowledge (I've linked multiple sources, there are dozens. And the only websites that disagree are CT websites that provide no math, experiments, or links) that office fires burn up to 1200c or over 2000f though 1800f is all that is required for this incident to occur just as I explained it. 1800f is not at all a stretch. It is a little below the average temps in a typical office fire.
DRAT311 11 months ago
@VasbrosGames Lets assume for a second that this was the steel of one of the many sections of outer column being melted by thermite? The thermite would have to be placed directly up against a significant portion of the columns between the windows. Why didn't we see the thermitic reaction through the windows? Why didn't steel leak from any of the other holes? Why did it just happen to only come from the corner where the plane was?
DRAT311 11 months ago
@VasbrosGames Just go here - wwwDOTdebunking911DOTcom/thermiteDOThtm and read the discussion on the amount of thermite necessary to cut through enough of the vertical columns in the WTC to make it collapse. And then explain why some of the trace elements found in thermite were NOT found in any samples of debris from the WTC. You're saying Aluminum required assumptions and can't be proven while failing to provide any evidence of thermite or a rational scenario involving it.
DRAT311 11 months ago
@DRAT311 What is the orange metal spewing out of the side of the building?
Tary88 11 months ago
@Tary88 We can never know for sure. Just like we can never know for sure if OJ killed his wife. The evidence in both cases has been presented. You can read the arguments here and watch the video. You can see the color of the aluminum before it touches the heatsink. Basically at this point I think if you say its steel or you say he's innocent all the evidence in the world could never change your mind because your mind wasn't making the decision in the first place.
DRAT311 11 months ago
@DRAT311 But you can say for sure its not aluminum? How or why though is impossible to know for sure.
Tary88 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DRAT311 But you can say for sure its not aluminum? How or why though is impossible to know for sure.
Tary88 11 months ago
...And, quite frankly, everyone knows molten aluminum is silver anyway. Common sense, common knowledge. There's no magic fairy to help government's fairytales here.
Jones proposed this, NIST dismissed it with a silly explanation, Jones proved it wrong through experiment. Coming back with another baseless excuse is facetious at best. There's the evidence.
Speaking of NIST, not even they say it's aluminum alone, but "mixture of wood, plastic and aluminum". They know it doesn't glow, at least.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon No, all CT's "know." Just like all CT's "know" 911 was an inside job and "everyone" "knows" aliens landed at Roswell. Declaring something true doesn't make it so. I've shown you multiple videos of orange aluminum and its right before you in this very video. You say that if it was hard then it couldn't flow... exactly... and if you pause it as its flowing, before it's touched the pan... It's orange. After it touches the heatsink and becomes solid it returns to silver.
DRAT311 1 year ago
@DRAT311 Insult is not an argument. There's the evidence, either present something contrary, or it's end of the argument.
What you did is copy-paste baseless ignorance of basic metallurgy taken from a crummily-written personal that not even government's conspiracy story supports. This isn't research.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon 1:33 = Orange aluminum falling through free air.
DRAT311 1 year ago
@DRAT311 I told you already it's not orange, it's the glow of the smelting pot reflecting off of it. Look close and you'll see it's still silver: 1800F isn't nearly enough temperature to get it to glow. More importantly, it DOES lose it's glow extremely quickly.
The video you have there shows you CAN get it to glow, as you can with any other substance. At its melting point, however, and at 1,000C, it does not glow orange, and it will lose the glow quickly in the air (as shown).
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon Here is another video. I've shown this to you before. watch?v=NU956GwJDRQ Why does this aluminum continue to be orange after its poured into a mold that isn't a heat sink?
DRAT311 1 year ago
After doing further reading on the subject from a website who's domain i shall link on my page, I have concluded that the molten metal seen from the towers is Molten Lead from the UPS battery owned by Fuji Bank, a tenant of the 81st floor. It was either this or a combination of this and molten Slag from the aluminum, molten glass, and burning organic material.
Either way, it could not have been steel or iron, because there was no melting of the structure of the building face, (continued)
burninrain1 1 year ago
@burninrain1 (continued) despite it being subjected to, according to the conspiracy theorists, molten steel, for several minutes, which, according to those who say it was steel, had to be around 1400-1500 degrees C, which is the melting point of steel.
burninrain1 1 year ago
@burninrain1 (continued), although if it was subjected to steel at 1400-1500 degrees C for several minutes, then there would have been.
burninrain1 1 year ago
@burninrain1 "the molten metal seen from the towers is Molten Lead from the UPS battery owned by Fuji Bank, a tenant of the 81st floor."
I've seen this discussed before. Seems like a good possibility.
"and molten Slag from the aluminum"
which is most likely an aluminum alloy, not pure aluminum.
The curious thing is that the dripping stuff only occurs in one location, so that strengthens the argument that it's from a site specific substance like the UPS battery bank.
bagintree 1 year ago 2
@bagintree
Go heat lead (or batteries*sigh*) up to 1800F and pour it out and let me know what it looks like....
8real 1 year ago
@burninrain1
You mean after going to a debunking website and reading all the red herrings, lol....Do some real research. Your comments on batteries, temps, "could not have been", 1400-1500C, are all red herrings. If this happened, then that would have happened and if that happened, this would have happened, blah blah blah....Go heat lead up to 1800F, record it and post it as a response.
8real 1 year ago
@burninrain1 Molten lead looks almost exactly like molten silver or aluminum (watch?v=sN5aMjTCfo4). Glass melts at 1500c or greater (wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_melting_point_of_glass)
Ahlywog 11 months ago
@burninrain1
"Either way, it could not have been steel or iron, because there was no melting of the structure of the building face,"
The building face was clad with aluminum. How then did you conclude the above? And who ever suggested that the molten metal MUST come from the building face?
It may have been from further within the structure and flowed over the concrete floor.
clipper0udo2 11 months ago
For my source of my statement regarding the UPS, google:
11 Settembre: UPS on the 81st floor of WTC2?
And it should be the first link.
burninrain1 1 year ago
The metal from the WTC was most likely mixed in with other materials, such as glowing embers from burning organic material and molten glass, and chemical reactions from foreign materials also potentially added to the glow.
Also, there was much more aluminum pouring out of the WTC than from the crucible, and the ambient lighting likely added to the glow as well.
I'm not saying that I know for sure that it is aluminum, but it likely was not steel, because the metal flowed from (continued)
burninrain1 1 year ago
@burninrain1 (continued) the building face for several minutes, yet there was no evidence of melting of the supporting steel structure of the building face.
burninrain1 1 year ago
@burninrain1 Another possible cause were the many UPS (Uninterruptible Power Supply) batteries belonging to Fuji Bank, which was a tenant of the 81st floor. Lead from the batteries, as well as hydrogen generated during a short circuit, also likely added to the glow.
So, not only was the aluminum naturally slightly orange, but organic material, molten lead and glass, ambient lighting, and highly flammable hydrogen likely had an effect on the glow.
The metal was, therefore, likely aluminum.
burninrain1 1 year ago
Drat311... I guess you can continue to split hairs that will defy all laws of science. The fact that 2 of the hijackers were trained on a military base seems to be overlooked too. The other hijackers who were trained at a public flight school were living with an FBI informant. I'm not going to talk till I'm blue in the face anymore with people who absolutely refuse to look at this for what it is.
crazypaul34 1 year ago
@crazypaul34 The fact is, I'm the one addressing your points and explaining in detail why they are wrong and providing evidence. All you've done so far is accuse me of insults, respond to my evidence by literally saying "blah blah blah" and nothing else, and then said you have evidence but don't want to waste your time presenting it. You are wasting me time.
DRAT311 1 year ago
@DRAT311 Name me one steel only support structure that was hit by a plane and survived. Do you know the difference between steel and concrete? Concrete does not weaken in fire like steel. WTC7 was a very unique and very poorly designed structure. It had a giant open atrium in the first 10 floors so all of the weight was laterally distributed to 3 columns. The fire was caused by lateral transfers expanding from heat, not collapsing. It was unique in every way.
DRAT311 1 year ago
@DRAT311 ..... Go look at youtube footage of building 7 falling and not compare it to a demolition. Its an exact cabon copy. As for wasting time this is why I don't care anymore about disproving anyone with a theory that's never worked with steel or built anything. 2 of the hijackers trained on a military base in Pensacola. Two other hijackers that went to a commercial pilot school were living with an FBI infromant. The money trails that lead to our supposed allies..... this is why I don't care
crazypaul34 1 year ago
@crazypaul34 The fact that it looks like a demolition means nothing! If it were a carbon copy there would be explosions heard like on EVERY demolition. If it were a demolition the building would have fallen into its own footprint, not into the verizon building across the street, causing so much damage it had to be demolished. If it were a demo the collapse would have started at the bottom, not with the penthouse sinking into the core several seconds before the facade collapsed.
DRAT311 1 year ago
@DRAT311 .... Well of course it didn't exactly fall like a construction demolition because that takes months of cutting to even get it to fall perfectly. As for falling in the footprint it damn near perfectly did. As for explosions, go check out more videos of witnesses reporting explosions. Not just office workers, but police and firemen who were also veterans. So they know what a bomb sounds like. As for the fact of dodging documented facts I presented keep clinging to that raft.
crazypaul34 1 year ago
@crazypaul34 I could produce evidence for you all day but in the end you'll just continue not caring. The money you need to follow is the 100's of millions being made by all of the people who started the 911 conspiracy theory. They saw the market for paranoia and they met the demand perfectly. Every one of them is rich and none of them are using that money to finance an investigation into what happened. They could easily finance a new official investigation but thats not what they're after.
DRAT311 1 year ago
@DRAT311 .... Yeah no shit I wouldn't care. You're trying to compare the money of people selling books to the money of BP and Halliburton. Who has clearly more to gain financially ? Every investigation they have lobbied to get started have been shut down. Don't believe this country does some foul shit with terrorism ? Look into the history of how the United States commited terrorism, bombed mosques, killed women and children to overthrow the elected leader of Iran some time ago.
crazypaul34 1 year ago
and what was all of the terrorism we commited over ? Their democraticaly elected leader wanted to socialize their country's oil fields cutting off BP. Sounds familiar to me. As for book sales... I'm sure Bush and Cheney's friends made allot more money (in the billions) and never lifted a pen. Start to read in to what this country has really done and don't write it off. Most countries hate us for a legitimate fucking reason.
crazypaul34 1 year ago
@crazypaul34 ...Are you being serious? The US, terrorism?
I DARE you to give me ONE example of the US Military intentionally proforming a military operation to bomb a mosque with the intent of killing civilians.
I also dare you to name one operation who's intent was the murder of innocent women and children.
Compare that to the constant terrorism Muslims commit; all of the churches bombed or burned;the slavery the Berbers committed; all the things destroyed by Islam, such as (continued)
burninrain1 1 year ago
@burninrain1 (continued) The Library of Alexandria, and the outer casing of the Great Pyramid of Giza (although it was shaken loose during an earthquake, the Muslims removed the casing to build mosques and fortresses in Cairo).
Consider the fact that they have invaded Christian Lands all throughout history; The Moors conquering Spain and invading France; the Seljuks destroying the Byzantines and turning the Empire into the Ottoman Empire, which constantly invaded Europe; (continued)
burninrain1 1 year ago
@burninrain1 (continued) In fact, it was the Seljuk invasion which sparked the Crusades. Originally, The First Crusade was a cry for help from the Anatolians to the rest of Europe, which was answered through the first Crusade.
The US, terrorism? I don't think so.
burninrain1 1 year ago
@burninrain1 ... For naming specific operations look into Operation Northwoods. And for some good research read into the CIA's involvement during the 1953 Iranian Coup De'etat. The more CIA documents declassified the more you will learn just how many terrorists this governmnet has had on a payroll. And the reason for overthrowing the democratically elected Iranian president...... He wanted to socialize the oil fields for the country and keep them away from BP.
crazypaul34 1 year ago
@crazypaul34 Well, first of all, the socializing of any economic venture is immoral and wrong. Mohammed Mosaddegh wrongfully nationalized the British owned Anglo-Iranian Oil company, and this was Britain's largest overseas investment, so, while i do think that Britain and the CIA overreacted by putting Iran under dictatorship, you have to understand the background of the whole fiasco. Besides, this took place 58 years ago.
burninrain1 1 year ago
@burninrain1 .... So you're saying the terrorism used was good ? Whatev....
crazypaul34 1 year ago
@MrHollywood2177
You watched it, and commented....How much time do you have on your hands? It is one of MANY examples that shows what aluminum looks like at 1800F. Go make a video to dispute that fact and post it!
8real 1 year ago
@8real Here's another video that shows aluminum still glowing as its poured shortly before it starts to re-solidify (Which means its cooled back down to 1200). I think your video here already shows aluminum pouring at glow temp nicely. You're just mistakenly thinking that as its hardening and returning to a silver color that its still 1800f.
DRAT311 1 year ago
@8real Forgot the link... watch?v=NU956GwJDRQ
DRAT311 1 year ago
hahaha I love the triumph of pure science over bullshit, excellent work, thank you for the video
fertilizerspike 1 year ago
Here's a video of orange flowing aluminum. Clearest at 2:42. The video even states that the vessels have to be replaced because they reach up to 1742 degrees. /watch?v=DiQOMJvQTpg
DRAT311 1 year ago
@DRAT311
You dummy, those are the anodes they use for the electrolysis reaction that separates the aluminum from the bauxite.
fertilizerspike 1 year ago
@DRAT311
I have repeated this so many times, but I will do it again. The debate is not whether aluminum can be orange. It is what does aluminum look like at 1800F. 1800F being the highest temp a uncontrolled fire can get. Yes, even with jet fuel....
8real 1 year ago 5
@8real (1) Your aluminum does glow as it is poured but turns silver as its cooled by the air. Aluminum becomes solid again around 1200f and even the aluminum dripping from your container is starting to harden and won't pour. The aluminum in the following picture also cools that quickly - wwwDOTdebunking911DOTcom/capture7DOTjpg - note the spots along the very bottom are silver. (2) Fires can reach hotter than 1800 - wwwDOTdoctorfireDOTcom/flametmpDOThtml - enDOTwikipediaDOTorg/wiki/Flame
DRAT311 1 year ago
I don't know about YOU guys, but I sure CAN see the aluminum bright orange until it hits the FRYING PAN at room temperature. That's only about 1700 degrees cooler. My guess is that's what turned it silver, OBVIOUSLY
Take a look at 1:33 in this video, and the lick of orange hot aluminum is right there in front of you.
Merlin5x5 1 year ago
Those who thought the yellow/orange metal from the wtc was aluminum probably ate too much aluminum themselves - hence the low IQ -lolol
swu880 1 year ago
Well i've done construction work in core drilling holes for electrician's , plumbers etc. in some of the old high rise's in down town Los Angeles....
You'll notice as you'll cut threw there'll be concrete & then underneath can be anything from rebar down to when you reach the bottom an alluminum frame underneath has sort of a waffle look.
The only thing that comes up from the hole being made is concrete slurry & silver flakes from the alluminum.
Nothing of any like orange material.
donjuandonjuan 1 year ago
Science.
It works, bitches.
SexyMelon 1 year ago 9
@SexyMelon Yes, science works. This video demonstrates that when aluminum is 1800deg and is first poured it is bright orange (As its dripping but before it comes in contact with the giant heat sink). Then after its been exposed to the air and a metal surface designed to absorb heat it quickly cools and begins to harden. At what temp does it harden? <1200f. So At 1800 it glows. At 1200 it turns silver. Just like sparks at top vs bottom of this pic: wwwDOTdebunking911DOTcom/capture7DOTjpg
DRAT311 1 year ago
@DRAT311 "and is first poured it is bright orange"
This is an illusion given off by the orange glow of the smelting pot reflecting from the liquid metal: it's actually the same colour. You can make molten aluminum orange, but it'll require much higher temperatures (1,100C+, I think), and even then it'll still be silver when poured. Even super-heated molten aluminum will still cool very quickly in open air, however.
Your source is a baseless personal blog. Do your research.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon "You can make molten aluminum orange, but it'll require much higher temperatures (1,100C+, I think)" Yes, that is about right and those are the temps in an office fire. Office fires reach 1200c - wwwDOTmaceDOTmanchesterDOTacDOTuk/project/research/structures/strucfire/Design/performance/fireModelling/nominalFireCurves/defaultDOThtm && wwwDOTdoctorfireDOTcom/flametmpDOThtml
DRAT311 1 year ago
@DRAT311 1,200C is extremely optimistic, however this AIR temperature, not of any elements coming in contact with it - according to UL263 specifications WTC's steel members wouldn't reach even 250C, for example - and although they're quite enough to make weaker metals like aluminum melt, they don't - or rather, have never ever produced - flows of orange aluminum. Check for yourself against WTC4,5,6, etc. fires.
Your links give out an error, could you PM them?..
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@DRAT311 In case you missed it earlier: this isn't really a good point of argument. Even NIST investigations never claimed it there to be glowing aluminum, they claimed that it was a mixture of burning wood and plastic that did mixed with it.
Like every other object aluminum will glow at certain point, however that point is beyond capacity of any kind of office fire, and that's why it has never happened. The biggest point isn't temperature, it's its bright-orange glow when falling through air.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@DRAT311 Oh yeah, that video earlier, that's "cherry red" glow, not "orange": orange one requires even higher temperatures, and the one to be visible at early hours in the morning during a bright day, falling through air, that's even higher. That's why it never happened. But anything can glow given right exposure.
Of course if you can find a video or writing of similar conditions producing something like that, that's another story. However you won't find it on "debunking" websites - I checked.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon Anytime a link cut from youtube doesn't appear to work its probably because youtube is adding formatting that doesn't show up until after you've entered it into the navigation bar and hit enter. Just look for and remove any %C2%AD in the address bar after you get the 404 and then try again.
DRAT311 1 year ago
@DRAT311 Got your PM, looks like a good source, I agree with what it says. Thanks.
Do consider what I said below, too.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@DRAT311 Oh, awesome, your source mentions ASTM tests.
"The time-temperature curve for the standard fire endurance test, ASTM E 119 goes up to 1260°C, but this is reached only in 8 hr."
These are standard, but NIST conducted them sans all fire-proofing on structural steel to test for capacity to collapse. You can't compare these things directly, but do note how long it takes to reach that temperature, and how hot the steel members got (absolute maximum of 250C, if I remember right).
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon 1120c was reached after 40 minutes. That is sufficient to produce orange aluminum. What does it matter that it takes another 7 hours to reach 1260c?
Are you just setting aside the aluminum topic completely and talking about the weakening of the steel and collapse of the building? If so then specify if you want to dicuss the towers or WTC7 because they had different causes of collapse. The steel inside WTC1+2 was hot enough for failure. 7 was not but it collapsed from expansion
DRAT311 1 year ago
@DRAT311 "1120c was reached after 40 minutes."
This is taken from one of NCSTARS, but it happens to be complete fabrication and - minding the aforementioned ASTM test results - egregious nonsense. These are actually the parameters NIST used for their simulations, not the actual data.
"That is sufficient to produce orange aluminum."
That's another issue that you have to prove. As it stands it's not enough in theory, and there's no proof in practice. Unless you can find any?..
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@SexyMelon No, 1120 after 40 minutes was taken from the link I gave you that you said looked legit. 1120 was reached after 40 minutes but 1260 wasn't reached until 8 hours. And you yourself even said 1100 was enough to produce orange aluminum. No that I've proven office fires reach that temp you're changing the temp at which aluminum glows? So your beliefs change to fit your needs?
DRAT311 1 year ago
@DRAT311 "No, 1120 after 40 minutes was taken from the link I gave you that you said looked legit."
Neither figure is even mentioned. You're mistaken, here's the actual quote I brought up earlier: "The time-temperature curve for the standard fire endurance test, ASTM E 119 [13] goes up to 1260°C, but this is reached only in 8 hr. In actual fact, no jurisdiction demands fire endurance periods for over 4 hr, at which point the curve only reaches 1093°C."
This isn't for WTC, this is ASTM test.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@DRAT311 "And you yourself even said 1100 was enough to produce orange aluminum."
Temperature of metal, not air. As I mentioned earlier, 8 hours of violent burn-out and temperatures in excess of 1,200C still won't heat up steel members to anywhere higher than 250C.
Aluminum often melts in fires, but it never flows like a river, and never flows like lava. That is impossible.
"So your beliefs change to fit your needs?"
Listen before resorting to accusations.
SexyMelon 1 year ago
@DRAT311 "Are you just setting aside the aluminum topic completely..."
No. Weakening of steel is a different topic, but I thought you'd be interested what effect fires actually have on metals. ASTM/UL tests aren't perfectly relevant, but neither is translating absolute highest temperature estimates to metal temperature estimates. It's a better comparison.
"The steel inside WTC1+2 was hot enough for failure. 7 was not but it collapsed from expansion"
Evidence for that being?..
SexyMelon 1 year ago