Just because someone who doesn't know anything about metal said there was molten steel doesn't mean it was molten steel. The thought of molten aluminum probably never occurred to the people saying that, and you mentioned yourself in this video, it was above the melting point of aluminum.
Also steel is a great conductor of heat, loses structural integrity at 500f, and under hundreds of tons of pressure with compromised beams it's not surprising the skeleton would come loose.
And why should we listen to your opinion if there was molten steel or not? You were not there, correct? The bigger question is, can fires 1000 ft up cause this? Obviously, not...
@muzicmaker2001 Eye witness testimonies are meaningless, some cop or fireman using the words "molten steel" proves only that the cop or fireman in question doesn't know the difference between saying molten steel and molten metal.
Where's your evidence that it actually was molten steel, and not the aluminum that made up the entire facade of the structure and would have melted at much lower temperatures?
Wait. Eyewitness testimonies are meaningless, but also can be used as evidence in court? Again, you are the one claiming these witnesses are wrong. The burden of proof is on you. Actual witnesses or some guy on YT dedicated to defending 911 no matter what the evidence is. Not a hard choice, right?
@muzicmaker2001 I repeat, some cop or fireman using the words "molten steel" proves only that the cop or fireman in question doesn't know the difference between saying molten steel and molten metal.
Where's your evidence that it actually was molten steel, and not the aluminum that made up the entire facade of the structure and would have melted at much lower temperatures?
My proof is the temps recorded NASA, eyewitnesses and video footage of extreme heat buried in the rubble. Yor proof that it didn't exist is...........? Help me out here?
@muzicmaker2001 So your proof is that there was extreme heat?
Ok here's help, the entire facade of the structure was made of aluminum, aluminum melts at much lower temperatures than steel, it's been confirmed that temperatures were high enough to melt aluminum, and this NASA BS has been debunked.
Where's the melted steel? Show me the melted steel.
So, let me get this right. You think the fire about 1000 ft up (the only heat source) melted the aluminum from the structure (before the collapse??) and then that aluminum somehow ended up buried under ground? Did it flow like lava downward to reach the ground or take the elevator down? And this fire 1000 ft up (or heated aluminum??) also melted cars and firetrucks at ground zero? You can't be serious with this?
So, when did this heat from the fire impacted zone end up buried in the rubble? Was it when the building collapsed and the upper floors smothered the fire? Or was it when the fire impacted area was pulverized and ejected laterally? And why hasn't this BS...err.. thermal transfer (to create temps over 1000C) occured in any other building collapse? Please use something other than 911myths, PM and Rkowen's videos for your research. I will say this. You are very entertaining..
@muzicmaker2001 Burning jet fuel ran down the beams we already covered this. There was plenty to fuel the fire and keep it going besides just the jet fuel, steel is an excellent conductor of heat so the heat from the top would have radiated throughout the entire structure, not to mention all the added heat as fires started all up and down the structure from burning jet fuel and the melting facade.
@muzicmaker2001 It was a searing hot liquid burning at over 1kf of course it ran down the beams it would burn through everything else.
By the time the jet fuel would have burned out several beams would be searing hot, massive fires would be going throughout the upper levels, and molten aluminum would be running down some of the beams. It would easily start a chain reaction as increased heat in any one area would radiate throughout the skeleton of the structure.
So, where is this molten aluminum kiddo? Was it tested and confirmed to be molten aluminum? Where the eyewitnesses of this molten aluminum? Here's another mystery. How did the people seen at the impact hole walk among this searing heat and molten aluminum? Let me know...
Yes, but my silverware hand wasn't 1000 ft from the food when that happened. You sorta left that part out, ehh? Funny..Don't take any of this seriously, ok? Because, I'm not. Again, why would anyone take your opinion over witnesses, USGS recorded temps and video of ground zero?
@muzicmaker2001 I'm arguing science and you're arguing anecdotes from people who wouldn't know to make the distinction between molten steel and molten metal, which you can hardly blame them for, and your entire argument hinges on anecdotes and (non)mystery rather than evidence, you completely fail at your burden of proof.
Where's the steel kid? Show me some actual molten steel, prove that there was actually melted steel. Hint, anecdotes and mystery aren't proof of your claim.
I think you have this reversed. You are only giving your opinion of what happened. Science? You mean, your theory based on what? But, the REAL evidence (USGS recorded temps, many witness accounts, video footage of ground zero showing the devastation caused by extreme heat) speaks for itself. Using the same logic, where's the aluminum son, kiddo, jr.? Did anyone confirm this? No? This is some kind of new science, right?
@muzicmaker2001 No I'm dealing in scientific facts, like the FACT that steel is an excellent conductor of heat, the FACT that burning jet fuel would have easily reached the melting point of aluminum, like the FACT that the heat would have radiated throughout the entire skeleton of the structure.
The Aluminum was the entire facade of the structure kiddo, and all you've got and temperature records that don't back up what you're saying, and anecdotes. Prove there was molten steel.
@muzicmaker2001 The entire facade of the structure was aluminum and the melting point of aluminum 1220.58 °F which the burning jetfuel exceeded kiddo you utterly and entirely fail.
So, what you're saying is you can't prove it was molten aluminum, correct? But, you expect me to prove it was molten steel? Has there been even ONE witness claiming molten aluminum at all?
@muzicmaker2001 What would you accept as proof? I've already shown you that the temperature of the burning jet fuel was sufficient to melt aluminum, not steel. The entire facade of the structure was aluminum. What would you accept as proof on that?
/watch?v=gge5NyqoNIQ Aluminum melts at 1220.58 °F
Firemen and Police Officers aren't experts on metallurgy, and they didn't have internet resources handy when they said steel, you have no evidence of any molten steel.
@muzicmaker2001 The best you have is heat from thermal imaging, and a bunch of people who wouldn't know molten steel from molten aluminum if their lives depended on it, you don't even have measurements of the temperatures from the imaging, you have nothing.
I'm providing actual scientific data, the best you have are anecdotes.
So, your "scientific data" is just the melting point of aluminum? And how it magically took the elevators (or stairs??) down from 1000 ft up and ended up buried underneath tons of rubble? Or maybe it flowed like lava out of the impact hole downward, but blind to any witnesses? Yep. I can see why you believe this. It seems plausible to me. Is this a joke? Is this my brother? C'mon now...
@muzicmaker2001 Thermal transfer across steel beams don't require an elevator or stairs, also molten aluminum is a dense liquid, gravity would carry it down and it would run along surfaces, starting fires and burning through things.
And again eye witnesses saw molten metal, just because they used the word steel doesn't mean it was steel. After seeing your no plane BS I'm starting to think this is just a troll channel, no one can be as stupid as you're pretending to be.
Oh, I got it now. The aluminum flowed along the surface of the 1350 ft building? I'm sure there is video showing this somewhere? No? And here's another mystery. The people seen at the North Tower impact hole just 20 mins before it collapsed? Did they walk over, around or thru the 10,000 gals of jet fuel, plane debris, office supplies....and now this just in, possibly molten aluminum to get to the impact hole? And yes, just accept your BS theory as fact or you're stupid?
So, after the collapse, how did all of this molten aluminum end up buried deep under tons of rubble? I'm guessing it burrowed like a gopher into the rubble? Did it melt the cars and firetrucks at ground zero also? This HAS to be a joke?
@muzicmaker2001 The same way everything else would, by being caught in the collapse.
Oh gee, thermal transfer and gravity are so hard, like the fact that temperatures exceeded the melting point of aluminum at several levels, or the fact that heat was radiated all the way to the basement by the beams, or the fact that there were fires at several levels, or the fact that liquids run down, or the fact that in high winds molten debris could fall on cars, man this is all so complicated.
3.-4. I'm sure there are examples of this thermal transfer in other building collapses? Ya know, where extreme temps were found underneath the building? Can you post some please? Thanks. You're not going to tell me this only happened on 911?
1: Gravity and thermal transfer sure is hard isn't it bro? Pro-Tip, burning liquid runs down, steel transfers heat, stuff caught fire all the way down the beams.
2: Cars burn, derper.
3-4: Other buildings don't have 1800f burning jet fuel running down the skeleton of the structure for several minutes starting fires throughout the structure. But yeah kiddo, thermal transfer starts fires all the time, lrn thermodynamics. Not hunting links for you
So, to summarize: You think fires 1000 ft up after the collapse melted cars and fused an engine with other parts? You don't have even ONE other example of this heat transfer in a building? No references to base this on? Where did you get this concept from? Your ass? Please tell me you have something more than just your opnion again?
@muzicmaker2001 Ok so the laws of physics don't apply to metal in buildings and you need special proof that they do thank you we're done enjoy being either a perfect 9/11 troll or a complete psychotic idiot.
So, we have many firsts on 911, ehh JR? First time a....err..THREE steel framed high rises collapsed due to fire (and) the first time heat was transfer to the bottom of building melting everything and creating extreme temps buried underneath the rubble lasting for weeks. Wow!! Can you tell me another bedtime story
@muzicmaker2001 6-7: You're either the biggest idiot or the biggest troll on youtube, how do you think they bend and fuse metals on purpose? Heat and pressure you moron.
Hey JR. You can work on this. There were hot spots discovered underneath WTC7 also. Was this caused by molten aluminum also? Was the WTC7 siding made of aluminum? What gives? Here's comes a different theory, right?
@muzicmaker2001 I'm sorry that you can't seem to understand a simple concept like thermal transfer, but with the extreme heat from the jet fuel getting it started, the skyscraper itself became fuel for the fire, generating massive heat, which would easily be transferred underground via the steel beams.
Meaning there would be fires throughout the underground levels if there was anything to melt of burn down there.
Why is this so hard for you? What do you think happened?
Ya see. I like references. Since this thermal transfer concept is common knowledge, there MUST be tons of other examples. Can you post some? I'll wait..thanx..
@muzicmaker2001 Kiddo show me another building with an entirely steel frame where molten jet fuel ran down the support beams and there will be your other example.
Molten jet fuel? LOL. I will ask these questions again.
1. Where is ANY proof that molten aluminum (or molten jet fuel) was even there? Not even one witness?
2. What was the force pushing downward to cause the friction/thermal transfer if the upper floors were either plverized or ejected laterally? This is obvious by watching any video of the collapses lke this one..
Here's something else to ponder while you're looking for other examples. At the initiation of the collapse, a significant portion of the fire impacted area and continuing downward was either pulverized to dust or ejected sideways. So, where is this FORCE (mass) pushing downward creating friction and ultimately heat energy? Was the bearing weight dust or air? There should be a massive chunk of building at the base. There was not..one to grow on...
@muzicmaker2001 Your bullshit has been debunked a hundred times kiddo you're misrepresenting the NASA quote as was shown in the video I linked you to, you got the temperature wrong (1000C? REALLY kid? Try again), it appears that the best evidence you have is some guys who wouldn't know the difference between molten aluminum and molten steel if their lives depended on it using the word steel.
Your argument is entirely anecdotal and you have the burden of proof, you fail.
P.S. Just because something that was proven false years & years ago still has a YouTube video up, sometimes even after the time period which it was proven false, it doesn't mean that it's still a valid argument...false info is false info regardless if you know it or not (even though all you Truthers claim to be experts)...it is up to YOU to check the facts, and the "Watch this other video" response is tired
I wish some dedicated debunker like yourself could explain the mechanism by which fires 1000 ft up created this heat buried underground? And how the max temp recorded at ground zero was greater than the max temps recorded in the WTC steel?
Really? You're going to sit there and say that the ONLY fires on 9/11 should have been the ones that were on the floors that were struck? That is just plain ignorant AND/OR purposely misleading. Apparently you think there's nothing flammable in an office building...
I guess cars on the street didn't catch on fire either, huh?
What "max temp recorded at ground zero", the 1,377ºF? Like I said, a BONFIRE...ah, you must be one of those "melted steel" Truthers
Where was this massive fire/heat at ground zero ANYTIME before the collapse that lead to extreme temps buried UNDERGROUND lasting for weeks? Please point this out to me. Was it cars burning that lead to this heat? Was it a bonfire underground? Funny...
Who says it was "massive"? It's a smoldering office fire that kept burning and inevitably being fed when they were moving the debris to clear the area and/or look for survivors...house fires can burn for days, what is so confusing??
Who said anything about "underground"? YOU STATE in THIS VIDEO that this is the recorded temperature of the RUBBLE PILE, NOT what is "underground"...you really need to get your story straight on your Truther-disinformation routine.
"There are still flames coming out of the BASE of the trade towers"
"At one piont, I think they were about 2800 degrees" What were you saying about a bonfire and "the 1,377ºF."
watch?v=Zww9-AaIgrw
Uhh, yes. Underground. Is everyone that mentioned the fire underground a truther? You didn't know this? Please research a little more. And office fires caused this? Really? Keep trying, but you more desperate with every post.
Watch the BEGINNING of YOUR OWN VIDEO where YOU present that there was 1,377ºF recorded in the rubble pile...not "underground" and not "2,800ºF"
PROVE that office fires didn't cause this...why would they take the time, effort, and money to fireproof steel beams in a building if an office fire could not do anything to the steel?
That video shows nothing but a guy saying 1,500ºF and a guy guessing 2,800ºF who is obviously guessing wrong...1,377ºF, remember??
Watch the video again and count how many times the word "underground" is used. Its time to deal with real science. Jet fuel and/or office fires from 1000 ft up can not melt steel and create that extreme heat buried underground. And if this was actually proven false years ago, why do you need to defend it? That doesn't make a ton of sense, does it?
Then why are you here if it has not accomplished anything? Question. How pathetic do YOU have to be to spend your time debating a so-called pathetic movement?
@greywolf424 Wow! You really got issues:) Impressive issues and yet well capable of enabling caps lock on your keyboard. And I must say , shouting "FUCKTARD , UNEDUCATED MENTALLY UNBALANCE FRUIT CAKE , COCK SMOKER" is quite revealing in terms of your educationlevel. You sir, are an excellent and well articulated debater. You simply slam your points home, backing them up with solid substance! And people say homeschooling is bad, LITTLE DO THEY KNOW, RIGHT?!? :D :D
Dimitri Khalezov. THE UNEDUCATED MENTALLY UNBALANCE FRUIT CAKE WHO THINKS NUCLEAR BOMBS WERE USED ON THE WTC EVEN THOUGH THERE IS LESS THAN ZERO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE CLAIMS.
To take it one step further, observe the chem comp of the dust. It is easy to show how the bed rock ganite was the feed stock for the high aluminasilicate content. Molybdenum spheres are also present, requiring 4700 deg F to melt.
Fission reactions is the only plausible explanation for this evidence.
Over 5million cubic feet of dust can not be denied.
Find shaking tower to see evidence of p-wave, which humans can't hear, on camera.
Nice to hear you contradicting yourself. Here's a quote from you- - "No steel sample directly from the impact zone showing heat degradation" and here you are talking about MELTED STEEL... which is obviously heat degradation. I'm confused now, just what exactly is your position on this again.
No contradiction at all, but very mysterous. There is no physical evidence (steel) of this heat from the impact zone, but we have extreme temps (hotter than what NIST gave for the max temp of any steel sample) buried deep into the rubble lasting for weeks. Obviously, this fire 1000 ft up did not burrow its way deep into the rubble like a gopher, so there must be another mechanism or catalyst for the creation of this heat. ENTER NANO-THERMITE...
I'm sure you can describe the mecanism at which fires 1000 ft up created this heat deep in the rubble? Throw in how the upper undamaged floors most likely smothered the fires when collapsing onto them and how a large portion of this area was ejected laterally or how they were intact floors at the base of the Towers after the collapse. Did the black smoe from the impact zone also cause this? This is very obvious
I'm sure you can describe the mecanism at which fires 1000 ft up created this heat deep in the rubble? Throw in how the upper undamaged floors most likely smothered the fires when collapsing onto them and how a large portion of this area was ejected laterally or how they were intact floors at the base of the Towers after the collapse. Did the black smoe from the impact zone also cause this? This is very obvious
@muzicmaker2001 A lot of people believe that the steel melted after a long time of cooking in the pile. They don't understand that physics doesn't work that way. Heat flows from hotter to cooler, not the other way around, so no matter how long you cook steel at 1400 F, it can never get hotter than 1400 F.
The only exception to the hotter to cooler flow is when you add mechanical work to the system, as is done in a refrigerator or air conditioner.
I'm sure you can describe the mecanism by which fires 1000 ft up created this heat deep in the rubble? Throw in how the upper undamaged floors most likely smothered the fires when collapsing onto them and how a large portion of this area was pulverized to dust and ejected laterally or how there were intact floors at the base of the Towers after the collapse. Did the black smoe from the impact zone also cause this? Obviously not
ever hear of E=mc2 do the math ,, a building of that size and wieght falling ,, on it self , the energy and forces are extreme ,,, would melt cars turn everything to dust and at the core would burn for ages
You sort of forgot something. The proof that ALL engineers/architects (or even one) agree with the official version and you? Or maybe you took a poll?
@muzicmaker2001 all these Engineering Organizations that support the conclusions of NIST . American Consulting Engineers Council (ACEC) American Society for Precision Engineering (ASPE) Society of Engineering Science (SES) American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Institution of Civil Engineers (ICE) American Concrete Institute (ACI) American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) European Association for Structural Dynamics
How many support logic? I thought we already covered this (see below) just to name a few? And where is the documented proof that all of the institutions you listed support the OV?
patriotsquestion911*com/engineers*html
1,300+ Engineers and Architects
250+ Pilots and Aviation Professionals
220+ Senior Military, Intelligence Service, Law Enforcement, and Government Officials
Speaking of almost no one, there's no proof of all the institutions you listed supporting the OV? You didn't just make that up, did you? Say it isn't so...
@muzicmaker2001 RICHARD GAGE HAS NEVER PUBLISHED ANYTHING ON HIS OWN TO SUPPORT HIS CLAIMS..... HE IS A PARASITE WHO MAKES HIS LIVING EXPLOITING THE PEOPLE WHO DIED ON 9/11..... NOTHING MORE.
Asking questions about events that make logical sense has nothing to do with disrespecting anyone. Disinformation agents use this "guilt ploy" to try to steer people away from the truth. Nice try though. Pathetic, but nice try.
@muzicmaker2001 DON'T CHANGE THE FACT THAT IN MORE THAN NINE YEARS THE TWOOF MOVEMENT HAS FAILED TO PRODUCE A SINGLE SHRED OF SCIENTIFICALLY VERIFIABLE OR LEGALLY ACTIONABLE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THEIR CLAIMS THAT WOULD STAND UP IN ANY COURTROOM ANYWHERE ON THE PLANET...... AND THE FACT GAGE IS MAKING HIS LIVING EXPLOITING THE PEOPLE WHO DIED ON 9/11 IS WELL DOCUMENTED.
If all that is true, why do we need debunkers like yourself touring multiple 911 pages on your daily campaign.That makes no sense at all. The fact that you (and the other horde of 911 shills) have to be here only proves that there is a cover up. Don't you know that?
@muzicmaker2001 THIS CRAP "8. Nano-thermite discovered" HAS BEEN DEBUNKED SO MANY WAYS IT ISN'T EVEN FUNNY ANYMORE...... THERE IS NOT ONE ACCREDITED INDEPENDENT LABORATORY ON THIS ENTIRE PLANET THAT SUPPORTS THIS BULLSHIT CLAIM..... NOT ONE.
If the movement will never accomplish anything, why are you (and other horde of plants) here? Ya see? That doesn't make sense, does it? If the official version was filled with so much irrefutable evidence, you wouldn't have a job.
@muzicmaker2001 .....AND THE FACT REMAINS...... THAT AFTER ALMOST 10 YEARS YOU STILL CAN NOT PRODUCE ANY SCIENTIFICALLY VERIFIABLE OR LEGALLY ACTIONABLE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT YOUR INSIDE JOBBIE JOB FAIRY TALE.
@muzicmaker2001@muzicmaker2001 OH .....AND THE FACT REMAINS THAT AFTER ALMOST 10 YEARS YOU STILL CAN NOT PRODUCE ANY SCIENTIFICALLY VERIFIABLE OR LEGALLY ACTIONABLE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT YOUR INSIDE JOBBIE JOB FAIRY TALE........ YOUR LOSER MOVEMENT HAS NEVER AND WILL NEVER ACCOMPLISH ANYTHING.
@muzicmaker2001 OH .....AND THE FACT REMAINS THAT AFTER ALMOST 10 YEARS YOU STILL CAN NOT PRODUCE ANY SCIENTIFICALLY VERIFIABLE OR LEGALLY ACTIONABLE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT YOUR INSIDE JOBBIE JOB FAIRY TALE........ YOUR LOSER MOVEMENT HAS NEVER AND WILL NEVER ACCOMPLISH ANYTHING..... HOWEVER I DO LOWE WATCHING THE TWOOF MOVEMENT SLOWLY CHOKE TO DEATH ON IT'S OWN LIES.
@muzicmaker2001 NEVER FORGOT ANYTHING..... ESPECIALLY THE FACT THAT AFTER ALMOST 10 YEARS YOU STILL CAN NOT PRODUCE ANY SCIENTIFICALLY VERIFIABLE OR LEGALLY ACTIONABLE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT YOUR INSIDE JOBBIE JOB FAIRY TALE.
Nist tried to duplicate the fire collapse and couldnt get remotely near the realistic facts.
They eventually reached a collapse point by loading the weight double to what it actually was and by feeding oxygen into the fire so that it was totally unrealistic.
The only thing that proved to me was that the fire hypotheses was untenable.
There is no physical evidence that heat contributed to the collapse....
"Of the more than 170 areas examined on 16 perimeter column panels, only three columns had evidence that the steel reached temperatures above 250 ºC. Using metallographic analysis, NIST determined that there was no evidence that any of the samples had reached temperatures above 600 ºC." (p 140)-NIST
@muzicmaker2001 You say there is no evidence that heat played a part in the collapse because the steel was only heated to 600c? Thats 1100f. Thats the temperature at which steel is reduced to 50% strength. When they rate fire proofed steel they rate it based on how long it can be exposed to fire before it reaches 600c because thats its failure point. And thats pg 140 of what document? None of them are that long. NCSTAR #?
Of the more than 170 areas examined on 16 perimeter column panels, only three columns had evidence that the steel reached temperatures above 250 ºC.
Now, there is no evidence that this heat impacted the steel directly from the impact zone. Next, throw in the fact that people were seen standing on this steel direct before collapse. It doesn't make logical sense.
@muzicmaker2001 Thanks, I found the report. Right next to your quote it also mentions that they recovered less than 1% of the columns from the effected areas. So while 600c (1100f) is the failure point of steel they only recovered 1% of the steel in the fire and it did reach that point. The other 99% may have been hotter or cooler. In a previous post you talk about the 3% of exterior columns found only reaching 250f. But they didn't initiate the collapse due to fire...
@muzicmaker2001 ... Exterior columns failed due to loss of interior lateral trusses. Without lateral support and with interior columns at 1100deg the exterior columns cannot support the entire building without buckling inward like a piece of paper you're trying to stand up straight.
@muzicmaker2001 Steel recovered - /wtc.nist.gov/media/gallery.htm#recover You're the one who submitted the NIST reports temps as proof for your argument. Now you're refuting the evidence you submitted?
That's what "exact location undetermined" means...Again, where is ANY evidence that the steel direct from the impact zone experienced temps hot enough to weakened it by 50%? But, using simple logic, people were seen at the imapct hole directly before the collapse.
It's scientific "believes" (lrn2 context/spell)...you're an idiot looking for a conspiracy...and that's besides the fact that it can be proven time and time again what happened on 9/11 was not an inside job
@CrazyRay7979 I`m an idiot looking for a conspiracy? If so, the government is idiots for claiming there was a conspiracy (19 hijackers,osama etc) Historically, wars commited by the US has been a product of false flag operations and lies. You
would be a special retard instantly believing this is the exception. If you have caught your neighbour stealing 50 times in a row, the 51th time, would u
investigate someone half around the world without motive? Since your special, you probably would.
Why does this video show the melting point of aluminum in order to try to prove that the fires were hot enough to melt STEEL?? Does the creator of this video not know that steel and aluminum are two different things?
what hes trying to put across is, the temps were not just made by molten aluminum. There is moltel metal dripping from the first tower just before collapse and deniers tend to say its aluminum from the plane.
Nope, it's an attempt to lie to continue the Truther agenda...just like how they never play the entire Mike Walter quote, purposely don't show the photos of ironworkers making the angled cuts on the steel beams, refusing to show pictures of the opposite side of WTC7, using texts out of context...and many other things that to someone informed, can see the obvious BS they are trying to push
Truther agenda? Your posts are over many 911 CT clips? What exactly is your agenda again? To fight for or spread a truth that already exists? Or to ensure that the REAL truth is not revealed or accepted by the masses?
Oh sure, I'm one of the thousands and thousands of people that would be required to keep 9/11 a secret and not a-one telling anyone and resisting becoming an instant "celebrity" by exposing the secret because we are all promised seven-figure cabinet jobs in the New World Order
You are aware that you are the minority, right? The majority of the country know that terrorists and planes did 9/11, when will you wise up and learn the facts?
If the majority of the country believes what you do, why are you here again..day after day, week after week? Seems odd to be "fighting" for something that is already the accepted truth.
@CrazyRay7979 facts that make no sense. 19 guys with box cutters brought down the greatest military defense network in the world. if you want me to believe that you will have to kill me.
@CrazyRay7979 well i know why your name is CrazyRay. you absolutely refuse to accept anything but the governments story which makes you a direct threat to Constitution of the United States. so if its so easy to attack America why doesn't it more often? according to you all you have to do is slip through airport security nevermind the Greatest military defense network in the world failed HUM i wonder why?
@CrazyRay7979 if you ever want to debate 9/11 with me in person i live here 9750 N 96th street #123 scottsdale, az 85258 or i can meet you somehwere, where would you like to be buried? i absolutely will not stand for people who support a war they are not fighting in, you fucking fuck.
@CrazyRay7979 so when do you leave for the WAR RAY? since you seem to believe whatever the government is telling us when do you leave to protect our freedoms? YOU FUCK.
Just because someone who doesn't know anything about metal said there was molten steel doesn't mean it was molten steel. The thought of molten aluminum probably never occurred to the people saying that, and you mentioned yourself in this video, it was above the melting point of aluminum.
Also steel is a great conductor of heat, loses structural integrity at 500f, and under hundreds of tons of pressure with compromised beams it's not surprising the skeleton would come loose.
Laughingblades 3 weeks ago
@Laughingblades
And why should we listen to your opinion if there was molten steel or not? You were not there, correct? The bigger question is, can fires 1000 ft up cause this? Obviously, not...
watch?v=Zww9-AaIgrw
watch?v=3SLIzSCt_cgo
muzicmaker2001 3 weeks ago
@muzicmaker2001 Eye witness testimonies are meaningless, some cop or fireman using the words "molten steel" proves only that the cop or fireman in question doesn't know the difference between saying molten steel and molten metal.
Where's your evidence that it actually was molten steel, and not the aluminum that made up the entire facade of the structure and would have melted at much lower temperatures?
Anecdotes? You fail your burden of proof.
Laughingblades 3 weeks ago
@Laughingblades
Wait. Eyewitness testimonies are meaningless, but also can be used as evidence in court? Again, you are the one claiming these witnesses are wrong. The burden of proof is on you. Actual witnesses or some guy on YT dedicated to defending 911 no matter what the evidence is. Not a hard choice, right?
muzicmaker2001 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@muzicmaker2001 I repeat, some cop or fireman using the words "molten steel" proves only that the cop or fireman in question doesn't know the difference between saying molten steel and molten metal.
Where's your evidence that it actually was molten steel, and not the aluminum that made up the entire facade of the structure and would have melted at much lower temperatures?
Anecdotes? You fail your burden of proof.
Laughingblades 3 weeks ago
@muzicmaker2001 You're the one making the positive claim kiddo, you're claiming it was steel, so prove it.
Laughingblades 3 weeks ago
@Laughingblades
My proof is the temps recorded NASA, eyewitnesses and video footage of extreme heat buried in the rubble. Yor proof that it didn't exist is...........? Help me out here?
muzicmaker2001 3 weeks ago
@muzicmaker2001 So your proof is that there was extreme heat?
Ok here's help, the entire facade of the structure was made of aluminum, aluminum melts at much lower temperatures than steel, it's been confirmed that temperatures were high enough to melt aluminum, and this NASA BS has been debunked.
Where's the melted steel? Show me the melted steel.
Laughingblades 3 weeks ago
@Laughingblades
So, let me get this right. You think the fire about 1000 ft up (the only heat source) melted the aluminum from the structure (before the collapse??) and then that aluminum somehow ended up buried under ground? Did it flow like lava downward to reach the ground or take the elevator down? And this fire 1000 ft up (or heated aluminum??) also melted cars and firetrucks at ground zero? You can't be serious with this?
muzicmaker2001 3 weeks ago
@muzicmaker2001
1: Jet fuel ran down the beams
2: Steel is an excellent conductor of heat
3: Molten aluminum could easily end up all kinds of places, it's a molten liquid at that point.
4: Heat levels have been confirmed high enough to melt the aluminum facade.
5: Thermal transfer would have carried the extreme heat down to the base & could have easily started fires and melted aluminum
You still haven't provided any evidence of molten steel, have you abandoned that argument?
Laughingblades 3 weeks ago
@Laughingblades
So, when did this heat from the fire impacted zone end up buried in the rubble? Was it when the building collapsed and the upper floors smothered the fire? Or was it when the fire impacted area was pulverized and ejected laterally? And why hasn't this BS...err.. thermal transfer (to create temps over 1000C) occured in any other building collapse? Please use something other than 911myths, PM and Rkowen's videos for your research. I will say this. You are very entertaining..
muzicmaker2001 3 weeks ago
@muzicmaker2001 Burning jet fuel ran down the beams we already covered this. There was plenty to fuel the fire and keep it going besides just the jet fuel, steel is an excellent conductor of heat so the heat from the top would have radiated throughout the entire structure, not to mention all the added heat as fires started all up and down the structure from burning jet fuel and the melting facade.
And 1000c? Really? Wow kiddo, just wow.
I'm sorry that you fail so hard at science.
Laughingblades 3 weeks ago
@Laughingblades
"Burning jet fuel ran down the beams we already covered this"
If you believe the official report...
“The initial jet fuel fires themselves lasted at most a few minutes" NIST, Sep 2005, PP 183
"But the jet fuel itself burnt in a matter of minutes, within less than ten minutes." -Lead Investigator Dr. Shyam Sunder, NIST
muzicmaker2001 3 weeks ago
@muzicmaker2001 It was a searing hot liquid burning at over 1kf of course it ran down the beams it would burn through everything else.
By the time the jet fuel would have burned out several beams would be searing hot, massive fires would be going throughout the upper levels, and molten aluminum would be running down some of the beams. It would easily start a chain reaction as increased heat in any one area would radiate throughout the skeleton of the structure.
Laughingblades 3 weeks ago
@Laughingblades
So, where is this molten aluminum kiddo? Was it tested and confirmed to be molten aluminum? Where the eyewitnesses of this molten aluminum? Here's another mystery. How did the people seen at the impact hole walk among this searing heat and molten aluminum? Let me know...
muzicmaker2001 3 weeks ago
@muzicmaker2001 Kiddo let me ask you something.
Have you ever burned your hand on a hot piece of silverware because the food was too hot?
Srsly you learn about this sort of stuff in the third grade.
Laughingblades 3 weeks ago
@Laughingblades
Yes, but my silverware hand wasn't 1000 ft from the food when that happened. You sorta left that part out, ehh? Funny..Don't take any of this seriously, ok? Because, I'm not. Again, why would anyone take your opinion over witnesses, USGS recorded temps and video of ground zero?
muzicmaker2001 3 weeks ago
@muzicmaker2001 I'm arguing science and you're arguing anecdotes from people who wouldn't know to make the distinction between molten steel and molten metal, which you can hardly blame them for, and your entire argument hinges on anecdotes and (non)mystery rather than evidence, you completely fail at your burden of proof.
Where's the steel kid? Show me some actual molten steel, prove that there was actually melted steel. Hint, anecdotes and mystery aren't proof of your claim.
Laughingblades 3 weeks ago
@Laughingblades
I think you have this reversed. You are only giving your opinion of what happened. Science? You mean, your theory based on what? But, the REAL evidence (USGS recorded temps, many witness accounts, video footage of ground zero showing the devastation caused by extreme heat) speaks for itself. Using the same logic, where's the aluminum son, kiddo, jr.? Did anyone confirm this? No? This is some kind of new science, right?
muzicmaker2001 3 weeks ago
@muzicmaker2001 No I'm dealing in scientific facts, like the FACT that steel is an excellent conductor of heat, the FACT that burning jet fuel would have easily reached the melting point of aluminum, like the FACT that the heat would have radiated throughout the entire skeleton of the structure.
The Aluminum was the entire facade of the structure kiddo, and all you've got and temperature records that don't back up what you're saying, and anecdotes. Prove there was molten steel.
Laughingblades 3 weeks ago
@Laughingblades
Prove there was molten aluminum? See how reverse logic works?
muzicmaker2001 3 weeks ago
@muzicmaker2001 The entire facade of the structure was aluminum and the melting point of aluminum 1220.58 °F which the burning jetfuel exceeded kiddo you utterly and entirely fail.
Laughingblades 3 weeks ago
@Laughingblades
So, what you're saying is you can't prove it was molten aluminum, correct? But, you expect me to prove it was molten steel? Has there been even ONE witness claiming molten aluminum at all?
muzicmaker2001 3 weeks ago
@muzicmaker2001 What would you accept as proof? I've already shown you that the temperature of the burning jet fuel was sufficient to melt aluminum, not steel. The entire facade of the structure was aluminum. What would you accept as proof on that?
/watch?v=gge5NyqoNIQ Aluminum melts at 1220.58 °F
Firemen and Police Officers aren't experts on metallurgy, and they didn't have internet resources handy when they said steel, you have no evidence of any molten steel.
Laughingblades 3 weeks ago
@muzicmaker2001 The best you have is heat from thermal imaging, and a bunch of people who wouldn't know molten steel from molten aluminum if their lives depended on it, you don't even have measurements of the temperatures from the imaging, you have nothing.
I'm providing actual scientific data, the best you have are anecdotes.
Laughingblades 3 weeks ago
@Laughingblades
So, your "scientific data" is just the melting point of aluminum? And how it magically took the elevators (or stairs??) down from 1000 ft up and ended up buried underneath tons of rubble? Or maybe it flowed like lava out of the impact hole downward, but blind to any witnesses? Yep. I can see why you believe this. It seems plausible to me. Is this a joke? Is this my brother? C'mon now...
muzicmaker2001 3 weeks ago
@muzicmaker2001 Thermal transfer across steel beams don't require an elevator or stairs, also molten aluminum is a dense liquid, gravity would carry it down and it would run along surfaces, starting fires and burning through things.
And again eye witnesses saw molten metal, just because they used the word steel doesn't mean it was steel. After seeing your no plane BS I'm starting to think this is just a troll channel, no one can be as stupid as you're pretending to be.
Laughingblades 3 weeks ago
@Laughingblades
Oh, I got it now. The aluminum flowed along the surface of the 1350 ft building? I'm sure there is video showing this somewhere? No? And here's another mystery. The people seen at the North Tower impact hole just 20 mins before it collapsed? Did they walk over, around or thru the 10,000 gals of jet fuel, plane debris, office supplies....and now this just in, possibly molten aluminum to get to the impact hole? And yes, just accept your BS theory as fact or you're stupid?
muzicmaker2001 3 weeks ago
@muzicmaker2001 Gravity sure is hard isn't it bro?
Laughingblades 3 weeks ago
@Laughingblades
So, after the collapse, how did all of this molten aluminum end up buried deep under tons of rubble? I'm guessing it burrowed like a gopher into the rubble? Did it melt the cars and firetrucks at ground zero also? This HAS to be a joke?
muzicmaker2001 3 weeks ago
@muzicmaker2001 The same way everything else would, by being caught in the collapse.
Oh gee, thermal transfer and gravity are so hard, like the fact that temperatures exceeded the melting point of aluminum at several levels, or the fact that heat was radiated all the way to the basement by the beams, or the fact that there were fires at several levels, or the fact that liquids run down, or the fact that in high winds molten debris could fall on cars, man this is all so complicated.
Laughingblades 3 weeks ago
@Laughingblades
Watch this clip and tell me did molten aluminum cause this?
watch?v=Zww9-AaIgrw
1. melted tour buses, cars, firetrucks
2. car engine melted together with other parts of the car
3. flames still coming out of the BASE of the towers
4. 5-6 stories below ground, fires still burning until Dec01
5. workers digging up heated rubble/ 2800 degrees underground
6. massive thick steel bent like a pretzel
7. fused steel and concrete
muzicmaker2001 3 weeks ago
@muzicmaker2001
1: Fires period could cause that, have you ever seen the remains of a burning car?
2: What do you think they put thermite in the cars now? Pro-Tip, cars aren't 100% steel
3: Yeah bro we covered this, thermal transfer would carry heat to the bottom, starting fires at locations throughout the structure.
4: Yep, I know thermal transfer is hard for you, but the metal went under ground flammable stuff
5: Proof?
6: Tons of weight on hot steel
7: heat+pressure
Laughingblades 3 weeks ago
@Laughingblades
1. Fires from 1000 ft up caused this?
2. Doesn't answer the question
3.-4. I'm sure there are examples of this thermal transfer in other building collapses? Ya know, where extreme temps were found underneath the building? Can you post some please? Thanks. You're not going to tell me this only happened on 911?
5. Video
6-7. Other examples? None, right?
muzicmaker2001 3 weeks ago
@muzicmaker2001
1: Gravity and thermal transfer sure is hard isn't it bro? Pro-Tip, burning liquid runs down, steel transfers heat, stuff caught fire all the way down the beams.
2: Cars burn, derper.
3-4: Other buildings don't have 1800f burning jet fuel running down the skeleton of the structure for several minutes starting fires throughout the structure. But yeah kiddo, thermal transfer starts fires all the time, lrn thermodynamics. Not hunting links for you
5: Not proof
Laughingblades 3 weeks ago
@Laughingblades
So, to summarize: You think fires 1000 ft up after the collapse melted cars and fused an engine with other parts? You don't have even ONE other example of this heat transfer in a building? No references to base this on? Where did you get this concept from? Your ass? Please tell me you have something more than just your opnion again?
muzicmaker2001 3 weeks ago
@muzicmaker2001 Ok you have to be trolling, because otherwise you're too stupid to understand that burning debris could fall onto cars.
And if you're not trolling, and you legitimately are that stupid, just what is your conspiracy theory for how the cars got melted?
Laughingblades 3 weeks ago
@muzicmaker2001 Ok so the laws of physics don't apply to metal in buildings and you need special proof that they do thank you we're done enjoy being either a perfect 9/11 troll or a complete psychotic idiot.
Laughingblades 3 weeks ago
@Laughingblades
So, we have many firsts on 911, ehh JR? First time a....err..THREE steel framed high rises collapsed due to fire (and) the first time heat was transfer to the bottom of building melting everything and creating extreme temps buried underneath the rubble lasting for weeks. Wow!! Can you tell me another bedtime story
muzicmaker2001 3 weeks ago
@muzicmaker2001 6-7: You're either the biggest idiot or the biggest troll on youtube, how do you think they bend and fuse metals on purpose? Heat and pressure you moron.
Laughingblades 3 weeks ago
@Laughingblades
Hey JR. You can work on this. There were hot spots discovered underneath WTC7 also. Was this caused by molten aluminum also? Was the WTC7 siding made of aluminum? What gives? Here's comes a different theory, right?
muzicmaker2001 3 weeks ago
@muzicmaker2001 I'm sorry that you can't seem to understand a simple concept like thermal transfer, but with the extreme heat from the jet fuel getting it started, the skyscraper itself became fuel for the fire, generating massive heat, which would easily be transferred underground via the steel beams.
Meaning there would be fires throughout the underground levels if there was anything to melt of burn down there.
Why is this so hard for you? What do you think happened?
Laughingblades 3 weeks ago
@Laughingblades
Ya see. I like references. Since this thermal transfer concept is common knowledge, there MUST be tons of other examples. Can you post some? I'll wait..thanx..
muzicmaker2001 3 weeks ago
@muzicmaker2001 /watch?v=8JFrW_FtVKg Here you go try hard to understand it ok?
Laughingblades 3 weeks ago
@Laughingblades
No, you misunderstood. I meant post another example of building collapse where this occured? There must be tons, right??
muzicmaker2001 3 weeks ago
@muzicmaker2001 Kiddo show me another building with an entirely steel frame where molten jet fuel ran down the support beams and there will be your other example.
Laughingblades 3 weeks ago
@Laughingblades
Molten jet fuel? LOL. I will ask these questions again.
1. Where is ANY proof that molten aluminum (or molten jet fuel) was even there? Not even one witness?
2. What was the force pushing downward to cause the friction/thermal transfer if the upper floors were either plverized or ejected laterally? This is obvious by watching any video of the collapses lke this one..
watch?v=aBOd1XB943o
muzicmaker2001 3 weeks ago
@Laughingblades
Here's something else to ponder while you're looking for other examples. At the initiation of the collapse, a significant portion of the fire impacted area and continuing downward was either pulverized to dust or ejected sideways. So, where is this FORCE (mass) pushing downward creating friction and ultimately heat energy? Was the bearing weight dust or air? There should be a massive chunk of building at the base. There was not..one to grow on...
muzicmaker2001 3 weeks ago
@muzicmaker2001 Kiddo you're pretty much just incoherent spouting off moronic nonsense at this point.
Gravity pulls objects and the pressure would easily force lighter objects outward, which is exactly what we saw.
Laughingblades 3 weeks ago
@muzicmaker2001 Your bullshit has been debunked a hundred times kiddo you're misrepresenting the NASA quote as was shown in the video I linked you to, you got the temperature wrong (1000C? REALLY kid? Try again), it appears that the best evidence you have is some guys who wouldn't know the difference between molten aluminum and molten steel if their lives depended on it using the word steel.
Your argument is entirely anecdotal and you have the burden of proof, you fail.
Laughingblades 3 weeks ago
P.S. Just because something that was proven false years & years ago still has a YouTube video up, sometimes even after the time period which it was proven false, it doesn't mean that it's still a valid argument...false info is false info regardless if you know it or not (even though all you Truthers claim to be experts)...it is up to YOU to check the facts, and the "Watch this other video" response is tired
CrazyRay7979 1 month ago
1377ºF is the temperature of a bonfire
CrazyRay7979 1 month ago
@CrazyRay7979
I wish some dedicated debunker like yourself could explain the mechanism by which fires 1000 ft up created this heat buried underground? And how the max temp recorded at ground zero was greater than the max temps recorded in the WTC steel?
muzicmaker2001 1 month ago
@muzicmaker2001
Really? You're going to sit there and say that the ONLY fires on 9/11 should have been the ones that were on the floors that were struck? That is just plain ignorant AND/OR purposely misleading. Apparently you think there's nothing flammable in an office building...
I guess cars on the street didn't catch on fire either, huh?
What "max temp recorded at ground zero", the 1,377ºF? Like I said, a BONFIRE...ah, you must be one of those "melted steel" Truthers
CrazyRay7979 1 month ago
@CrazyRay7979
Where was this massive fire/heat at ground zero ANYTIME before the collapse that lead to extreme temps buried UNDERGROUND lasting for weeks? Please point this out to me. Was it cars burning that lead to this heat? Was it a bonfire underground? Funny...
muzicmaker2001 1 month ago
@muzicmaker2001
Who says it was "massive"? It's a smoldering office fire that kept burning and inevitably being fed when they were moving the debris to clear the area and/or look for survivors...house fires can burn for days, what is so confusing??
Who said anything about "underground"? YOU STATE in THIS VIDEO that this is the recorded temperature of the RUBBLE PILE, NOT what is "underground"...you really need to get your story straight on your Truther-disinformation routine.
CrazyRay7979 1 month ago
@CrazyRay7979
Quotes from the clip below:
"There are still flames coming out of the BASE of the trade towers"
"At one piont, I think they were about 2800 degrees" What were you saying about a bonfire and "the 1,377ºF."
watch?v=Zww9-AaIgrw
Uhh, yes. Underground. Is everyone that mentioned the fire underground a truther? You didn't know this? Please research a little more. And office fires caused this? Really? Keep trying, but you more desperate with every post.
muzicmaker2001 1 month ago
@muzicmaker2001
Watch the BEGINNING of YOUR OWN VIDEO where YOU present that there was 1,377ºF recorded in the rubble pile...not "underground" and not "2,800ºF"
PROVE that office fires didn't cause this...why would they take the time, effort, and money to fireproof steel beams in a building if an office fire could not do anything to the steel?
That video shows nothing but a guy saying 1,500ºF and a guy guessing 2,800ºF who is obviously guessing wrong...1,377ºF, remember??
CrazyRay7979 1 month ago
@CrazyRay7979
Watch the video again and count how many times the word "underground" is used. Its time to deal with real science. Jet fuel and/or office fires from 1000 ft up can not melt steel and create that extreme heat buried underground. And if this was actually proven false years ago, why do you need to defend it? That doesn't make a ton of sense, does it?
muzicmaker2001 1 month ago
No molten steel at ground zero. This video is 100% proof of fire. Woopie.
biggbrattz 2 months ago
@biggbrattz
Are these shills paid in canadian currency?
muzicmaker2001 2 months ago
So when the Next False Flag happens will the people still be so Gullible? Who's Next on the List IRAN or PAKISTAN? Place your bets.
bambam9969 5 months ago
@greywolf424
You sound like you might have some mental issues to get this upset over a simple debate about 911.
muzicmaker2001 6 months ago
@muzicmaker2001 THERE IS NO DEBATE SINCE TWOOFERS JUST MAKE SHIT UP AND LIE
greywolf424 6 months ago
@greywolf424
Just what is a twoofer? Anyone who questions 911? That sounds very intelligent.
muzicmaker2001 6 months ago
@muzicmaker2001 THIS COMING FROM A "NO PLANE" FUCKTARD.... THE JOKE OF THE TWOOF MOVEMENT.
greywolf424 6 months ago
@greywolf424
You might have more serious issues here than truthers and 911.
muzicmaker2001 6 months ago
@muzicmaker2001 YOUR PATHETIC TWOOFER MOVEMENT HAS ACCOMPLISHED NOTHING IN ALMOST 10 YEARS AND IT NEVER WILL
greywolf424 6 months ago
@greywolf424
Then why are you here if it has not accomplished anything? Question. How pathetic do YOU have to be to spend your time debating a so-called pathetic movement?
muzicmaker2001 6 months ago
@greywolf424 Wow! You really got issues:) Impressive issues and yet well capable of enabling caps lock on your keyboard. And I must say , shouting "FUCKTARD , UNEDUCATED MENTALLY UNBALANCE FRUIT CAKE , COCK SMOKER" is quite revealing in terms of your educationlevel. You sir, are an excellent and well articulated debater. You simply slam your points home, backing them up with solid substance! And people say homeschooling is bad, LITTLE DO THEY KNOW, RIGHT?!? :D :D
roxxphatcox 5 months ago
@roxxphatcox NOTHING TO DEBATE... THE FACTS SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES YOUR PATHETIC TWOOF MOVEMENT HAS NEVER AND WILL NEVER ACCOMPLISH ANYTHING
greywolf424 5 months ago
@greywolf424 Your funny:)
roxxphatcox 5 months ago
@roxxphatcox YOU'RE LAUGHABLE
greywolf424 5 months ago
@greywolf424 Hehehe, ignorance is bliss:)
roxxphatcox 5 months ago
@roxxphatcox YOU WOULD KNOW
greywolf424 5 months ago
@greywolf424 I`m rubber your glue etc:) I`m atleast glad you have a hobby:)
roxxphatcox 5 months ago
Dimitri Khalezov. THE UNEDUCATED MENTALLY UNBALANCE FRUIT CAKE WHO THINKS NUCLEAR BOMBS WERE USED ON THE WTC EVEN THOUGH THERE IS LESS THAN ZERO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE CLAIMS.
greywolf424 6 months ago
All of this is explained by Dimitri Khalezov.
To take it one step further, observe the chem comp of the dust. It is easy to show how the bed rock ganite was the feed stock for the high aluminasilicate content. Molybdenum spheres are also present, requiring 4700 deg F to melt.
Fission reactions is the only plausible explanation for this evidence.
Over 5million cubic feet of dust can not be denied.
Find shaking tower to see evidence of p-wave, which humans can't hear, on camera.
cheerdiver 6 months ago
Comment removed
greywolf424 6 months ago
Nice to hear you contradicting yourself. Here's a quote from you- - "No steel sample directly from the impact zone showing heat degradation" and here you are talking about MELTED STEEL... which is obviously heat degradation. I'm confused now, just what exactly is your position on this again.
vejet 7 months ago
@vejet
No contradiction at all, but very mysterous. There is no physical evidence (steel) of this heat from the impact zone, but we have extreme temps (hotter than what NIST gave for the max temp of any steel sample) buried deep into the rubble lasting for weeks. Obviously, this fire 1000 ft up did not burrow its way deep into the rubble like a gopher, so there must be another mechanism or catalyst for the creation of this heat. ENTER NANO-THERMITE...
muzicmaker2001 7 months ago
@vejet
Does that help?
muzicmaker2001 7 months ago
Comment removed
vejet 7 months ago
@vejet
I'm sure you can describe the mecanism at which fires 1000 ft up created this heat deep in the rubble? Throw in how the upper undamaged floors most likely smothered the fires when collapsing onto them and how a large portion of this area was ejected laterally or how they were intact floors at the base of the Towers after the collapse. Did the black smoe from the impact zone also cause this? This is very obvious
watch?v=Zww9-AaIgrw
muzicmaker2001 7 months ago
@vejet
@vejet
I'm sure you can describe the mecanism at which fires 1000 ft up created this heat deep in the rubble? Throw in how the upper undamaged floors most likely smothered the fires when collapsing onto them and how a large portion of this area was ejected laterally or how they were intact floors at the base of the Towers after the collapse. Did the black smoe from the impact zone also cause this? This is very obvious
watch?v=Zww9-AaIgrw
muzicmaker2001 7 months ago
@muzicmaker2001 A lot of people believe that the steel melted after a long time of cooking in the pile. They don't understand that physics doesn't work that way. Heat flows from hotter to cooler, not the other way around, so no matter how long you cook steel at 1400 F, it can never get hotter than 1400 F.
The only exception to the hotter to cooler flow is when you add mechanical work to the system, as is done in a refrigerator or air conditioner.
punxsutawneybarney 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@muzicmaker2001 Yes... because of course termite in the basement caused the 90th floor to collapse.
vejet 7 months ago
@vejet
I'm sure you can describe the mecanism by which fires 1000 ft up created this heat deep in the rubble? Throw in how the upper undamaged floors most likely smothered the fires when collapsing onto them and how a large portion of this area was pulverized to dust and ejected laterally or how there were intact floors at the base of the Towers after the collapse. Did the black smoe from the impact zone also cause this? Obviously not
watch?v=Zww9-AaIgrw
muzicmaker2001 7 months ago
Comment removed
vejet 7 months ago
ever hear of E=mc2 do the math ,, a building of that size and wieght falling ,, on it self , the energy and forces are extreme ,,, would melt cars turn everything to dust and at the core would burn for ages
66holt 1 year ago
@66holt
It seems these guys disagree..
patriotsquestion911*com/engineers*html
1,300+ Engineers and Architects
muzicmaker2001 1 year ago
@muzicmaker2001 "1,300+ Engineers and Architects'
.
WHICH MEANS NOTHING SINCE IT AMOUNTS TO ABOUT 0.0008%
greywolf424 1 year ago
@greywolf424
"ABOUT 0.0008%"
Yes, forget experts and listen to some random guy on youtube? Or did you mean compared to the disinfo agents on youtube? Funny..
muzicmaker2001 1 year ago
@muzicmaker2001 Guess what, there are over 1.5 million engineers and 132,000 architects in the U.S. alone:
bls*gov/oco/ocos027.htm#emply
bls*gov/oco/ocos038.htm#emply
(replace * with . )
.
SO GUESS WHAT, IT IS EXACTLY LESS THAN 0.0008%
greywolf424 1 year ago
@greywolf424
You sort of forgot something. The proof that ALL engineers/architects (or even one) agree with the official version and you? Or maybe you took a poll?
muzicmaker2001 1 year ago
greywolf424 1 year ago
@greywolf424
"all these Engineering Organizations that support the conclusions of NIST"
So, you know this by a poll, a petition, a website or some sort of clairvoyance?
muzicmaker2001 1 year ago
@muzicmaker2001 BY DOCUMENTED FACTS....
greywolf424 1 year ago
@muzicmaker2001 HOW MANY SUPPORT THE TWOOF MOVEMENT, ZERO
greywolf424 1 year ago
@greywolf424
How many support logic? I thought we already covered this (see below) just to name a few? And where is the documented proof that all of the institutions you listed support the OV?
patriotsquestion911*com/engineers*html
1,300+ Engineers and Architects
250+ Pilots and Aviation Professionals
220+ Senior Military, Intelligence Service, Law Enforcement, and Government Officials
400+ Medical Professionals
muzicmaker2001 1 year ago
@muzicmaker2001 "How many support logic?
.
YOU MEAN YOUR FAIRY TALE ALMOST NO ONE
greywolf424 1 year ago
@greywolf424
Speaking of almost no one, there's no proof of all the institutions you listed supporting the OV? You didn't just make that up, did you? Say it isn't so...
muzicmaker2001 1 year ago
@muzicmaker2001 "there's no proof of all the institutions you listed supporting the OV?
.
PROVEN LIE, THEY HAVE ALL PUBLISHED PAPERS SUPPORTING IT.
greywolf424 1 year ago
@greywolf424
Wanna sign the petition? LOL
www2*ae911truth*org/signpetition*php
muzicmaker2001 1 year ago
@muzicmaker2001 THE ONLY PETITION I WOULD SIGN WOULD BE ONE TO HAVE TWOOFERS CLASSIFIED AS DOMESTIC TERRORISTS AND TIRED FOR TREASON.
greywolf424 1 year ago
@greywolf424
Ever feel like you and the other disinfo agents are on an island by yourselfs? What I want to know is does anyone actually believe you and your BS?
muzicmaker2001 1 year ago
@muzicmaker2001 I AM NOT THE ONE WITH THE MINORITY OPINION, I AM NOT THE ONE ON AN ISLAND ALL ALONE
greywolf424 1 year ago
@greywolf424
Boy, you really get around the 911 pages, huh? Now, why would anyone think you're a disinfo agent?
(Unseen Footage) Tower 7 blasted into rubble from NEW angle!
NEW PROOF 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! Richard Gage. Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth!
HOW DID WORLD TRADE CENTER 7 FALL?
9/11 Inside Job - The Most Damning Evidence Yet!
wtc 7 collapse
911 Case Study: Pentagon Flight 77
muzicmaker2001 1 year ago
@muzicmaker2001 NONE OF THAT CRAP IS EVIDENCE..... IT IS NOTHING BUT CAREFULLY EDITED PROPAGANDA.... ONLY ONE SPEWING DISINFORMATION IS YOU.
greywolf424 1 year ago
@muzicmaker2001 RICHARD GAGE HAS NEVER PUBLISHED ANYTHING ON HIS OWN TO SUPPORT HIS CLAIMS..... HE IS A PARASITE WHO MAKES HIS LIVING EXPLOITING THE PEOPLE WHO DIED ON 9/11..... NOTHING MORE.
greywolf424 1 year ago
@greywolf424
Asking questions about events that make logical sense has nothing to do with disrespecting anyone. Disinformation agents use this "guilt ploy" to try to steer people away from the truth. Nice try though. Pathetic, but nice try.
muzicmaker2001 1 year ago
@muzicmaker2001 DON'T CHANGE THE FACT THAT IN MORE THAN NINE YEARS THE TWOOF MOVEMENT HAS FAILED TO PRODUCE A SINGLE SHRED OF SCIENTIFICALLY VERIFIABLE OR LEGALLY ACTIONABLE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THEIR CLAIMS THAT WOULD STAND UP IN ANY COURTROOM ANYWHERE ON THE PLANET...... AND THE FACT GAGE IS MAKING HIS LIVING EXPLOITING THE PEOPLE WHO DIED ON 9/11 IS WELL DOCUMENTED.
greywolf424 1 year ago
@greywolf424
If all that is true, why do we need debunkers like yourself touring multiple 911 pages on your daily campaign.That makes no sense at all. The fact that you (and the other horde of 911 shills) have to be here only proves that there is a cover up. Don't you know that?
muzicmaker2001 1 year ago
@muzicmaker2001 PROVE ANYONE IS PAYING ME TO EXPOSE YOUR LIES..... I AM DOING IT BECAUSE I HAVE A DEEP SEATED PERSONAL HATRED OF LIARS.
greywolf424 1 year ago
@greywolf424
Find the lies:
1. Near free fall collapse
2. Witness accounts of explosions
3. Pulverized concrete at initiation of collapse
4. Pre-collapse ground shaking
5. Demolition flashes
6. No physical evidence of extreme heat at impact hole but..
7. Extreme temps buried in basement/rubble for weeks
8. Nano-thermite discovered
muzicmaker2001 1 year ago
@muzicmaker2001 1. PROVES NOTHING...... 2. PROVES NOTHING......3. TOTALLY MEANINGLESS......4.PROVES NOTHING.......5.PROVEN LIE......6.PROVEN LIE........7.COMMON IN BUILDING FIRES......8.PROVEN LIE
greywolf424 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@muzicmaker2001 AS I SAID, MORE THAN NINE YEARS AND NOT ONE SHRED OF EVIDENCE.
greywolf424 1 year ago
@muzicmaker2001 KEEP GOING, DEBUNKING YOUR LIES WILL BE FUN
greywolf424 1 year ago
@greywolf424
is that your idea of debunking? Just stating "PROVEN LIE (or) "PROVES NOTHING?" Wow. I hope you're not a lawyer.
muzicmaker2001 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@muzicmaker2001 NO IT MEANS YOU ARE SPEWING LIES THAT HAVE BEEN PROVEN TO BE LIES.
greywolf424 1 year ago
@muzicmaker2001 THIS CRAP "8. Nano-thermite discovered" HAS BEEN DEBUNKED SO MANY WAYS IT ISN'T EVEN FUNNY ANYMORE...... THERE IS NOT ONE ACCREDITED INDEPENDENT LABORATORY ON THIS ENTIRE PLANET THAT SUPPORTS THIS BULLSHIT CLAIM..... NOT ONE.
greywolf424 1 year ago
@greywolf424
Still zippo debunking evidence, huh?
muzicmaker2001 1 year ago
@muzicmaker2001 YOU ARE THE ONE WITH ZERO EVIDENCE, YOU'RE JUST TRYING TO PLAY GAMES TO COVER IT UP
greywolf424 1 year ago
@greywolf424
Just your opinion is not evidence.
muzicmaker2001 1 year ago
@muzicmaker2001 SAME COULD BE SAID FOR YOU...... WHICH IS WHY YOUR "MOVEMENT" HAS NEVER AND WILL NEVER ACCOMPLISH ANYTHING
greywolf424 1 year ago
@greywolf424
If the movement will never accomplish anything, why are you (and other horde of plants) here? Ya see? That doesn't make sense, does it? If the official version was filled with so much irrefutable evidence, you wouldn't have a job.
muzicmaker2001 1 year ago
@muzicmaker2001 STILL WAITING, PROVE ANYONE IS PAYING ME TO EXPOSE YOUR PATHETIC LIES.
greywolf424 1 year ago
@greywolf424
At least you have a job, right? Its telling lies all day, but its a job.
muzicmaker2001 1 year ago
@muzicmaker2001 IT'S NOT A JOB, AND I AM NOT THE ONE TELLING LIES.
greywolf424 1 year ago
@greywolf424
Is it a daily hobby?
muzicmaker2001 1 year ago
@greywolf424 Learn some physics
cheerdiver 6 months ago
@cheerdiver I HAVE FORGOTTEN MORE ABOUT PHYSICS THAN AN UNEDUCATED COCK SMOKER LIKE YOU WHO NEVER MADE IT THOUGH HIGH SCHOOL WILL EVER KNOW.
greywolf424 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@muzicmaker2001 .....AND THE FACT REMAINS...... THAT AFTER ALMOST 10 YEARS YOU STILL CAN NOT PRODUCE ANY SCIENTIFICALLY VERIFIABLE OR LEGALLY ACTIONABLE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT YOUR INSIDE JOBBIE JOB FAIRY TALE.
greywolf424 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@muzicmaker2001 @muzicmaker2001 OH .....AND THE FACT REMAINS THAT AFTER ALMOST 10 YEARS YOU STILL CAN NOT PRODUCE ANY SCIENTIFICALLY VERIFIABLE OR LEGALLY ACTIONABLE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT YOUR INSIDE JOBBIE JOB FAIRY TALE........ YOUR LOSER MOVEMENT HAS NEVER AND WILL NEVER ACCOMPLISH ANYTHING.
greywolf424 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@muzicmaker2001 OH .....AND THE FACT REMAINS THAT AFTER ALMOST 10 YEARS YOU STILL CAN NOT PRODUCE ANY SCIENTIFICALLY VERIFIABLE OR LEGALLY ACTIONABLE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT YOUR INSIDE JOBBIE JOB FAIRY TALE........ YOUR LOSER MOVEMENT HAS NEVER AND WILL NEVER ACCOMPLISH ANYTHING..... HOWEVER I DO LOWE WATCHING THE TWOOF MOVEMENT SLOWLY CHOKE TO DEATH ON IT'S OWN LIES.
greywolf424 1 year ago
@muzicmaker2001 NEVER FORGOT ANYTHING..... ESPECIALLY THE FACT THAT AFTER ALMOST 10 YEARS YOU STILL CAN NOT PRODUCE ANY SCIENTIFICALLY VERIFIABLE OR LEGALLY ACTIONABLE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT YOUR INSIDE JOBBIE JOB FAIRY TALE.
greywolf424 1 year ago
Nist tried to duplicate the fire collapse and couldnt get remotely near the realistic facts.
They eventually reached a collapse point by loading the weight double to what it actually was and by feeding oxygen into the fire so that it was totally unrealistic.
The only thing that proved to me was that the fire hypotheses was untenable.
zenoist2 1 year ago
1341ºF , 1377ºF...you can get above those temperatures in a bonfire
CrazyRay7979 2 years ago
There is no physical evidence that heat contributed to the collapse....
"Of the more than 170 areas examined on 16 perimeter column panels, only three columns had evidence that the steel reached temperatures above 250 ºC. Using metallographic analysis, NIST determined that there was no evidence that any of the samples had reached temperatures above 600 ºC." (p 140)-NIST
muzicmaker2001 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"There is no physical evidence that heat contributed to the collapse...."
Thus ruling out thermite as a cause. Keep debunking those twoofers!
thedman113 1 year ago
@muzicmaker2001 You say there is no evidence that heat played a part in the collapse because the steel was only heated to 600c? Thats 1100f. Thats the temperature at which steel is reduced to 50% strength. When they rate fire proofed steel they rate it based on how long it can be exposed to fire before it reaches 600c because thats its failure point. And thats pg 140 of what document? None of them are that long. NCSTAR #?
DRAT311 1 year ago
@DRAT311
Read NIST's quote again.
Of the more than 170 areas examined on 16 perimeter column panels, only three columns had evidence that the steel reached temperatures above 250 ºC.
Now, there is no evidence that this heat impacted the steel directly from the impact zone. Next, throw in the fact that people were seen standing on this steel direct before collapse. It doesn't make logical sense.
muzicmaker2001 1 year ago
@DRAT311
The quote is from:
Final Report on the Collpase of the WTCs, Chapter 6, Section 6.4.3 Damage Analysis page 90 (140 of 298)
muzicmaker2001 1 year ago
@muzicmaker2001 Thanks, I found the report. Right next to your quote it also mentions that they recovered less than 1% of the columns from the effected areas. So while 600c (1100f) is the failure point of steel they only recovered 1% of the steel in the fire and it did reach that point. The other 99% may have been hotter or cooler. In a previous post you talk about the 3% of exterior columns found only reaching 250f. But they didn't initiate the collapse due to fire...
DRAT311 1 year ago
@muzicmaker2001 ... Exterior columns failed due to loss of interior lateral trusses. Without lateral support and with interior columns at 1100deg the exterior columns cannot support the entire building without buckling inward like a piece of paper you're trying to stand up straight.
DRAT311 1 year ago
@DRAT311
can you post ANY evidence showing that ANY steel samples (trusses, columns) directly from the impact zone experienced temps of 1100C?
muzicmaker2001 1 year ago
@muzicmaker2001 Steel recovered - /wtc.nist.gov/media/gallery.htm#recover You're the one who submitted the NIST reports temps as proof for your argument. Now you're refuting the evidence you submitted?
DRAT311 1 year ago
@DRAT311
My bad. It was a trick question. NIST couldn't distinguish the steel directly from the impact location.
"Twenty-three pieces were identified as being parts of trusses, although it was not possible to identify their locations.."
(p 137)- NIST
muzicmaker2001 1 year ago
@DRAT311
That's what "exact location undetermined" means...Again, where is ANY evidence that the steel direct from the impact zone experienced temps hot enough to weakened it by 50%? But, using simple logic, people were seen at the imapct hole directly before the collapse.
muzicmaker2001 1 year ago
@CrazyRay7979 U wouldnt believe evidence NOT supporting your "religious"
belives in the government even it was flying about written on bush`s forehead
saying " WE DID IT AGAIN FOLKS" . The power of sheepness is strong in this
one. I mean, come on... We get amazed in europe of the ignorance of US citizens, mainly because of people like you. But we have come to realize this
isnt the truth anymore, US citizens are more alert than ever before, your just not one of them.
roxxphatcox 1 year ago
@roxxphatcox
It's scientific "believes" (lrn2 context/spell)...you're an idiot looking for a conspiracy...and that's besides the fact that it can be proven time and time again what happened on 9/11 was not an inside job
CrazyRay7979 1 year ago
@CrazyRay7979 I`m an idiot looking for a conspiracy? If so, the government is idiots for claiming there was a conspiracy (19 hijackers,osama etc) Historically, wars commited by the US has been a product of false flag operations and lies. You
would be a special retard instantly believing this is the exception. If you have caught your neighbour stealing 50 times in a row, the 51th time, would u
investigate someone half around the world without motive? Since your special, you probably would.
roxxphatcox 1 year ago 2
@roxxphatcox
You're an idiot, plain and simple...enjoy worrying about the sky falling on your head
CrazyRay7979 1 year ago
after 5 day`s of cooling by the firefighters there is still a pool at melting point of.
somtimes you just wanne hear what you want to see, no matter what is said to you.
Telfyr 2 years ago
Why does this video show the melting point of aluminum in order to try to prove that the fires were hot enough to melt STEEL?? Does the creator of this video not know that steel and aluminum are two different things?
thedman113 2 years ago
what hes trying to put across is, the temps were not just made by molten aluminum. There is moltel metal dripping from the first tower just before collapse and deniers tend to say its aluminum from the plane.
rsolgtp 2 years ago
Nope, it's an attempt to lie to continue the Truther agenda...just like how they never play the entire Mike Walter quote, purposely don't show the photos of ironworkers making the angled cuts on the steel beams, refusing to show pictures of the opposite side of WTC7, using texts out of context...and many other things that to someone informed, can see the obvious BS they are trying to push
CrazyRay7979 2 years ago
Truther agenda? Your posts are over many 911 CT clips? What exactly is your agenda again? To fight for or spread a truth that already exists? Or to ensure that the REAL truth is not revealed or accepted by the masses?
muzicmaker2001 2 years ago
Oh, I see I can only reply to one video, huh?
You're clearly a delusional follower of the Truther agenda
CrazyRay7979 2 years ago
I can't hardly stop you from doing your job as a disinfo agent...as you were.
muzicmaker2001 2 years ago
Oh sure, I'm one of the thousands and thousands of people that would be required to keep 9/11 a secret and not a-one telling anyone and resisting becoming an instant "celebrity" by exposing the secret because we are all promised seven-figure cabinet jobs in the New World Order
You are aware that you are the minority, right? The majority of the country know that terrorists and planes did 9/11, when will you wise up and learn the facts?
CrazyRay7979 2 years ago
If the majority of the country believes what you do, why are you here again..day after day, week after week? Seems odd to be "fighting" for something that is already the accepted truth.
muzicmaker2001 2 years ago
@CrazyRay7979 Yes Ray, we are aware the fact that most of the US population are dumb fucks. However you should salute your fellow countrymen risking
ridicule and what worse is to educate people like you. If you had READ about
your own country`s historical background you would know who the usual
suspect is. And shocking as it may seem to dumb fucks, its not 19 fundamentalists.
roxxphatcox 1 year ago
@roxxphatcox
You're just an idiot, 9/11 wasn't an inside job...deal with it
CrazyRay7979 1 year ago
@CrazyRay7979 facts that make no sense. 19 guys with box cutters brought down the greatest military defense network in the world. if you want me to believe that you will have to kill me.
MCHESTER29 1 year ago
@MCHESTER29
Ummm, no...19 guys with box cutters exploited airport security and caused 9/11...got any more of the usual Truther one-liners in you?
CrazyRay7979 1 year ago
@CrazyRay7979 well i know why your name is CrazyRay. you absolutely refuse to accept anything but the governments story which makes you a direct threat to Constitution of the United States. so if its so easy to attack America why doesn't it more often? according to you all you have to do is slip through airport security nevermind the Greatest military defense network in the world failed HUM i wonder why?
MCHESTER29 1 year ago
@CrazyRay7979 if you ever want to debate 9/11 with me in person i live here 9750 N 96th street #123 scottsdale, az 85258 or i can meet you somehwere, where would you like to be buried? i absolutely will not stand for people who support a war they are not fighting in, you fucking fuck.
MCHESTER29 1 year ago
@CrazyRay7979 so when do you leave for the WAR RAY? since you seem to believe whatever the government is telling us when do you leave to protect our freedoms? YOU FUCK.
MCHESTER29 1 year ago