Greetings to all:

We were exposed to the work of Enrico Manieri here ( http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_F...opic=14698&st=0 ) on Digest’s “Glowing Metal” Thread where he appears reluctant to defend LC member rebuttals. He has refused to give comment on my rebuttal to his Pentagon Paper ( http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_F...showtopic=14947 ), as he will likely turn a blind eye to this one. Enrico is pasting his Loyal Bushie Cover Story tripe in post after post on this fine Board without any intention of actually defending a single word. His original paper can be viewed here:

http://11-settembre.blogspot.com/2007/04/r...ough-steel.html

---------------------

Once again Enrico is presenting a paper using a very narrow thesis to support a predetermined conclusion based upon a comedy of circumstantial evidence. Instead of offering us a theory on how these three WTC skyscrapers collapsed into their own footprints just hours apart on the same day, his limited focus is upon findings on what cutting torches ‘can’ do to steel in a controlled environment. There is no attempt to explain ‘all’ of the evidence in these related 911Truth cases pointing to the Controlled Demolition ( http://www.ae911truth.org ) of all three WTC skyscrapers.

These claims will never be supported by any evidence displayed in this paper. He has already assumed that all WTC steel was ‘cut’ using torches, which is discredited by his own evidence. Demolition crews cutting steel on the WTC site in NO WAY creates ‘tons’ ( http://www.ae911truth.org/ #13 of 16 points in right-hand column) of molten metal ( http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/moltensteel.html ) found under all three WTC skyscrapers weeks after the attacks.

The column Enrico is attempting to describe stands six feet over the head of the confused fireman standing on a pile of building debris. His suggestion is that a demolition worker climbed a ladder to stand above this column and make a 45-degree angled cut away from himself AND diagonally along the widest side of the supporting commonent. As a demolition supervisor with over 30 years experience, I can tell you this guy is completely out of his cotton picking mind! This crime scene is in no way ready for the cutting of any column steel, until the loose debris is removed from the area. Any demolition worker cuts will be of the 90-degree variety and not these dangerous 45-degree cuts displaying definite Controlled Demolition signatures. The demolition supervisor was charged with carrying out a predetermined plan to ‘walk’ each column line in one of the four directions by placing these 45-degree angle shaped-charge cuts all over the WTC steel-framed network. Careful study of the blueprints and load bearing capacities for each series of supporting columns, beams, girders and bar-joists tells the Demo Supervisor which direction to walk the collapsing columns AND, when precisely to detonate the adjacent incendiary charges allowing the entire structure to collapse symmetrically into its own footprint. Walking a column line in the wrong direction in a single area of the building can cause catastrophic results and place everyone in the area in grave danger. The Demolition Specialists who transformed this . . .



. . . into this tiny pile . . .



. . . did so after months of careful and meticulous planning and the precise execution of that plan. Many 2800-degree steel connections had to be ‘severed’ to weaken the WTC-7 steel-framed network BEFORE the final series of simultaneous detonations brought WTC-7 down into its own footprint. The same is true for all three WTC skyscrapers and the reason so many ‘explosions’ ( http://youtube.com/watch?v=OkWTXz7tcn8 ) were reported prior to each collapse. Even so, let’s look at a closer shot of this famous photo and the cut Enrico is talking about:



Remember again that this 45-degree angled cut is at least 12 feet above the ground and would serve NO PURPOSE at all to any Demo supervisor’s plan to remove this debris from the scene. However, we are standing inside the basement area where a very important part of the Controlled Demolition plan was executed. Note the heavy concentration of Termite Residue on the face of the column facing you, but the opposing side has very little (about 25 percent) of the same molten metal. Why? If a worker really stood on a ladder (heh) to make this unnecessary cut, then the same amount of slag (molten iron) residue should be present on the nearest side (facing us) AND the inside of the opposite side (inside of the column). The reason the inside of the column (facing us) has 25 percent of the residue, while the outside of the opposing side (nearest us) has 75 percent, is because that is typical of a Thermite Shaped Charge.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc_charges.html



Do some research at the link above and educate yourself a little bit on the use of these ‘cutter charges.’ The Controlled Demolition plan includes placing these 45-degree cutter charges all over the building. The type and size of the charge determines whether you will have a ‘burn’ with no sound, or an ‘explosion’ with a great deal of sound. Muffling devices can be used to cover and hide sounds for this kind of Inside Job, but overuse would leave the kinds of incriminating evidence the bad guys are working to avoid. These ‘burn’ charges are set off to activate the sulfur-enriched Thermate and create the 2500-degree Centigrade temps that literally cut through solid steel like butter. However (this is the important part), the charge is activated from the ‘outside’ of the column, which allows the first 75 percent of the molten residue to fall ‘outside’ the column. The cutting procedure is almost complete, before the Thermate works down to the ‘inside’ of the column, which allows only one quarter of the molten iron residue to fall on the ‘inside.’ The proportions common to using a cutting torch places 100 percent of the residue on the far side of the operator and none at all on his side of the steel column or beam. If a real cutting torch was used to create the 45-degree cut in the Confused Fireman picture (not), then the molten slag on the inside AND outside would be identical. Such is not the case, because of the 75 percent outside AND 25 percent inside slag proportions of a real ‘Thermate Shaped Charge” are present in the photograph.

If Mayor Giuliani, FEMA and the Justice Department (principals carrying out Tripod2 exercises = http://www.infowars.com/print/Sept11/wargames_cover.htm ) had nothing to hide, then why limit Ground Zero access to every other professional photographer on the planet? :0) Why did FEMA have all the structural steel evidence removed and all the trucks tracked on GPS ( http://globalresearch.ca/articles/SZY506A.html ), even firing a driver for taking an unauthorized lunch break? :0) The answer in all of these cases is “9/11 Was Definitely An Inside Job” and the same people with foreknowledge of the attacks were in charge of covering up their involvement by the systematic destruction of the evidence.

What Bullony! We just considered one of the most famous examples in the pictures above. :0) Imagine how many pictures of incriminating evidence we would possess if Giuliani, FEMA and the Justice Department were not involved in covering everything up! We need not look far to find another example of 45-degree angle cutter-charge cuts.



By a show of hands, how many readers really believe one of these workers climbed a 30-foot ladder to make that 45-degree cut? :0) These guys have tons of building debris to remove before even thinking about making any cuts on any structural steel. And yet, we see “Severed Column Ends” scattered throughout the debris pile. Are we also to assume these workers ran around to make 90-degree cuts, before removing the building debris? What a joke! And who really believes ‘building fires’ made all of these cuts? Explain how the red iron steel is untouched and unburned and definitely not melted, but we have all of these ‘severed steel’ members scattered throughout the debris pile. Enrico is suffering for a serve case of “Loyal Bushie” Grand Delusion that any ‘building fire’ and ‘worker cuts’ can explain all of the Controlled Demolition signature evidence present in this single picture. Look at the large steel column supporting the building next door to realize these steel supports can carry massive loads, but not if you place a 45-degree angle 2500+degree Thermate shaped charge to ‘walk’ that column in either of the four directions.

No sir. Evidence for Controlled Demolition is escaping Enrico’s notice. Go back to the Thermite shaped-charge site ( http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtc_charges.html ) and examine the evidence from the two ‘SAVE’ columns in my demonstration:



Start at the very top of the two-part picture to realize these columns have been subjected to a great deal of stress. Follow the straight red line down to see where the massive columns were literally bent revealing the noticeable signs. Not only are these two columns bent by a huge amount of stress, they are twisted in a predictable direction according to the very specific Controlled Demolition process. Imagine for a moment that these larger upper columns are attached to the lower stub columns in the WTC basement on 9/11 just prior to the collapse. A Thermate cutter-charge was placed on the columns of this particular column line for all the upper members to ‘walk’ to your left. However, long steel members are susceptible to bending, while the much shorter stub columns are practically impossible to bend. You can reproduce evidence for these conclusions by taking a 20-foot piece of #5 rebar (common residential and low-rise building material) to easily bend it around so both ends touch. However, try that with a piece just 6 inches long. :0)

The cutter charge was activated just after all of the charges were set off running up the entire column line to the top of the WTC steel network. As these upper columns slid off the column stubs, then all of the weight was momentarily placed on the upper portion of the 45-degree cut AND upon the left side of the column stub moved very quickly to the right. This shifting of the weight placed ‘all’ of the combined weight supported by this column on the very right side, which ‘bent’ the column to give us this Controlled Demolition evidence. The longer upper column then slid completely off the smaller supporting pedestal to impact the concrete pad and break the back of the entire column line running up the length of the WTC steel-framed network.

If this column had simply been exposed to fire AND had been cut by a demo worker’s torch (not), then we would see no signs of the ‘bending’ and ‘stress’ from the shifting loads part of the Controlled Demolition Scenario. Enrico is running around pretending that demolition workers regularly use these 45-degree angel cuts, when that is absolutely RIDICULOUS. Cutting down huge red iron columns using 45 degree cuts is dangerous for the workers and wastes tons of fuel in the process. Demo cuts from torches are rarely anything other than the typical 90 degrees from my three decades of demo experience. I encourage Enrico and everyone here to find a Demo Expert willing to testify that WTC-7 was brought down from building fires. :0)

Rebuttal to Enrico's WTC-2 81st Floor Paper >> http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_F...showtopic=14698

Rebuttal to Enrico's Pentagon Paper >> http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_F...showtopic=14947

GL,

Terral

I am not Enrico but there are some things you have said here that I don't think are supported by the facts:

I have yet to see evidence of 'tons of molten metal', and besides you are mixing two issues here. Molten metal can easily be caused by office fires, aluminium and lead were both present in large quantities in the towers. The issue over molten steel or iron is the one which Enrico seems to address with the cutting torch answers. As yet I have seen no good estimations to the amount of molten steel or even any convincing evidence of it existing.

I'm not a demolition supervisor but there are pictures of cutting in progress at the towers where the person cutting is doing so at an angle:


There's also a video available at (I think) debunk911.com or similar which shows a worker at Ground Zero pointing at angular cut columns and describing the cuts as done by workers.

This is not true at all, you are discussing two entirely different materials. Thermite conflagrates, it reacts slowly (relatively) and releases remarkable amounts of heat but can only 'explode' (I don't think it can detonate) if the expansion of gas is compressed. On the other hand, high explosives which are used in 'cutter charges' detonate, their reaction is extremely brief and serves to deform the steel faster than the force can be transmitted, thereby fracturing it.

I have never seen any documentation, reference or any other information about such thing as a 'Thermite Shaped Charge', please cite?

What energy source is keeping the metal molten?

Approx 40-80 floors worth of office furniture, likely fed by the numerous tunnels terminating in 'the bathtub'. What do you think is?

Office furniture? This is a joke, right?

It burns at nearly 1000C, should be hot enough to melt several metals and meet all the measurements of heat taken.

Hi EN:

Our readers can examine the video evidence for themselves. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4p6UuGE0plk

What ‘can’ happen is far from what actually happened to all three WTC skyscrapers on 9/11. Placing aluminum and Lead in the towers has nothing to do with WTC-7 collapsing into its own footprint in 6.6 seconds from being struck by nothing at all. All of Enrico’s probability notions of what ‘can’ happen are nothing more but More Loyal Bushie Disinformation.

Really? Your characterizations of his disinformation article represent meaningless drivel in this debate. Hopefully your entire post is not based upon what EN has not seen . . .

Your picture shows nobody cutting anything.

The expansion of what? Since you do not believe me, then listen again to Dr. Steven Jones ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEoKhyXKWxQ ) explaining that “Super-Thermite is explosive.” (05:25/07:45). Thermate is the source of all the ‘sulfur’ and ‘aluminum oxide’ residue in the molten metal. Building fires do not inject superheated sulfur and aluminum oxide residue into the molten metal deposits. These molten iron pools were burning hotter after six weeks (1500-degrees Centigrade), than building fire ‘peak temperatures.’ To answer your 45-degree cut point:



If steel workers came by and made these 45-degree angle cuts, then what force pushed them over to the right and towards the ‘high side’ of the cut? Try to follow along: The upper portion of the severed column slid off these stub columns, as the upper members moved to the left. The weight of the building pushed all of these columns in the opposite direction of the sliding upper members, which stripped the anchor bolts or caused the bottom plate to bend severely. Go around to every 45-degree angle cut and you will find them all leaning in the same direction as the ‘top’ of the angled cut. If your workers went around and randomly cut these columns using a 45-degree angle cut (not), then you should see examples of the columns leaning in all 4 directions relative to the ‘top’ of the angle cut. Right? That is not the case, because these upper column sections slid off the lower stub columns during the Controlled Demolition of the building, when all of the weight of the entire vertical column line was still bearing down on all of these stub columns. This entire column line walked to the ‘left,’ which moved all of the stub columns in the opposite direction to the ‘right.’ Since building fires have never caused the collapse of a steel-framed skyscraper before or since 9/11, then one must wonder where you are deriving this kind of information. :0)

All three WTC skyscrapers were wired with a series of different kinds and classes of Thermate and explosive charges. That is why we have ‘burning’ and many ‘explosions’ ( http://youtube.com/watch?v=OkWTXz7tcn8 ) taking place in each case. Part of taking these buildings down included setting of explosions to create a vacuum environment, which actually sucked the buildings down into their own footprints. Those charges had nothing to do with Thermite, Thermate or Super-Thermite.

A ‘charge’ can include any incendiary or explosive component. A ‘shaped-charge’ is merely a custom fitted cutting or explosive charge designed for achieving a particular goal. A “Thermite Shaped Charge” contains 2500-degree Thermite, rather than using Cordite or other explosive. The reason you having difficulty doing research on this topic is because demolition companies are required to use government approved and ‘traceable’ compounds. The bad guys used Thermite, because the combination of aluminum and metal oxide is not traceable to any manufacturer. “Thermite Shaped Charge” is a phrase I coined at 911Truth.org ( http://www.911truthgroups.org/Forum/tabid/...40/Default.aspx ) to describe this class of very much illegal ‘cutter charges.’

GL,

Terral

Here's a steel worker making a diagonal cut in a column with a thermic lance, at GZ



p.s. the photo of a trio of cut columns you posted is actually the remains of a steel panel from the exterior wall. Does your "theory" now extend to CD of the walls? Do you have any idea of their construction?

Well that's an interesting claim.

These are the best numbers NIST was able to generate in a highly combustible frame house fire.



"The NIST FDS computer simulation predicted fire conditions and events that correlate well with information from NIOSH and ATF. The model simulation was based on a fire that started on the kitchen stove. Smoke and hot gases from the fire began to spread through the house within seconds after ignition occurred. However, the FDS/Smokeview simulation of the flame front indicates that the fire itself did not spread beyond the kitchen until approximately 8 minutes after flaming ignition.

The critical event in this fire was the on-set of conditions consistent with flashover in the kitchen. At this point, approximately 8:32 AM, this fire started a transition from a single room and contents fire with smoke throughout the structure, to a fire that involved the majority of the structure within approximately 60 s. The hot gas layer temperatures in the living room increased from approximately 200 °C to 300 °C (390 °F to 570 °F) to more than 600 °C (1110 °F) in less than a minute. The hot gases and flames continued to spread rapidly from the living room through the stairway to the second floor. This quick change in thermal conditions and flame spread through the duplex led to the 3 firefighters being trapped inside and succumbing to the effects of the fire environment."



SOURCE:
http://www.fire.nist.gov/CDPUBS/NISTIR_6854/duplex.htm


MM

Wow. Breathtaking. Cherry-picking at its most rampant and shameless.

I took the trouble to read the entire report you posted.

The fire was being actively fought less than 24 mins after the first call.

The "slice temperature" diagrams at he bottom of the report clearly indicate temperatures into the red zone, i.e. the 800°C + range. The animation confirms this.

But you just chose the gas temperature quoted for the living room, because it appears "low" (although still around the melting point of aluminium). Throughout the report, the phrase "in excess of 600°C" is used.

The report, in fact, confirms the typical house/office fire temperatures we've been quoting for some time now, and perfectly adequate to melt all the metals we've been discussing.

Doesn't look like a diagonal cut to me compared to the nice 45 degree slices in the previous photos. Can you highlight the cut? Is that an I-beam he's cutting? I'd like to see him make a perfectly symmetric 45 degree cut on a box beam with his thermic lance in those rough conditions. I don't think it'd be close to ruler straight.

Hi Gwb, MM and CaGuy:

Many thanks to Caguy and MM for pointing out the obvious problems with Gwb’s ‘diagonal cut’ (heh) and En’s “1000C” furniture fire claims respectively. For those unaware, a 1000-degree Centigrade fire is a whopping 1832 degrees Fahrenheit. Do the math here for yourself:

Centigrade / Fahrenheit conversion page = http://walking.about.com/library/cal/uctemp.htm

However, the SchawbCorp / Underwriters Laboratories tests for building fires establish an 800 degree threshold for typical building fires.

Source >> http://www.schwabcorp.com/faqs.htm#fire_safe

En’s “1000C” claims are bogus and more than twice the actual temperatures of an average building fire, according to the Underwriters Laboratories tested and proven benchmarks. The Loyal Bushie Disinformation Artists harp on ‘maximum possible’ temperatures and not typically ‘sustained’ temps part of the typical building fire environment. Even a demolition worker’s torch has massive ‘maximum temperatures,’ but no 2800-degree structural steel is cut until the delivery system is functioning and set properly AND the heat is applied more rapidly than the steel-frame network can disperse it. No demolition crew ever demolished a 2800-degree steel-framed skyscraper by setting a few office fires and running away. To understand precisely what took these three Silverstein-owned and Silverstein-insured skyscrapers down ‘demolition-style’ within hours of the same day, then I strongly suggest you forget about WTC-1 and WTC-2 completely. Move your complete attention over 350 feet away to WTC-7 where the same pools of sulfur and aluminum oxide rich ( http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2006/WTC-Jones19mar06.htm ) molten metal ( http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/moltensteel.html ) was found AND the steel-framed skyscraper was struck my no Jetliner at all. Stop allowing these Loyal Bushie Disinformation Artists to lead you around WTC-1 and WTC-2 by the nose with all of this Official Cover Story “building fire did it” BULLONY. This is why I posted the Opening Post (OP) Disinformation Article in the WTC-7 Forum in the first place. :0) Never buy this ridiculous “Building Fire” LIE from any of these Loyal Bushie Cover Story cronies. The steel-frame network itself is designed and constructed to withstand even the hottest building fires, because the energy is literally absorbed by the 2800-degree steel and transported AWAY from the building fire location MORE QUICKLY than the available fuel can feed the fire.

All of this ‘softening’ of steel from 1000-degree temps is FOOLISHNESS concocted by the leaders of the Loyal Bushie Disinformation Artists like the Popular Mechanics cronies. They want you to believe that heat simply sits and builds up in one location proximal to the building fire, when that is simply a MYTH never supported by any of the evidence anywhere. If energy is released into the building fire environment AND transferred to the 2800-degree structural steel, then the adjacent columns and beams are heated up and quickly equalize the temperatures by spreading that evenly throughout the entire network. You cannot superheat the steel columns or beams in a single room to the required 2800 degrees, before that energy is spread throughout the entire ‘bolted and welded together’ steel-framed network. The truth is that even columns and beams hundreds of feet away from the building fire would rise in temperature, as the heat moves from the hotspots to the cooler steel components of the network. Now to the disinformation spread around in this thread:

I obtained my first General Contractor’s license in Camden County, Georgia in the mid 1980’s and my father is still a General Contractor in Florida. Even at a very young age, I was using cutting torches in taking buildings down and rebuilding them for his General Contracting company. I worked my way from the bottom of the totem pole into the supervisor position over many years and am likely one of the best first-hand witnesses posting on this Board on this topic. En’s picture ( http://xs219.xs.to/xs219/07361/cut2.jpg ) simply does not show anyone cutting anything, as already stated. Gwb (Sept 3 2007, 02:07 PM) offered a second picture . . .



. . . claiming this is a 45-degree angle torch cut. :0) Anyone can see the worker is making his cut in 90-degree fashion horizontal to the ground, which is typical for a demolition worker severing structural steel. What the picture does not show are the choker cables fixed to the upper column being held by a crane or other lifting apparatus. Demo crews do not cut these columns down like trees in the forest and yell “timberrrrr!” :0). A 45-degree angle cut would waste valuable fuel resources and ‘time,’ because those cuts are longer and throw more slag around. Another important detail to note is the debris around these columns has been removed sufficiently to give adequate access to the steel members. However, this is NOT the case in the Opening Post images:



Here you can clearly see debris littering the potential demo site that would certainly be removed by ‘laborers’ long before any of my highly trained and highly paid demo personnel could think about working here. Establishing proper ‘footing’ and clean pathways for entering and exiting the demo site is mandatory and a primary concern for any demo supervisor. Failing to follow proper step-by-step procedures in these dangerous settings will eventually get many of your workers injured and killed themselves. We see the same scenario here:



Here we have a clean 45-degree angle cut located far above the huge pile of WTC debris. What did any Demo worker stand on to make that cut? :0) Look into the background and my “Severed Column End” notation to realize this steel member is cut ’90-degrees’ AND is under a ton of building debris. Who is going to claim this cut was made by one of these demo workers? :0) The debris obviously landed on top of this ‘already cut column’ during the “Controlled Demolition” (CD) process. These 45-degree angle cuts are definite CD signatures, but all CD cuts are NOT made at 45 degrees. Only the columns needed to ‘walk’ in a direction are cut at these fancy angles, but many steel members are cut at the typical 90 degrees to simply break the 2800-degree steel connection. That is why you see many 90-degree cuts littered throughout this WTC debris pile, BEFORE any demo worker could even think about cutting any steel. Someone please calculate the probability of ‘building fires’ creating these 45-degree and 90-degree ‘cutter charge’ cuts in the 2800-degree ‘red iron’ steel scattered throughout this debris pile. :0) Use your eyes to scan the debris pile and note all of the two and four-inch members scattered everywhere. How did building fires ‘cut’ these pieces from the original WTC-7 steel-framed network? :0) Reducing this massive 47 story skyscraper into this tiny little pile involved the severing of literally thousands and thousands of ‘red iron’ steel connections of every size, which is absolutely IMPOSSIBLE by the setting of any number of building fires. CaGuy asks EN

What fuel source caused one pound of 2800 degree structural steel to melt in the first place? :0) We still have the problem of trying to heat up any component of the entire WTC-7 network ‘more quickly’ than the energy was carried away and spread throughout the adjacent columns and beams. A ‘bought and paid for’ scientist can take a piece of structural steel into his laboratory and substantiate all kinds of “building fire” claims, because a single detached unit does NOT have the same characteristics as a component of a much larger steel-framed network. The Loyal Bushie Disinformation artists need to take a good look at WTC-7 during the initial moments of the collapse:

http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardi...wtc/WTC_ch5.htm



Look through the unbroken windows for even a hint of 2800-degree fires. :0) And yet, the massive columns are standing just inside these windows:

http://www.jameswickstrom.com/news_links/wtc7pulled.htm



Someone please explain how you superheat all of these WTC-7 columns and beams from a few building fires AND without the breaking of a single window? :0) No sir. The Thermite Shaped Charges were placed and wrapped to hide the visual evidence that 2500-degree+ Centigrade ‘cutter charges’ were used to sever ‘all’ of these massive connections ‘simultaneously.’ By a show of hands, how many understand the basic concept of any building designed and constructed using “Compartmentalization” of all structural steel components? Head over to the 911Research website ( http://911research.wtc7.net/mirrors/guardi...wtc/WTC_ch5.htm ) and educate yourself on the reasons ‘why’ bringing down any modern skyscraper using building fires is an absolute impossibility. Read the entire page and investigate the information from their links. This is only a short summary:



Figure 5-3 gives you an idea of the myriad of 2800-degree steel connections that had to be severed to reduce this 47-story overbuilt skyscraper into a tiny little pile in just 6.6 seconds. You see the extra cross-bracing protecting the 23rd floor chosen to be Rudy Giuliani’s Office of Emergency Management (OEM) bunker ( http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/context...99commandcenter ) , where he spent an extra 15 million bucks to beef up this location for his own Emergency Command and Control Center for this kind of situation. Note that some of the Cantilever transfer girders were nine feet tall! :0)



Section 5.3.3 begins descriptions of the “Compartmentalization” building strategy used in constructing this state of the art skyscraper using concrete slabs horizontally and curtain walls vertically. This does not even begin to address the 3-hour ‘spray-on’ fireproofing insulation and multiple layers of gypsum wallboard ‘separating’ these vital 2800-degree components away from one another. Even if a building fire was started inside ‘one’ of these sub-compartments, the fuel source in that section would be extinguished LONG before any fire could breach these ‘fireproof’ safety countermeasures. This is why you have many highly trained and experienced architects and engineers at http://www.ae911truth.org speaking in a single voice knowing with 100 percent certainty that these WTC skyscrapers were DEFINITELY brought down using CD techniques CLEARLY visible in all the WTC-7 evidence.

A series of fires burning for days and days could not bring WTC-7 down and certainly NOT in a matter of hours. The Official Bushie Administration “Building Fire did it” theory has no precedent in the history of this planet and anyone believing that nonsense for one minute must ignore a mountain of CD evidence. The bad guys are attempting to drown out the concerted voices of the ‘experts’ by using every available source of Loyal Bushie Disinformation possible to cover the tracks of the real insider terrorists who murdered innocent Americans on 9/11. You must conduct your own 911Truth investigation by examining ‘all’ of the evidence, which will allow every LC member to break the chains of the Great Delusion based upon nothing but Loyal Bushie LIES.

Never allow any of these Bushie Disinformation Artists to label you as a Conspiracy Theorist (a CT’er), because even the evil Bush/Rove Administration spreads lies that the 9/11 attacks were carried out by a ‘group’ of Bearded Jihadist Radicals. :0) 911Truther’s simply disagree on the ‘identities’ of the real insider terrorists responsible for planning and carrying out these attacks against We The People. I encourage everyone reading this post (not the Loyal Bushie Disinfo Artists obviously) to head out to 911Truth.org ( http://www.911truth.org/ ) and sign up as a 911Truther ( http://www.911truthgroups.org/Forum/tabid/421/Default.aspx ) demanding nothing less from the out-of-control Bushie Administration and our ‘do-nothing’ Congress.

Terral

Terral, nice investigation. You have proved beyond a reasonable doubt that WTC7 was brought down by controlled demolition. That also proves 9/11 was an inside job. Excellent work!

b/s .. one at a time .. :

"Hoffman’s assertion regarding maximum fire temperatures is contradicted by professional fire scientists. As one example, a reference office fire test [42] conducted in the United Kingdom, as part of the Cardington experiments in 1998, demonstrated that “cellulosic,” or largely wood- and paper-based fires, can easily send atmospheric temperatures 10 cm below roof decking above 1000 oC and sustain this temperature for several minutes, and remain over 800 oC for over half an hour. This same test showed temperatures 1.8 m below the decking to rise as high as 1200 oC, and remain above 1000 degrees for ten minutes. Modern offices, containing more plastics, are seen to reach even higher temperatures of up to 1300 oC, after which they approximate the cellulosic curve. They do not only attain these temperatures during a “flashover.” NIST itself gathered similar results by conducting its own full-scale fire test, found in NCSTAR1-5E, in which a series of cubicle offices were built in a faithful recreation of a WTC floor, and set alight with carefully measured quantities of jet fuel. The results from this experiment, seen in Figures 6-6 through 6-12 of this report, show temperatures peaking well above 1000 oC for substantial periods of time, consistent with the Cardington results and completely refuting Hoffman’s claims."

I have already quoted the NIST WTC office-fire recreation in another post.

Similarly, you have ignored a number of other links to fire tests which confirm these figures.

The Kader factory, the Iron Mountain depot and the Malvern paper factory were all steel-framed and all collapsed rapidly through fire alone. The (steel) Interstate 580 overpass collapsed after 19 minutes exposure to fire. Fire weakens steel. Melting is not a requirement. Do you get that ???

The piloted ignition of (say) wood requires a temperature of 350°C / 662°F alone.

Perhaps it's time to extend your knowledge of house/office fires beyond the SchwabCorp website? However, I suspect your rampant pomposity will get in the way of mere learning.

LOL!

You want to compare a dilapidated steel shed like this


to a modern skyscraper like this?


Next, you'll be comparing steel bridges to buildings... oh wait! LOL

Hi CaGuy:

Thanks a bunch. I am doing my best to encourage Richard Gage, the architects and engineers at AE911Truth.org ( http://www.ae911truth.org ) to challenge the Popular Mechanics ( http://www.popularmechanics.com/ ) cronies to a live television debate of the Building Fire versus the Controlled Demolition explanations of the WTC skyscrapers. Nothing would be more pleasing than seeing Jim Meigs and the magazine’s senor staff squirming in their chairs and trying to defend their Building Fire propaganda on national television in front of everyone. :0)

I am about to begin a series of 911Truth rebuttals to their Loyal Bushie Disinformation beginning here:

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology...aw/4220721.html

Any LC member wanting to take their side in these debates is welcome to stand at the plate for a couple of swings. :0)

Fun, fun, fun,

Terral
911Truth.org
AE911Truth.org
PilotsForTruth.org

The "dilapidated steel shed" - which in fact was a fully functional factory until after the fire - had a damn sight less vertical load to support than the skyscraper. Yet it collapsed.

But I don't suppose you can comprehend this point.

Fact is - fire weakens steel.

Would you like to address Terral's errors in assessing typical office/house fire temperatures? Rate of weakening of steel in fires?

Or is your "intellect" down at the level of describing perfectly functional steel-framed buildings as "dilapidated sheds"? Was the 580 overpass a "ramshackle footbridge" ??? Nah.

Perhaps you have nothing of substance to offer this debate?
Perhaps you could grow up and enter the adult world?

Your call.

Let me clarify myself: a fully functional factory inside of a dilapidated steel shed. LOL. My point was they are not comparable structures. What condition was the structure before the fire? Was the steel fireproofed, UL tested, grade and thickness of steel, etc. How many seconds did it take to collapse? Or did it partially cave in?

Let me correct you. Fire CAN weaken steel given adequate sustained temperature that overcomes fireproofing and thermal dissipation of heat from the adjacent steel. You need a lot to prove such as temperatures, locale and durations which you can't. Or you can just plug in your wild assumptions and make the pieces fit like all the other government subsidized experts do.

LOL. Keep them insults a comin! Shows how desperate you are. LOL!!!

Wow, there are so many assumptions and mistakes here I don't know where to start!

Lets begin with the temperature of fire, you have linked to a page which (to my knowledge) has mistaken F for C. The typical temperature of fire is well in excess of 800F and often in excess of 800C, the UL tests they are referring to range from 1500F to 2000F. If typical fires are approximately 50% of the testing temperatures, why do the Cardington Fire Tests clearly show temperatures in excess of 1000C? Why did NISTs reconstruction and burning of WTC workstations exceed 1000C? Why was it so easy for me to melt aluminium beer cans in an open fire a couple of nights ago?

Indeed I think the very properties of flame would conspire to ensure a minimum temperature of 750F or so as what you are actually seeing is radiation given off by superheated gas. This only begins to occur at or around 450C.

Skipping quite a lot of cruft we get to the next main point you try to make, which is this:

This has some measure of accuracy, as steel certainly does conduct heat. It's not hugely efficient like copper, aluminium or steel but the effect certainly exists. However, most of the rest of what you have said is entirely wrong. While heat will be transferred through the steel it is proportional to the difference in temperature and the surface area available for conduction. We can easily determine the area available for trusses and it appears to be exceedingly low. Indeed the trusses were at the worst place possible in a fire, in the hot gas layer directly below the ceiling. If you truly believe that you cannot possibly heat up these steel trusses fast enough to cause them to significantly weaken, why were they fireproofed?

As to whether the picture I posted shows cutting or not, I should put it in context:

Indeed there is video of people talking about cutting these sections right here: rtsp://video.pbs.org/americarebuilds/videostories_tours_220.rm?v1st=9355F28D685FF698

I hope this clears up these silly accusations, the diagonal cuts were undoubtedly made by cleanup workers and indeed if they were done with thermite cutter charges as you claim, why are they not uniform? In the large image you post later on you entirely fail to explain why there is a massive difference in cut heights at one corner of the column! Surely a simultaneous attack by melting (rather than blasting) would result in a uniform 'smoothed' cut rather than this?

I look forward to your response.

Wrong. A rise in temperature from 20°C to 21°C produces a weakening. If you want to understand the effects of the actual WTC damage and fires then best you read NIST NCSTAR 1 Final Report, available here:

http://wtc.nist.gov/reports_october05.htm

Or - research outside the NIST realm if you don't trust them. But, you'll find the same science being applied everywhere.

Can't melt steel.

Actually it somewhat can, as I referenced in the thread in The Lounge, although it certainly can't produce 'rivers of molten steel' however the only evidence for this existing seems to be conjecture.

How can you possibly believe the cuts made on beams near ground level were made by thermite. It is clear that the buildings failed near the tops of the building. Do you really believe if someone was planning to bring the building down by explosives they wouldn't know enough to realize the beams didn't have to be cut at that low level. Would they have wasted all the time and energy and risked discovery by planting explosives or thermite where it was unneccessary.

I told you the JREFers were blitzing prior to 9/11/07.

If the LC Admins want to let them own the Loose Change Forum, all they have to do is stand back and watch the Gravy train.

MM

Hey MM, have you seen this? rtsp://video.pbs.org/americarebuilds/videostories_tours_220.rm?v1st=9355F28D685FF698

Yeah, sure you did. You got jokes, man. Seriously.

Hi CaGuy and Gwb:

Gwb is talking out of his hat. 20-degrees Celsius is 68-degrees Fahrenheit ( http://walking.about.com/library/cal/uctemp.htm ) and structural steel melting point is 2800-degrees Fahrenheit. Nobody can say CaGuy is wrong, because he intentionally stated an axiom using general terms to protect himself. Fire ‘can’ weaken given ‘adequate sustained temperature’ that ‘overcomes’ fireproofing AND ‘thermal dissipation’ of heat from (into or through) adjacent steel. CaGuy did not say fire ‘will’ do anything, but told you the 911Truth about what steel ‘can’ do in certain circumstances. Elephants ‘can’ fly, if you give them large enough wings. :0) Of course if one never flies, then you needed bigger wings . . . The 911Truth is that steel absorbs heat energy out of a warm environment to transfer that into a cooler one, whether you intentionally design things that way or not. Setting a fire in one WTC-7 room would eventually heat up some of the 2800-degree steel through the 3-hour fireproofing, but that energy would be carried to cooler portions of the steel-frame network more quickly that the fuel source could heat the steel in that room. If you stick the end of an iron rod into a campfire, then you will see what I mean very quickly. :0)

Building fires ( http://www.schwabcorp.com/faqs.htm#fire_safe ) do not get anywhere near hot enough to ‘weaken’ 2800-degree structural steel, because every steel component is bolted and welded into the larger steel-framed network. Anyone who has actually used an acetylene cutting torch ( http://www.nedians.8m.com/prodprac.htm ) knows you do not begin cutting anything upon placing the flame to the steel. You sit there and apply heat and apply heat and apply more heat, until the steel begins flickering like a mini sparkler. The steel around the cut location turns red hot, before you can cut one inch of structural steel, because the heat is running away from the cutting location more quickly than you can introduce that into the steel member itself. Once you do reach that magical point where you are putting more heat into the steel than can be dispersed, THEN you kick on the cutting gas and begin cutting through this single area that ‘is now’ hot enough to be severed. If you stop cutting in that location and move just a few feet away, you would have to start the heating up process all over again, because the heat runs away from your location to be spread evenly throughout the entire steel-frame network. Everyone should realize these cutting torch settings must be optimum, or you can waste an entire tank of fuel and never but one piece of steel. :0) The idea that building fires are going to ‘sever’ all WTC-7 structural steel columns, beams, girders and bar-joists simultaneously is nothing less than hilarious. WTC-7 collapsed ‘symmetrically’ with great precision and nothing like that is possible apart from Controlled Demolition.

The NIST pinheads are a bunch of LIARS running diversion for the Official Bushie “Inside Job” Cover Story, just like the 911Commission cronies and the Popular Mechanic LIARS. The LC members using these “Loyal Bushies” as sources . . . well . . . decide for yourselves. :0)

GL,

Terral

The 580 Bridge was reinforced concrete with wrought iron for support. You are comparing 2 entirely different things to suppose the same outcome. If NIST's own workstation tests under load pass then any partially fireproofed beams or fully fireproofed beams don't fail at all. This is why the guy from UL was fired when he came forward.

You misunderstand.

I didn't say it would melt at 20°C. That would be daft. I said any rise in temperature produces a weakening. Which it does.

The assumption running around this thread has been that there's no problem with the steel until it melts. That's plain wrong. Steel loses half its structural strength at around 600°C

You also said as part of your disinformation campaign;

NIST clearly states that WTC office furnishings fires never lasted more than 20 minutes in any single location. 20 minutes to start, build up and decline to a smolder. How you can possibly stretch that to a sustained "well above 1000C" is beyond me.

Digging up test results that have no bearing on WTC and are refuted in the NIST report is nothing more than lying to support your continued propaganda gwb_223.

I don't readily accuse people of lying but when they start quoting NIST and I know that NIST's 20 minute figure has been frequently referred to here, and responded to by them, then their feigned ignorance is nothing less than a lie!

Ask yourself readers!

Why do people like gwb_223, e^n, and Patches O'Houlihan spend SO MUCH TIME here trying to undermine the 9/11 Truth Movement?.

What happened on 9/11 was BIG!

If it was an inside job it was VERY BIG!

Do you not think that those responsible would not assign people to undermine sites like the Loose Change Forum??

MM

Yeah. The scumbags keep promising that "the cheque is in the post", but it never arrives.

I'd take legal action against the NWO for back-pay, but the standard-issue Black Helicopter comes in so handy ...

Good to see you have a sense of humour gwb_223.

Bottom line, you are still coming from a society that believes in social privilege and your backing the wrong horse!

I suggest you explain why you spend so much time and effort attacking an investigation into 9/11 when you could be outside enjoying the weather?

I'll have my Yorkshire relatives check on you to make sure your not responding with a load of prepaid crap!


MM

Do you indeed?

And the strawman didn't go unnoticed. I'm not attacking "an investigation into 9/11". I'm attacking b/s. And so far the b/s doesn't warrant even thinking about a formal re-investigation.

Yet you sit in front of your pc in England with nothing to lose from a full and proper investigation, but you continue to invest your precious free time in obstructing efforts to bring this about.

How strange unless somehow it is worth $$ your while?

MM

Nope. Never made a penny out of 9/11. That's just your paranoia at work.

Hi Gwb and miragememories (MM):

No. Gwb did a terrible job of explaining his nonsense, as usual.

That is bullony. Heat never rests inside the steel-frame network in any skyscraper. Please forgive if I point out another facet of your complete ignorance of this ‘steel’ topic. The heat inside any steel network runs from the hot or warm areas to the cold almost instantly, because (as everyone knows but you), steel is an excellent conductor of heat. You are suggesting that one part of the steel-framed network can be heated to allow weakening, when that is just ridiculous, because the energy is spread evenly through the ‘warming’ assembly of connections. Building fires do not possess sufficient energy to melt one pound of WTC-7 steel, because the energy would be quickly transferred from the fire source into the entire steel-framed network.

LOL. I have only been around the General Contracting business like my father and his father for about 35 years and have supervised the demo of many buildings. You cannot make these kinds of bogus claims about structural steel bolted and welded into a STEEL-FRAMED NETWORK. The energy cannot possibly sit still in one place for even one moment, as if the connected steel next door is going to remain cool. Stop being foolish! :0) 600 degrees Celsius is 1112 degrees Fahrenheit and typical building fires do not burn at those temperatures anyway ( http://www.schwabcorp.com/faqs.htm#fire_safe ) . 800 degrees Fahrenheit is only 426 degrees Celsius and you do not even have enough building fire energy to weaken one pound of WTC-7 steel. Building fires also do not create 1500-degree Celsius molten metal ( http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/moltensteel.html ) pools found under all three demolished WTC skyscrapers. Gwb acts like everyone needs to worry about living and working inside these very much ‘fireproof’ skyscrapers, because one has never burned to collapse into its own footprint in the history of this planet. That includes the Twin Towers and WTC-7, because they were all taken down by Controlled Demolition ( http://www.ae911truth.org ). :0) No, I do not represent AE911Truth.org and never will . . .

In case you are unaware, the vast majority of Gwb’s posts are one to six sentences of nothing. Therefore, he is not wasting much of his time and anyone led astray by his nonsense is not even paying attention. :0)

GL,

Terral

Hi Terral

Interisting work. Congratulations. There is still a larfge gap in any CD theory.

In your opinion, how do u think the thermite was laid, without being discovered?

When was it laid?

It is purely speculation. Yet, for a CD to have occured, there must be a logical permutation that exists that allows for a sensible means in which the building was rigged for demolition. Can you provide that logical permutation?

If a CD did indeed occur then somehow it was rigged. How?

:lol:

Among metals you're struggling to find a *worse* conductor of heat. There's titanium and then there's, er , .... ?? Which is why steel is not greatly favoured among cooks. You get hotspots over the heat source because the heat conducts slowly.

Are you polluting yet another thread with your baseless assertions, Terral?

Are you a disinfo agent, intent on bringing the 9/11 Truth movement into total disrepute? How much are you being paid for this?

Sheesh. MM suspects me of being a paid shill, but I take my hat off to you. Hope you're getting seriously big bucks for your work.

How can he be disinfo for the truth movement if he is helping the truth movement?! I have been following this thread for a while and you always answer with one sentence or two and terral with a full report lol.

Terral.

I would also like to see some information on residue of thermite/thermate on steel vs residue from cutting torches. You boldly claim that what you see on the photo's is not posssible with a cutting torch. Can you provide some scientific research that can back up said claim?

Very easy to make such claims, but some supporting eveidence will only reinforce your rebuttal.

I am glad, that your expertise in demolition has indicated that months of planning would be neccessary to place the many thermite/thermate charges in the building, on all the columns as you mentioned. As I asked earlier, how was this done? How did all this work go unnoticed? There must be a logical answer to this question.