WTC Steel

[switchpoint]

This really doesn't have much to do with the conspiracy angle, however, it does serve to answer some of those that insist that all the steel from the WTC towers was shipped off the China the next day.

But I am sure someone is going to claim its all fake unless I can show the serial numbers.

Anyway, these are photos taken in the area I am from when the steel was being moved to an Industrial Museum. Thought people would like to see them.

http://www.mcall.com/photos/all-5steel-041410-pictures,0,149513.photogallery

[sylvan8798]

I'm sure they scrubbed the Mountain DEW off all those pieces. And the explosives dust. And the dustified other steel.

[switchpoint]

Yeah, I'm sure they also scraped off all the "place thermite here" paint marks.

I sure wish We Are Clowns had shown up with all those former steelworkers saluting the steel as it went by. That would have been fun to watch.

[sheeplesnshills]

I'm sure they scrubbed the Mountain DEW off all those pieces. And the explosives dust. And the dustified other steel.

I think I see a subway grating in one of those pictures.....so that proves that those trucks are really jet powered.:)

[bio]

This really doesn't have much to do with the conspiracy angle, however, it does serve to answer some of those that insist that all the steel from the WTC towers was shipped off the China the next day.

But I am sure someone is going to claim its all fake unless I can show the serial numbers.

Anyway, these are photos taken in the area I am from when the steel was being moved to an Industrial Museum. Thought people would like to see them.

http://www.mcall.com/photos/all-5steel-041410-pictures,0,149513.photogallery

the problem is, that only 5 or 6 pieces of the core columns of 1, 2, which stood in the impact and fire floors above, were recovered. NIST found no evidence, that these columns became hotter than 600 C.

the problem is, that NIST had not a single piece of steel from the WTC-7 and had to spin a scenario, which is even for Dr. Greening not consistent which videos and photo-evidences.

[DGM]

the problem is, that only 5 or 6 pieces of the core columns of 1, 2, which stood in the impact and fire floors above, were recovered. NIST found no evidence, that these columns became hotter than 600 C.

the problem is, that NIST had not a single piece of steel from the WTC-7 and had to spin a scenario, which is even for Dr. Greening not consistent which videos and photo-evidences.
And not one shred of evidence has even been produced that shows the collapses were anything other then fire induced. Yet you believe in CD, why?

[funk de fino]

the problem is, that only 5 or 6 pieces of the core columns of 1, 2, which stood in the impact and fire floors above, were recovered. NIST found no evidence, that these columns became hotter than 600 C.

Thats all they chose because it is all they could identify. Read NISTNCSTAR1-3chaps. Then come back.

the problem is, that NIST had not a single piece of steel from the WTC-7 and had to spin a scenario, which is even for Dr. Greening not consistent which videos and photo-evidences.

Appeal to authority noted.

[RedIbis]

the problem is, that only 5 or 6 pieces of the core columns of 1, 2, which stood in the impact and fire floors above, were recovered. NIST found no evidence, that these columns became hotter than 600 C.

the problem is, that NIST had not a single piece of steel from the WTC-7 and had to spin a scenario, which is even for Dr. Greening not consistent which videos and photo-evidences.

Actually, as far as core columns go, NIST found none that reached temps above 250C. They worked off of assumption after that, which is exactly what they did for the steel they didn't have when coming up with their preposterous WTC 7 hypothesis.

[bio]

Thats all they chose because it is all they could identify. Read NISTNCSTAR1-3chaps. Then come back.

Appeal to authority noted.

do you think, that was a grave problem?

[BigAl]

I think I see a subway grating in one of those pictures.....so that proves that those trucks are really jet powered.:)

And for Jam's benefit here's a rare picture of a NYC subway car that got sucked up in the recovery steel from the pile and on it's way to China.

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/thum_174224bcdc267876ab.jpg (http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=19770)

[switchpoint]

Actually, as far as core columns go, NIST found none that reached temps above 250C. They worked off of assumption after that, which is exactly what they did for the steel they didn't have when coming up with their preposterous WTC 7 hypothesis.

Yeah, that preposterous notion that if you let a building burn for 5 or 6 or 7 hours that it may fall down. Totally off the wall. What were people thinking?

Of course the only "reasonable" explanation is that super secret black ops government ninja agents snuck into the building, planted noiseless explosives, remote controlled two passenger planes into the adjacent buildings, which were also planted with explosives, blew up those buildings with half the people in them killing thousands, but then waited until building 7 was completely evacuated, then had the fire chief call the building owner who then gave the order to "pull it", which, as we all know, is super secret black ops government ninja agents language for "blow it up", and then just to make sure that this all remained top secret, hush-hush, the building owner told everyone in a TV interview that he ordered the building "pulled".

Yeah, that's a lot less preposterous. ;)

[RedIbis]

Yeah, that preposterous notion that if you let a building burn for 5 or 6 or 7 hours that it may fall down. Totally off the wall. What were people thinking?



Good question since:

The collapse of WTC 7 is the first known instance of a tall building brought down primarily by uncontrolled fires.

[BigAl]

Good question since:

The collapse of WTC 7 is the first known instance of a tall building brought down primarily by uncontrolled fires.


Name another all-steel structure that had an uncontrolled (i.e. an unfought fire).

[funk de fino]

Actually, as far as core columns go, NIST found none that reached temps above 250C. They worked off of assumption after that, which is exactly what they did for the steel they didn't have when coming up with their preposterous WTC 7 hypothesis.

I suggest you read the material I mentioned, but this time read it for comprehension. They assumed nothing.

[funk de fino]

do you think, that was a grave problem?

If there were no identifying marks on it how were they supposed to identify it? They only used what they could positively identify, anything else was worthless for this part.

There is no way you read those chapters in that time. You are a waste of time.

[funk de fino]

Good question since:

So if a not so tall building collapsed, in less time, while being fought, that would mean a tall building could in fact collapse in a longer fire which was unfought?

Or does fire not affect steel?

[switchpoint]

The collapse of WTC 7 is the first known instance of a tall building brought down primarily by uncontrolled fires.

Just a little logic test here. Lets take out one word and see what happens:

"The collapse of WTC 7 is the first know instance of a building brought down by uncontrolled fires".

Well, we know that's not true. So it must have something then to do with the height. What, in particular, makes "tall" buildings impervious to damage from fire? Is it something to do with gravity?

[EventHorizon]

Or does fire not affect steel?

Duh, why do you think they call Superman "The Man of Steel"? He's invincible, just like steel! Nothing can weaken it (except kryptonite).

[twinstead]

Anybody else thinking the towers may have been felled by an orbital kryptonite weapon?

[UNLoVedRebel]

Actually, as far as core columns go, NIST found none that reached temps above 250C.Did you forget this part?

"It must be recognized that the examined locations represent less than one percent of the core columns located in the fire-exposed region, and thus these temperatures cannot be considered representative of general conditions in the core."
NIST NCSTAR 1-3 6.8.6

[Mr.Herbert]

Good question since:


The collapse of WTC 7 is the first known instance of a tall building brought down primarily by uncontrolled fires.





So Red, I think we all agree that if you are ever in a tall building that catches fire...you should stay in there to prove us all wrong.

[Mr.Herbert]

Duh, why do you think they call Superman "The Man of Steel"? He's invincible, just like steel! Nothing can weaken it (except NANO-kryptonite).

fixed that for ya :)

[Clippy]

RedIbis,

If the US government (or rogue faction thereof) was trying to get rid of evidence, why would it ship it to China?

[Bell]

RedIbis, beside no core columns that were exposed to fires over 250C, what else was not recovered from the pile?

Evidence that the WTC was destroyed by any other means than local failure of the structure, due to impact damage and fire, resulting in a progressive collapse.

[Edx]

Actually, as far as core columns go, NIST found none that reached temps above 250C. They worked off of assumption after that, which is exactly what they did for the steel they didn't have when coming up with their preposterous WTC 7 hypothesis.

If I remember correctly, they tested steel temperatures by observing paint cracking, they couldn't test some steel since there was no paint left, the ones they did test they expected to have those low temperatures.

[Reactor drone]

Good question since:

The collapse of WTC 7 is the first known instance of a tall building brought down primarily by uncontrolled fires.




So what, in your opinion, was the point of previous firefighting efforts in tall buildings? Was it (a)-to save building contents, (b)-to prevent damage to the building or (c)-a combination of the two.

[cyclonic]

Here is most of the steel

35zZeNcIAZ8

[BigAl]

RedIbis, beside no core columns that were exposed to fires over 250C, what else was not recovered from the pile?
]

Your point?

So what? For WTC 1/2 video shows that core beams remained standing after the exterior tube and floors fell away.

For WTC7, the concept of ""core beam" is vague. Fire and lack of firefighting caused the structure to collapse.

[RedIbis]

RedIbis,

If the US government (or rogue faction thereof) was trying to get rid of evidence, why would it ship it to China?

Because it was melted down and recycled for trinkets.

[scissorhands]

Because it was melted down and recycled for trinkets.

I didnt realise the Chinese govt was so chummy with Bush that they would help him cover up 9/11.
What if someone had noticed all the thermite residue and bits of det cord?

[scissorhands]

Your point?

So what? For WTC 1/2 video shows that core beams remained standing after the exterior tube and floors fell away.

For WTC7, the concept of ""core beam" is vague. Fire and lack of firefighting caused the structure to collapse.

I think you are misunderstanding what Bell is getting at.

[RedIbis]

I didnt realise the Chinese govt was so chummy with Bush that they would help him cover up 9/11.
What if someone had noticed all the thermite residue and bits of det cord?

Are you saying that the Chinese didn't recycle WTC steel?

[ElMondoHummus]

So, CNN has an "iReport" (reader generated stories) on the same topic that switchpoint posted ("World Trade Center "Trees" Return Home (http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-432419?hpt=Sbin)"). And whaddaya know? The "angle cut", "footprint", and "nanothermate" (sic) made an appearance in the comments section. :rolleyes:

There are maroons, and there are maroons... and then there are truthers. :nope:

[Clippy]

Because it was melted down and recycled for trinkets.

But why send it on a lengthy journey on a barge to the other side of the world, to a recycling outfit located in a geopolitical rival? Why not do this in the US, if there was incriminating evidence in the steel?

[Clippy]

BTW, I don't accept the "official" version of 9/11, but I think there are a lot of things that get accepted uncritically within the "Truth Movement."

[Clippy]

By "doing this in the US" I mean doing this somewhere you have control over what happens to the steel (e.g. Chinese officials don't just decide to keep some samples for themselves).

[ElMondoHummus]

I wouldn't read that level into the issue being raised about steel being shipped off. Truthers really only bring it up to argue that the steel supposedly was not fully examined, and that's really their only point. That in and of itself is an argument to mislead (see here (http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/groundzerocleanup%2Cfreshkillssortingopera)), but I don't think they really emphasize the fact it was shipped to China as much as the fact that it was recycled at all. Where it was recycled is sort of irrelevant from either their or our point of view.

[sylvan8798]

So, CNN has an "iReport" (reader generated stories) on the same topic that switchpoint posted ("World Trade Center "Trees" Return Home (http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-432419?hpt=Sbin)"). And whaddaya know? The "angle cut", "footprint", and "nanothermate" (sic) made an appearance in the comments section. :rolleyes:

There are maroons, and there are maroons... and then there are truthers. :nope:

Thanks for adding your voice of sanity to the mix. :)

[Clippy]

I wouldn't read that level into the issue being raised about steel being shipped off. Truthers really only bring it up to argue that the steel supposedly was not fully examined, and that's really their only point. That in and of itself is an argument to mislead (see here (http://sites.google.com/site/wtc7lies/groundzerocleanup%2Cfreshkillssortingopera)), but I don't think they really emphasize the fact it was shipped to China as much as the fact that it was recycled at all. Where it was recycled is sort of irrelevant from either their or our point of view.

I don't see it as irrelevant. If the steel was the "smoking gun" of 9/11, it would seem absurd to ship it to a geopolitical rival.

[dafydd]

BTW, I don't accept the "official" version of 9/11, but I think there are a lot of things that get accepted uncritically within the "Truth Movement."

As a budding truther,give us your version then,or is it the usual ''Hey,I'm only asking questions''?

[sylvan8798]

These pieces were exterior columns. It would have been physically impossible to put the typical cd wrap device around an exterior column while it was in place without breaking through the exterior of the building (no space, the columns were half in and half out). Truthers can't explain what type of device could make 45 degree cuts without even being strapped on. I'm sure CD companies would love to know!

[Clippy]

As a budding truther,give us your version then,or is it the usual ''Hey,I'm only asking questions''?

Thanks for your interest, dafydd. I'm not budding; I've shed what few diseased petals may have been acquired during my intial interest in 9/11, about 2 years ago, and am down to a skeptical stem. This subforum became largely uninteresting after Greening was banned, and I only occasionally come back these days to see what's up.

[funk de fino]

Because it was melted down and recycled for trinkets.

After it was all examined. So what?

[eutychus]

Anybody else thinking the towers may have been felled by an orbital kryptonite weapon?

Don't give them any ideas!

[Bell]

RedIbis, beside no core columns that were exposed to fires over 250C, what else was not recovered from the pile?

Evidence that the WTC was destroyed by any other means than local failure of the structure, due to impact damage and fire, resulting in a progressive collapse.

Your point?

So what? For WTC 1/2 video shows that core beams remained standing after the exterior tube and floors fell away.

For WTC7, the concept of ""core beam" is vague. Fire and lack of firefighting caused the structure to collapse.

I think you are misunderstanding what Bell is getting at.

Indeed. Meanwhile, RedIbis has not commented on my post. How clever!

[RedIbis]

Indeed. Meanwhile, RedIbis has not commented on my post. How clever!

I didn't know I had an obligation to comment on a vague opinion.

[Bell]

I didn't know I had an obligation to comment on a vague opinion.

What vague opinion :confused:

And for someone making a deal out of the fact that none of the recovered steel was exposed to temperatures above 250C, you sure know how to avoid discussing the fact that no evidence was recovered, proving the WTC collapsed by any other means than structural failure due to impact damage and fires.

Clever indeed!

[RedIbis]

What vague opinion :confused:

And for someone making a deal out of the fact that none of the recovered steel was exposed to temperatures above 250C, you sure know how to avoid discussing the fact that no evidence was recovered, proving the WTC collapsed by any other means than structural failure due to impact damage and fires.

Clever indeed!

Quote me, but don't misrepresent my position. I never said that "none of the recovered steel was exposed to temperatures above 250C."

Go re-read what I did say and see if you can spot the difference. I doubt you'll take up this challenge.

[A W Smith]

Did I just hear a dirty lying bird admit that the WTC steel did in fact experience temperatures above 250C???

[Bell]

Quote me, but don't misrepresent my position. I never said that "none of the recovered steel was exposed to temperatures above 250C."

Go re-read what I did say and see if you can spot the difference. I doubt you'll take up this challenge.

Well, we have this quote:

Actually, as far as core columns go, NIST found none that reached temps above 250C. They worked off of assumption after that, which is exactly what they did for the steel they didn't have when coming up with their preposterous WTC 7 hypothesis.

And I see where you are getting at. But...

Either there were core columns exposed to temperatures above 250C, but NIST did not recover those.

Or there were no core columns exposed to temperatures above 250C, hence NIST did not recover those.

Which is it?

Also, I'm still waiting for an explanation why no evidence was found, proving the WTC collapsed by any other means than structural failure due to impact damage and fires.

[RedIbis]

Well, we have this quote:



And I see where you are getting at. But...

Either there were core columns exposed to temperatures above 250C, but NIST did not recover those.

Or there were no core columns exposed to temperatures above 250C, hence NIST did not recover those.

Which is it?

Also, I'm still waiting for an explanation why no evidence was found, proving the WTC collapsed by any other means than structural failure due to impact damage and fires.

I sure you hope you see it since it's two entirely different statements. At least debate in good faith.

Of your two possibilities, the second is obviously much more likely since what core column steel NIST did recover did not experience temps above 250C.

What I wouldn't do is premise a collapse hypothesis on the possibility that the former happened when you have absolutely no physical evidence for it.

After thousands of posts and a few years on this forum, I have to admit it's absurd that I'm pointing this out again.

[Bell]

I sure you hope you see it since it's two entirely different statements. At least debate in good faith.

The statements might be different, but the conclusions are not. Quoting yourself: "As far as core columns go, NIST found none that reached temps above 250C."

Of your two possibilities, the second is obviously much more likely since what core column steel NIST did recover did not experience temps above 250C.

Also, no evidence was found proving the WTC collapsed by any other means than structural failure due to impact damage and fires.

What I wouldn't do is premise a collapse hypothesis on the possibility that the former happened when you have absolutely no physical evidence for it.

After thousands of posts and a few years on this forum, I have to admit it's absurd that I'm pointing this out again.

What physical evidence do you have that it DID NOT happen due to impact damage and fires?

[cyclonic]

Are you saying that the Chinese didn't recycle WTC steel?

I can't believe you posted that after i posted a video showing where most of the steel ended up!
all these supposed 100.000s tons shipped to china and not one photo or even a drawing of it?
If it was a CD why would the chinese cover it up?

[BigAl]

I sure you hope you see it since it's two entirely different statements. At least debate in good faith.

Of your two possibilities, the second is obviously much more likely since what core column steel NIST did recover did not experience temps above 250C.

What I wouldn't do is premise a collapse hypothesis on the possibility that the former happened when you have absolutely no physical evidence for it.



So what? As a simplification, the exterior columns failed first. The core columns collapsed only after they lost the cross-bracing provided by the exterior columns and floors.

Collapse due to unfought fire and impact damage fits all the evidence and video we do have plus all the theory and models we can devise.

You and anyone else is welcome to come up with a hypothesis that is a better fit for any of the above.

[sylvan8798]

You and anyone else is welcome to come up with a hypothesis that is a better fit for any of the above.
And it's not enough to just say that it fits better. You have to model it with something. And by something I don't mean pizza boxes, eggs, lemons, or spaghetti (cooked or raw). I mean either a scaled physical model with accompanying supporting calculations or a computer model OF YOUR HYPOTHESIS.

[RedIbis]

And it's not enough to just say that it fits better. You have to model it with something. And by something I don't mean pizza boxes, eggs, lemons, or spaghetti (cooked or raw). I mean either a scaled physical model with accompanying supporting calculations or a computer model OF YOUR HYPOTHESIS.

Do I get access to all the physical evidence?

[Clippy]

Do I get access to all the physical evidence?

You seem to be avoiding this question, RedIbis. If there was incriminating evidence in the steel, why would the conspirators allow it to be shipped to China?

[Bell]

Do I get access to all the physical evidence?

You are aware that no evidence was found proving the WTC collapsed by any other means than structural failure due to impact damage and fires?

[RedIbis]

You are aware that no evidence was found proving the WTC collapsed by any other means than structural failure due to impact damage and fires?

NIST admitted they didn't test for it.

[dafydd]

I sure you hope you see it since it's two entirely different statements. At least debate in good faith.

Of your two possibilities, the second is obviously much more likely since what core column steel NIST did recover did not experience temps above 250C.

What I wouldn't do is premise a collapse hypothesis on the possibility that the former happened when you have absolutely no physical evidence for it.

After thousands of posts and a few years on this forum, I have to admit it's absurd that I'm pointing this out again.

Nothing new there,everything you post is absurd.

[dafydd]

Thanks for your interest, dafydd. I'm not budding; I've shed what few diseased petals may have been acquired during my intial interest in 9/11, about 2 years ago, and am down to a skeptical stem. This subforum became largely uninteresting after Greening was banned, and I only occasionally come back these days to see what's up.

Glad to hear it.

[Bell]

NIST admitted they didn't test for it.

Why should they test for it?

[RedIbis]

Nothing new there,everything you post is absurd.

It is indeed absurd that the NIST collapse hypothesis is based on core columns exceeding 250C, when no evidence exists for it.

[switchpoint]

It is indeed absurd that the NIST collapse hypothesis is based on core columns exceeding 250C, when no evidence exists for it.

The buildings collapsed - that's pretty good evidence.

[RedIbis]

The buildings collapsed - that's pretty good evidence.

True. Case closed. Why study anything?

[BigAl]

It is indeed absurd that the NIST collapse hypothesis is based on core columns exceeding 250C, when no evidence exists for it.

So what?

The core beams are not where the collapse initiated.

[DGM]

It is indeed absurd that the NIST collapse hypothesis is based on core columns exceeding 250C, when no evidence exists for it.
How do you figure there was no evidence of it?

Quick, go back and edit your post to say "physical" evidence. :rolleyes:

[tfk]

It is indeed absurd that the NIST collapse hypothesis is based on core columns exceeding 250C, when no evidence exists for it.

Sorry, Red. Your statement is absurd.

It is precisely analogous to claiming that the assertion that "the people on board flight 93 were killed when the plane crashed" is "supported by no evidence".

Nobody saw the plane hit the ground.
Nobody recorded (at that moment) the accelerations & physical trauma to their bodies.

They simply found the debris of the plane, the bodies intermixed and therefore "jumped to the hypothesis that they were killed by the impact, when no physical evidence for it exists".

You are ignoring two huge facts that negate your assertion:

1. We have a huge body of evidence that tells us what happens in plane crashes, which are survivable, which are not, etc.

2. We have developed, over the last half century, a field of engineering called computer simulation. A field that is famously GIGO when employed by incompetents, but is incredibly powerful and reliable when operating within well known & experimentally supported fields.

And the combination of these two bodies of knowledge and computational ability allow us to assert, with great assurance, that the people found amongst the debris of the plane in Shanksville were, in fact, killed in - and by - the crash.

The heat generated in office fires is just as well understood as the decelerations of planes in crashes.

The temperatures to which that energy will heat the columns is well modeled by FEA computer sims. And has been validated by experiment.

The damage caused to the building by the crash is pretty well modeled, subject to variations in the specific details.

All of the above has variations to it. And it is impossible to say that "this particular bolt or flange or piece of this column got to this specific temperature".

But part of the engineering is that it is not necessary to generate that level of accuracy to understand the big picture. It is possible to bracket the outputs with sensitivity studies of the inputs, and then to use those studies to produce "most probable" and "boundary" outputs.

Not surprisingly, considering the engineering talent they brought to the problem, this is exactly what NIST did.

They never had any intention of trying to figure out the temps the columns were exposed to by finding pieces of steel in the rubble. They certainly would have happily preserved any of those key pieces had they found them. But it was never either a requirement or the expected way to determine the column temps.

That was always going to be the result of computer modeling of the event.

You assertion that "no evidence" exists for NIST's conclusions ignores 50 years of engineering.

Excuse me if I take a bit of umbrage at what I consider to be a Luddite interpretation of my field.


Tom

[funk de fino]

NIST admitted they didn't test for it.

All the steel was examined by forensic examiners at the sorting sites. I guess they missed all the CD evidence then?

[funk de fino]

It is indeed absurd that the NIST collapse hypothesis is based on core columns exceeding 250C, when no evidence exists for it.

Yes, they did, they just couldn't identify where those core columns came from in the towers.

[bio]

Sorry, Red. Your statement is absurd.

It is precisely analogous to claiming that the assertion that "the people on board flight 93 were killed when the plane crashed" is "supported by no evidence".

Nobody saw the plane hit the ground.
Nobody recorded (at that moment) the accelerations & physical trauma to their bodies.

They simply found the debris of the plane, the bodies intermixed and therefore "jumped to the hypothesis that they were killed by the impact, when no physical evidence for it exists".

You are ignoring two huge facts that negate your assertion:

1. We have a huge body of evidence that tells us what happens in plane crashes, which are survivable, which are not, etc.

2. We have developed, over the last half century, a field of engineering called computer simulation. A field that is famously GIGO when employed by incompetents, but is incredibly powerful and reliable when operating within well known & experimentally supported fields.

And the combination of these two bodies of knowledge and computational ability allow us to assert, with great assurance, that the people found amongst the debris of the plane in Shanksville were, in fact, killed in - and by - the crash.

The heat generated in office fires is just as well understood as the decelerations of planes in crashes.

The temperatures to which that energy will heat the columns is well modeled by FEA computer sims. And has been validated by experiment.

The damage caused to the building by the crash is pretty well modeled, subject to variations in the specific details.

All of the above has variations to it. And it is impossible to say that "this particular bolt or flange or piece of this column got to this specific temperature".

But part of the engineering is that it is not necessary to generate that level of accuracy to understand the big picture. It is possible to bracket the outputs with sensitivity studies of the inputs, and then to use those studies to produce "most probable" and "boundary" outputs.

Not surprisingly, considering the engineering talent they brought to the problem, this is exactly what NIST did.

They never had any intention of trying to figure out the temps the columns were exposed to by finding pieces of steel in the rubble. They certainly would have happily preserved any of those key pieces had they found them. But it was never either a requirement or the expected way to determine the column temps.

That was always going to be the result of computer modeling of the event.

You assertion that "no evidence" exists for NIST's conclusions ignores 50 years of engineering.

Excuse me if I take a bit of umbrage at what I consider to be a Luddite interpretation of my field.


Tom

so many words to say nothing but something irrational. wow :rolleyes:

NIST built up their computer simulation - on the assumption, that the core columns heat up more than 250 C - although there is no real evidence for that as Red says.
your point:
... because the towers came down, NIST is right.

[twinstead]

so many words to say nothing but something irrational. wow :rolleyes:

NIST built up their computer simulation - on the assumption, that the core columns heat up more than 250 C - although there is no real evidence for that as Red says.
your point:
... because the towers came down, NIST is right.

You appear to believe the WTC was felled by demolitions, with even LESS evidence to support it than NIST's theory. Why is that?

[BigAl]

so many words to say nothing but something irrational. wow :rolleyes:

NIST built up their computer simulation - on the assumption, that the core columns heat up more than 250 C - although there is no real evidence for that as Red says.
your point:
... because the towers came down, NIST is right.

If you actually understood models and structures you'd know that when the model says 250Deg was enough, it makes the conclusions from the model even more solid.

[NutCracker]

so many words to say nothing but something irrational. wow :rolleyes:

NIST built up their computer simulation - on the assumption, that the core columns heat up more than 250 C - although there is no real evidence for that as Red says.
your point:
... because the towers came down, NIST is right.

Please enumerate the evidence you have in favor of your theories.


(Hint: it is the empty set, nada, zilch)

[Bell]

so many words to say nothing but something irrational. wow :rolleyes:

NIST built up their computer simulation - on the assumption, that the core columns heat up more than 250 C - although there is no real evidence for that as Red says.
your point:
... because the towers came down, NIST is right.

That is further than the truth than:

... because the towers came down, the truthers are right.

Because seriously, that is all you have. The towers came down. But thank you for trying.

[RedIbis]

How do you figure there was no evidence of it?

Quick, go back and edit your post to say "physical" evidence. :rolleyes:

I figured that since we were discussing the evidence that a steel core column had exceeded a certain temp, any evidence would be physical in nature.

One can never underestimate the value of semantics in this forum.

[BigAl]

I figured that since we were discussing the evidence that a steel core column had exceeded a certain temp, any evidence would be physical in nature.



Lets discuss the fact that the collapse initiated at the exterior columns and that the core columns didn't collapse until they lost the bracing provided by the exterior columns and floors.

[funk de fino]

so many words to say nothing but something irrational. wow :rolleyes:

NIST built up their computer simulation - on the assumption, that the core columns heat up more than 250 C - although there is no real evidence for that as Red says.
your point:
... because the towers came down, NIST is right.

That is incorrect. They had core columns heated above that but could not use them because they did not identify them. Your ignorance of what the NIST report says in laughable.

[funk de fino]

I figured that since we were discussing the evidence that a steel core column had exceeded a certain temp, any evidence would be physical in nature.

One can never underestimate the value of semantics in this forum.

All the steel was examined by forensic examiners at the sorting sites. I guess they missed all the CD evidence then?

One can never underestimate the value of avoiding posts in this forum.

[tfk]

bio,

You don't like lots o' words? I'll be brief.


so many words to say nothing but something irrational. wow


You'll elaborate, of course.
Probably not.


NIST built up their computer simulation - on the assumption, that the core columns heat up more than 250 C


No. They did not.


although there is no real evidence for that as Red says.


Yes. There is.


your point:
... because the towers came down, NIST is right.


Uh, no. I never said or implied anything close to that.

Try again.

Tom

[tfk]

I figured that since we were discussing the evidence that a steel core column had exceeded a certain temp, any evidence would be physical in nature.

One can never underestimate the value of semantics in this forum.

Really...?

Get yourself about 20 6' lengths of steel pipe. Build a bonfire. Stick the pipe a variable distance from the bonfire. Some in the center, some near the edge, some completely out of the fire. Now let them cool. After they've cooled for a couple of weeks, take 10 of them & tell me how you plan on telling me the temperatures that they saw.

Take the other 10 and bury them in another fire pit, a really hot one, for about 2 months.

Now tell me how you plan on telling me their time-temp exposure in the FIRST bonfire only. Please give an indication of your expected error bands in both time & temp.

I'm anxious to hear your proposal ...


Tom

[RedIbis]

Really...?

Get yourself about 20 6' lengths of steel pipe. Build a bonfire. Stick the pipe a variable distance from the bonfire. Some in the center, some near the edge, some completely out of the fire. Now let them cool. After they've cooled for a couple of weeks, take 10 of them & tell me how you plan on telling me the temperatures that they saw.

Take the other 10 and bury them in another fire pit, a really hot one, for about 2 months.

Now tell me how you plan on telling me their time-temp exposure in the FIRST bonfire only. Please give an indication of your expected error bands in both time & temp.

I'm anxious to hear your proposal ...


Tom

So how did they determine the temps of the steel they did have?

[funk de fino]

So how did they determine the temps of the steel they did have?

Read the relevant parts of the report. duh

[DavidJames]

Read the relevant parts of the report. duhEasier said then done.

One must be willing read
Capable of understanding what's presented
Willing to accept the results

I think this is a classic three strikes scenario.

[ktesibios]

Y'know, if you take the time to peruse NCSTAR 1-3, you will find, on page 134 of the .pdf, Table 6-2, which gives the locations from which the identified core column samples came, by column number and floor. You will also find two handy diagrams, figs. 6-29a & 6-29b, which show the locations of all the column numbers within the core.

Armed with that information, you can go to NCSTAR 1-5 and examine what temperatures the fire simulations predicted those columns would reachon those floors. You'll find the relevant figures on pp. 198-226 of the .pdf.

Guess what? The predictions are consistent with the physical evidence for those column samples.

In simple terms, troofers, your precious "but the columns weren't hotter than 250C" schtick means exactly the opposite[i] of what you want it to mean- it tends to [i]validate the results of the fire sims, that is, it increases our confidence that they weren't wildly cockeyed when they predicted much higher temperatures for some of the other core columns.

This information is readily available to anyone who has the rudimentary skills involved in reading English text and interpreting a color-coded graphic presentation of numerical data.

And yet, you continue to bleat this discredited talking point. Why?

[sylvan8798]

Puzzle: Clearly (to moi anyways) if the obviousness of a "CD" is so obvious, then the guys at NIST (who are educated to a degree far advanced of the average truther high school student) would recognize this. They would have realized they were being asked to advance a lie. Why then, would they not lie and say they had seen evidence that the temperatures reached, oh, say, 1500 degrees? Hell, you are lying already, why not support it with whatever numbers make it work best? Even photoshop some pics and make up some faux data charts. Who can argue, if you have conveniently sent the steel off to China?

It makes no sense to me whatsoever. But then, truther carp rarely does. :confused:

[gumboot]

We can actually make a pretty solid conclusion that NIST did in fact find core columns exposed to temperatures in excess of 250 degrees.

The method used for determining the temperature exposure was the affect of heat on paint. However, this process was limited, because when exposed to a particular level of heat the paint was completely burned off, thus destroying the required evidence for temperature assessment.

However, we can know that any column with burned off paint must have been exposed to temperatures in excess of those where paint remained.

Since columns with an exposure of 250 degrees retained paint (because this is how they determined the temperature), it must follow that any column where paint was completely burned off must have experienced a temperature at a minimum in excess of 250 degrees.

Thus, NIST recovered steel that was exposed to temperatures in excess of 250 degrees.

It's simple deduction, dear Watson.

[Unsecured Coins]

Because it was melted down and recycled for trinkets.

Found one!

http://i454.photobucket.com/albums/qq266/Horsecrazylady/1.jpg

[fess]

It is indeed absurd that the NIST collapse hypothesis is based on core columns exceeding 250C, when no evidence exists for it.

What is the ignition temperature of Jet-A fuel?
What is the burning temperature of jet fuel?

I think you will find that both are well over 250 deg., what more evidence is needed?

[Orphia Nay]

Here is most of the steel

35zZeNcIAZ8

Great video, clyclonic. Thanks for that. :)

Though the bit with Leslie Robertson brought tears to my eyes. :(

[cyclonic]

Great video, clyclonic. Thanks for that. :)

Though the bit with Leslie Robertson brought tears to my eyes. :(
Your welcome :)

Yes orphia the man has suffered a great deal.

[Derek Johnson]

it does serve to answer some of those that insist that all the steel from the WTC towers was shipped off the China the next day.



Next day? Says who?

[Clippy]

RedIbis has avoided this question. Maybe another Truther will give it a shot.

If the WTC steel contained evidence for a CD, why would the conspirators allow it to be shipped on a barge to China?

[George152]

What is the ignition temperature of Jet-A fuel?
What is the burning temperature of jet fuel?

I think you will find that both are well over 250 deg., what more evidence is needed?

And then you have the combustion of the materials and fittings in the offices that can produce temperatures in the 1000-1200 degree range..

[jammonius]

Puzzle: Clearly (to moi anyways) if the obviousness of a "CD" is so obvious, then the guys at NIST (who are educated to a degree far advanced of the average truther high school student) would recognize this. They would have realized they were being asked to advance a lie. Why then, would they not lie and say they had seen evidence that the temperatures reached, oh, say, 1500 degrees? Hell, you are lying already, why not support it with whatever numbers make it work best? Even photoshop some pics and make up some faux data charts. Who can argue, if you have conveniently sent the steel off to China?

It makes no sense to me whatsoever. But then, truther carp rarely does. :confused:


:confused: is right...

This thread is too far along in the process of group think to be helped.

Enjoy your thread, posters.

all the best

[sylvan8798]

That the best you have to offer there, jammonius?

[DC]

RedIbis has avoided this question. Maybe another Truther will give it a shot.

If the WTC steel contained evidence for a CD, why would the conspirators allow it to be shipped on a barge to China?

because the chance is lower someone will notice something while recycling.
less educated workers there.

[Clippy]

because the chance is lower someone will notice something while recycling.
less educated workers there.

Thanks for answering, DC.

The issue of it being recycled was not the central point, but I would counter that it could have been recycled in the US, where the conspirators would have much more control over who saw the steel and what was done with it.

As for less educated workers, I don't know that the chances of the average Joe or the average Jin knowing what they were looking at would be much different. And the real danger would be from somebody who knew what to look for having a look at the steel. Seems awfully careless to risk that happening in China.

[switchpoint]

Next day? Says who?

My hyperbole, based on years of reading truther misinformation. The next day, immeadiately and most importantly - that ALL of the steel was shipped out for recycling. This is one of what I believe are the top ten truther lies. That all the steel is gone for good and now there is now way to "disprove" their whacky theories.

[LashL]

And the steel is still being recycled. What exactly is it that 'truthers' think is wrong with that?

The following message is from FDNY firefighter, Lee Ielpi (Ret).

The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey is accepting requests from organizations that would like to request a piece of World Trade Center steel. The steel was recovered from the World Trade Center site after September 11, 2001 and secured at JFK Airport by The Port Authority of NY and NJ until now.

The September 11th Families Association is proud to be part of this great effort to distribute steel to organizations interested in creating memorials. The steel withstood the most horrific attack on American soil that took the lives of 2,973 innocent people - one of whom was my son Jonathan Ielpi a Firefighter with FDNY Squad 288. This is an extraordinary opportunity to obtain a piece of World Trade Center steel.

The steel must be used in a memorial open to the general public such as in parks, fire/EMS/police stations, emergency service training grounds for uniformed personnel or places of public assembly. The steel is not intended for and may not be used in personal collections, sold or used for fundraising. All requests for steel must be in writing on official letterhead from an officer of the requesting agency, or a not for profit organization and will be verified.

Requests from departments outside the United States are welcome.

INSTRUCTIONS HERE: http://www.911families.org/WTC%20Steel%20Public%20Memorials.pdf (http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?et=1102697149056&s=41500&e=001q5W50dQIMFEJpykxmp4zRp6uP0p6jlDAGgpuWR1xUnzw6 gcGQHelAXKpWRdVbpoA6Kla7moH6LAJeWWih7-BgFEf2YsICR4h8hiWCoMYLCu8GtvP_F4gKMpNWOkTUxjqKYy5-SlFZUyUJVFZtwLL6EiarNoWOoxiopzfzANQfxfCdUCz4FfYMA= =)

(snipped)




And the PANYNJ is hardly making a secret of their continuing efforts to recycle the steel.

http://www.panynj.gov/wtcprogress/wtc-9-11-steel.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_New_York_(LPD-21)

[sheeplesnshills]

And then you have the combustion of the materials and fittings in the offices that can produce temperatures in the 1000-1200 degree range..

And in the Fires on 911, large holes in the building would have allow easy ingress of air to the fire and exit of the smoke, far more so that in a conventional office fire. Indeed given the breeze (albeit light) that day (and which increases with height) the free flow of air may have added a "blast furnace" effect elevating temps well above what would be considered normal.

[sheeplesnshills]

because the chance is lower someone will notice something while recycling.
less educated workers there.

Never been there? I have.....and I found their engineers quite capable. Never mind the fact that if the Chinese gov. had any idea that the truthers might be right they would have had a really close look themselves. We may be trading partners but no one could call their Gov. friendly.

[aggle-rithm]

because the chance is lower someone will notice something while recycling.
less educated workers there.

Interesting statistic:

There are more honor students in China than there are students of any kind in the United States.

[DC]

i didnt want to say the Chineses in general are bad educated, and sure their engineers are atleast as good as ours.
but i know steel recycling companys, and no engineer there, only workers with relatively low education.

would you regocnise remainings from a CD or thermite on heavy damaged and dirty steel peaces? i dont.

[RedIbis]

Interesting statistic:

There are more honor students in China than there are students of any kind in the United States.

There are also more illiterate people. What's your point?

[switchpoint]

i didnt want to say the Chineses in general are bad educated, and sure their engineers are atleast as good as ours.
but i know steel recycling companys, and no engineer there, only workers with relatively low education.

would you regocnise remainings from a CD or thermite on heavy damaged and dirty steel peaces? i dont.

Talk about "bad educated"!

[funk de fino]

There are also more illiterate people. What's your point?

Once you are done sniping, you could read the report.

[aggle-rithm]

There are also more illiterate people. What's your point?

That people in China are not necessarily less educated than we are. Were you not able to glean that from the context?

Oh well, it's off-topic anyway.

[Clippy]

So RedIbis doesn't answer the question, but then he comes back to make some quibbling point about education levels in China. This subforum is such a complete waste of time, I have to wonder what motivates people on either side of the 'debate', like RedIbis and T.A.M., to make thousands of posts here. The Truth Movement is going nowhere. It is full of idiots who think they're qualified to pass judgement on scientific matters they don't really understand (e.g. Kevin Barrett and David Ray Griffin). The Truth Movement's yammering obsession with 'science' and 'peer review' has been its undoing. Frank Greening is the only prominent 'Truther' I can think of who is worth paying any attention to.

RedIbis and DC, I'm sure you're nice people. But at some point you guys just have to realize that your arguments are going absolutely nowhere.

[funk de fino]

So RedIbis doesn't answer the question, but then he comes back to make some quibbling point about education levels in China. This subforum is such a complete waste of time, I have to wonder what motivates people on either side of the 'debate', like RedIbis and T.A.M., to make thousands of posts here. The Truth Movement is going nowhere. It is full of idiots who think they're qualified to pass judgement on scientific matters they don't really understand (e.g. Kevin Barrett and David Ray Griffin). The Truth Movement's yammering obsession with 'science' and 'peer review' has been its undoing. Frank Greening is the only prominent 'Truther' I can think of who is worth paying any attention to.

RedIbis and DC, I'm sure you're nice people. But at some point you guys just have to realize that your arguments are going absolutely nowhere.

To be fair to my ex nemesis DC, I would say he is not a truther now. I give him credit for backing away from his earlier positions. Him and G Urich are the only one's I have seen that have done so.

He has me on ignore however so maybe won't see this.

[RedIbis]

RedIbis and DC, I'm sure you're nice people. But at some point you guys just have to realize that your arguments are going absolutely nowhere.

I'm not all that nice.

[dafydd]

:confused: is right...

This thread is too far along in the process of group think to be helped.

Enjoy your thread, posters.

all the best



http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/234094bd9d2a14b4ae.gif (http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=19836)

[DC]

So RedIbis doesn't answer the question, but then he comes back to make some quibbling point about education levels in China. This subforum is such a complete waste of time, I have to wonder what motivates people on either side of the 'debate', like RedIbis and T.A.M., to make thousands of posts here. The Truth Movement is going nowhere. It is full of idiots who think they're qualified to pass judgement on scientific matters they don't really understand (e.g. Kevin Barrett and David Ray Griffin). The Truth Movement's yammering obsession with 'science' and 'peer review' has been its undoing. Frank Greening is the only prominent 'Truther' I can think of who is worth paying any attention to.

RedIbis and DC, I'm sure you're nice people. But at some point you guys just have to realize that your arguments are going absolutely nowhere.

hey i just played devils advocate :)

i gave up the religion of 9/11 CT's a while ago and am recovering slowely but steady :D

[ref]

To be fair to my ex nemesis DC, I would say he is not a truther now. I give him credit for backing away from his earlier positions. Him and G Urich are the only one's I have seen that have done so.

He has me on ignore however so maybe won't see this.

DC, funk had this to say :)

[DC]

DC, funk had this to say :)

thanks :)

[dafydd]

RedIbis has avoided this question. Maybe another Truther will give it a shot.

If the WTC steel contained evidence for a CD, why would the conspirators allow it to be shipped on a barge to China?

Truthers never put up,but they don't shut up either.

[aggle-rithm]

I'm not all that nice.

Personally, I would be fine with that, if you at least had the courage of your convictions.

Or will you not admit to having any of those, either?

[Clippy]

hey i just played devils advocate :)

i gave up the religion of 9/11 CT's a while ago and am recovering slowely but steady :D

Sorry, I didn't realize you weren't saying you necessarily believed that explanation. I do remember a post from a long ways back where you'd said you were no longer sure about CD (not sure if that was twin towers and/or WTC7).