What do all the buildings have in common?

[Crazy Chainsaw]

What can destroy concrete, release energy from metals, add literally eat the buildings from the inside?
What can do all this and Be recycled by the fires or its own reactions with metals and show up in high concentration in the air data?
NIST fire tests by the way are a few Hundred degrees shy of the mark they left one part out one critical part.
What compounds can literally eat a plane?

[T.A.M.]

I dunno....H20, O2, please tell me.

TAM:)

[The Doc]

Thermite! :p

[Mercutio]

Ooh, a riddle! I knows it!

Um...

Time.







Oh, you were talking about these particular buildings and planes? Inertia, gravity, heat, political/religious fervor.

[gumboot]

Thermite! :p



I know they eat wood... but eating a plane? C'mon...

-Gumboot

[Mr. Skinny]

Uranyl acetate?

Salt water?

[uk_dave]

What can destroy concrete, release energy from metals, add literally eat the buildings from the inside?
What can do all this and Be recycled by the fires or its own reactions with metals and show up in high concentration in the air data?
NIST fire tests by the way are a few Hundred degrees shy of the mark they left one part out one critical part.
What compounds can literally eat a plane?

I dunno, but I'll have a pint please.

[Pyrrho]

What can destroy concrete, release energy from metals, add literally eat the buildings from the inside?

Gravity

What can do all this and Be recycled by the fires or its own reactions with metals and show up in high concentration in the air data?

There was much more than concrete and metals in the buildings.

NIST fire tests by the way are a few Hundred degrees shy of the mark they left one part out one critical part.
What compounds can literally eat a plane?
Mercury.

http://www.popsci.com/popsci/how20/09550e0796b84010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html

Besides, the jets were probably shredded to bits during the impact phase, and further decimated by the explosions of jet fuel.

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Resublimated Thiotimoline ?

[brodski]

Alkahest?

[rwguinn]

Resublimated Thiotimoline ?

ah--The timing is off

[Gravy]

What can destroy concrete, release energy from metals, add literally eat the buildings from the inside?Me, after eating at Happy Fresh Taco.

[Checkmite]

Besides, the jets were probably shredded to bits during the impact phase, and further decimated by the explosions of jet fuel.


Indeed. If one has the stomach for it, one can watch a huge jet disintegrate into almost nothing (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUEhNKBi4DY) by striking the earth.

Not much left.

[Myriad]

What can destroy concrete, release energy from metals, add literally eat the buildings from the inside?


Shiva.

Sure, people are going to say lots of other stuff, like heat, time, oxygen, CO, reactive metals, and dynamic loads, but all those things are just maifestations of Shiva.

Especially Gravy, after eating at Happy Fresh Taco.

Respectfully,
Myriad

[Crazy Chainsaw]

SO2, and HCL because.
Even Chlorine in water can react with aluminum if strong enough.
Reactive metals when subjected to hydrogen Chlorine and SO2 sulfuric acid SO2 plus Ozone give off hydrogen gas.
Find a place where hydrogen and organics are present without Oxygen and Bacteria can create hydrogen sulfide.
From what I have seen the fires were nothing compared to Chemical reactions inside the buildings.
The fires were just the Bunsen burner to increase the rate of the reactions, the spheres everyone is concerned about are just a result of those reactions.
Think about it, Calcium Chloride will react with Zinc, but not with steel, Hydrochloric acid will react with steel, Copper, Zinc, Aluminum, and Calcium carbonate, and when heated all the Chloride compounds give off Chloride gas. Which reacts again with metals.
The building in question is designed to prevent chimney effects that might lead to the buildup of Hydrogen.
All three buildings have basically the same Chemistry going on inside them just to different degrees.

[WildCat]

The building in question is designed to prevent chimney effects that might lead to the buildup of Hydrogen.
I would think that the humongous holes punched into the towers by the planes (or debris in the case of WTC 7), and subsequent breaking of windows by the fuel explosion and the fires, would keep quite the draft flowing through the building. There had to be an equal volume of air flowing in to replace all the smoke flowing out, no?

[rwguinn]

SO2, and HCL because.
Even Chlorine in water can react with aluminum if strong enough.
Reactive metals when subjected to hydrogen Chlorine and SO2 sulfuric acid SO2 plus Ozone give off hydrogen gas.
Find a place where hydrogen and organics are present without Oxygen and Bacteria can create hydrogen sulfide.
From what I have seen the fires were nothing compared to Chemical reactions inside the buildings.
The fires were just the Bunsen burner to increase the rate of the reactions, the spheres everyone is concerned about are just a result of those reactions.
Think about it, Calcium Chloride will react with Zinc, but not with steel, Hydrochloric acid will react with steel, Copper, Zinc, Aluminum, and Calcium carbonate, and when heated all the Chloride compounds give off Chloride gas. Which reacts again with metals.
The building in question is designed to prevent chimney effects that might lead to the buildup of Hydrogen.
All three buildings have basically the same Chemistry going on inside them just to different degrees.

CC:
How much time does it take for these reactions, in the concentrations in the towers, given the airflow through all the broken glass, and other gaping holes, to eat through enough steel to be the equivalent of heating steel to 500 C plus?

You have less than an hour in reality. Give us a clue.

[Quad4_72]

SO2, and HCL because.
Even Chlorine in water can react with aluminum if strong enough.
Reactive metals when subjected to hydrogen Chlorine and SO2 sulfuric acid SO2 plus Ozone give off hydrogen gas.
Find a place where hydrogen and organics are present without Oxygen and Bacteria can create hydrogen sulfide.
From what I have seen the fires were nothing compared to Chemical reactions inside the buildings.
The fires were just the Bunsen burner to increase the rate of the reactions, the spheres everyone is concerned about are just a result of those reactions.
Think about it, Calcium Chloride will react with Zinc, but not with steel, Hydrochloric acid will react with steel, Copper, Zinc, Aluminum, and Calcium carbonate, and when heated all the Chloride compounds give off Chloride gas. Which reacts again with metals.
The building in question is designed to prevent chimney effects that might lead to the buildup of Hydrogen.
All three buildings have basically the same Chemistry going on inside them just to different degrees.

What exactly are you suggesting all of this means?

[knot]

acetylene

At any rate, it wasn't the heat temperature of the fire, it was the amount of fire that warped the support columns in a short amount of time. A lighter will not heat a 5 gallon bucket of water very quickly but and entire floor of fire will evaporate the water and possibly melt the container very quickly - especially when drafts and explosive backdrafts are occurring.

I suspect that many of the explosions heard were indeed fire backdrafts and in a building that size, a backdraft can be a tremendous explosion.

[Unsecured Coins]

Is this anything like that building in New York that was made of a type of metal that basically made it a huge, super-conductive antenna designed and built expressly for the purpose of pulling in and concentrating spiritual turbulence?

[knot]

BTW, the plane's wheels are made of magnesium.

[Mojo]

What ... can literally eat a plane?Michel Lotito (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Lotito).

OK, only a Cessna according to the Wikipedia entry, but maybe he's managed to work his way up to 767s and been secretly hired by the gubmint.

[HannibalGroup]

Is this anything like that building in New York that was made of a type of metal that basically made it a huge, super-conductive antenna designed and built expressly for the purpose of pulling in and concentrating spiritual turbulence?

You mean the one my girlfriend lives in ... at the corner of Spook Central?

[pomeroo]

What can destroy concrete, release energy from metals, add literally eat the buildings from the inside?
What can do all this and Be recycled by the fires or its own reactions with metals and show up in high concentration in the air data?
NIST fire tests by the way are a few Hundred degrees shy of the mark they left one part out one critical part.

What compounds can literally eat a plane?



Teddy Kennedy's breath.

They've proved it.

[Unsecured Coins]

You mean the one my girlfriend lives in ... at the corner of Spook Central?
She's not your girlfriend. You find her interesting because she's a client and because she sleeps above her covers... *four feet* above her covers...

[Civilized Worm]

What can destroy concrete, release energy from metals, add literally eat the buildings from the inside?
What can do all this and Be recycled by the fires or its own reactions with metals and show up in high concentration in the air data?
NIST fire tests by the way are a few Hundred degrees shy of the mark they left one part out one critical part.
What compounds can literally eat a plane?


Is this the latest Chuck Norris joke?

[Checkmite]

She's not your girlfriend. You find her interesting because she's a client and because she sleeps above her covers... *four feet* above her covers...

It's not the girl, Coins; it's the building. The architect's name was Ivo Shandor (I found it in Tobin's spirit guide).

[Unsecured Coins]

Pretend for a moment that I don't know anything about metallurgy, engineering, or physics, and just tell me what the hell is going on!

[rwguinn]

Pretend for a moment that I don't know anything about metallurgy, engineering, or physics, and just tell me what the hell is going on!
I do know somewhat about those things, and I have not a clue at wht CrazyChainsaw and Apollo20 are driving at!

[Crazy Chainsaw]

I do know somewhat about those things, and I have not a clue at wht CrazyChainsaw and Apollo20 are driving at!

PVC and other plastics form HCl, sulfuric acid is formed by SO2 plus Ozone, like that given off by sunlight or by Electrical motors.

If you study enough about it the reactions are almost instantaneous with just a little heating to speed up the reactions. Calcium carbonate forms Calcium Chloride, reactions of calcium chloride with Zinc give off Hydrogen, reactions of Zinc Chloride with Aluminum cause Aluminum Chloride to form reactions with aluminum Chloride and water release more Hydrogen + Chloride. Heat only speeds the chemical reactions.

Should I mention that reactions of HCL and iron leave Iron chloride, when that reacts with Zinc and water Zinc Chloride and Iron Oxide with a Little iron chloride can from right next to bare aluminum.

There is more to this, there might be a structure in the buildings that would assure a very rapid sequence of reactions, as well as trapping the Hydrogen.


The windows do not matter if the hydrogen is trapped in the center under the mechanical floors, In elevator shafts.

I am still working on this so please bare with me, I also have a day job.

[rwguinn]

PVC and other plastics form HCl, sulfuric acid is formed by SO2 plus Ozone, like that given off by sunlight or by Electrical motors.

If you study enough about it the reactions are almost instantaneous with just a little heating to speed up the reactions. Calcium carbonate forms Calcium Chloride, reactions of calcium chloride with Zinc give off Hydrogen, reactions of Zinc Chloride with Aluminum cause Aluminum Chloride to form reactions with aluminum Chloride and water release more Hydrogen + Chloride. Heat only speeds the chemical reactions.

Should I mention that reactions of HCL and iron leave Iron chloride, when that reacts with Zinc and water Zinc Chloride and Iron Oxide with a Little iron chloride can from right next to bare aluminum.

There is more to this, there might be a structure in the buildings that would assure a very rapid sequence of reactions, as well as trapping the Hydrogen.


The windows do not matter if the hydrogen is trapped in the center under the mechanical floors, In elevator shafts.

I am still working on this so please bare with me, I also have a day job.
I would think the concentrations--and mass-- would be a bit low for any reaction to be significant. Even dropping a chunk of steel in HCL takes time to eat it away, and chemical reactions are very quantity specific- In layman's terms, the stuff gets used up.
Unless you go nuclear, it is difficult to get more out than you put in.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

I would think the concentrations--and mass-- would be a bit low for any reaction to be significant. Even dropping a chunk of steel in HCL takes time to eat it away, and chemical reactions are very quantity specific- In layman's terms, the stuff gets used up.
Unless you go nuclear, it is difficult to get more out than you put in.

Steel has a low reactivity to HCL, calcium and zinc are highly reactive an produce a lot of hydrogen to to the Zinc on the steel acting as an anode.
http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/maney/mst/2005/00000021/00000009/art00016

http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/maney/mst/2003/00000019/00000012/art00019

It is actually the sulfuric acid that produces more reactions with steel.

[rwguinn]

Steel has a low reactivity to HCL, calcium and zinc are highly reactive an produce a lot of hydrogen to to the Zinc on the steel acting as an anode.
http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/maney/mst/2005/00000021/00000009/art00016

http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/maney/mst/2003/00000019/00000012/art00019

It is actually the sulfuric acid that produces more reactions with steel.
and it is still a slow process, compared with thermal weakening--and just how many moles/second of hydrogen were you planning on producing in this reaction?

[Crazy Chainsaw]

and it is still a slow process, compared with thermal weakening--and just how many moles/second of hydrogen were you planning on producing in this reaction?

Yes I know it is a slow process it takes less than a 1/100 of a second for the Hydrogen to form.

http://chainsawsanders.com/ironclorideZinccloride.JPG

The hydrogen provides more energy to structural thermal wreaking, and also some hydrogen would be absorb by the steel.

The Reactions with HCL and metals are reversed by heating so the compound regenerate after thermal decomposition. Water breaking down into hydrogen could even occur below the fires in an environment where people were.

[rwguinn]

Yes I know it is a slow process it takes less than a 1/100 of a second for the Hydrogen to form.
my question was not how fast the hydrogen forms.
how long before zinc(or, heck-Hydrogen) embrittlerment is a major contributor to the large, thick chunks of steel in the tower support structure?
please don't interpret--the question was clear.


http://chainsawsanders.com/ironclorideZinccloride.JPG

The hydrogen provides more energy to structural thermal wreaking, and also some hydrogen would be absorb by the steel.

The Reactions with HCL and metals are reversed by heating so the compound regenerate after thermal decomposition. Water breaking down into hydrogen could even occur below the fires in an environment where people were.
I don't deny that such reactions occur, and possibly did occur.
Occam's razor, however, still points toward the combination of structural damage and thermal weakening as the culprits, here.
The molecules involved were at an elevated temperature, and as such, extremely energetic. Combine that with the large available airflow, and the vast majority of the involved molecules would leave the building very quickly. The towering column of smoke is testimony to those conditions.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

my question was not how fast the hydrogen forms.
how long before zinc(or, heck-Hydrogen) embrittlerment is a major contributor to the large, thick chunks of steel in the tower support structure?
please don't interpret--the question was clear.

I don't deny that such reactions occur, and possibly did occur.
Occam's razor, however, still points toward the combination of structural damage and thermal weakening as the culprits, here.
The molecules involved were at an elevated temperature, and as such, extremely energetic. Combine that with the large available airflow, and the vast majority of the involved molecules would leave the building very quickly. The towering column of smoke is testimony to those conditions.

It is not just the embrittlement, the hydrogen adds fuel to the flame, the hydrogen freely mixes with air, and burns hotter than the carbon fuels do it was likely to self ignite in many instances with oxygen but there is potential for embrittlement very quickly from hot Iron reacting with hot hydrogen.

As the hydrogen flowed upward along the floor pans and out. The production of hydrogen could be very proliferate, that and lack of available oxygen, would cause rapid embrittlement of any steel the hydrogen came in contact with.

Hydrogen formed in or near the elevator shafts would tend to want to vent upward, as would hydrogen formed along the floor pans. Once the Available oxygen in the air was used up by the remaining hot Hydrogen would react instantaneously with the heated steel it would take several minutes though for significant weakening of the structure to occur from hydrogen embrittlement alone, but the combination of elevated temperature, oxidation of steel do to hot steam and the recreation of hydrogen by steel itself when subjected to hot steam are very likely.

Occam's razor, does not favor NIST's collapse scenario, As I believe Apollo20 has pointed out in a previous tread.
Because the conditions are there from more intense and more damaging reactions than NIST elaborated too, and because a key element was left out of the NIST fire tests.

Also NIST Does not explain the Spheres or the high levels of HCL in the data, or the elevated temperatures long after the collapse.
In theory if left alone the steel an metals in the rubble pile could have combusted over years though producing hydrogen.
It just makes a more logical conclusion than Carbon based fuels.

The hydrogen forms and burns next to the bottom floor pans next to the concrete first raining down zinc chloride and iron chloride Iron sulfide on anything below it.

The smoke is coming from the fire region-fires, the hydrogen could be burning in the core in the elevator shafts and go totally un noticed only producing steam.

YOU can not see the elevator shafts, and there are sufficient metals to make a lot of hydrogen.

Hydrogen embrittlement effects welds and bolts mostly, It would not take long if the steel was heated for the hydrogen to effect it. It requires both heat and the elements to effect the material.

Also The bolts in question are not A36 steel, they are an alloy bolt that does contain some Chromium for added strength, although they are not Nickel-Chromium stainless steels. So zinc and hydrogen embrittlement are quite possible in the bolts.

[Zep]

Do you seriously think that hot hydrogen gas would continue to "rise and flow" anywhere before it was all combusted in a fireball? Seriously? I mean, have you ever done 2nd grade chemistry?

[rwguinn]

Do you seriously think that hot hydrogen gas would continue to "rise and flow" anywhere before it was all combusted in a fireball? Seriously? I mean, have you ever done 2nd grade chemistry?
I don't think "fireball" would be the term.
At the temperatures these guys are talking about, it would be a continuous process. the hydrogen would ignite at the moment of formation, and never have the opportunity to either collect for a fireball, or "rise and flow".
I am not saying the situation described is impossible, but the examination of the remains of the towers showed no evidence of explosives, hydrogen or zinc embritlement, or other exotic chemical reactions.
There was evidence of plastic bending and of shear, buckling, and tensile failure in the steel.

[Gravy]

Occam's razor, does not favor NIST's collapse scenario, As I believe Apollo20 has pointed out in a previous tread.Sorry, but expressing an opinion about something is different from demonstrating that it is so.

[uk_dave]

PVC and other plastics form HCl, sulfuric acid is formed by SO2 plus Ozone, like that given off by sunlight or by Electrical motors.

If you study enough about it the reactions are almost instantaneous with just a little heating to speed up the reactions. Calcium carbonate forms Calcium Chloride, reactions of calcium chloride with Zinc give off Hydrogen, reactions of Zinc Chloride with Aluminum cause Aluminum Chloride to form reactions with aluminum Chloride and water release more Hydrogen + Chloride. Heat only speeds the chemical reactions.

Should I mention that reactions of HCL and iron leave Iron chloride, when that reacts with Zinc and water Zinc Chloride and Iron Oxide with a Little iron chloride can from right next to bare aluminum.

There is more to this, there might be a structure in the buildings that would assure a very rapid sequence of reactions, as well as trapping the Hydrogen.


The windows do not matter if the hydrogen is trapped in the center under the mechanical floors, In elevator shafts.


OMG! We're all gonna die!!!!!! :eek:

[MRC_Hans]

What is this? A CT as in Chemistry Theory?

What is the need for this, rather far-fetched theory? What is the evidence that the buildings were "eaten from within"? Methinks this is an advanced version of the strawman fallacy: Building an elaborate and unlikely theory to support the position of the other side, thereby implying that such antics are needed to support it in the first place. CC, there is no need of such speculation: No evidence points to any of the collapses having exotic explanations.

Hans

[Crazy Chainsaw]

It is not just the embrittlement, the hydrogen adds fuel to the flame, the hydrogen freely mixes with air, and burns hotter than the carbon fuels do it was likely to self ignite in many instances with oxygen but there is potential for embrittlement very quickly from hot Iron reacting with hot hydrogen.

As the hydrogen flowed upward along the floor pans and out. The production of hydrogen could be very proliferate, that and lack of available oxygen, would cause rapid embrittlement of any steel the hydrogen came in contact with.

Hydrogen formed in or near the elevator shafts would tend to want to vent upward, as would hydrogen formed along the floor pans. Once the Available oxygen in the air was used up by the remaining hot Hydrogen would react instantaneously with the heated steel it would take several minutes though for significant weakening of the structure to occur from hydrogen embrittlement alone, but the combination of elevated temperature, oxidation of steel do to hot steam and the recreation of hydrogen by steel itself when subjected to hot steam are very likely.

Occam's razor, does not favor NIST's collapse scenario, As I believe Apollo20 has pointed out in a previous tread.
Because the conditions are there from more intense and more damaging reactions than NIST elaborated too, and because a key element was left out of the NIST fire tests.

Also NIST Does not explain the Spheres or the high levels of HCL in the data, or the elevated temperatures long after the collapse.
In theory if left alone the steel an metals in the rubble pile could have combusted over years though producing hydrogen.
It just makes a more logical conclusion than Carbon based fuels.

The hydrogen forms and burns next to the bottom floor pans next to the concrete first raining down zinc chloride and iron chloride Iron sulfide on anything below it.

The smoke is coming from the fire region-fires, the hydrogen could be burning in the core in the elevator shafts and go totally un noticed only producing steam.

YOU can not see the elevator shafts, and there are sufficient metals to make a lot of hydrogen.

Hydrogen embrittlement effects welds and bolts mostly, It would not take long if the steel was heated for the hydrogen to effect it. It requires both heat and the elements to effect the material.

Also The bolts in question are not A36 steel, they are an alloy bolt that does contain some Chromium for added strength, although they are not Nickel-Chromium stainless steels. So zinc and hydrogen embrittlement are quite possible in the bolts.

I don't think "fireball" would be the term.
At the temperatures these guys are talking about, it would be a continuous process. the hydrogen would ignite at the moment of formation, and never have the opportunity to either collect for a fireball, or "rise and flow".
I am not saying the situation described is impossible, but the examination of the remains of the towers showed no evidence of explosives, hydrogen or zinc embritlement, or other exotic chemical reactions.
There was evidence of plastic bending and of shear, buckling, and tensile failure in the steel.

Free Hydrogen exists in the sun, you have to have oxygen to combust it, no oxygen no combustion, and hydrogen could have been created in places where there was no fire, and flow upward into the fires, where it robbed oxygen from the carbon fires making them appear to smolder out while actually they were hotter than ever.

The key here is you probably could not combust all the hydrogen for the same reason you could not combust all the fuel in the fire ball there is simply not enough oxygen in the air, and if the hydrogen burns at the ceiling in contact with the galvanized floor pan the excited water molecules react with the hot metals oxidizing the metals and creating more hydrogen.
I have done the experiments and I know the hotter it get the more hydrogen produced until the metals are gone.
It was fascinating to just watch metal disappear, the Hot hydrogen actually melts the oxide layer that is the key to the continued reaction. Once the metals oxides are molten they drop do to gravity, exposing bear metal to the not super heated steam. Forming more oxides and more hydrogen.

The processes are reversible, HCL to metal chlorides, Metal chlorides to HCL, Hydrogen+Oxygen to water, Super heated steam+metal to Hydrogen.

Water in this circumstance is actually a fuel that can produce intense heat. I know it sounds crazy but I discovered it by accident and it works and works well.

The Kerosene actually gives off Water - Hot Steam as it burns.
You can go ahead and call me nuts now that is OK every time I talk about this some one does, even Dr. Jones, But I have used this process to create the Iron sphere I sent to him as well as to produce high levels of HCL in the air do to the recycling of metal Chlorides.
IT is not that the PVC produces a lot of HCL it is that it is recycled though the metals and concrete and most of it becomes air born though the reactions including the Chlorides in the concrete itself.

YOU can go ahead Call me Crazy I really do not mind, but I watched and 8 foot piece of galvanized steel 22 guage just disappear before my eyes zink and steel both reacting and producing a bright blue flame.

[uk_dave]

Water in this circumstance is actually a fuel that can produce intense heat. I know it sounds crazy but I discovered it by accident and it works and works well.



I thought that was common knowledge. Like spraying water on to coals before adding them to a furnace.

Anyway, what's this all got to do with the wtc towers?

You seem to be talking about galvanised thin sheet steel.

The floor pans in the wtc towers were sheet steel and may have been glavanised, but they weren't structural.

So how did this interesting, but pointless chemical reaction impact on the failure of the structure?

[Crazy Chainsaw]

What is this? A CT as in Chemistry Theory?

What is the need for this, rather far-fetched theory? What is the evidence that the buildings were "eaten from within"? Methinks this is an advanced version of the strawman fallacy: Building an elaborate and unlikely theory to support the position of the other side, thereby implying that such antics are needed to support it in the first place. CC, there is no need of such speculation: No evidence points to any of the collapses having exotic explanations.

Hans

How would it be a conspiracy theory if it was a natural event of the materials in the buildings, and the impact of a Jet plane with fuel into the buildings?

I am only investigating Oddities and possible causes that are problems in NIST assessment of the collapses.
If there are problems evidence that is inconsistent with NIST's finding should I not look into the possible causes of that evidence?
Should I not investigate Honestly and Unbiased or does the truth and evidence actually matter in this?
Is NIST NOW to be the JERF Bible or is it truth, and Science, along with Critical thinking that is valued here?
I hope that JERFers are indeed Unbiased Critical thinkers because any reaction even one unlikely in a normal environment might be highly likely if the environment were modified to favor the reactions.

[MRC_Hans]

Occam's razor, does not favor NIST's collapse scenario, As I believe Apollo20 has pointed out in a previous tread.

A lot of CT's have tried to claim that. Ironically, their alternative explanation is far more complex and unlikely.


Because the conditions are there from more intense and more damaging reactions than NIST elaborated too, and because a key element was left out of the NIST fire tests.

Also NIST Does not explain the Spheres or the high levels of HCL in the data, or the elevated temperatures long after the collapse.


Listen, if there was any sign of some exotic destruction mechanism at work, you can be sure NIST would have pointed to it. After all, an importan aspect of their task was to find out what risks 911 implied for other high-rise buildings, existing and future, should they be involved in comparable disasters (not only terrorism, but also more conventional mishaps). So ifthere had been even a hint of evidence for some unexpected effect, you can be quite sure they would have investigated it.

As for HCL, it is a product of PVC from wire insulation and other electrical gear being heated (by the fires and the heat from the collapse). This is a normal occurence in fires, espcially in industrial and office complexes and often causes as much damage as the fire itself. But it is a long-term damage.

In theory if left alone the steel an metals in the rubble pile could have combusted over years though producing hydrogen.

Unlikely. From other disasters, and war experience, smoldering ruins with steel and other metals in them have been left to themselves for long periods. They cool down eventually when the more conventional combustibles have been consumed.

The smoke is coming from the fire region-fires, the hydrogen could be burning in the core in the elevator shafts and go totally un noticed only producing steam.

YOU can not see the elevator shafts, and there are sufficient metals to make a lot of hydrogen.

There is an important flaw in your equation. The same as the "water as fuel" people make: Hydrogen binds strongly to the materials with which it forms compounds. To free it, you need to apply more energy than you can get from burning the freed hydrogen.

Hans

[Zep]

I'm not going to call you anything at all. Instead, could you please explain in significantly more detail about these statements of yours:Free Hydrogen exists in the sun, you have to have oxygen to combust it, no oxygen no combustion, and hydrogen could have been created in places where there was no fire, and flow upward into the fires, where it robbed oxygen from the carbon fires making them appear to smolder out while actually they were hotter than ever.
And:Water in this circumstance is actually a fuel that can produce intense heat. I know it sounds crazy but I discovered it by accident and it works and works well.
Can I also ask: Is English not your first language?

[MRC_Hans]

How would it be a conspiracy theory if it was a natural event of the materials in the buildings, and the impact of a Jet plane with fuel into the buildings?

No, I said Chemistry Theory.

I am only investigating Oddities and possible causes that are problems in NIST assessment of the collapses.

Which oddities? There aren't any.

If there are problems evidence that is inconsistent with NIST's finding should I not look into the possible causes of that evidence?

Certainly. But what is the evidence you refer to? Where is the evidence that any considerable amount of materials were consumed?


Should I not investigate Honestly and Unbiased or does the truth and evidence actually matter in this?


Yes, but your investigation should start with evidence, not assumptions.

Hans

[gumboot]

NIST's conclusion is the ONLY theory relating to the WTC collapses that I have EVER seen that sufficiently explains ALL of the observed phenomena. (And that's not even getting into the fact that other explanations require phenomena that was not observed).

-Gumboot

[MRC_Hans]

The key here is you probably could not combust all the hydrogen for the same reason you could not combust all the fuel in the fire ball there is simply not enough oxygen in the air, and if the hydrogen burns at the ceiling in contact with the galvanized floor pan the excited water molecules react with the hot metals oxidizing the metals and creating more hydrogen.
Uhh, exactly where does all that hydrogen come from? There is no hydrogen to speak of in metals, so where does it come from?

Please explain the chemistry.

Hans

[Crazy Chainsaw]

OMG! We're all gonna die!!!!!! :eek:

Eventually we all do, just a question of when and how, I am not insane uk_dave, I have just stumbled quite accidentally on a way the fires might have ignited the floor pans causing the release of energy from the metals in the buildings.

There would not even be any flames just intense heat, and the fires would appear to be going out at and below the impact zones.

[gumboot]

Eventually we all do, just a question of when and how, I am not insane uk_dave, I have just stumbled quite accidentally on a way the fires might have ignited the floor pans causing the release of energy from the metals in the buildings.


The observed phenomena indicates this did not occur (though I suppose speculation on whether it is possible might be interesting from a purely academic point of view).

Not only are the floor trusses clearly visible NOT burning, but the collapse initiation requires that they remain intact - something that would not happen if they were on fire.

-Gumboot

[rwguinn]

How would it be a conspiracy theory if it was a natural event of the materials in the buildings, and the impact of a Jet plane with fuel into the buildings?

I am only investigating Oddities and possible causes that are problems in NIST assessment of the collapses.
If there are problems evidence that is inconsistent with NIST's finding should I not look into the possible causes of that evidence?
Should I not investigate Honestly and Unbiased or does the truth and evidence actually matter in this?
Is NIST NOW to be the JERF Bible or is it truth, and Science, along with Critical thinking that is valued here?
I hope that JERFers are indeed Unbiased Critical thinkers because any reaction even one unlikely in a normal environment might be highly likely if the environment were modified to favor the reactions.

I have not quoted the NIST at any time. I am simply raising questions with respect to assertions that are being made, red herrings being laid, and possible junk science being postulated.
I feel that you are underestimating the amount of O2 available, overestimating the amount of zinc and/or hydrogen being freed, and are seriously close of stepping across the science/folklore line.
That free hydrogen ( at Those temperatures?) could, and possibly did exist, I have no doubts. That it could contribute to the heat available, no doubt. But the heat available was already overkill.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Uhh, exactly where does all that hydrogen come from? There is no hydrogen to speak of in metals, so where does it come from?

Please explain the chemistry.

Hans

H20, in this case steam super hot steam reacting with the metals, giving off hydrogen then instantly burning, creating super hot steam reacting with the metals, giving off more hydrogen, instantly burning giving off super hot steam.
Water-steam is simply the compound that liberates the energy in the metals Oxygen in the air is used up to create it, The hydrogen is recycled and builds up as more steam comes from below.
It is just simple chemistry.
Because more steam is continuously rising up, more hydrogen is produced than can be burned leading to it being absorbed by metals that are hot enough to allow the Crystalline structures to vibrate and absorb it.


I know go ahead and call me insane, I am only reporting on what I witness happen in a test experiment, but I am reporting faithfully. ON the reactions that are and were possible.

[rwguinn]

H20, in this case steam super hot steam reacting with the metals, giving off hydrogen then instantly burning, creating super hot steam reacting with the metals, giving off more hydrogen, instantly burning giving off super hot steam.
Water-steam is simply the compound that liberates the energy in the metals Oxygen in the air is used up to create it, The hydrogen is recycled and builds up as more steam comes from below.
It is just simple chemistry.
Because more steam is continuously rising up, more hydrogen is produced than can be burned leading to it being absorbed by metals that are hot enough to allow the Crystalline structures to vibrate and absorb it.


I know go ahead and call me insane, I am only reporting on what I witness happen in a test experiment, but I am reporting faithfully. ON the reactions that are and were possible.

Erm...I am not up on my chemistry, but I do remember some thermodynamics.
What you describe is a self-perpetuating process-aka a perpetual motion/positive energy device.
The heat of formation of water from 2H2+O2->2H20 is less than the reaction the other way requires (2H2O+heat->2H2+2O2).
There's this thing called entropy that prevents what you describe from happening. With applied, external heat, the situation can work, but then, the heat available to increase the steel temperature is actually less than it was, because you have to break down the water using some of it.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

The observed phenomena indicates this did not occur (though I suppose speculation on whether it is possible might be interesting from a purely academic point of view).

Not only are the floor trusses clearly visible NOT burning, but the collapse initiation requires that they remain intact - something that would not happen if they were on fire.

-Gumboot

The trusses would not have burned the floor pans under the concrete would have, especially in places where the HCL would have reacted with the concrete, or in the center of the floor pan in the core.
In the visible outer edge as in the photos that have been shown here the hydrogen would have dissipated, as has been suggested here.

I am Looking at reactions that would have been hidden in the core out of view, like in sealed elevator shafts.
Does anyone have any information on the way the electrical systems were configured, especially the way the wiring was run across the concrete slabs and what type of Conduit was used?

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Erm...I am not up on my chemistry, but I do remember some thermodynamics.
What you describe is a self-perpetuating process-aka a perpetual motion/positive energy device.
The heat of formation of water from 2H2+O2->2H20 is less than the reaction the other way requires (2H2O+heat->2H2+2O2).
There's this thing called entropy that prevents what you describe from happening. With applied, external heat, the situation can work, but then, the heat available to increase the steel temperature is actually less than it was, because you have to break down the water using some of it.

Check the temperature steel produces when it Oxidizes, burn I think you will find it can be up to about 3000c.
The oxidation of steel is the external heat source.
NO perpetual motion/positive energy device Here just he natural energy liberated from the steel once the steel and Zinc are used up the reaction stops.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

I thought that was common knowledge. Like spraying water on to coals before adding them to a furnace.

Anyway, what's this all got to do with the wtc towers?

You seem to be talking about galvanised thin sheet steel.

The floor pans in the wtc towers were sheet steel and may have been glavanised, but they weren't structural.

So how did this interesting, but pointless chemical reaction impact on the failure of the structure?

The Floor pans were 22 Guage galvanized steel, in other word the perfect fuel source in the right conditions.
The HCL and Zinc start the production of hydrogen and it builds as the temperature and super heated steam build up from the kerosene of High sulfur Diesel fuel.
It Would take a very rapid large multi story fire involving hydrocarbons to start the process, anyone know where that would have come from in these three buildings?
Trap Hydrogen anywhere against the Zinc and steel the reactions build up as more steam is added, and trapped.
Eventually the pans ignite and burn just from air alone.
That could be masked in the early fires by the smoke and flame around the impacts Zones.

[rwguinn]

Check the temperature steel produces when it Oxidizes, burn I think you will find it can be up to about 3000c.
The oxidation of steel is the external heat source.
NO Here just he natural energy liberated from the steel once the steel and Zinc are used up the reaction stops.

yes--but you have to somehow get the steel up to that self-sustaining reaction temperature in the first place. And there was absolutely no evidence of steel burning and/or temperatures high enough to cause steel to burn in either the towers, the bridge, or WTC7

[gumboot]

The trusses would not have burned the floor pans under the concrete would have, especially in places where the HCL would have reacted with the concrete, or in the center of the floor pan in the core.


Er... the floor pans are part of the truss assembly. If the floor pans had burned the floor contents would have fallen through, the truss assemblies would have failed, and would not have pulled the exterior columns inwards.




I am Looking at reactions that would have been hidden in the core out of view, like in sealed elevator shafts.


You realise the elevator shafts didn't have floor pans, right? I mean... that's kind of obvious.

-Gumboot

[Crazy Chainsaw]

yes--but you have to somehow get the steel up to that self-sustaining reaction temperature in the first place. And there was absolutely no evidence of steel burning and/or temperatures high enough to cause steel to burn in either the towers, the bridge, or WTC7

When was the steel in the floor pans found and tested?
They were not recovered or tested, just the structural steel in the core, and the outer perimeter columns.

There is evidence of molten steel in the spheres, that are in the early air samples. The metal had to be hot enough to form them.
The molten steel in the spheres is combined with Zinc, at just the right ratio to have come from the floor pans in the early fires.

[Quad4_72]

When was the steel in the floor pans found and tested?
They were not recovered or tested, just the structural steel in the core, and the outer perimeter columns.

There is evidence of molten steel in the spheres, that are in the early air samples. The metal had to be hot enough to form them.
The molten steel in the spheres is combined with Zinc, at just the right ratio to have come from the floor pans in the early fires.

Please, do present us all with your evidence. We are all dying to see it.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Er... the floor pans are part of the truss assembly. If the floor pans had burned the floor contents would have fallen through, the truss assemblies would have failed, and would not have pulled the exterior columns inwards.






You realise the elevator shafts didn't have floor pans, right? I mean... that's kind of obvious.

-Gumboot

Yes I fully realize the structure of the Elevator shafts, but you also have to remember that most were sealed to prevent a chimney effect I believe with galvanized metal and thin Concrete, at the Mechanical floors.

I am still checking on how the elevator shafts were constructed, however I was told that they were sealed, in that manor. However any sealing would allow the hydrogen to build up and flow out across the floor pans, once the reaction starts applying steam continues the reactions until the metal is exhausted.

The hydrogen it just he match, the steel and Zinc are the bond fire. YOU only need the match long enough to light the bond fire.

[uk_dave]

CC,

Do you think your experiment would be affected by placing one side of the sheet steel against a concrete slab?

[rwguinn]

When was the steel in the floor pans found and tested?
They were not recovered or tested, just the structural steel in the core, and the outer perimeter columns.

There is evidence of molten steel in the spheres, that are in the early air samples. The metal had to be hot enough to form them.
The molten steel in the spheres is combined with Zinc, at just the right ratio to have come from the floor pans in the early fires.

Ok, I would expect that the steel spheres would be at the bottom of the dust/ash layers deposited by the fires, and fairly close-in to their origin.
They are considerably heavier than air, have a surface area-to-weight
ratio considerably higher than any other dust particles, and therefore would be less bouyed up by the temperature, and less likely to travel far on air currents.
Where are they in the dust analysis? Oops--I don't see them. See lots of Sulfer, gypsum, and other stuff, but no iron-zinc spereoids.

[gumboot]

When was the steel in the floor pans found and tested?
They were not recovered or tested, just the structural steel in the core, and the outer perimeter columns.



That's not entirely true. NIST also recovered a number of intact truss sections. The problem with them was they were on ground zero in enormous stacks - 3,900m2 stacks. They weren't practical to deal with so recovery crews bent them up into enormous balls. As such it became impossible for NIST to determine which floor a given truss belonged to, or even which truss pieces belonged with which other truss pieces (obviously the recovery efforts and shoving them into big balls broke them up a bit). Because NIST could not determine their location in the building their value was limited.

However they certainly did recover and test floor assemblies.

-Gumboot

[Crazy Chainsaw]

CC,

Do you think your experiment would be affected by placing one side of the sheet steel against a concrete slab?

Since hydrogen is trapped under concrete when concrete with calcium Chloride is used on top of Galvanized steel, is that what your referring to, Also since anywhere HCL could react with the concrete it forms calcium Chloride, now what does that bag of calcium Chloride in my buildings say, Oh yeah Danger highly incompatible with Zinc Hydrogen explosion may occur.

Also SO2 + O3+ H2O forms sulfuric acid, that when attacks concrete, if it forming gypsum if it contacts Zinc it can trap hydrogen in the gypsum.

I know guys I am just Crazy no one is dumb enough to store High sulfur fuels in a Building not with them known to release SO2, but what is the danger anyway, I mean it is not like the towers were in New York City with all the Ozone produced by the traffic, and electrical motor used in a modern buildings and sunlight.

[FactCheck]

Is it me or are people acting threatened by this? This doesn't seem to be a conspiracy theory. It's not like they're saying the evil doers planted this floor pan during construction to collapse the building. Even if they are wrong this should be throughly explored to rule this out. If they're right then the NIST did miss this which does go to creating codes which can save lives and property in future fires. I bet the NIST would love this debate.

I just wish we didn't have to pull teeth. I don't understand the chemistry questions followed by the answer many posts later. It seems like a game to me. Or maybe they are used to teaching and we are getting free chemistry lessons? :)

[gumboot]

Yes I fully realize the structure of the Elevator shafts, but you also have to remember that most were sealed to prevent a chimney effect I believe with galvanized metal and thin Concrete, at the Mechanical floors.



Do you have any evidence that they were sealed? I understood that the shafts themselves were open from basement to roof, and the reports of jet fuel fireballs around elevator shafts on numerous floors throughout the building supports this.

-Gumboot

[FactCheck]

Since hydrogen is trapped under concrete when concrete with calcium Chloride is used on top of Galvanized steel, is that what your referring to, Also since anywhere HCL could react with the concrete it forms calcium Chloride, now what does that bag of calcium Chloride in my buildings say, Oh yeah Danger highly incompatible with Zinc Hydrogen explosion may occur.

Also SO2 + O3+ H2O forms sulfuric acid, that when attacks concrete, if it forming gypsum if it contacts Zinc it can trap hydrogen in the gypsum.

I know guys I am just Crazy no one is dumb enough to store High sulfur fuels in a Building not with them known to release SO2, but what is the danger anyway, I mean it is not like the towers were in New York City with all the Ozone produced by the traffic, and electrical motor used in a modern buildings and sunlight.How many ozone producing copiers and printers would you say were in that closed office building per square acre?

http://h20000.www2.hp.com/bizsupport/TechSupport/Document.jsp?objectID=bpl01433

And what happenes to this ozone in a closed building like the towers?

Forgive the ignorance of the questions.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Ok, I would expect that the steel spheres would be at the bottom of the dust/ash layers deposited by the fires, and fairly close-in to their origin.
They are considerably heavier than air, have a surface area-to-weight
ratio considerably higher than any other dust particles, and therefore would be less bouyed up by the temperature, and less likely to travel far on air currents.
Where are they in the dust analysis? Oops--I don't see them. See lots of Sulfer, gypsum, and other stuff, but no iron-zinc spereoids.

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2470637#post2470637

This might enlighten you some what to what I am trying and failing to explain.

[rwguinn]

Do you have any evidence that they were sealed? I understood that the shafts themselves were open from basement to roof, and the reports of jet fuel fireballs around elevator shafts on numerous floors throughout the building supports this.

-Gumboot
no, they were not sealed. In fact, they were merely double-thickness drywall boxed-in. ne group chopped their way through them by hand to get out.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Do you have any evidence that they were sealed? I understood that the shafts themselves were open from basement to roof, and the reports of jet fuel fireballs around elevator shafts on numerous floors throughout the building supports this.

-Gumboot

The freight, and express elevators are not sealed, the rest it depends on the elevator, as has been discussed here some are sealed .
It only takes one shaft to start the reaction, there also are other places that can trap hydrogen in the buildings. It only takes one match to start a giant fire.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

no, they were not sealed. In fact, they were merely double-thickness drywall boxed-in. ne group chopped their way through them by hand to get out.

Could some one please post the elevator diagrams again, the express elevator is the one your referring to in the above mention sentence I believe.

PS. Drywall is enough to confine hydrogen gas.
It contains moisture, water in it, that is what makes it such good protection in fires.

[Quad4_72]

I am still waiting for some hard evidence here. So far, all I have seen is hypotheticals and assumptions from CC.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

How many ozone producing copiers and printers would you say were in that closed office building per square acre?

http://h20000.www2.hp.com/bizsupport/TechSupport/Document.jsp?objectID=bpl01433

And what happenes to this ozone in a closed building like the towers?

Forgive the ignorance of the questions.

SO2+O3 is one of the ways that Ozone breaks down, naturally it is created and broken down rapidly in the environment making acid formation likely.


http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/tfacts117.html

[Crazy Chainsaw]

I am still waiting for some hard evidence here. So far, all I have seen is hypotheticals and assumptions from CC.

Do you have an explanation for the metal spheres in the early air data that can only come from molten steel or oxidizing steel?
You can find out more about that on the page I posted a link to on the Debate What Debate tread.
NIST does not address them except to say that they could have come from early cutting operations, but they are most likely precollapse not post collapse.

Here is also an article from Mark Ferran, on Iron.
http://www.debunking911.com/ironburns.htm

I am still working on this but experimentation and Observation has pointed out to me that the potential for the reaction is there in the buildings.

[gumboot]

The freight, and express elevators are not sealed, the rest it depends on the elevator, as has been discussed here some are sealed .
It only takes one shaft to start the reaction, there also are other places that can trap hydrogen in the buildings. It only takes one match to start a giant fire.



I'm not sure that they actually are. The fireballs were not only reported in freight and express elevators. Indeed, the FDNY feared that elevators would collapse down the shafts and "pancake" onto each other - something that would be impossible if the shafts were sealed between sections.

-Gumboot

[gumboot]

Just to clarify, that when we're discussing the "sealing" of the elevator shafts we're talking vertical sealing between the stacked ranks of elevators - that is sealed floors across the shaft - not the walls.

-Gumboot

[gumboot]

Do you have an explanation for the metal spheres in the early air data that can only come from molten steel or oxidizing steel?



I may be behind the times, but what precisely is the source for the existence of these "spheres"?

-Gumboot

[FactCheck]

SO2+O3 is one of the ways that Ozone breaks down, naturally it is created and broken down rapidly in the environment making acid formation likely.


http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/tfacts117.htmlLet me see if I have this right. Please understand I am a layman and genuinely interested in this.


Ozone is broken down to form SO2+O3 during a normal work day.
The airliner impact and explosion/starts fires creating a chemical reaction with the SO2+O3 and the zinc of the unprotected flooring.
The chemical reaction raises the heat level during the event
This added heat explains the missing element in the NIST report to explain why they needed to add soffits
This also explains why there was evidence of zinc spheres around GZ.


If this is not the chain of events, could you please modify it so us two year olds can follow you? :)

* FactCheck grabs a warm bottle of milk and a bancky and waits for reply.

[Vincent Vega]

Antimatter. Gosh!
http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:YlPL5opShJ2keM:http://www.ugo.com/versus/images/characters/gallery_Napoleon_Dynamite_1.jpg

[Quad4_72]

Do you have an explanation for the metal spheres in the early air data that can only come from molten steel or oxidizing steel?
You can find out more about that on the page I posted a link to on the Debate What Debate tread.
NIST does not address them except to say that they could have come from early cutting operations, but they are most likely precollapse not post collapse.

Here is also an article from Mark Ferran, on Iron.
http://www.debunking911.com/ironburns.htm

I am still working on this but experimentation and Observation has pointed out to me that the potential for the reaction is there in the buildings.

Before you start asking me for explanations on ANYTHING, would you mind explaining what YOU think happened? Do you have some sort of alternate conspiracy theory that we have never heard of? Do you think explosives brought down the towers? etc.

[FactCheck]

Before you start asking me for explanations on ANYTHING, would you mind explaining what YOU think happened? Do you have some sort of alternate conspiracy theory that we have never heard of? Do you think explosives brought down the towers? etc.No, I believe he is looking to explain some observations in the NIST report.

Personally, I don't care if he thinks explosives brought the building down, as long as he has evidence for his conclusions. But again, I don't think that's the case.

[Quad4_72]

No, I believe he is looking to explain some observations in the NIST report.

Personally, I don't care if he thinks explosives brought the building down, as long as he has evidence for his conclusions. But again, I don't think that's the case.

I am really just trying to figure out what conclusion he is trying to reach. He is spouting a lot of information but I have yet to see a conclusion or a point to it all.

[Corsair 115]

Free Hydrogen exists in the sun, you have to have oxygen to combust it, no oxygen no combustion, and hydrogen could have been created in places where there was no fire, and flow upward into the fires, where it robbed oxygen from the carbon fires making them appear to smolder out while actually they were hotter than ever. Just wondering, but what does the statement "Free Hydrogen exists in the sun..." have to do with anything? How is this connected to your theory exactly?

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Before you start asking me for explanations on ANYTHING, would you mind explaining what YOU think happened? Do you have some sort of alternate conspiracy theory that we have never heard of? Do you think explosives brought down the towers? etc.

EXPLOSIVES IN that environment are you NUTS?
I practically ruled that out even thermates, and thermite probably would not have survived!

I believe that the buildings were subjected to conditions to which no normal buildings in history were subjected to though terrorist flying planes into a building.
I simply have problems with NITS for logical reasons, one of those being that the reactivity of chemical reactions in the building was not tested.
I have conducted the experiments and was shocked at what I saw.
Totally shock and in awe, I watched a steel peace of galvanized steel completely dissolve do to a diesel fuel fire, into Black Iron oxide, and Aluminum Chloride.

It does not take that much hydrogen either, to start the reactions. zinc and HCl are the key.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Just wondering, but what does the statement "Free Hydrogen exists in the sun..." have to do with anything? How is this connected to your theory exactly?

Simple the person I was replying to told that the hydrogen would self ignite but I wanted that person to know that it takes Oxygen for that.
With out Oxygen, the Hydrogen can not burn there fore the hydrogen can react and embrittle the metal.

[Quad4_72]

EXPLOSIVES IN that environment are you NUTS?
I practically ruled that out even thermates, and thermite probably would not have survived!

I believe that the buildings were subjected to conditions to which no normal buildings in history were subjected to though terrorist flying planes into a building.
I simply have problems with NITS for logical reasons, one of those being that the reactivity of chemical reactions in the building was not tested.
I have conducted the experiments and was shocked at what I saw.
Totally shock and in awe, I watched a steel peace of galvanized steel completely dissolve do to a diesel fuel fire, into Black Iron oxide, and Aluminum Chloride.

It does not take that much hydrogen either, to start the reactions. zinc and HCl are the key.

I see. Well you are definitely right, those were conditions that were never seen in any other office fire before. The impact and the addition of jet fuel is something that you just can't gauge exactly how much damage it was doing on the inside but its obvious that it was substantial.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

I'm not sure that they actually are. The fireballs were not only reported in freight and express elevators. Indeed, the FDNY feared that elevators would collapse down the shafts and "pancake" onto each other - something that would be impossible if the shafts were sealed between sections.

-Gumboot

Fire seals stop falling elevator cars, please you would have just as much chance of stopping a small speeding automobile.

After the fire in the 70s the elevators were redesigned to stop chimney effects, but they were still vented though the air handling system.
Once the air handling system stop functioning the venting would have stopped, the original fire balls going downward were probably a result of the planes fuel going down the air handling vents to the elevator shafts.

[gumboot]

Fire seals stop falling elevator cars, please you would have just as much chance of stopping a small speeding automobile.


Make up your mind. Before you were asserting that the floor truss systems extended through the elevator shafts. Now you're claiming they were "fire seals". Which is it?

If there were fire seals in place, how did the fireballs get so far down the elevator shafts?




After the fire in the 70s the elevators were redesigned to stop chimney effects, but they were still vented though the air handling system.
Once the air handling system stop functioning the venting would have stopped, the original fire balls going downward were probably a result of the planes fuel going down the air handling vents to the elevator shafts.


I'm sorry, but the evidence indicates massive volumes of jet fuel exploding through elevator shafts at every level of the building. This is unexplainable if the shafts are sealed at each section.

-Gumboot

[uk_dave]

I get the feeling some people have a solution in search of a problem.

[Gravy]

I have conducted the experiments and was shocked at what I saw.
Totally shock and in awe, I watched a steel peace of galvanized steel completely dissolve do to a diesel fuel fire, into Black Iron oxide, and Aluminum Chloride.

It does not take that much hydrogen either, to start the reactions. zinc and HCl are the key.The effects you're describing were not observed in the steel that was examined from the fire zones. And keep in mind that the bowing of the east wall of the south tower happened within 18 minutes of impact.

[gumboot]

Someone please correct me if my logic is faulty here...

But if this proposal is true - and the presence of free hydrogen (or something) resulted in the ignition and burning of the floor pans at 3000oC - surely this would make the NIST collapse initiation proposal entirely impossible.

My issue with this is, the NIST collapse initiation proposal is supported by fairly solid evidence - namely photographic evidence and both police and victim eye witness testimony.

Furthermore, many of these eye witness testimonies are captured during the event itself (the victims being obvious examples) thus one cannot argue that this sagging floor theory was fabricated after the fact to conceal the truth.

-Gumboot

[MRC_Hans]

H20, in this case steam super hot steam reacting with the metals, giving off hydrogen then instantly burning, creating super hot steam reacting with the metals, giving off more hydrogen, instantly burning giving off super hot steam.
Water-steam is simply the compound that liberates the energy in the metals Oxygen in the air is used up to create it, The hydrogen is recycled and builds up as more steam comes from below.
It is just simple chemistry.
Because more steam is continuously rising up, more hydrogen is produced than can be burned

There is a bit of technobabble in the above, but yes, there is a process in which water is split into hydrogen and oxygen in the presense of metals. It is called a reduction process. For it to act as you say, however, it requires a constant supply of water. You can't assume that the water is recycled, because then the process would not produce energy.

Also, had something like that happend, it would have been very noticeable. Remember, there were people inside the buildings. They would sort of have noticed if the interiour of the building had been 3000 degrees hot (and it would also have shown on the outside).

leading to it being absorbed by metals that are hot enough to allow the Crystalline structures to vibrate and absorb it.

That was pure technobabble.

I know go ahead and call me insane, I am only reporting on what I witness happen in a test experiment, but I am reporting faithfully. ON the reactions that are and were possible.

We (or at least I ) don't call you insane. Just misguided. Your extrapolation of the experiment you watcehd to the WTC fires does not work. It does not fit the observations made that day.

Hans

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Oridginally posted by Hans, There is a bit of technobabble in the above, but yes, there is a process in which water is split into hydrogen and oxygen in the presense of metals. It is called a reduction process. For it to act as you say, however, it requires a constant supply of water. You can't assume that the water is recycled, because then the process would not produce energy. The energy comes from the metals, DA, and there is a constant supply of steam from the fires.
The hydrogen is recycled after it burns in air, and forms more water!
Also, had something like that happend, it would have been very noticeable. Remember, there were people inside the buildings. They would sort of have noticed if the interiour of the building had been 3000 degrees hot (and it would also have shown on the outside).
Not if it occurred in the core, and show me the evidence of the people in the actual fire zone, it would have been hidden in the fires. Reactions also would have been likely in other parts of the buildings away from the fires.


That was pure technobabble.
So your saying that heat does not effect the Crystalline structures of metals congratulation you just said fire does not melt steel!


We (or at least I ) don't call you insane. Just misguided. Your extrapolation of the experiment you watcehd to the WTC fires does not work. It does not fit the observations made that day.
Yes it does, it fits the observed data, and it would cause bowing of the truss sections and is even more likely to cause the bowing than the NIST hypothesis, because it effects the upper section of the truss weakening it.

The experiment was a legitamate attempt to understand the chemical processes involved in the fire.
NIST Screwed up there fire models Leaving out a critical structure that threw the models they used off. It makes all the difference in the world.

[uk_dave]

NIST Screwed up there fire models Leaving out a critical structure that threw the models they used off. It makes all the difference in the world.

Are you stating, here and now, that NIST lied in order to confirm the preconceived mechanism for collapse?

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Someone please correct me if my logic is faulty here...

But if this proposal is true - and the presence of free hydrogen (or something) resulted in the ignition and burning of the floor pans at 3000oC - surely this would make the NIST collapse initiation proposal entirely impossible.

My issue with this is, the NIST collapse initiation proposal is supported by fairly solid evidence - namely photographic evidence and both police and victim eye witness testimony.

Furthermore, many of these eye witness testimonies are captured during the event itself (the victims being obvious examples) thus one cannot argue that this sagging floor theory was fabricated after the fact to conceal the truth.

-Gumboot

It would only add energy to the collapse, not totally take away the sagging floor theory.
It would actually make bowing of the trusses more likely by heating them from above as well as below. It would also degrade the concrete though the quick lime process, and the process that makes plaster of Paris from Gypsum.

The Glow of the burning floor pans can be hidden in the early fires or obscured by smoke. and the temperature for the floor pans to burn only has to be hotter than 1350c not the total 3000c, 3000c is just the maximum potential.
When Hydrogen burns it creates super heated steam if trapped under a metal floor it is hot enough to force its way though the protective oxide layer, and into the metal itself causing another hydrogen reaction and leaving more oxide, once the oxide builds up enough it drips off.
You Would not be able to tell the oxide formed from the oxide of the early cutting operations so it might have been ignored.
As you said some of the truss assemblies were recovered and tested but only a few, Most were not testable and as such critical data might have been missed.

[Zep]

CC, please describe in detail the "experiment" you conducted/saw to support your theory here. And also tell us where this was done.

Thanks.

[WildCat]

SO2+O3 is one of the ways that Ozone breaks down, naturally it is created and broken down rapidly in the environment making acid formation likely.


http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/tfacts117.html
How many people who escaped the towers suffered burns from acid? I don't recall any... and acid strong enough to eat through steel would certainly have a devastating effect on flesh and bone.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Are you stating, here and now, that NIST lied in order to confirm the preconceived mechanism for collapse?

NO they simplified the model to study heat on the truss sections and left out one critical detail that was critical, I think it was an honest mistake.
With the data they had they came up with the only logical hypothesis that they could, Which was the Collapse theory as they out lined it.

[Gravy]

The experiment was a legitamate attempt to understand the chemical processes involved in the fire....without attempting to model the building materials, construction, combustibles, loads, damage, or fires.

NIST Screwed up there fire models Leaving out a critical structure that threw the models they used off. It makes all the difference in the world.Another wild accusation backed with absolutely no evidence. Please don't do that.

[gumboot]

It would only add energy to the collapse, not totally take away the sagging floor theory.


Garbage. Combustion cannot in any way contribute to collapse energy. Collapse energy comes from gravity. Fire has no impact on GPE.

If the floor truss assemblies themselves are on fire, they cannot sag and pull other structural elements inwards. Such a proposal is ludicrous.




The Glow of the burning floor pans can be hidden in the early fires or obscured by smoke.

These apparantly burning floors were also entirely missed by people inside the building, who one would think would have noticed. This concealing smoke was very selective, preventing the NYPD aviation until from noticing the burning steel floor truss assemblies but not preventing them from seeing the core columns glowing red hot, which they reported.




and the temperature for the floor pans to burn only has to be hotter than 1350c not the total 3000c, 3000c is just the maximum potential.


It doesn't make much difference. You're proposing that structural elements burned that were required to remain structurally intact in order for the collapse initiation to work. Structural elements that are burning intensely do not remain intact.

-Gumboot

[MRC_Hans]

The energy comes from the metals, DA, and there is a constant supply of steam from the fires.

The only way energy can come from metals is if they burn. Steel can burn, but it is a very spectacular effect.


The hydrogen is recycled after it burns in air, and forms more water!


Please state the chemical process you propose. You both claim that the hydrogen burns, reacts with the metals, and that the metals burn. All of these cannot be true at the same time. If you think they are, please explain the chemistry.


Not if it occurred in the core, and show me the evidence of the people in the actual fire zone, it would have been hidden in the fires. Reactions also would have been likely in other parts of the buildings away from the fires.


Reactions consuming tons of steel @3000 degrees?? That would have the whole building blazing like a torch in no time.


So your saying that heat does not effect the Crystalline structures of metals congratulation you just said fire does not melt steel!


No, I said you were spouting technobabble. If "leading to it being absorbed by metals that are hot enough to allow the Crystalline structures to vibrate and absorb it" is your way of saying "fire can melt steel", then you are technobabbling.



We (or at least I ) don't call you insane. Just misguided. Your extrapolation of the experiment you watcehd to the WTC fires does not work. It does not fit the observations made that day.
Yes it does, it fits the observed data, and it would cause bowing of the truss sections and is even more likely to cause the bowing than the NIST hypothesis, because it effects the upper section of the truss weakening it.


No, it does not fit the observations. There were no observations indicating vast superheated processes going on, just regular fires. Heartbreaking as it is, there were people above the fire zones calling emergency centers and relatives on the phone. They did not mention anyhing about white-hot chemical fires raging in the core.

The experiment was a legitamate attempt to understand the chemical processes involved in the fire.

There is no need to any special understanding. Conventinal fires are quite adequate to explain the events.

NIST Screwed up there fire models Leaving out a critical structure that threw the models they used off. It makes all the difference in the world.

Present your evidence. Chemical formulas will do.

Hans

[Crazy Chainsaw]

How many people who escaped the towers suffered burns from acid? I don't recall any... and acid strong enough to eat through steel would certainly have a devastating effect on flesh and bone.

Acid burn can be mistaken for second degree fire burns and go un noticed, also the formation of the acid requires water or steam how many people will stand in super heated steam and survive?
How many first responders are suffering lung upper respiratory Pulmonary problems from HCL and SO2 ?
Acids actually react stronger to Zinc than to water based people, although there would have been some eye, lung and Pulmonary damage.
There are several records during the first world war of people surviving mustard gas attack. Even Hitler survived it, unfortunately.
The compound are most likely to interact in places the chemicals can be trapped such as on a flat surface above a fire. Or in a cavity between concrete and galvanized metal, where electrical conduit and wiring would be run.

[Dave_46]

CC, please describe in detail the "experiment" you conducted/saw to support your theory here. And also tell us where this was done.

Thanks.

You beat me to it Zep.

Crazy Chainsaw, I would also like to know the details of the experiment.

Thanks

Dave

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Originally posted by gumboot,
Garbage. Combustion cannot in any way contribute to collapse energy. Collapse energy comes from gravity. Fire has no impact on GPE.

If the floor truss assemblies themselves are on fire, they cannot sag and pull other structural elements inwards. Such a proposal is ludicrous.
DA. the trusses are not burning, the decking above the the floor pans is. The hydrogen can not be trapped around the trusses. Also the increase of energy in the metal helps to increase the likelihood of it being plastic. Reducing the necessary energy that it takes for gravity to act upon it.




These apparantly burning floors were also entirely missed by people inside the building, who one would think would have noticed. This concealing smoke was very selective, preventing the NYPD aviation until from noticing the burning steel floor truss assemblies but not preventing them from seeing the core columns glowing red hot, which they reported.
IT is not the truss assemblies burning but the floor pans the trusses would not burn the hydrogen would not collect around the trusses enough. since the reaction is up near the top above the trusses, the trusses actually help conceal it.




It doesn't make much difference. You're proposing that structural elements burned that were required to remain structurally intact in order for the collapse initiation to work. Structural elements that are burning intensely do not remain intact.
DA the floor pans are un insulated and are not even structural. DA. It only adds heat energy to the collapse so that less gravitational PE is involved in the collapses simply making them faster with more energy.
Follow along I never said the trusses themselves burned, they are insulated, although a good portion of that insulation would no doubt have been shredded in the impact of the planes.
I am specifically referring to the 22 guage galvanized steel floor pans above the trusses. Which were non structural and were not insulated.

[gumboot]

Acid burn can be mistaken for second degree fire burns and go un noticed, also the formation of the acid requires water or steam how many people will stand in super heated steam and survive?



Not many, however are there any reports of super heated steam on 9/11? No. There is, however, ample reports of lots of water in the towers, because the impacts severed the water sprinkler system.




How many first responders are suffering lung upper respiratory Pulmonary problems from HCL and SO2 ?


Were you theory correct, those present on 9/11 (and specifically in the buildings) would have suffered much more severe symptoms than those who worked in recovery efforts afterwards. The reality is the total reverse is true. The respiratory problems experienced by recovery workers at GZ are a result of the toxic dust.

In comparison survivors from the towers (who would have been most exposed to the phenomena you describe) have not suffered respiratory problems.

-Gumboot

[Zep]

Acid burn can be mistaken for second degree fire burns and go un noticed, also the formation of the acid requires water or steam how many people will stand in super heated steam and survive?
How many first responders are suffering lung upper respiratory Pulmonary problems from HCL and SO2 ?
Acids actually react stronger to Zinc than to water based people, although there would have been some eye, lung and Pulmonary damage.
There are several records during the first world war of people surviving mustard gas attack. Even Hitler survived it, unfortunately.
The compound are most likely to interact in places the chemicals can be trapped such as on a flat surface above a fire. Or in a cavity between concrete and galvanized metal, where electrical conduit and wiring would be run.1) I'm not a chemist by any stretch of the imagination, but I did pass high school and university science, and I have a first aid qualification. So I do believe the above is rather fanciful speculation, as well as being mostly inapplicable to 9/11.

2) I'm sure the ER qualified people can give you much better understanding of the detection and proper medical responses to both fire and acid burns. That should help correct some of the bloopers you seem to be making.

3) Repeat request: Please describe in detail the "experiment" you conducted/saw to support your theory here. And also tell us where this was done.

Thanks.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Originally posted by MRC_Hans;The only way energy can come from metals is if they burn. Steel can burn, but it is a very spectacular effect.

What do you think happens when steel reacts with H20 to form hydrogen the steel burns, forming and oxide and releasing heat. The break down of the water releases the hydrogen to burn again and form more water from oxygen in the air. The energy comes from the oxidation of the metals, and from the oxidation of the hydrogen to form more water.

Please state the chemical process you propose. You both claim that the hydrogen burns, reacts with the metals, and that the metals burn. All of these cannot be true at the same time.
If you think they are, please explain the chemistry.

HCL from PVC,+H20= Hydrochloric acid, Hydrochloric Acid+Zinc= Hydrogen, Hydrogen+Oxygen= super heated water. Super heated water plus Iron=Iron oxide, and hydrogen, Hydrogen plus Oxygen=super heated water.
Some of the water for the reaction actually comes from the burning fuels, Kerosene gives off Carbon Dioxide, and
H2O when burned. There are Also Busted steam pipes all though out the buildings.
Once the reaction starts the metals and oxidizing hydrogen produce enough heat to continue the reaction unil the metals are exhausted. The metals can even become hot enough to oxidize with atmosheric oxygen if a source stong enough is availiable.


Reactions consuming tons of steel @3000 degrees?? That would have the whole building blazing like a torch in no time.
It Could only occur on the floor pans themselves but It would raise the heat value considerably.



No, I said you were spouting technobabble. If "leading to it being absorbed by metals that are hot enough to allow the Crystalline structures to vibrate and absorb it" is your way of saying "fire can melt steel", then you are technobabbling.

Then your saying that heat does not cause the Crystalline structures in metals to vibrate and glow because of black body radiation. That same vibration of the structures, movement is responsible for melting steel, and make the absorption of hydrogen in low oxygen environment highly likely.

When you heat steel the Crystalline structure start to detach from one another that is what weakens it allowing the Collapse that NIST proposes, When the Crystalline structures totally degrade then the metal is said to be molten or Melted, or Liquid. It is the Crystalline bonds in the metals that give them their strength.


No, it does not fit the observations. There were no observations indicating vast superheated processes going on, just regular fires. Heartbreaking as it is, there were people above the fire zones calling emergency centers and relatives on the phone. They did not mention anyhing about white-hot chemical fires raging in the core.
Why would they have noticed it, they would most likely have been moving away from the fires to try to avoid being burned alive. They were also probably more involved with trying to get help than in providing information on what was burning and at what temperature.


There is no need to any special understanding. Conventinal fires are quite adequate to explain the events.
Yes for some of the events they are perfectly adequate, but not for all.
NIST's simply can not adiquately explain some of the events, and some of the data!



Present your evidence. Chemical formulas will do.

See above.

[gumboot]

What's this HCL you keep talking about?

Do you mean HCl?

-Gumboot

[gumboot]

Why would they have noticed it, they would most likely have been moving away from the fires to try to avoid being burned alive. They were also probably more involved with trying to get help than in providing information on what was burning and at what temperature.



Unfortuantely they couldn't escape the fires because they were trapped. Those that did try to avoid the fires did so by jumping to their deaths. Obviously these people were not the ones talking to 9-11 operators and describing conditions in the building.



Yes for some of the events they are perfectly adequate, but not for all.
NIST's simply can not adiquately explain some of the events, and some of the data!


This is the second time I've asked, but I'd really love to know precisely what observed phenomena NIST failed to address.

-Gumboot

[Crazy Chainsaw]

1) I'm not a chemist by any stretch of the imagination, but I did pass high school and university science, and I have a first aid qualification. So I do believe the above is rather fanciful speculation, as well as being mostly inapplicable to 9/11.

2) I'm sure the ER qualified people can give you much better understanding of the detection and proper medical responses to both fire and acid burns. That should help correct some of the bloopers you seem to be making.

Both types of burns are usually treated the same way irrigation, then treated specifically dependent on the reaction of the burns and indications of what caused it and also chemical burns are common in fires, as well. Usually with Chemical burns in industrial environments the source is known already. The old rule of first aid still applies to both burns, if in doubt flush it out. Which means to irrigate the burn with water.

3) Repeat request: Please describe in detail the "experiment" you conducted/saw to support your theory here. And also tell us where this was done.



Thanks.

I simply modeled the live decking and concrete, with Low sulfur diesel fuel, as the fuel for the fires. With of course PVC pipe buring below the 22 guage metal with a small injection of steam to simulate a busted steam pipe.
The reaction started before I injected the steam, and the metal was attacked by the Chloride from both sides, which caused it to ignite.

NIST did not do a live Galvanized decking model or model the A 325 galvanized bolts that Dr. Greening was referring to.
The experiment like all my experiments was conducted on my land. NO one wishes to pursue this anymore, although I believe there is significant reason for pursuing research into certain abnormalities that NIST neglects.
IT might actually lead to safer buildings one day.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

What's this HCL you keep talking about?

Do you mean HCl?

-Gumboot

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrochloric_acid

[gumboot]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrochloric_acid

Er...

Okay first off the chemical formula is HCl, not HCL. HCL would be a compound consisting of Hydrogen, Carbon, and... well, there is no element with the symbol L.

Secondly... you said:


HCL from PVC,+H20= Hydrochloric acid

In this context HCL cannot mean hydrochloric acid. Indeed, what you seem to mean is hydrogen chloride gas (also HCl) of which hydrochloric acid is the aqueous solution.

-Gumboot

[gumboot]

I simply modeled the live decking and concrete, with Low sulfur diesel fuel, as the fuel for the fires.



And how on earth did this diesel fuel manage to get into the towers?

I must confess I am utterly confused.

-Gumboot

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Unfortuantely they couldn't escape the fires because they were trapped. Those that did try to avoid the fires did so by jumping to their deaths. Obviously these people were not the ones talking to 9-11 operators and describing conditions in the building.





This is the second time I've asked, but I'd really love to know precisely what observed phenomena NIST failed to address.

-Gumboot

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1165/graphics/IRON-04-IMAGE.jpg

The spheres in the air data that seem to be precollapse, that requires temperatures above 1565c for them to form.
NIST discounts that temperature in the fires. That is exactly in the ream of the temperatures that I am describing. Also there is evidence for burned aluminum which would have produced temperatures of 2800c NIST discounts that though because it could have occurred do to friction. The prolong heating in the Rubble pile, the figure Nist gives with carbon based fuels do not add up.

[rwguinn]

And how on earth did this diesel fuel manage to get into the towers?

I must confess I am utterly confused.

-Gumboot

I would have prefered kerosine, myself, as it is a lot closer to JP than diesel.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Er...

Okay first off the chemical formula is HCl, not HCL. HCL would be a compound consisting of Hydrogen, Carbon, and... well, there is no element with the symbol L.

Secondly... you said:



In this context HCL cannot mean hydrochloric acid. Indeed, what you seem to mean is hydrogen chloride gas (also HCl) of which hydrochloric acid is the aqueous solution.

-Gumboot

Actually it is HCl reacting with steam and Zinc at the metal interface of the floor pans. creating the first hydrogen. Sorry I have only one hand to type with so some times I leave the cap locks on when typing HCl.

IT is a very interesting and complicated reaction, the Zinc Chloride and Hydrogen are just the start of the process, once the Zinc Chloride melts, the Hydrogen burning near the surface of the steel heat it to where it reacts with steam in an oxidation reaction that releases more hydrogen.
Until you run out of steam, or steel the reaction continues.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

I would have prefered kerosine, myself, as it is a lot closer to JP than diesel.

I had the Diesel, and I also repeated the experiment with Kerosene there is not that much difference between kerosene and diesel. Either works as a fuel source.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Not many, however are there any reports of super heated steam on 9/11? No. There is, however, ample reports of lots of water in the towers, because the impacts severed the water sprinkler system.






Were you theory correct, those present on 9/11 (and specifically in the buildings) would have suffered much more severe symptoms than those who worked in recovery efforts afterwards. The reality is the total reverse is true. The respiratory problems experienced by recovery workers at GZ are a result of the toxic dust.

In comparison survivors from the towers (who would have been most exposed to the phenomena you describe) have not suffered respiratory problems.

-Gumboot

There are eyewitness accounts of multiple steam heating pipe explosions. IN both towers

How many people survived from above the impact zone,
Besides the few lucky ones?

The HCl would rise and be most prominent in the upper stories of the buildings with weak Hydrochloric acid in the lower parts, also reacting with metals.

[rwguinn]

I had the Diesel, and I also repeated the experiment with Kerosene there is not that much difference between kerosene and diesel. Either works as a fuel source.

Ok, I do not doubt that you saw what you saw. I will also concede on the diesel--it's close enough, although you can get JP-4 out at your local airport.
What we need to know is your test set-up. All the materials involved, physical locations, and delivery methods. There are numerous types and levels of galvanized steel out there--we need to know more than "20 gauge".
Also we need to know the chemical composition of the results. "A pile of black iron oxide" doesn't cut it. You are postulating a specific chemical reaction--we have to know the results, chemically.
What temperature measurement device(s) did you use, and where were they? What is their accuracy? Are they that accurate? How do you know? They were Calibrated when?
What I'm saying here is that there is an assertion, that in my eyes, at least, has some of the appearance of "I made a diesel fire, threw a bunch of stuff on it, and got this black stuff out", and assumes some things that are by no means certified true. Help us out here.

[FactCheck]

Let me see if I have this right. Please understand I am a layman and genuinely interested in this.


Ozone is broken down to form SO2+O3 during a normal work day.
The airliner impact and explosion/starts fires creating a chemical reaction with the SO2+O3 and the zinc of the unprotected flooring.
The chemical reaction raises the heat level during the event
This added heat explains the missing element in the NIST report to explain why they needed to add soffits
This also explains why there was evidence of zinc spheres around GZ.


If this is not the chain of events, could you please modify it so us two year olds can follow you? :)

* FactCheck;2563759 grabs a warm bottle of milk and a bancky and waits for reply.Anyone?

[gumboot]

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1165/graphics/IRON-04-IMAGE.jpg

The spheres in the air data that seem to be precollapse, that requires temperatures above 1565c for them to form.
NIST discounts that temperature in the fires.


Thanks. What is the source for the existence of these spheres?



The prolong heating in the Rubble pile, the figure Nist gives with carbon based fuels do not add up.


Why not? Are you proposing that these fires are not capable of producing temperatures this high?




There are eyewitness accounts of multiple steam heating pipe explosions. IN both towers


In the basements...




How many people survived from above the impact zone,
Besides the few lucky ones?


About 3%. (This includes those who were killed on impact).




The HCl would rise and be most prominent in the upper stories of the buildings

Why?

Just a question, an important thing for me is, what sort of volume are we talking here? I mean, how much of this free hydrogen and hydrochloric acid and hydrogen chlorine gas is needed to actually set multiple 3,900m2 floor pans alight? (Beneath 4 inches of concrete).

-Gumboot

[R.Mackey]

The spheres in the air data that seem to be precollapse, that requires temperatures above 1565c for them to form.
NIST discounts that temperature in the fires. That is exactly in the ream of the temperatures that I am describing. Also there is evidence for burned aluminum which would have produced temperatures of 2800c NIST discounts that though because it could have occurred do to friction. The prolong heating in the Rubble pile, the figure Nist gives with carbon based fuels do not add up.

We had this same discussion (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2510597#post2510597) in the "Debate! What Debate?" thread.

The parts I've bolded are the key points. I've read through that whole report (http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1165/508OF05-1165.html), and I can't find any way to verify that these spherules did in fact originate before the collapse. More importantly, we don't know how many of them there were. They could be quite unusual specimens.

If they are unusual, then there are other mechanisms that can indeed explain their formation, and higher temperatures as well, in localized areas. I've brought this up before. (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2497745#post2497745) Mechanical friction and/or turbulent erosion as the plane hit is the one that I personally favor, though it's also possible if not likely that some violent reactions (oxygen bottles from the plane, UPS systems, etc.) would create brief periods and small areas of much higher temperatures.

Globally, the NIST fire modeling effort matches the observed collapse time with reasonable agreement. This suggests that any additional, unknown source of combustion, such as you propose, had a minor to negligible impact on the structure's overall integrity.

I also support a more careful simulation of the fire conditions to see if there are such underappreciated chemical attack modes present in quantity. It is possible. However, you need to accept that they are not proven at this time. There are other explanations for all of the observed phenomena, including the spherules. We need to sharpen up our experiments considerably before making a judgment one way or the other.

[rwguinn]

<<Snip>
I also support a more careful simulation of the fire conditions to see if there are such underappreciated chemical attack modes present in quantity. It is possible. However, you need to accept that they are not proven at this time. There are other explanations for all of the observed phenomena, including the spherules. We need to sharpen up our experiments considerably before making a judgment one way or the other.
At the risk of sounding like a TV program "Thank the diety of your choice--You're here!"
At last, a voice of sanity. I've been trying to hold down the fort, with a little help from others, but Dear Ed, it is tough to fill your shoes.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Thanks. What is the source for the existence of these spheres?

The air sample data. Collected by the USGS and. http://delta.ucdavis.edu/WTC.htm

http://delta.ucdavis.edu/wtc_air.htm






Why not? Are you proposing that these fires are not capable of producing temperatures this high?

Only if a Chimney effect with Carbon Black could have been achieved, NIST says that did not happen.
They can only be formed in molten metals in air, hince the sperical shape.







In the basements...

The stairs right below the impact zone are not in the basements one of he witness reported a steam pipe explosion there the steam pipes carried the heat to the exchangers though out the buildings.




About 3%. (This includes those who were killed on impact).





Why?

Just a question, an important thing for me is, what sort of volume are we talking here? I mean, how much of this free hydrogen and hydrochloric acid and hydrogen chlorine gas is needed to actually set multiple 3,900m2 floor pans alight? (Beneath 4 inches of concrete).

They ignite both above and below the concrete the concrete actually makes it easier to ignite them.
About two gallon of water converted to steam, and about 1 ounce of hydrochloric acid, Converted to HCl is the smallest amount that I used to ignite the galvanized metal.
-Gumboot

It totally freaked me out it was so easy as long as the hydrogen stayed near the metal it was just freaking weird and un expected.

The first experiment I just used some PVC Pipe, as the source for HCl and it worked. I tried as best as I could to model an actually section of he towers decking.

[PhantomWolf]

I do have some issues here. First thing, CC, it's an interesting theory, but sometimes we have to remember that theories are just that and when the evidence isn't there we have to discard them no matter how exciting and fun they are. This is why people keep going on about the proof.

The best way to deal with this is to determine what things would falsify this theory.

To me several things would stand out. 1) High concentrations of HCl in the upper building would mean exposure to it by thoses still alive in the upper building. 2) Burnt steel would leave evidence. 3) Flames from burning steel would be seen, and 4) there should be evidence of diminishing fires if they were being "drowned" by hydrogen.

Let's look at them.

1) I've been exposed to HCl gas, its very, very, very nasty stuff. HCl is intensely hydroscopic (water seeking) and when it gets into our lungs it sucks the liquid out of the cells and into the lungs. This means that the lungs fill up with liquid making it very hard to breathe, and since the liquid is acidic, very painful. I got a breathful by accident when some escaped an experiment in a fumehood. Even with just that small amount an only 1-2 second exposure, I was coughing, having trouble breathing and didn't fully recover for nearly 30 minutes (well if you don't include the awful taste I had in my mouth over the next few days.) Having had first hand experience, and having heard the tapes of callers from the upper tower floors, including one conversation occuring at the time of the collapse, it seems pretty obvious to me that while they were affected to a degree by smoke, that this smoke was not heavy in HCl gas. This would indicate that the levels in the upper building were not high.

2) Most of the steel was recovered. I know that certain groups like to claim that 80% was missing, but there is not evidence of this, and there is no evidence of the steel having been burnt. This is a major problem to the theory.

3) As Kiwi pointed out, the NYPD chopper crew reported being abole to see into the building and see the core columns glowing. Why wouldn't they have been able to see the flames from the bruning steel. You yourself have stated that such a reaction is quite spectacular, and yet it seems to have gone totally un-noticed by everyone.

4) The fires were diminishing. Look at the photo below.

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/879045fd54c8e5e6c.jpg

Note that the fires are well and truely burning, having engulfed 3-4 entire floors. There fires were not going out at the time of the collapses, they were still burning fiercely. The idea of fires being starved of air and small fires on just a few floors is entirely a conspiracy based myth.

Now it would seem to me that these 4 things cause very serious problems to your theory, and what I'd like you to consider and answer is "The absence (or presence) of what reasonable things do you think would falsify your theory?"

The second thing I want you to consider are, "Are those things absent (or present)?" I know that falisfying your theory is a hard thing to do, especially when it's an exciting and explosive one, but if you don't, it's not science.