Fire leads to collapse of California highway overpass

[patchbunny]

Offered for your discussion. Note from the photos that the structure used steel girders, which failed in the heat from the fire.

San Francisco Chronicle

(04-29) 09:24 PDT OAKLAND -- The heat of a dramatic gasoline tanker fire destroyed an overpass and closed two major roadways in the MacArthur Maze at the East Bay access to the Bay Bridge early this morning.

A section of the roadway taking traffic from the Bay Bridge onto eastbound Interstate 580 fell onto the connector that brings East Bay traffic from Interstate 80 to Interstate 880 southbound toward Oakland and San Jose.

More can be found here (http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/archive/2007/04/29/BAGVOPHQU46.DTL)

[~enigma~]

Offered for your discussion. Note from the photos that the structure used steel girders, which failed in the heat from the fire.

San Francisco Chronicle

(04-29) 09:24 PDT OAKLAND -- The heat of a dramatic gasoline tanker fire destroyed an overpass and closed two major roadways in the MacArthur Maze at the East Bay access to the Bay Bridge early this morning.

A section of the roadway taking traffic from the Bay Bridge onto eastbound Interstate 580 fell onto the connector that brings East Bay traffic from Interstate 80 to Interstate 880 southbound toward Oakland and San Jose.

More can be found here (http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/archive/2007/04/29/BAGVOPHQU46.DTL)
Was this an inside job?

[ref]

That looks baaad.

Wonder what the truthers will make out of this.

[uk_dave]

(sighs)

Don't you get it yet?

EVERYTHING which occured either before 911 or after 911, if it confirms the basis of the official version can be discounted as being staged in order to provide the confirmation you are depending on.

We're through the looking glass here people..... and the CT world is full of mad hatters.

[beachnut]

That was a gasoline fire, and everyone knows gasoline has less energy per pound than jet fuel, so the gasoline fire was able to destroy both steel and concrete like a knife cutting through butter. Actually looks like a big mess. But we also know the bridge was built 200 billion times stronger than needed, so it had to be Thermite/Thermate explosives, or a beam weapon, possible anti-matter class. The gas truck is planted as was the driver with burns at the hospital. This is a bigger than a smoking gun, this is a whole smoking highway.

As everyone knows steel is indestructible, like the Titanic was unsinkable. Fair?

[parky76]

Look. We have already established that fire CANNOT melt steel. Didn't you listen to Rosie? Clearly this was an inside job. How do we know the fire department didn't decide to "pull" the highway due to the failing structure? I smell Silverstein all over this. :D

[Quad4_72]

The JEWS are at it again!

[~enigma~]

Was the steel certified by UL?

[slugmancs]

The JEWS are at it again!

I read somewhere the bridge had asbestos and was never at capacity... think it was BridgeTruth.com

[Unsecured Coins]

Was the steel certified by UL?

By Kevin Ryan his damn self....

[parky76]

lololol. My sister lives in Marin county. She is a Jew. And...her boyfriend...is an Israeli!!! Coincidence? I think not.

I'll bet anything the California DOT just recently renewed its terrorism insurance for their highways, in the amount of $3 billion.

4/28 WAS AN INSIDE JOB!!!!!

[~enigma~]

lololol. My sister lives in Marin county. She is a Jew. And...her boyfriend...is an Israeli!!! Coincidence? I think not.

4/28 WAS AN INSIDE JOB!!!!!
You have got to work Molech into this otherwise it isn't a bohemian grove type woo :)

ETA - did ariel's photos show the overpass looked like Molech or was it a swastika?

[The Silver Shadow]

My mother's birthday was just 12 days before. My mom is a teacher, she used to teach in a predominantly Jewish community. THIS HAS CONSPIRACY WRITTEN ALL OVER IT!!!!!!111

[parky76]

Interstate 580 is a direct link to Bohemian Grove. Something is up my friends. The NWO must be getting restless.

Expect the Israeli attack against Thailand to begin shortly.

[~enigma~]

lololol. My sister lives in Marin county. She is a Jew. And...her boyfriend...is an Israeli!!! Coincidence? I think not.

I'll bet anything the California DOT just recently renewed its terrorism insurance for their highways, in the amount of $3 billion.

4/28 WAS AN INSIDE JOB!!!!!
Marin county...the overpass went up in smoke...are we sure this isn't a publicity stunt for the rerelease of Cheech and Chong's "Up In Smoke"?

[Trigood]

It's amazing that no one died. Who alerted all those people not to show up on the freeway that morning? That's what I'd like to know!!!

Let's do the math: 4/28/07 = 4+2+8+0+7 = 21 = 2+1 = 3. Three is now the new 11!!! Three-dee-three3333!!!!

But seriously, it's great that no one did die, apparently.

Pix: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/object/article?f=/chronicle/archive/2007/04/29/BAGVOPHQU46.DTL&o=4

[defaultdotxbe]

psyop

QED

[parky76]

Fascinating how no Israelis died in the collapse. Funny how they are always warned to stay away.

[~enigma~]

Was a publicity stunt for "Up In Smoke" just like the mooninites in Boston :)

Eta - [roxdog mode] it's so obvious..,[/roxdog mode]

[Retrograde]

Let's do the math: 4/28/07 = 4+2+8+0+7 = 21 = 2+1 = 3. Three is now the new 11!!! Three-dee-three3333!!!!


You've overlooked the obvious: 33 = 3*11, and 3*3 = 9, => 9-11. It's right there under our noses!

Fascinating how no Israelis died in the collapse. Funny how they are always warned to stay away.

According to the SF Chronicle, one of the first people on the scene was named Isaac Rodriquez. If that doesn't raise a red flag - or a false flag....he says he was working near by - at 4AM, right. Sure sounds suspicious to me.

Seriously, I've driven that particular stretch of road and it scares me in daylight in good weather. I'm surprised there aren't more accidents there. Tomorrow's commute is going to be hellacious.

[patchbunny]

Not only do I work for Caltrans, I was on that particular structure yesterday! And I've worked for the DoD!

Not jewish, though. Does that knock me out of the conspiracy?

[~enigma~]

Not only do I work for Caltrans, I was on that particular structure yesterday! And I've worked for the DoD!

Not jewish, though. Does that knock me out of the conspiracy?
What is your relation to Cheech and Chong and did you plant the lightpoles I gave you?

ETA - oh damn...didn't mean to say that last part out loud...

[rwguinn]

What is your relation to Cheech and Chong and did you plant the lightpoles I gave you?

ETA - oh damn...didn't mean to say that last part out loud...

It was a conspirisy! They was supposed to 3" rebar on 4' centers. The C4 coating powderized them!

[patchbunny]

Don't know Cheech Marin and Tommy Chong. Never met them. Prove otherwise! I dare you! Hahaha!

I never watered the light poles after I planted them. I'm afraid they're not growing at all. :(

Oh, and Cheech says hello.

[Trigood]

You've overlooked the obvious: 33 = 3*11, and 3*3 = 9, => 9-11. It's right there under our noses!
Thanks Retro, I guess my mind was too ristricted to the OCT to understand the truth. My my, it's all so obvious, once you point it out!

[HeyLeroy]

http://liveu-97.vo.llnwd.net/vidilife/image/2006/10/10/946639/1198597L.jpg

Proof it was teh Jooos.

[knot]

It has to be thermite or perhaps concrete termite nano-bots - or a missile. :duck:

[RandFan]

They was supposed to 3" rebar on 4' centers. My life would be complete if I could never hear or see 3" rebar on 4' centers ever again.

[parky76]

This bridge just happens to collapse during the Jewish Sabbath, when Orthodox Jews are forbidden from driving. Coincidence? I think not.

[eeyore1954]

Never before in the history of mankind has a non wooden overpass collapsed solely from fire. Obviously it was done by explosives planted during constuction of the overpass.

[boloboffin]

I just heard that the driver, after turning over the truck (he was teh speeding), managed somehow to hobble over to a gas station, where a conveniently waiting cab driver drove him to the hospital...

...where he's being treated for teh SECOND-DEGREE BURNS!!!!!1111!!!

OMGWTFBBQ!!!!1!

[parky76]

Do you think this will appear in LC:FC?

[LashL]

<snip>According to the SF Chronicle, one of the first people on the scene was named Isaac Rodriquez. If that doesn't raise a red flag - or a false flag....he says he was working near by - at 4AM, right. Sure sounds suspicious to me.



Further, Rodriguez said, "It really looked fake..."

"...It's made of steel and concrete, and it was bent at both angles of the pillar. It really looked fake. ..."

And, he said, "It was incredible because it was a roar.

A "roar" is the same as an "explosion", as everyone knows, so it must have been a bomb or thermite/thermate or a beam weapon from space.

And the truck has, apparently, disappeared!!!eleventy111!

No recognizable sign of the truck remains at the scene. One Caltrans worker there early this morning held up his thumb and forefinger an inch apart to describe how big the tanker is now.

Clearly, a false flag operation, and the NWO messed up and forgot to plant transport truck remnants around the area...

[Checkmite]

Here's what you do. You make sure to get the truck's unit number (these are assigned by the gasoline company which owns the truck). Then you call the company's fuel depot and explain that you want that truck (for example, Truck 9112001) delivered to a specific address. The manager will likely have been trained to respond with "that truck is destroyed" or "it burnt up on the freeway on Saturday", or something similar. So you respond, firmly stating again that you need that truck to go to a specific address. If the manager keeps insisting the truck was destroyed, indicate with authority that "the truck needs to be moved - some people know it wasn't destroyed and they are looking for it." Then we make sure we have the depot staked out, and watch. The truck will show up, guaranteed.

Then you will know the truth.

[Darth Rotor]

http://liveu-97.vo.llnwd.net/vidilife/image/2006/10/10/946639/1198597L.jpg

Proof it was teh Jooos.
How does one tell? Is that pillar circumcised?

DR

[Puggy]

http://liveu-97.vo.llnwd.net/vidilife/image/2006/10/10/946639/1198597L.jpg

Proof it was teh Jooos.

Not only that. If the "fire" was hot enough to destroy the overpass, how come those people are RIGHT there?!!!!!!1111

Also, there's no evidence of a "gasoline tanker". :jaw-dropp

[strathmeyer]

Are we sure there was actually a bridge there? I haven't read any first hand accounts of people who saw the bridge standing before the fire. For all we know, the government was supposed to build a bridge, but instead they just lit a fire there and dropped a lot of bridge rubble. You know what? That doesn't even look like American bridge rubble... It's obviously Iranian bridge rubble! I knew our government was working with those evil Iranians all along!

[gumboot]

How does one tell? Is that pillar circumcised?

DR



Look closely at the "firemen"... ;)

-Gumboot

[Civilized Worm]

How does one tell? Is that pillar circumcised?

DR


Look closely at the firefighters, it took me a few seconds to spot but then I LOLled.

[Apollo20]

Well this is what the Associated Press had to say about the Oakland Bridge incident which occurred at 3:45 a.m. today:

"8,600 gallons of gasoline ignited....flames rose 200 feet into the air ... (temperatures) exceeded 2750 degrees and caused the steel beams... to buckle AND BOLTS HOLDING THE STRUCTURE TOGETHER

TO MELT,

LEADING TO COLLAPSE"

I wonder if the bolts were GALVANIZED STEEL?

[~enigma~]

Well this is what the Associated Press had to say about the Oakland Bridge incident which occurred at 3:45 a.m. today:

"8,600 gallons of gasoline ignited....flames rose 200 feet into the air ... (temperatures) exceeded 2750 degrees and caused the steel beams... to buckle AND BOLTS HOLDING THE STRUCTURE TOGETHER

TO MELT,

LEADING TO COLLAPSE"

I wonder if the bolts were GALVANIZED STEEL?And again I say...where is waterboy and UL in all this?

[rwguinn]

Well this is what the Associated Press had to say about the Oakland Bridge incident which occurred at 3:45 a.m. today:

"8,600 gallons of gasoline ignited....flames rose 200 feet into the air ... (temperatures) exceeded 2750 degrees and caused the steel beams... to buckle AND BOLTS HOLDING THE STRUCTURE TOGETHER

TO MELT,

LEADING TO COLLAPSE"

I wonder if the bolts were GALVANIZED STEEL?
A-5-72 (aka A-36, just like the WTC) steel. Carbon steel. Not stainless (CRES)

How long does it take for your zinc embrittlement to occur in carbon steel (not stainless)?

[PhantomWolf]

(Temperatures) exceeded 2750 degrees and caused the steel beams... To buckle and bolts holding the structure together to melt

Ha...

From this page (http://www.tcforensic.com.au/docs/article10.html)

temperature of flame from burning petrol is 471°-560°C
Melting Point of Steel 1100°-1600°C

How can a petrol fire get to 2750°F when petrol burns at only 1040°F, 972° lower than it need to melt steel??!!!??!!!1!!!!1111!!!:jaw:

[beachnut]

Well this is what the Associated Press had to say about the Oakland Bridge incident which occurred at 3:45 a.m. today:

"8,600 gallons of gasoline ignited....flames rose 200 feet into the air ... (temperatures) exceeded 2750 degrees and caused the steel beams... to buckle AND BOLTS HOLDING THE STRUCTURE TOGETHER

TO MELT,

LEADING TO COLLAPSE"

I wonder if the bolts were GALVANIZED STEEL?Where did the paper get this from? Have you ever known a paper to get everything right?

[Graham2001]

It was a conspirisy! They was supposed to 3" rebar on 4' centers. The C4 coating powderized them!

I've never been able to understand that (not the C4 coating part), can we have the figures in metric? ;)

[~enigma~]

Ha...

From this page (http://www.tcforensic.com.au/docs/article10.html)




How can a petrol fire get to 2750°F when petrol burns at only 1040°F, 972° lower than it need to melt steel??!!!??!!!1!!!!1111!!!:jaw:
They don't know Fourier's law:

http://www.efunda.com/formulae/heat_transfer/conduction/images/fourier_law.gif

or

http://www.efunda.com/formulae/heat_transfer/conduction/images/heat_eqn.gif

let alone

Q = -hA(Ts – T)

And i am not going to tell them. Do you want to?

[rwguinn]

I've never been able to understand that (not the C4 coating part), can we have the figures in metric? ;)
76.2mm rebar on 1.2192 m centers! 111 eleventy one!

eta--oops--Meters ane m's, not M's
dadgummed SIU!

[parky76]

Please tell me they aren't talking about this at LC. Then again...should we expect any different?

[rwguinn]

They don't know Fourier's law:

http://www.efunda.com/formulae/heat_transfer/conduction/images/fourier_law.gif

or

http://www.efunda.com/formulae/heat_transfer/conduction/images/heat_eqn.gif

let alone

Q = -hA(Ts – T)

And i am not going to tell them. Do you want to?

Whatever you do, don't step in that. It sticks to your shoe and comes off on the carpet:D

[~enigma~]

Please tell me they aren't talking about this at LC. Then again...should we expect any different?
I would but that would be a lie.

[~enigma~]

Whatever you do, don't step in that. It sticks to your shoe and comes off on the carpet:D
Words of experience?

[rwguinn]

Words of experience?

Yeah--I know when I'm in over my head--unlike some people I could name, but won't.:p

[~enigma~]

Yeah--I know when I'm in over my head--unlike some people I could name, but won't.:p
You can name the Greek god...we won't laugh :)

[parky76]

Fire can't bring down a major structure...but wind can?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacoma_Narrows_Bridge#Collapse

[WildCat]

Here's what you do. You make sure to get the truck's unit number (these are assigned by the gasoline company which owns the truck). Then you call the company's fuel depot and explain that you want that truck (for example, Truck 9112001) delivered to a specific address. The manager will likely have been trained to respond with "that truck is destroyed" or "it burnt up on the freeway on Saturday", or something similar. So you respond, firmly stating again that you need that truck to go to a specific address. If the manager keeps insisting the truck was destroyed, indicate with authority that "the truck needs to be moved - some people know it wasn't destroyed and they are looking for it." Then we make sure we have the depot staked out, and watch. The truck will show up, guaranteed.

Then you will know the truth.
And you have to match the serial number of every single part of the truck to the one allegedly involved in the crash. WHY HASN'T THE NTSB DONE THIS?! WHAT ARE THEY HIDING?

[rwguinn]

Fire can't bring down a major structure...but wind can?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacoma_Narrows_Bridge#Collapse

Just to keep our Twoofers out, I'm gonna show you an equation that describes how a force vibration can get out of control: A=f(1/(wn^2-wf^2-2*z*wf*wn*j))
where wn is the natural frequency of the structure, wf is the frequency of the forcing function (turbulence shed off the bridge), and j=sqrt(-1)
as you can see, when wf=wn, all that keeps amplitude from being infinite is z, the damping factor. For that structure, that mode, z would be about 5-7% (0.05 to 0.07)...

[Crazy Chainsaw]

A-5-72 (aka A-36, just like the WTC) steel. Carbon steel. Not stainless (CRES)

How long does it take for your zinc embrittlement to occur in carbon steel (not stainless)?

http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/maney/mst/2005/00000021/00000009/art00016

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


I fail to see what Chromium Stainless steels have to do with a discussion of hydrogen Imbrittlement, in Galvanized steel because of the Chemical, and Electrical reaction of Zinc as an anode.

[LashL]

Well this is what the Associated Press had to say about the Oakland Bridge incident which occurred at 3:45 a.m. today:

"8,600 gallons of gasoline ignited....flames rose 200 feet into the air ... (temperatures) exceeded 2750 degrees and caused the steel beams... to buckle AND BOLTS HOLDING THE STRUCTURE TOGETHER

TO MELT,

LEADING TO COLLAPSE"

I wonder if the bolts were GALVANIZED STEEL?

I am not at all surprised that news outlets would publish such things, but I find it difficult to believe that AP could possibly know the temperature at which the fire burned. Surely, it is too early for any specific forensic investigatory results to be known at this stage.

(Of course, that has never stopped news outlets from publishing conjecture; or from misconstruing what they have been told; or from misquoting what they have been told; or from misinterpreting what they have been told; or from leaping to conclusions and misapplying what they have been told.)

[rwguinn]

http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/maney/mst/2005/00000021/00000009/art00016

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


I fail to see what Chromium Stainless steels have to do with a discussion of hydrogen Imbrittlement, in Galvanized steel because of the Chemical, and Electrical reaction of Zinc as an anode.
You went and lost me there, podner.
Zinc embrittlement occurs, according to the links of the good doctor, in CRES primarily, not carbon steels. This was pointed out by gravy (link) yet Apollo20 presents it as a fact for carbon steels (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2557948#post2557948)
My point is that even hydrogen embrittlement take time--hours-to-weeks depending on conditions. And it is a major, nasty process--quick, as such things go.
How long does it take for zinc embrittlement to occur in carbon steel, such that the reacton weakens very thick slabs of carbon steel, and is it quicker that the thermal weakening process?

[Crazy Chainsaw]

You went and lost me there, podner.
Zinc embrittlement occurs, according to the links of the good doctor, in CRES primarily, not carbon steels. This was pointed out by gravy (link) yet Apollo20 presents it as a fact for carbon steels (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2557948#post2557948)
My point is that even hydrogen embrittlement take time--hours-to-weeks depending on conditions. And it is a major, nasty process--quick, as such things go.
How long does it take for zinc embrittlement to occur in carbon steel, such that the reacton weakens very thick slabs of carbon steel, and is it quicker that the thermal weakening process?

In a High Acid environment, like in concrete with high sulfur levels, the reaction of the acid with zinc produces hydrogen Ion the metal absorbs them the amount of the acids and the temperature depend on the speed of the reaction.
It is a similar reaction to that of a Zinc Chloride battery.
I believe that Frank is confusing Zinc embrittlement with hydrogen embrittlement caused by Zinc which can be more rapid than zinc embrittlement because hydrogen can sneak in side the Crystals of the metals faster than the larger Zinc molecules.
To separate reactions one cause Zinc.

[rwguinn]

In a High Acid environment, like in concrete with high sulfur levels, the reaction of the acid with zinc produces hydrogen Ion the metal absorbs them the amount of the acids and the temperature depend on the speed of the reaction.
It is a similar reaction to that of a Zinc Chloride battery.
I believe that Frank is confusing Zinc embrittlement with hydrogen embrittlement caused by Zinc which can be more rapid than zinc embrittlement because hydrogen can sneak in side the Crystals of the metals faster than the larger Zinc molecules.
To separate reactions one cause Zinc.

I must take the blame here. Apollo20 never mentioned Hydrogen embrittlement--I did, as a comparison.
He went off on zinc embrittlement, as far as I can tell, as a likely contributor to the collapse of the towers.
I could be wrong, but I don't think so.

[Crazy Chainsaw]

I must take the blame here. Apollo20 never mentioned Hydrogen embrittlement--I did, as a comparison.
He went off on zinc embrittlement, as far as I can tell, as a likely contributor to the collapse of the towers.
I could be wrong, but I don't think so.

Normally hydrogen Embrittlement would take years because of the low hydrogen production in nature, but a fire and increasing the speed both of hydrogen product, and its reactions with metals as well as increased heating from its combustion certainly could have, and likely from the evidence did play a part in the collapses.

[rwguinn]

Normally hydrogen Embrittlement would take years because of the low hydrogen production in nature, but a fire and increasing the speed both of hydrogen product, and its reactions with metals as well as increased heating from its combustion certainly could have, and likely from the evidence did play a part in the collapses.

we're way off topic here. I answered you in the "what do the buildings have in common" (http://ttp://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=2562236#post2562236) thread-let's try to keep it there, so we can be consistent, ok?

[Apollo20]

How fast can zinc liqiud metal embrittlement, LME, occur?

LME-induced cracks propagate along grain boundaries at rates that may reach several meters per second if substantial amounts of elastic strain energy are present in the stressed solid, thus giving rise to descriptions of LME failure as "catastrophic brittle fracture."

Studies have shown that ferritic steels are susceptible to LME by molten zinc at temperatures of 450 deg C, while austenitic steels require temperatures of 750 deg C.

See "The Technical Lessons of Flixborough" The Chemical Engineer, April 1976.

[Civilized Worm]

Fire can't bring down a major structure...but wind can?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacoma_Narrows_Bridge#Collapse


Wind? Or a SECRET GOVERNMENT WEATHER CONTROL DEVICE!

[rwguinn]

How fast can zinc liqiud metal embrittlement, LME, occur?

LME-induced cracks propagate along grain boundaries at rates that may reach several meters per second if substantial amounts of elastic strain energy are present in the stressed solid, thus giving rise to descriptions of LME failure as "catastrophic brittle fracture."

Studies have shown that ferritic steels are susceptible to LME by molten zinc at temperatures of 450 deg C, while austenitic steels require temperatures of 750 deg C.

See "The Technical Lessons of Flixborough" The Chemical Engineer, April 1976.
OK, that's the crack propigation rate in already embrittled steel. It says nothing about th embrittlement rate. P_leas don't confuse the two.
Now, at 750C, what is the penetration rate of Liquid metalic zinc into the steel at that temperature, which by the way is now at <60% of its original strength due to temperature effects?
second, how is this liquid metalic zinc getting into/onto the vertical support columns, which are at the ends of the floor pans, which pans are visibly and logicaly sagging in the middle? Unless you can show that unlike other fluids, Liquid metalic zinc flows against gravity, you need to show a mechanism.
Again, I am not doubting that these reactions occurred. I am simply having a great deal of difficulty visualizing the volume of reactants required, the mechanism for the occurance, and how they would be greater in effect than the thermal strength reduction

[nicepants]

I received an anonymous e-mail from "Mike B" who was at the scene and said he heard a countdown from 20 to 0 right before the collapse.

He is afraid to go public, for safety reasons.

[Apollo20]

RWGUINN:

Please read up on the Flixborough Disaster and all will be revealed.

Or you could ask Gravy who appears to be very knowledgeable on LME...

[rwguinn]

RWGUINN:

Please read up on the Flixborough Disaster and all will be revealed.

Or you could ask Gravy who appears to be very knowledgeable on LME...
Nice diversion! Absolutly perfect non sequitur (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_sequitur)!
Ok, so you have oxidation of cyclohexane, which afik was not present at the bridge, WTC 1, 2 or 7, a temporary (http://www.hse.gov.uk/comah/sragtech/caseflixboroug74.htm) bypass pipe (20") designed by inexperienced engineers, with insufficient analysis and testing, bursting under high pressure, releasing a flamable gas, which ispersed in a cloud(being denser than air), and which was ignited by some source.
This relates to any of the Buildings/bridges/structuresundeer discussion in what way? Where is the H2 or Zn embrittlement? Where is the 750 degree ambient temperature it takes to form the gas.
I think we all know that has the ignition source been at the point of pipe rupture and operating at the time of rupture, there would have been no explosion.
Thishappens with reasonable frequency with gas stoves and water heaters in homes. The gas is leaking, collects, reaches the pilot light, and boom!

[Puggy]

Guys, guys, guys!!11

Don't Let Science Get In The Way. 4/28 Was An Inside Job!!!!!!!1111!

[kookbreaker]

Or you could ask Gravy who appears to be very knowledgeable on LME...

What the heck is it with this childish mad-on against Gravy?

[rwguinn]

Nice diversion! Absolutly perfect non sequitur (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_sequitur)!
<<snip diescription of disaster>>

I'm sorry--I was thinking non sequitur in the sense of the absurd.
What Apollo20 did was lay a red herring (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring) at our feet

[Apollo20]

"This was pointed out by gravy (link) yet Apollo20 presents it as a fact for carbon steels..."

RWGUINN: Please go to a Science Library and do a REAL search on LME.

Otherwise you are wasting my time!

[rwguinn]

"This was pointed out by gravy (link) yet Apollo20 presents it as a fact for carbon steels..."

RWGUINN: Please go to a Science Library and do a REAL search on LME.

Otherwise you are wasting my time!
No, Doctor--if you truly are one-
You are wasting ours.
You drag a red herring across the path in an attempt to confuse us with irrelevance, refuse to address questions and concerns pointed at your hypothesis, cannot describe any mechanism by which your hypothesis could be true, cannot point to any evidence (in the case under discussion) that could support your hypothesis, and you accuse others of wasting your time?

I am reminded of th physics prof I had in college who tried to flunk the engineers because we used the Law of Cosines in a vector analysis problem. "It isn't a 90 degree angle!" he claimed. We had to go to the Dean of the department to get it corrected. Next semester he as teaching "Philosophy of Physics"
Grow up, sir. Act like a scientist. either support your hypothesis, modify it, or abandon it.

(oh--I guess it would also help if you clarly stated your hypothesis, too)

[~enigma~]

Does this argument remind anybody else of a three stooges episode? Cmon guys....what the hell does your pissing match have to do with anything in this thread?

[Apollo20]

Oh Aptly Named RGUINN:

Others?

No, I said YOU were wasting my time!
Please read up on the Flixborough Disaster!
I have given you a reference; have you read the article?
From your last few posts it suggests you haven't...

[~enigma~]

Does this argument remind anybody else of a three stooges episode? Cmon guys....what the hell does your pissing match have to do with anything in this thread?

[rwguinn]

Oh Aptly Named RGUINN:

Others?

No, I said YOU were wasting my time!
Please read up on the Flixborough Disaster!
I have given you a reference; have you read the article?
From your last few posts it suggests you haven't...

No--you did not provide a link. I looked it up, and I gave you a link to the official report.
I am done with a "Scientist" who cannot even state his hypothesis, much less show any evidence in support, or provide any mechanism for its actuality.
I call troll.
so, ~enigma~
you can get back to whatever it is you object to.

[Gravy]

RWGUINN:

Please read up on the Flixborough Disaster and all will be revealed.

Or you could ask Gravy who appears to be very knowledgeable on LME...Yes, I came across the Flixborough incident (http://shippai.jst.go.jp/en/Detail?fn=0&id=CB1058048&). It concerns zinc embrittlement of stainless steel. Your point?

[rwguinn]

Oh Aptly Named RGUINN:

Others?

No, I said YOU were wasting my time!
Please read up on the Flixborough Disaster!
I have given you a reference; have you read the article?
From your last few posts it suggests you haven't...
Ok, whomever you are.
Zinc embrittlement can occur in Stainless steel under 6.5 ksi stress and at a temperature of 800C in a matter of seconds. Thank you, gravy, for the extra link the doctor did not provide and insisted he did.
The situation remains the same. Poor design, poor analysis, no testing led to failure. To state that zinc embrittlement caused the failure would be a stretch. It was a contributor to the failure, but not the reason for the failure.
And no relationship to the towers or bridge, which were A-36 steel, not stainless steel. In other words, a red herring.
G'bye, doc. write when you can tell us what your hypothesis actually is.

[sackett]

Okay, knock it off! I confess! I zapped the %@$&*+ overpass with an early type of hi-energy beam we were working on across the Bay in Berkeley. This was back in 1965/66. There may have been some beers involved, maybe a wierd cigarette, so what's the big deal?

Goddamn time-warp. Somebody should fix those %@$&*+ things.

And I am not now nor have I ever been Jewish, except for one time at band camp.

[WildCat]

No--you did not provide a link. I looked it up, and I gave you a link to the official report.
I am done with a "Scientist" who cannot even state his hypothesis, much less show any evidence in support, or provide any mechanism for its actuality.
I call troll.
:bigclap

Like I said before - Apollo20 is a chemist trying to solve an engineering problem. And when the only tool you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

The bridge collapse shows that nothing more than heat is needed to weaken steel sufficiently, in fact it started to sag within 20 minutes of the crash. Nothing Apollo20 has cited could possible act that quickly, and it would take an extraordinary set of circumstances to occur at all, let alone 3 times in one day in 3 separate fires.

[~enigma~]

No--you did not provide a link. I looked it up, and I gave you a link to the official report.
I am done with a "Scientist" who cannot even state his hypothesis, much less show any evidence in support, or provide any mechanism for its actuality.
I call troll.
so, ~enigma~
you can get back to whatever it is you object to.
Thank you :)

[uk_dave]

Thank you :)

You banned at LCF yet? :D

[~enigma~]

You banned at LCF yet? :D
No...

[rwguinn]

:bigclap

Like I said before - Apollo20 is a chemist trying to solve an engineering problem. And when the only tool you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

The bridge collapse shows that nothing more than heat is needed to weaken steel sufficiently, in fact it started to sag within 20 minutes of the crash. Nothing Apollo20 has cited could possible act that quickly, and it would take an extraordinary set of circumstances to occur at all, let alone 3 times in one day in 3 separate fires.
What he has failed topoint out in all his dodging and ducking is that the Fitzborough plant worked just fine for 2 months before the failure--which was due to increased pressure. Re-reading the report--the temperature of the system was ~155C under operating conditions. The split in the CRES bellows was determined to be post-fire, not pre-fire:
The cause of this split is as follows. A leak occurred as a result of two loose bolts at a flange on the non-return valve, located near the 50in. (1270mm) split. This leak gave rise to an accumulation of oxidizable residues in the lagging and spontaneous combustion or a spray which was ignited by induced elctrostatic charges; the result being a flame directed into the inside of an 8in. (203mm) bend. It was assumed that the 50in. (1270mm) split occurred by zinc embrittlement and creep cavitation at high temperatures. This assumption was later confirmed by a metallurgical investigation showing that zinc embrittlement on austenitic stainless steel at a temperature of between 800 and 900 degree C could occur in a pipe under a stress of 3.21ton/sq.in. (48.8N/sq.mm) within a few seconds."
Since the as-designed reaction never reached nywhere near 800C, this certainly was not the caause--
Aand, WTC 1, 2, 7, and the bridge didn not use any stainles steel in their construction.(and you wouldn't use mere CRES at those temps, anyway--or I wouldnt--Inconel, maybe...)

[~enigma~]

What he has failed topoint out in all his dodging and ducking is that the Fitzborough plant worked just fine for 2 months before the failure--which was due to increased pressure. Re-reading the report--the temperature of the system was ~155C under operating conditions. The split in the CRES bellows was determined to be post-fire, not pre-fire:
Since the as-designed reaction never reached nywhere near 800C, this certainly was not the caause--
Aand, WTC 1, 2, 7, and the bridge didn not use any stainles steel in their construction.(and you wouldn't use mere CRES at those temps, anyway--or I wouldnt--Inconel, maybe...)
please...could we drop the pissing contest. It's a bridge for christ sake...

[rwguinn]

please...could we drop the pissing contest. It's a bridge for christ sake...

If you think that defining a hypothesis, claiming expertise, claiming analogies where none exist, and pointing out shortcomings in the science of a self-proclaimed scientist is a pissing contest, then no, I won't quit.

[uk_dave]

What he has failed topoint out in all his dodging and ducking is that the Fitzborough plant worked just fine for 2 months before the failure--which was due to increased pressure. Re-reading the report--the temperature of the system was ~155C under operating conditions. The split in the CRES bellows was determined to be post-fire, not pre-fire:
Since the as-designed reaction never reached nywhere near 800C, this certainly was not the caause--
Aand, WTC 1, 2, 7, and the bridge didn not use any stainles steel in their construction.(and you wouldn't use mere CRES at those temps, anyway--or I wouldnt--Inconel, maybe...)

Isn't Apollo20's contention that the official account is wrong and that only a handful of unbiased, truly independant scientists have the balls to come up with another hypothesis and the government had better damn well include them on any future investigatory panel or they'll sqweem and sqweem until they are sthick?

[~enigma~]

If you think that defining a hypothesis, claiming expertise, claiming analogies where none exist, and pointing out shortcomings in the science of a self-proclaimed scientist is a pissing contest, then no, I won't quit.
You can be the bigger man though...is that too much to ask?

[kookbreaker]

I couldn't tell if this was posted already, but I suppose it was inevitable.

Much stupid: http://stopthelie.com/freeway_collapse.html

[rwguinn]

You can be the bigger man though...is that too much to ask?
You mean that by ignoring junk science, bald assertions, and unsupported hypotheses, I am being a better person? Sounds like "Ignore it and it will go away", which never works.
Besides, I am genuinely interested in the actual science here, if not the cryptology of CC and Apollo20.
I would love to find out where they are going, and what they think happened that simple structural damage, deformation, and loading don't explain. How much volume of chemicals is required? How long does it take? Where is all this data coming from.
I will ask pointed questions. I will not allow unsupported assertions to just lie there, and I certainly won't be drawn off by a red herring, if I can help it.

[FactCheck]

Ha...

From this page (http://www.tcforensic.com.au/docs/article10.html)




How can a petrol fire get to 2750°F when petrol burns at only 1040°F, 972° lower than it need to melt steel??!!!??!!!1!!!!1111!!!:jaw:I see reporters are just as lazy as they were on 9/11...

He's a good reporter...

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=80850

[HeyLeroy]

How does one tell? Is that pillar circumcised?
DR
Look closely at the "firemen"... ;)
-Gumboot

http://liveu-33.vo.llnwd.net/vidilife/image/2006/10/10/946639/1199133L.jpg

Those aren't diamond merchants...

[Mangoose]

Check out the video of the collapse: http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=local&id=5255492

[Unsecured Coins]

damage control from Woo Central!

Comment: Debunkers are already using this to attack the 9/11 truth movement in claiming that this explains the collapse of the towers and WTC 7. Syndicated radio host Neil Boortz attacked Alex Jones this morning, claiming that this refutes the controlled demolition hypothesis. In reality, the freeway collapse is completely different and the comparison is ridiculous.
I can already hear defenders of the official account screaming "See, fire can cause a steel structure to collapse-the bridge collapsed!"
Comparing the circumstances surrounding the fire and subsequent partial collapse of this bridge to the circumstances surrounding the fires and subsequent complete collapse of the towers and WTC 7 is flawed from end to end. This fact should be obvious to most people; but let's point out a few things just in case they weren't already noticed.
1. This was an open air environment where flames were able to reach their absolute maximum temperature; white-hot and shooting upwards of 200 feet in the air.
http://prisonplanet.com/images/april2007/300407freeway1.jpg
2. Those 200 foot flames were acting on a single support truss that was fastened to the two columns pictured here. That truss (and the connectors that fastened it to the columns) represents a small fraction of the steel that would have been found on a single floor of the towers or WTC 7. So again, far more heat focused on a single truss and no way to redistribute the load once that truss was weakened.
http://prisonplanet.com/images/april2007/300407freeway2.jpg
3. You'll notice that despite the intense fires ability to weaken the truss and connectors that there is NO mention of molten metal in the debris. Also, unlike the debris of the towers and WTC 7, it's not likely we're going to hear anything about thermate (specifically used to destroy steel columns) in the bridge debris.
http://prisonplanet.com/images/april2007/300407freeway3.jpg
4. You'll notice that the concrete roadway that "pancaked down" on the roadway below did not cause the lower freeway to collapse. Nor has the concrete disintegrated into a fine powder.
5. You'll notice the columns were not torn down by the collapse, nor did they evaporate into thin air, rather they are still standing (having only lost the the truss and connectors that held the roadway to them.)
http://prisonplanet.com/images/april2007/300407freeway4.jpg
So to quickly recap:
White-hot 200 foot flames acting on a single truss (and no ability to redistribute the load once weakened.)
No molten metal and certainly no thermate found
No column failure
No evaporation / pulverization of concrete
No "pancake collapse"
-Ending with a paragraph from The 1-hour Guide to 9/11.
For the record, few in the scientific community doubt that it's theoretically possible for a building to experience failure if it is subjected to devastating heat for a sufficient period of time. And additional factors like no fire-proofing, no sprinkler systems, insufficient steel to "bleed off" heat or inferior construction greatly increase the possibility. However, what is "doubted" (or more accurately; considered downright impossible) is that such a failure would resemble anything like what was witnessed on 9/11. -Gradual, isolated, asymmetrical failures spread out over time; perhaps -simultaneous disintegration of all load bearing columns (leaving a pile of neatly folded rubble a few stories high) -no way.

[noblecaboose]

damage control from Woo Central!



Where can I find a nice, gigantic pile of concrete and melted steel to bang my head into?

Oh hey, here's one by my house!

::BANG:: ::BANG::

[aggle-rithm]

This was an open air environment where flames were able to reach their absolute maximum temperature; white-hot and shooting upwards of 200 feet in the air.

That's why steel is smelted in an open-air environment. ;)

[Boone 870]

Wake up people!!! 4/28 was an inside job!!!


Who at the California Department of Transportation ordered a standdown? Clearly, the California Highway Patrol had cruisers on standby for emergencies and yet, the speeding tanker truck passed by all the radars allowing it to ram into the concrete (reinforced steel) overpass!

I have yet to see any evidence that it was in fact a tanker truck at all! Could it have been a SUV? A small hybrid car? What about the C-Dot cameras that were facing the overpass? Why won't they just release all the videos and put this theory to rest? Just asking questions?

[~enigma~]

You mean that by ignoring junk science, bald assertions, and unsupported hypotheses, I am being a better person? Sounds like "Ignore it and it will go away", which never works.
Besides, I am genuinely interested in the actual science here, if not the cryptology of CC and Apollo20.
I would love to find out where they are going, and what they think happened that simple structural damage, deformation, and loading don't explain. How much volume of chemicals is required? How long does it take? Where is all this data coming from.
I will ask pointed questions. I will not allow unsupported assertions to just lie there, and I certainly won't be drawn off by a red herring, if I can help it.
You can do what you want dude...chill. I'm just saying that if we don't feed Apollo, he will stop. This is a bridge not 9/11 nor is it a conspiracy. Also, I really doubt NIST will bother with a multi-year study on this.

[Checkmite]

Note to Troofers:

No. We aren't seriously using, or even considering the freeway collapse as genuine evidence against the various crackpot "controlled demolition" allegations. There has, since Day One, been a bottomless fount of real scientific evidence which satisfies that need.

We're just using the freeway collapse to make fun of you.

[Apollo20]

ENIGMA/RWGUINN:
I confess to being mystified by your approach on the JREF. I welcome hearing you question any statement I've made, and I certainly don't mind being corrected by you on a scientific matter. But, when you reproach me, I have to wonder...........

[boloboffin]

ENIGMA/RWGUINN:
I confess to being mystified by your approach on the JREF. I welcome hearing you question any statement I've made, and I certainly don't mind being corrected by you on a scientific matter. But, when you reproach me, I have to wonder...........

Dr. Greening, are there any stores near your house that sell mirrors?

[Piggy]

You people are so gullible.

Bush and his henchmen know the Truthers are knocking on their door.

They have to do something to discredit the 9/11 Truth movement. Or else, they're all gonna be exposed.

So they orchestrated this "fire" and "collapse" just so people like you will be fooled -- AGAIN!

I mean, really -- no one dies?! C'mon!

This was all a setup.

And you people bought it, hook, line, and sinker.

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[FactCheck]

The highway collapse doesn't prove the towers collapsed by fire. They just don't get it. It proves fire weakens steel well below the melting point.

All they have are straw men.

[PhantomWolf]

ENIGMA/RWGUINN:
I confess to being mystified by your approach on the JREF. I welcome hearing you question any statement I've made, and I certainly don't mind being corrected by you on a scientific matter. But, when you reproach me, I have to wonder...........

Well to be honest I am mystified by your approach here. I have corresponded with scientists and engineers on these boards (well more specifically BAUT and ApolloHoax) and always found them to explain their ideas not only in great depth but with a clarity that allows for even the least educated layman to attempt an understanding of where they are coming from. Be it a geologist, a mechanical engineer, a chemist, a physicist, or an aerospace engineer, they all have a similar pattern in their posting in trying to be as informative as possible.

I have found the same here, with many of those that know the topics able to produce posts containing vast amounts of information that is both enlightening and easy to read, even for those that haven't delved into the topic previous. I've always stated that the hard part isn't getting a scientist to talk, it's getting them to shut-up about things.

However, you are totally different, I might as well trying to pull hen's teeth rather than to try and get you to say anything. Trying to make my way through your posts is like trying to play pin the tail on the donkey when the donkey is in another city. You are evasive and refuse to actually commit yourself to a line of reasoning or make yourself clear in the least. Playing cryptic games really doesn't help here. Now sure, you might not be interested in handing everything to people on a silver platter, and fair enough, everyone should indeed think for themselves rather then following along dogmatically, but what you're doing currently ranks right up there with posting a random Apollo images and saying "See they faked it." Would you write a paper you wanted to publish in the same way as you have been posting here? I seriously doubt that.

Now I'm not saying that you need to treat everyone as ignorant laymen, there are a lot of qualified people on this board, but playing "guess what I'm thinking" while sniping in one sentence posts will do nothing but get people's backs up. If you want to lay your cards on the table, put your ideas out, with supporting evidence, and have us discuss it like rational human beings of supposed intelligence, then great, lets do it, no one is going to steal your ideas and claim them as our own. If on the other hand you're planning to keep acting like a troll, well I'm afraid that's what you'll be treated like.

[Apollo20]

Well, Bolboboffin and Phantomwoof:

Touche!

All I hear is:

There can't be any chemical effects because NIST say so..........

YAWN

[boloboffin]

Well, Bolboboffin and Phantomwoof:

Touche!

All I hear is:

There can't be any chemical effects because NIST say so..........

YAWN

How silly. I don't think those words even appeared in my post to you. I suggest that you are importing the meanings that you think you hear in my post. It seems to be exhausting work for you - perhaps you should stop.

[Brainster]

Rosie O'Donnell still thinks she was right (http://www.rosie.com/blog/2007/04/30/monday-again/), (Click on the video blog if you have a strong enough stomach) because the bridge didn't have 25 central columns like WTC 7 did. And it didn't come down at free fall speed (sic). Of course, it seems to come down quite rapidly indeed, easily breaking through the next level. But Rosie has a comeback: It also didn't pulverize the concrete.

:eek:

ETA: Anybody know if the report of steel melting is just an assumption or a conclusion? I note that the original source for the temperature of the fire claimed that it exceeded 2750 F, but I'm wondering if he just assumed the steel melted and therefore that's how hot it had to be?

[PhantomWolf]

Well, Bolboboffin and Phantomwoof:

Touche!

All I hear is:

There can't be any chemical effects because NIST say so..........

YAWN

Show us where anyone here as said that? If you can't find it then you're obviously hearing things. I for one am interested in your ideas because I'm a chemist (analytical but still...) and I want to see where you're going, but I'm not at all interested in wadding through the mire to get anywhere. I did think that we might have started getting somewhere on the iron spherical issue, but then you left and nothing was resolved. I'm very happy to get into a serious discussion, but all this sniping and acting childish really isn't helping.

[kookbreaker]

Well, Bolboboffin and Phantomwoof:

Touche!

All I hear is:

There can't be any chemical effects because NIST say so..........

YAWN

I would defy you to find anywhere where anyone says this. This is something you have invented out of whole cloth, and obscured by acting as if everyone should know the play and players from day one. You insult this forum, you insutlt he intelligent folks here, all without cause or reason, and all based on an assumption that is purely your own.

Nobody here has said "There can't be any chemical effects because NIST say so..........", in fact going through your old threads 99% of the problem is that you are making a huge fuss about these 'chemical effects' and fail utterly to disclose the major signifigance of them and why there are no alternative explanations! This is partly from you flippant attitude, partly from your dropping one-or-two line posts and expecting everyone else to understand immediately what it is that you are talking about.

Greening, you are supposed to be a professional and a scholar. Right now I would have a hard time discerning you from a repeat sock-puppet of a troll we have arond these parts. Is this seriusly any way for someone with your skills to behave? Making unfounded accusations and repeating unexplained complaints? That's childishness! If this is how you behave in real life I can imagine that its no surprise your complaints to other professionals have gotten nowhere.

Seriously. Stop acknowledging 'touches' like PhantomWolf's and start LISTENING to what they are trying to tell you! You acknowledge his complaint in your first sentence and then promptly ignore his advice in the remainder of your post with taunting trollish antics.

I should not have to say the following to someone with as much academic credentials as you, and who is also probably many years my senior: Grow up.

[~enigma~]

Well, Bolboboffin and Phantomwoof:

Touche!

All I hear is:

There can't be any chemical effects because NIST say so..........

YAWN
where did they say that or are you under the impression that because NIST didn't address it they mean it never happened? Also, do you know what a strawman argument is?

[Graham2001]

[CT THINK]
The conspiracy is real!

Check out the 'evidence' (http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php?p=977995#post977995) here;)

[/CT THINK]

[LashL]

[CT THINK]
The conspiracy is real!

Check out the 'evidence' (http://www.bautforum.com/showthread.php?p=977995#post977995) here;)

[/CT THINK]

I was JUST about to post that photo when I saw your post! (I saw it on a different forum than the one you linked to but it cracked me up, too :D )



http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/thum_111034636ab848e1ae.jpg

429truth.org - bwahahahahaha!

[jaydeehess]

Originally Posted by Apollo20 :
Well this is what the Associated Press had to say about the Oakland Bridge incident which occurred at 3:45 a.m. today:

"8,600 gallons of gasoline ignited....flames rose 200 feet into the air ... (temperatures) exceeded 2750 degrees and caused the steel beams... to buckle AND BOLTS HOLDING THE STRUCTURE TOGETHER

TO MELT,

LEADING TO COLLAPSE"

I wonder if the bolts were GALVANIZED STEEL?
A-5-72 (aka A-36, just like the WTC) steel. Carbon steel. Not stainless (CRES)

How long does it take for your zinc embrittlement to occur in carbon steel (not stainless)?

Ok, one has to understand how a journalist thinks.
They gather information only to the point where they believe they can draw conclusions.

info;
-Steel melts at 2750o
-Bridge truss sagged and collapsed in a fire
THUS the fire was 2750o or higher.

Dr. Greening seems to be on the same track as in his explosive fire retardant posts in another thread. Just like playing with the plebe's minds do you Dr.?

Once again with a little knowledge one can come up with many a theory to explain this collapse.
IIRC one theory regarding the towers was eutectic melting caused by the presence of sulfur. Well this was a busy highway and automobile exhaust emmissions contain sulfur compounds. At any rate there would be a coating of residue from exhaust of millions of vehicles on the steel. This was also in an area that would have sea spray present at times with all the attendant residue inherant with that.. One could concoct a theory that any of several elements and compounds in the residue resulted in eutectic action, embrittlement, catalytic reactions creating localized higher temps.,,,,,,,,,,,,,

oh, and of course if the bolts holding the whole she-bang together were galvinized then all one need do is show that they snapped .

[Mangoose]

I didn't mention this above, but if you check out the link you will see video of the sagging in the concrete-steel that immediately preceded the collapse, as well as the collapse itself when the sagging section broke free and fell.

[Travis]

I confess. I've been stuck on that freeway so many times that I've accrued acrimony against it of staggering proportions. Normally I do not oversee NWO fire and rescue operations so what a surprise when, early that morning, I was consulted on what to do. I remember getting a call from the fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of tanker trucks already, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and we watched the overpass collapse.

[Brainster]

I confess. I've been stuck on that freeway so many times that I've accrued acrimony against it of staggering proportions. Normally I do not oversee NWO fire and rescue operations so what a surprise when, early that morning, I was consulted on what to do. I remember getting a call from the fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of tanker trucks already, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and we watched the overpass collapse.

The first Merry Pason confession (http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2007/02/case-of-casual-confessor.html) of the 4-29 attack!

[Travis]

The first Merry Pason confession (http://screwloosechange.blogspot.com/2007/02/case-of-casual-confessor.html) of the 4-29 attack!

Merry Pason ?:confused:

Did you mean Perry Mason (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perry_Mason_%28TV_series%29)?

[~enigma~]

Merry Pason ?:confused:

Did you mean Perry Mason (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perry_Mason_%28TV_series%29)?
Go to the link in Brainster's post then sit in the corner wearing a dunce cap for 30 minutes :)

ETA - Some people miss everything...

[MRC_Hans]

Yawn. Well somebody's gotta do it:

damage control from Woo Central!

Comment: Debunkers are already using this to attack the 9/11 truth movement in claiming that this explains the collapse of the towers and WTC 7. Syndicated radio host Neil Boortz attacked Alex Jones this morning, claiming that this refutes the controlled demolition hypothesis. In reality, the freeway collapse is completely different and the comparison is ridiculous.
I can already hear defenders of the official account screaming "See, fire can cause a steel structure to collapse-the bridge collapsed!"

And that is what it shows. CT ers have been saying: "No steel structure has ever collapsed ue to fire", conviniently ignoring the many examples where they have. Well fellows, here is another example. Deal with it.

Comparing the circumstances surrounding the fire and subsequent partial collapse of this bridge to the circumstances surrounding the fires and subsequent complete collapse of the towers and WTC 7 is flawed from end to end.

There are a number of differences, yes. We are not the ones making generalized statements, however.


This fact should be obvious to most people; but let's point out a few things just in case they weren't already noticed.
1. This was an open air environment where flames were able to reach their absolute maximum temperature; white-hot and shooting upwards of 200 feet in the air.


Wrong. An open air environment is not the environment where you get the highest temperatures, exactly because it is open; heat is lost to the surroundings at a tremendous rate, and the in-rushing air cools the fire.

2. Those 200 foot flames were acting on a single support truss that was fastened to the two columns pictured here.

Wrong. That truss was not 200 ft in the air. The 200ft flames (probably a reporter exaggeration, btw, none of the pictures show flames of that size) indicate heat lost from the centre of the fire, where the truss was.


That truss (and the connectors that fastened it to the columns) represents a small fraction of the steel that would have been found on a single floor of the towers or WTC 7.


That truss was dimensioned to carry a much higher load than any steel member of the WTC.

So again, far more heat focused on a single truss and no way to redistribute the load once that truss was weakened.

The redistribution notion is nonsense. Steel is a fairly poor heat conductor, as metals go. So poor that a steel bar can be white hot in one end and cool enough to touch in the other.

3. You'll notice that despite the intense fires ability to weaken the truss and connectors that there is NO mention of molten metal in the debris.

Because, unlike the WTC, once the fuel fire burned out, there was no combustible material left.


Also, unlike the debris of the towers and WTC 7, it's not likely we're going to hear anything about thermate (specifically used to destroy steel columns) in the bridge debris.


We also did not hear of any thermate in the WTC debris. I know CTers try to claim various sulphur traces and slag is thermate residue, but to bring down the WTC buildings, tons of thermate would have been needed. Thermate works on a more or less pound to pound basis, that is, to melt a pound of steel, you need a pound of thermate, so if the WTC buildings were brought down by thermate, there would have to be hundreds of tons of it.

4. You'll notice that the concrete roadway that "pancaked down" on the roadway below did not cause the lower freeway to collapse. Nor has the concrete disintegrated into a fine powder.

There IS a difference between the behaviour of a two-storey structure and a 110 (or 47) storey structure. Do I need to explain the differences?


5. You'll notice the columns were not torn down by the collapse, nor did they evaporate into thin air, rather they are still standing (having only lost the the truss and connectors that held the roadway to them.)


And. What, in the WTC, evaporated into thin air (documentation required)?

Hans

[Travis]

Go to the link in Brainster's post then sit in the corner wearing a dunce cap for 30 minutes :)

Done and done, did some penance lashes too. Hope that will suffice.

ETA - Some people miss everything...

Actually I overlooked that there was a link in Brainster's post. I must be more tired than I thought.

[Apollo20]

Galvanized bolts may be used on bridges but they are NOT recommended for high temperature applications (See ASTM A325 or A490 Bolt Specification) because of possible zinc embrittlement.

By the way, did NIST do any surface/XRF/Auger analysis of WTC bolts, floor pans, floor concrete?

[rwguinn]

Galvanized bolts may be used on bridges but they are NOT recommended for high temperature applications (See ASTM A325 or A490 Bolt Specification) because of possible zinc embrittlement.

By the way, did NIST do any surface/XRF/Auger analysis of WTC bolts, floor pans, floor concrete?

Ok, I consulted with my brother, who has done bridge design for a company in texas for 20-some years. He's only an Civil engineer, not a chemist, but he does specifications.
Galvanized steel is generally not used in bridge construction. There are many reasons, but one must also consider that galvanization is a surface condition, and it can crack, leading to hidden corrosion, and that is a bad thing.
I would like to hear/see Crazy Chainsaw's galvanized steel test set-up, and I would also like to know more about the timing, distribution and quantity of the steel-zinc spheroids around WTC.
Nowhere have I doubted that the reactions described in total lack of detail do not occur. My question is in the time factor. We know that steel heated loses strength rapidly. Dr. G's apparent contention is that the chemical effects are great enough to be a major contributer. I see in the list of folks involved with the NIST report several fire safety experts.
Has anyone contacted them (Yes, I'm looking at you, Apollo20) to see if those things were considered?
As far as hydrogen release and burning go, I am still not convinced that the additional heat gained from the hydrogen is greater that that required to actually liberate the hydrogen. I need more on this.
So far, nothing anyone has said, without any evidence, or even theoretical equations, to back it up, has done anything to convince me that chemical reactions were of any great importance in any of the collapses under discussion.

[Apollo20]

The chemical energy released by the reactions of iron and zinc with HCl and O2 on the fire-affected floors of WTC 1 & 2 was about ten times LARGER than the potential energy released by the first one story drop of the upper section of WTC 1. So the CHEMICAL energies liberated in the WTC collapse were far larger than the gravitational energies.

And no one has answered my question about NIST's analysis of bolts and concrete, yet I have been assured NIST found no evidence for embrittlement.

And we haven't even talked about embrittlement of the welds.

And finally, I HAVE contacted NIST and been completely ignored!

Other scientists have, however, been most helpful including Profs Bazant, Cahill, and Barnett, etc, etc...

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Ok, I consulted with my brother, who has done bridge design for a company in texas for 20-some years. He's only an Civil engineer, not a chemist, but he does specifications.
Galvanized steel is generally not used in bridge construction. There are many reasons, but one must also consider that galvanization is a surface condition, and it can crack, leading to hidden corrosion, and that is a bad thing.
I would like to hear/see Crazy Chainsaw's galvanized steel test set-up, and I would also like to know more about the timing, distribution and quantity of the steel-zinc spheroids around WTC.
Nowhere have I doubted that the reactions described in total lack of detail do not occur. My question is in the time factor. We know that steel heated loses strength rapidly. Dr. G's apparent contention is that the chemical effects are great enough to be a major contributer. I see in the list of folks involved with the NIST report several fire safety experts.
Has anyone contacted them (Yes, I'm looking at you, Apollo20) to see if those things were considered?
As far as hydrogen release and burning go, I am still not convinced that the additional heat gained from the hydrogen is greater that that required to actually liberate the hydrogen. I need more on this.
So far, nothing anyone has said, without any evidence, or even theoretical equations, to back it up, has done anything to convince me that chemical reactions were of any great importance in any of the collapses under discussion.

The metal is the energy source, as is the Oxygen in the air the Hydrogen is just the way to get the energy out of the metal. Eventually the metal reacts on its own with steam to produce hydrogen and heat. If the metal get hot enough it can also burn spontaneously like in a chimney effect.

[rikzilla]

http://img399.imageshack.us/img399/718/429truth3fi5.jpg

WAKE UP TEH SHEEPLE!!!!!!!1111

[rwguinn]

The chemical energy released by the reactions of iron and zinc with HCl and O2 on the fire-affected floors of WTC 1 & 2 was about ten times LARGER than the potential energy released by the first one story drop of the upper section of WTC 1. So the CHEMICAL energies liberated in the WTC collapse were far larger than the gravitational energies.
You and Crazy Chainsaw keep asserting this, but when asked about volumes and concentrations,as well as origins of the HCl, there is silence.
How much HCl gas do you figure was generated, and why, with a great roaring fire down below, did it stick around with all those broken windows to exit from?

Secondly, with the sulfur noted in the piles, why would not the sulfur burn, and the combustion products mix with all that water, forming sulfuric acid, which has a much stronger effect on carbon steel than HCl does?

And no one has answered my question about NIST's analysis of bolts and concrete, yet I have been assured NIST found no evidence for embrittlement.
NIST also did not mention the lack of evidence of laser cutting, thermonuclear devices, pink pixies, or invading aliens from somewhere in Orion.
The facts are what they are. You state what is there, not what is not.


And we haven't even talked about embrittlement of the welds.

And finally, I HAVE contacted NIST and been completely ignored!

Other scientists have, however, been most helpful including Profs Bazant, Cahill, and Barnett, etc, etc...
Ok, how about some links to what they say about all you are postulating. It would be most helpful.
ETA: And in re: your first paragraph: How does the chemical energy get turned into kinetic energy in the open system that is the towers? AFAICT, it would simply be imbedded in the heat exiting the building--the heat that already exists from the chemical reaction of oxygenand existing and imported hydrocarbons

[Crazy Chainsaw]

You and Crazy Chainsaw keep asserting this, but when asked about volumes and concentrations,as well as origins of the HCl, there is silence.
How much HCl gas do you figure was generated, and why, with a great roaring fire down below, did it stick around with all those broken windows to exit from?

That would depend on how many computer, how much carpeting, How many PVC pipes and Vinyl Chloride plastics were used in the buildings, probably a lot.


Secondly, with the sulfur noted in the piles, why would not the sulfur burn, and the combustion products mix with all that water, forming sulfuric acid, which has a much stronger effect on carbon steel than HCl does?

There are lead acid batteries in the buildings as well as a lot of sulfur from other sources including the fuels that have been stored for decades we are looking at both types of acids but once the sulfur combines with Calcium it become calcium sulfate, gypsum.
However HCl becomes Calcium Chloride that reacts with Zinc to form Zinc Chloride.
One of the reason not to use galvanized bolts on bridges is because calcium salts cause Zinc desegregation and possible hydrogen embrittlement in micro fractures, if Zinc invades the micro fractures under the oxide layer then Zinc embrittlement occurs in the bolts.

NIST also did not mention the lack of evidence of laser cutting, thermonuclear devices, pink pixies, or invading aliens from somewhere in Orion.
The facts are what they are. You state what is there, not what is not.
That was just stupid chemical reactions are likely, and what you just mentioned is fantasy not reality please come back to it.

Ok, how about some links to what they say about all you are postulating. It would be most helpful.

I will see if I can find some for you a little later today.

[rwguinn]

I will see if I can find some for you a little later today.
RWguinn throws up his hands, walking away muttering to himself...
"why can't they answer the question asked?"
ETA:
And why is Crazy Chanisaw answering for Apollo20? They are beginning to even sound alike...

[~enigma~]

And finally, I HAVE contacted NIST and been completely ignored!
Why? What did NIST say to dismiss your ideas?

[rwguinn]

Why? What did NIST say to dismiss your ideas?
Sigh,
~enigma~, I'm sorry, but that is too good a "Stundie" material to let pass. No hard feelings, 'ol buddie, 'ol pal?:D

[~enigma~]

Sigh,
~enigma~, I'm sorry, but that is too good a "Stundie" material to let pass. No hard feelings, 'ol buddie, 'ol pal?:D
That is fine but it is a question that I would like to hear Apollo answer. You see to me it appears that he has no idea what a trawman is nor do I think he understands that silence does not necessarily mean disagreement.

[rwguinn]

That is fine but it is a question that I would like to hear Apollo answer. You see to me it appears that he has no idea what a trawman is nor do I think he understands that silence does not necessarily mean disagreement.

Oh, I agree with you--I would like to know how he contacted them, and his wording. In this actual case, does ignore mean that he got nothing in return (truly ignored) or a response that his ideas were being taken into consideration, or that his ideas had no merit, or that they had ben previously considered and found to have no significance... Just what dos ignored mean, here? I have a sneaking suspicion that anything other than O my Gawd! How could we have missed that!" will/would be less than acceptable in this case.
But, on the other hand,
I know that when I get a letter or email that begins with words tot the effect "You Idiot, you haven't a clue...", unless it is from my boss, I tend to ignore it.

[~enigma~]

Oh, I agree with you--I would like to know how he contacted them, and his wording. In this actual case, does ignore mean that he got nothing in return (truly ignored) or a response that his ideas were being taken into consideration, or that his ideas had no merit, or that they had ben previously considered and found to have no significance... Just what dos ignored mean, here? I have a sneaking suspicion that anything other than O my Gawd! How could we have missed that!" will/would be less than acceptable in this case.
But, on the other hand,
I know that when I get a letter or email that begins with words tot the effect "You Idiot, you haven't a clue...", unless it is from my boss, I tend to ignore it.My boss once said that to me but he didn't expect the backlash...HR promoted me to manager and demoted him to assistant manager. Needless to say he resigned about a week later....

[Apollo20]

Do you guys not understand what the word "ignored" means?

It means I received NO answer to a 16 page report that was received with great interest by Profs Cahill, Bazant and Barnett..... In fact two of these gentlemen phoned me to discuss my work!

As for links, I can only give you references to peer-reviewed papers in journals of science, engineering, physics, and chemistry.

But I guess you googlescientists are too lazy to go look them up!


Apollo20, keep things civil; don't personalize the discussion by adding insults. I'll leave the first and fourth sentences intact this time for your benefit, but keep this kind of commentary out of your responses, please.

[~enigma~]

Do you guys not understand what the word "ignored" means?What was this immature attack for? I must say that I am not surprised if anybody chooses to ignore you when it is clear to me and others that you have a really bad attitude.

[Rika]

I think rwquinn doesn't want to do your work for you in proving your theory.

Anyway, I'm not sure I follow. Wouldn't NIST have mentioned something like chemical reactions on that scale if it had found evidence of them?

[~enigma~]

I think rwquinn doesn't want to do your work for you in proving your theory.

Anyway, I'm not sure I follow. Wouldn't NIST have mentioned something like chemical reactions on that scale if it had found evidence of them?
Why would they look for evidence of a chemical reaction? You do realize that in the case of the wtc that would be akin to searching for evidence that gravity makes things fall...IOW a total waste of time and resources not to mention that it wasn't a stated goal of the report Apollo's slanderously calls nothing more than a feel-good attempt to explain building codes.

[kookbreaker]

But I guess you googlescientists are too lazy to go look them up!

Gee, with snips like this I wonder why they haven't bother to get back to you?:rolleyes:

Again you persist with insults when you have so far shown little of your actual work. I don't deny that you've done it, but you are still playing coy little games with it.

So again I say: GROW UP!

[rwguinn]

Do you guys not understand what the word "ignored" means?

It means I received NO answer to a 16 page report that was received with great interest by Profs Cahill, Bazant and Barnett..... In fact two of these gentlemen phoned me to discuss my work!

As for links, I can only give you references to peer-reviewed papers in journals of science, engineering, physics, and chemistry.

But I guess you googlescientists are too lazy to go look them up!
If we knew what your thesis was, and if we knew who "Profs Cahill, Bazant and Barnett" were, who they work for, and the papers they and you have published on this very phenomenon, in which journals--even a title--you know "Zinc Embrittlement of WTC1 and WTC2 Primary Structural Members During the 9/11/01 Disaster" would help.
It is amazing that no such papers have been published in anything I have found, in the last 3 years. searches:
Prof cahill yields this (http://www.gwu.edu/~gwchem/pdf/chem_nwslrt05.pdf)
prof bazant yields this (http://www.google.com/search?as_q=Chemistry+publications+9%2F11&hl=en&num=10&btnG=Google+Search&as_epq=Bazant&as_oq=&as_eq=&lr=&as_ft=i&as_filetype=&as_qdr=all&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&as_occt=any&as_dt=i&as_sitesearch=&as_rights=&safe=images), with a specific reference by a CT'er (http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=RYA20070313&articleId=5071) to bazant's championing of the Pancake theory
and Barnett +911+Chemistry+publications yields (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&as_qdr=all&q=Chemistry+publications+9%2F11+%22Barnett%22)

so, which ones? IF you weren't so damn cryptic, we might get somewhere. As it is, with your curious refusal or inability to express just what you are getting at, I for one will have to treat you as a troll.
Either say what you mean, or quit bellyakin!

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Why would they look for evidence of a chemical reaction? You do realize that in the case of the wtc that would be akin to searching for evidence that gravity makes things fall...IOW a total waste of time and resources not to mention that it wasn't a stated goal of the report Apollo's slanderously calls nothing more than a feel-good attempt to explain building codes.


Fire is a chemical reaction ~enigma~ Oxidation, I thought that and the collapse was what was being investigated!
Sorry I must have been wrong.

[~enigma~]

Fire is a chemical reaction ~enigma~ Oxidation, I thought that and the collapse was what was being investigated!
Sorry I must have been wrong.
We are not talking about fire and you clearly know that. Now go back to your defense of an irritable old man :)

[Rika]

Enigma: Let me clarify. unusual chemical reactions, ones that were not expected. Does that help any?

[~enigma~]

Enigma: Let me clarify. unusual chemical reactions, ones that were not expected. Does that help any?I understand that. What were the stated goals of the NIST report? Maybe answering that will help you understand why they were not interested in exotic or unusual reactions.

[Apollo20]

Analytical data derived from air monitoring at, or near, Ground Zero in the period September 2001 to May 2002 show that hydrogen chloride and many chlorinated organic species were present at significant levels up to December 2001. These included aliphatic species such as chloroform, chloroethane and di-chloroethane as well as the aromatic compounds chlorobenzene and di-chlorobenzene.

Apart from HCl, which is indeed a major product of the thermal degradation of PVC, the major decomposition products from heating PVC in the temperature range 300 – 500 °C are: benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, chlorobenzene, di-chlorobenzene and tri-chlorobenzene. All of these species were observed in the air at Ground Zero. Furthermore, the relative abundances of the PVC-derived compounds are consistent with literature data on the thermal decomposition of PVC.

The total amount of PVC in the Twin Towers may be estimated to be at least 3 tonnes per floor. PVC releases 57 % of its weight as HCl when heated above about 350 deg C, (with or without the presence of air). The associated energy release is 38 MJ/kg. HCl attacks zinc, copper and iron forming LOW MELTING POINT chlorides. Ferric chloride BOILS at 319 deg C......

On the topic of NIST's contribution to this question: It is interesting to note that the surface analytical data presented by S. W. Banovic in NIST NCSTAR 1-3C show that for the single column sample K-16, chlorine was the most abundant species (after iron of course!), and was generally HIGHER than the much debated sulfur. And if you look at the USGS Particle Atlas Table of XRF analyses for concrete particulate in WTC dust more than 50 % showed the presence of chlorine. This chlorine cannot be indigenous to the concrete since chloride ion is specified to be less than 200 ppm in concrete because of its deleterious effects on this material.

This is why I have asked about NIST's analyses of WTC concrete samples. I don't believe there are any! The concrete floor slabs were a structural component of the Twin Towers yet NIST chose to ignore them and focussed on the steel.

And , by the way, the HCl/Cl2 attack on the steel columns in NOT the major concern. You need to consider the effects of HCl, Cl2, fluxing agents such as ZnCl2 AND liquid zinc, copper or lead on the steel bolts and the welds....

Where is the WTC surface analytical data on the fractured bolts?

Where I worked, if a bolt failed in any component in a coal, oil, natural gas or nuclear power station it was sent to our lab for failure analysis. That would generally mean the fracture surface of the failed bolt was analysed in a SEM and an EDAX spectrum recorded. Eventually a full report was written. All this for ONE BOLT!

How many bolts/welds failed in the Twin Towers?

How many fracture surfaces were analysed?

[~enigma~]

Do you guys not understand what the word "ignored" means?What was this immature attack for? I must say that I am not surprised if anybody chooses to ignore you when it is clear to me and others that you have a really bad attitude.

[beachnut]

The chemical energy released by the reactions of iron and zinc with HCl and O2 on the fire-affected floors of WTC 1 & 2 was about ten times LARGER than the potential energy released by the first one story drop of the upper section of WTC 1. So the CHEMICAL energies liberated in the WTC collapse were far larger than the gravitational energies.

And no one has answered my question about NIST's analysis of bolts and concrete, yet I have been assured NIST found no evidence for embrittlement.

And we haven't even talked about embrittlement of the welds.

And finally, I HAVE contacted NIST and been completely ignored!

Other scientists have, however, been most helpful including Profs Bazant, Cahill, and Barnett, etc, etc...

Fire released more energy than gravity? Yes. Gravity of each building was about 248 tons of TNT per tower. Did everyone forget fire was a chemical reaction.

Fire, just from the jet fuel 315 tons of TNT of energy. (want joules, buy the rights)

Fire from the rest of the WTC burning, was what? 150 200 tons more of TNT energy.

Yes the chemical energy released was about twice the gravitational energy. What is the point? Are you upset because NIST will not answer you? Where is you paper and what are the conclusions? Why are you slow rolling and teasing as you try to make some veiled point? Why not present your neat stuff in a nice understandable fashion and tell all what it means and why. Who needs NIST?

Are you trying to say the failure of components on 9/11 were at the weak points due to the facts and evidence you are teasing all with? Why was your paper straight forward?

Are you now presenting some facts about the reaction, formerly known as fire, and you are telling us what was really happening as the chemical reaction was weakening the steel in the building?

Why not present some papers and idea instead of teasing people? Make some conclusions and present the evidence. Can you do that? Where can we see your stuff and what is the executive summary?

Why does anyone need NIST to debunk Jones, Fetzer, Ross, Woods, Reynolds, and Charlie Sheen?

[~enigma~]

Apollo, do you intend to answer...

Do you guys not understand what the word "ignored" means?What was this immature attack for? I must say that I am not surprised if anybody chooses to ignore you when it is clear to me and others that you have a really bad attitude.

[rwguinn]

Analytical data derived from air monitoring at, or near, Ground Zero in the period September 2001 to May 2002 show that hydrogen chloride and many chlorinated organic species were present at significant levels up to December 2001. These included aliphatic species such as chloroform, chloroethane and di-chloroethane as well as the aromatic compounds chlorobenzene and di-chlorobenzene.

Apart from HCl, which is indeed a major product of the thermal degradation of PVC, the major decomposition products from heating PVC in the temperature range 300 – 500 °C are: benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, chlorobenzene, di-chlorobenzene and tri-chlorobenzene. All of these species were observed in the air at Ground Zero. Furthermore, the relative abundances of the PVC-derived compounds are consistent with literature data on the thermal decomposition of PVC. Thank you.
This is useful information, in a way--but does not really help with our problem of iron-zinc spheroids and when they were formed and how they were distributed.
The breakdown of PVC is no surprise--several sources have said the same thing. We have stipulated that things break down when hot, and that HCl is one of the results of hot PVC.

The total amount of PVC in the Twin Towers may be estimated to be at least 3 tonnes per floor. PVC releases 57 % of its weight as HCl when heated above about 350 deg C, (with or without the presence of air). The associated energy release is 38 MJ/kg. HCl attacks zinc, copper and iron forming LOW MELTING POINT chlorides. Ferric chloride BOILS at 319 deg C......
6000 pounds of PVC per floor-that is about 7 pounds /square foot.
seems a bit excessive, but ok

On the topic of NIST's contribution to this question: It is interesting to note that the surface analytical data presented by S. W. Banovic in NIST NCSTAR 1-3C show that for the single column sample K-16, chlorine was the most abundant species (after iron of course!), and was generally HIGHER than the much debated sulfur. And if you look at the USGS Particle Atlas Table of XRF analyses for concrete particulate in WTC dust more than 50 % showed the presence of chlorine. This chlorine cannot be indigenous to the concrete since chloride ion is specified to be less than 200 ppm in concrete because of its deleterious effects on this material.

This is why I have asked about NIST's analyses of WTC concrete samples. I don't believe there are any! The concrete floor slabs were a structural component of the Twin Towers yet NIST chose to ignore them and focussed on the steel.
Nope, sorry. Concrete floors were parasitic. The trusswork supporting them was structure, but not the concrete.


And , by the way, the HCl/Cl2 attack on the steel columns in NOT the major concern. You need to consider the effects of HCl, Cl2, fluxing agents such as ZnCl2 AND liquid zinc, copper or lead on the steel bolts and the welds....

Where is the WTC surface analytical data on the fractured bolts?

Where I worked, if a bolt failed in any component in a coal, oil, natural gas or nuclear power station it was sent to our lab for failure analysis. That would generally mean the fracture surface of the failed bolt was analysed in a SEM and an EDAX spectrum recorded. Eventually a full report was written. All this for ONE BOLT!

How many bolts/welds failed in the Twin Towers?

How many fracture surfaces were analysed?
penetration rates for zinc/ sulphides/chlorides into steel? If less than, say, 1/2 inch/hour (an arbitrary and totally made-up number, based on my own belief that the stuff would have to penetrate pretty deep to do much more damage than the thermal effects, and the fact that it only hadan hour to operate in) , it isn't relevant-all examination of the fracture surfaces would tell is whether they were contaminated, with nothing revealed about when they were contaminated

[Apollo20]

This looks incorrect, please check:

"6000 pounds of PVC per floor-that is about 7 pounds /square foot."

[~enigma~]

Apollo, do you intend to answer...

Originally Posted by Apollo20 http://forums.randi.org/helloworld2/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=2566485#post2566485)
Do you guys not understand what the word "ignored" means?

What was this immature attack for? I must say that I am not surprised if anybody chooses to ignore you when it is clear to me and others that you have a really bad attitude.

[Apollo20]

Yes,

"Do you guys not understand what the word "ignore" means?"

[Apollo20]

Enigma:

Touche! (Sorry I don't know how to do "e acute".)

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Thank you.
This is useful information, in a way--but does not really help with our problem of iron-zinc spheroids and when they were formed and how they were distributed.
The breakdown of PVC is no surprise--several sources have said the same thing. We have stipulated that things break down when hot, and that HCl is one of the results of hot PVC.
6000 pounds of PVC per floor-that is about 7 pounds /square foot.
seems a bit excessive, but ok

Nope, sorry. Concrete floors were parasitic. The trusswork supporting them was structure, but not the concrete.

penetration rates for zinc/ sulphides/chlorides into steel? If less than, say, 1/2 inch/hour (an arbitrary and totally made-up number, based on my own belief that the stuff would have to penetrate pretty deep to do much more damage than the thermal effects, and the fact that it only hadan hour to operate in) , it isn't relevant-all examination of the fracture surfaces would tell is whether they were contaminated, with nothing revealed about when they were contaminated

Sulfuric acid has had decades to penetrate the steel is that long enough?

[~enigma~]

Yes,

"Do you guys not understand what the word "ignore" means?"Well you sort of answered. Not much of a reason for attacking. So would you be offended if we all started responding to you in kind?

[Apollo20]

RWGUINN:

You used the term "pretty deep" in your last post. Could you please quantify this and provide a reference.

[~enigma~]

Enigma:

Touche! (Sorry I don't know how to do "e acute".)
Hey...I am Jewish and that was awfully close to tushy...but thank you for the compliment :D

[Apollo20]

ENIGMA:

It would be great to have some technical input from you, do you have any?

[Pardalis]

Touche! (Sorry I don't know how to do "e acute".)

é

Glad I could help.

[Apollo20]

You call that help?

[Pardalis]

You can copy and paste it now all you want, it's yours.

[~enigma~]

ENIGMA:

It would be great to have some technical input from you, do you have any?
About a chemical reaction that is nothing out of the ordinary....NO

And in case you are interested I might have had one if it wasn't for your flippant attitude.

[~enigma~]

You call that help?Better late than never...

[Slayhamlet]

You call that help?

ASCI: Alt + 0233 = é

[Pardalis]

From what I read from Greening's posting attitude here, I have a little idea of why he got ignored by the NIST...

[Checkmite]

Yes,

"Do you guys not understand what the word "ignore" means?"


Yes, it's "what Apollo20 does to common sense answers".

When you explain how, when a single bolt in a component at Very Important Place X breaks, a battery of careful and thorough tests are done on it; and then ask why NIST hasn't tested all those bolts that used to hold together the WTC towers - see, that question has a very common sense answer that you seem to be choosing to ignore.

[ConspiRaider]

é

Glad I could help.
Apollo is right, that is a cute "e"!

Look at him! Adorable! Always with a big smile for everyone regardless of conspiratorial temperament, I just love that! Don't hug until you see the white of his eye (tee hee). And that little beanie cap he's wearing - where on earth did you find that?

Someday he'll grow up to be a big, stiff, right-angled "E" with faultless proportions and a rather square mindset. But we can marvel at such an itty-bitty fuzzy-wuzzy round-guy cutie-pie "e" for at least a little while. Such a little heartbreaker!

[rwguinn]

This looks incorrect, please check:

"6000 pounds of PVC per floor-that is about 7 pounds /square foot."
you are absolutely correct. I gave sq ft/pound. too many things going on at once. Thanks for the correction.

[~enigma~]

And that little beanie cap he's wearing - where on earth did you find that?
That little beanie cap is a yarmulke...that is a Jewish é :D

[rwguinn]

RWGUINN:

You used the term "pretty deep" in your last post. Could you please quantify this and provide a reference.

I thought I did.
It is a number I made up, assuming the average wall/flange thickness of the supports in the area of collapse was 1 to 1.5 inch, I figured 1/2 depth for a 30-50% strength reduction (same as thermal reduction at 750C), assuming your reaction reduces the strength to zero. Conservative, yes.
But I did say arbitrary in my post.

[rwguinn]

Sulfuric acid has had decades to penetrate the steel is that long enough?
So, what you are saying was that the towers were ready to come down anyway?
Sulphuric acid had been eating away at the steel for decades, and nobody noticed, during any of the periodic inspections and/or remodelings?

OOOOKKKKKKKAY...

[~enigma~]

So, what you are saying was that the towers were ready to come down anyway?
Sulphuric acid had been eating away at the steel for decades, and nobody noticed, during any of the periodic inspections and/or remodelings?

OOOOKKKKKKKAY...Didn't you know that it was a result of air pollution that the wtc fell. it's our fault...oh the inhumanity :)

[parky76]

Enigma. I already told you. The WTC was destroyed because UPN 9 was jealous that the twin towers gave Channel 11 free advertising. :D

[~enigma~]

Enigma. I already told you. The WTC was destroyed because UPN 9 was jealous that the twin towers gave Channel 11 free advertising. :D
Nah..that was a story designed to let the real perpetrators go scott free and continue polluting...and these guys thought it was the government...HA :)

[kookbreaker]

So the troothers are now claiming that since the tip of the flame was touching the bridge, and that is the 'hottest part of the flame', that it meant the heat transfer was much better than those columns that were only immersed in the flames.

*sigh*

[~enigma~]

So the troothers are now claiming that since the tip of the flame was touching the bridge, and that is the 'hottest part of the flame', that it meant the heat transfer was much better than those columns that were only immersed in the flames.

*sigh*
:jaw: you mean they still confuse heat and temperature. The temepature gradient for a flame is pretty conclusive in that that base has a higher temperature than the tip. For other reasons that I don't really want to get into right now, the heat you can measure at the tip is almost always more than at the base but how do they apply this to 9/11. To me it's just proof that their non-knowledge of physics isn't just restricted to 9/11 but it applys to life in general.

[jaydeehess]

Originally Posted by Crazy Chainsaw
Sulfuric acid has had decades to penetrate the steel is that long enough?
So, what you are saying was that the towers were ready to come down anyway?
Sulphuric acid had been eating away at the steel for decades, and nobody noticed, during any of the periodic inspections and/or remodelings?



H2SO4 may have had some time to corrode the metal somewhat but I suspect not much since any new deposits would have to make their way throughthe layer already affected before attacking new steel. However the layer of sulfur containing compounds on the steel would increase over time. This would have little effect on the steel UNTIL the temperature rose high enough to cause a eutectic process lowering the melting point and increasing loss of strength as a function of temperature.

Yes, there is a process by which air pollution can contribute to building collapse during major fires.

[gumboot]

:jaw: you mean they still confuse heat and temperature. The temepature gradient for a flame is pretty conclusive in that that base has a higher temperature than the tip. For other reasons that I don't really want to get into right now, the heat you can measure at the tip is almost always more than at the base


This is something I'd be curious to hear more about... :) If anyone feels like explaining it to me.

Seems to me, applying my ignorant logic, that while the base may have higher temperature, the tip has higher heat transfer. This makes it feel "hotter", however more importantly it means the tip will heat up another object faster than the base (which, at least at the basic level of experimentation, appears to be true).

In which case the "troofer" claim does have some vague merit, in that the tip of said fire would transfer more heat to a piece of steel than the base.

Of course it all seems a bit irrelevant to me as an ENGULFED and enclosed building will have plenty of scenarios of steel exposed to both tips and bases of various flames. Additionally, in an enclosed space the air temperature would increase much more dramatically than the air around an open highway, thus the heated steel in the building would be less capable of cooling through thermal radiation.

The tanker fire also occurred in the middle of the night while 9/11 occurred during day time. In addition the average high for Oakland in April is 19 degrees whereas the average high for New York in September is 24 degrees. Thus you also have the NYC event happening in a significantly hotter climate.

-Gumboot

[Crazy Chainsaw]

H2SO4 may have had some time to corrode the metal somewhat but I suspect not much since any new deposits would have to make their way throughthe layer already affected before attacking new steel. However the layer of sulfur containing compounds on the steel would increase over time. This would have little effect on the steel UNTIL the temperature rose high enough to cause a eutectic process lowering the melting point and increasing loss of strength as a function of temperature.

Yes, there is a process by which air pollution can contribute to building collapse during major fires.

IT is more important what the H2SO4 Does on the Zinc, and on the concrete, there is a lot of Gypsum in the concrete that would allow H2SO4 to go right though the concrete without reacting with it.
Over time the amount of Gypsum would even increase, and break down of Lime stone aggregate, would create and release Calcium Chloride.

[rwguinn]

IT is more important what the H2SO4 Does on the Zinc, and on the concrete, there is a lot of Gypsum in the concrete that would allow H2SO4 to go right though the concrete without reacting with it.
Over time the amount of Gypsum would even increase, and break down of Lime stone aggregate, would create and release Calcium Chloride.
Again, you are talking about stress relief. if the concrete breaks down, and the pan disappears, the load on the floor trusses is reduced, which lessens the sag and the crippling load at the floor/column joint. How does that aid collapse?

[XXX]

Speaking of the Truthers reactions, did any of you guys catch this one yet? (Not quite sure where it's origin is from though...)

Did you happen to see the photo of the damage 8600 gallons of gasoline exploding and burning causes?? See any powderized concrete???? Dozens of burned cars???? Ejected material blocks away?

Gasoline burns much much hotter than jet fuel (Kerosene). In the hijacked planes, there was @ 15,000 gallons of kerosene at takeoff. Figure they burned up 10% on takeoff and flying. 13,500. Figure at least 50% of the remaining fuel exploded on impact. That is a low estimate, in my opinion. 6750 explodes, 6750 burns.

Now, look at this overpass. I have welded the 3" rebar that reinforces the concrete on these California overpasses, certified double butt welds, with 9018 low hydrogen electrodes, rebar preheated to 250F.

I am unaware of what "steel beams" they allude to, unless it is embedded in the concrete column supporting the roadbed. But, it is their story, let them tell it.
I have many many times passed over this very section of freeway. I used to work in Hayward, 10 minutes down the freeway. This section is less than 3 stories tall.

The concrete did not powderize. The steel did not melt. The asphalt, which is made of petroleum products, simply melted and swayed, not powderized, not burned and gone. The story states the "steel beams buckled" and the bolts holding them "melted." Collapsed. In Place. All the pieces still there, except these "bolts." No hole in the ground, even though THIS explosion and fire was at GROUND LEVEL.


The article also states definitively that the temperatures reached 2750F. HOW they KNOW this is beyond me, unless they are stating gasoline burns at 2750 degrees, but also stating steel doesn't melt then.
NOW YOU GET MY POINT????????

If steel beams here in California didn't disappear and powderize to nothing at OFFICIALLY GIVEN TEMP of 2750 with gasoline, like at the WTC Tower's core beams did, HOW IN THE HELL did KEROSENE POWDERIZE CONCRETE AT 675F maximum temperatures?????? Especially given the fact the jet fuel only burned the TOP FLOORS????
Read the article by the Danish Professor of Chemistry.
Kerosene burns at 675F.


Officially now (facts given by authorities), California has stated gasoline can't melt steel, only cause it to turn PLASTIC UNDER EXTREME HEAT.

If the official 911 story had ANY credibility, the towers should have looked like elongated pretzels. Twisted steel.

################################################## ######

“Your countrymen have been murdered and the more you delve into it the more it looks as
though they were murdered by our government, who used it as an excuse to
murder other people thousands of miles away.”
— Lt. Col. Shelton F. Lankford, USMC (ret)
Retired U.S. Marine Corps Fighter Pilot

http://www.patriotsquestion911.com/

[westprog]

ASCI: Alt + 0233 = é

Alt Gr e - é
Ctrl Alt e - é

[westprog]

That's why steel is smelted in an open-air environment. ;)

When I want the gas oven to work quicker I just open the door.

[peteweaver]

That looks baaad.

Wonder what the truthers will make out of this.

Maybe they will paint in an F16...

[Crazy Chainsaw]

Again, you are talking about stress relief. if the concrete breaks down, and the pan disappears, the load on the floor trusses is reduced, which lessens the sag and the crippling load at the floor/column joint. How does that aid collapse?

However if the concrete pans only burn in a certain section not the whole pans then that places more uneven loads on the trusses, as well as weakening the trusses from the heat produced by the burned sections.

[Architect]

I still can't get over the fact that people would thing that "powderized" is a real word and expect to get taken seriously.....:rolleyes: