Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

CB_Brooklyn · 08-08-2007, 12:46 AM

WTC Molten Metal: Fact or Fiction?

Analysis of the Evidence

If 9/11 was an inside job, the perpetrators obviously have total control of the media. In this case, would it not make sense for them to plant propaganda in the media to distract those who are already suspicious of the attacks? As Dr Judy Wood has asked, “If 9/11 was well planned, wouldn't the cover-up be even more well planned?”

The perpetrators are experts at propaganda. Those who know 9/11 was an inside job also know the official story told by the media to be nothing but propaganda. Interestingly, the Washington Post says the military is targeting the “U.S. Home Audience” with a “propaganda campaign”.

Americans have a bad habit of believing those who they consider trustworthy instead of examining evidence for themselves. As former Assistant Secretary to the US Treasury, Dr Paul Craig Roberts said, “Americans never check any facts. Who do you know, for example, who has even read the Report of the 9/11 Commission, much less checked the alleged facts reported in that document. I can answer for you. You don’t know anyone who has read the report or checked the facts.”

Many still trust George W Bush simply because of the media.
People don’t check facts.
People don’t analyze evidence.
People don’t think.

How do we really know there was molten metal at Ground Zero? Just because a “mild mannered” scientist says so?

Let’s take a look at the molten metal evidence piece by piece. The reader is encouraged to look at the information for themselves and to think for themselves.

*Eyewitnesses / Statements*

Leslie Robertson - Structural Engineer / Designer of WTC:

On the Structural Engineers Association of Utah’s website, James Williams (SEAU President) described what Robertson said at an October 2001 conference: “as of 21 days after the attack, the fires were still burning and molten steel was still running”.

Robertson received millions of taxpayer dollars and could be considered a member of the Global Elite. Who do the Global Elite represent, us or themselves?

William Langewiesche - Only Journalist to Have Unrestricted Access to Ground Zero During Cleanup:

In his book “American Ground”, Langewiesche said: “in the early days, the streams of molten metal that leaked from the hot cores and flowed down broken walls inside the foundation hole.”

Did Langewiesche see this molten metal himself, or is he repeating statements from others? Do the 9/11 perpetrators control the information the media puts out?

Ron Burger - Public Health Advisor at the National Center for Environmental Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention:

The National Environmental Health Association’s paper “Messages in the Dust” quotes Burger: “Feeling the heat, seeing the molten steel, the layers upon layers of ash, like lava, it reminded me of Mt. St. Helens and the thousands who fled that disaster.”

Burger is on a government payroll. Is he trustworthy? Burger’s statement was published in a government document. Is it trustworthy?

Ken Holden - Involved in Organizing Ground Zero Cleanup:

The 9/11 Commission Report quotes Holden: “Underground, it was still so hot that molten metal dripped down the sides of the wall from [WTC] Building 6."

Holden is on a government payroll and helped organize the cleanup of an inside job terrorist attack. Is he trustworthy? Is the 9/11 Commission Report trustworthy, or is it propaganda?

Guy Lounsbury - Member of New York Air National Guard’s 109th Air Wing:

National Guard Magazine article written by Lounsbury (excerpt): “One fireman told us that there was still molten steel at the heart of the towers' remains. Firemen sprayed water to cool the debris down but the heat remained intense enough at the surface to melt their boots.”

If the temperature was hot enough to melt the firefighters’ boots,
their feet would have been incinerated.

When water comes in contact with molten metal,
the result is a steam explosion:

Wikipedia quote (emphasis added): “A dangerous steam explosion can be created when liquid water encounters hot, molten metal. As the water explodes into steam, it splashes the burning hot liquid metal along with it, causing an extreme risk of severe burns to anyone located nearby and creating a fire hazard.”

A Google search reveals numerous government documents with warnings and safety information on this topic.

Rest assured, the Fire Department of New York knows not to spray water anywhere near molten metal!

Steam explosions are highly dangerous,
as we learned in NYC in July 2007:

Associated Press excerpt: "McCullough was driving a tow truck that was thrown into the air by the powerful geyser of steam. He landed in the crater gouged out by the blast and suffered third-degree burns over 80 percent of his body."

Source and more information on Dr Wood’s site

Look at the Ground Zero photo below.
Note the fumes surrounding the workers. Is this really a steam explosion? Are the workers boiled?

Source

But what about the firefighters who claim to have actually seen molten metal? Perhaps the 9/11 perpetrators performed a PSYOP suggesting it was molten metal, and this idea got repeated around Ground Zero. After such a tragedy as 9/11 people don’t wish to reflect back and relive the event, so they latch on to the first answer they get.. See Dr Wood’s site for more information.

(References for the witnesses above, as well as other quotes, can be found here and here.)

*Official Government Thermal Map Image*

Source

The official government thermal map from 9/16/01 above shows Zone F to be the largest hot spot. But the following photo shows no large hot spots just seven days later, 9/23/01:

Source

Assuming the official government thermal maps to be authentic, we know most of the molten metal disappeared less than two weeks after 9/11.

However, the US government thermal map images are likely doctored. As Dr Wood shows here and here, Zone F is the same area as this empty, damp hole in a FEMA picture filed 9/18/01. Where's the molten metal?

Source

*Solid Orange Slag*

This picture appears in Steven Jones’ current (last checked August 1, 2007) September 2006 “Why Indeed” paper, which also states the photographer to be Frank Silecchia, and that the picture was taken on 9/27/01 according to the photographer’s aid. But is the picture authentic?

We notice the slag being lifted by a metal crane. Note the close proximity between the slag and the exposed hydraulics.

According to Jones’ paper (and confirmed by the charts he references), the color of the solid metal slag indicates a temperature over 845° C.

Yet, mechanical engineering handbooks reveal hydraulics to fail at a fraction of the temperature of Jones’ slag:

Machinery Lubrication – “Hydraulic Equipment Reliability: Beyond Contamination Control”
Quote (emphasis added): “Hydraulic fluid temperatures above 82°C (180ºF) damage most seal compounds and accelerate oil degradation. A single overtemperature event of sufficient magnitude can permanently damage all the seals in an entire hydraulic system, resulting in numerous leaks. The by-products of thermal degradation of the oil (soft particles) can cause reliability problems such as valve-spool stiction and filter clogging.”

Machinery Lubrication – “ Symptoms of Common Hydraulic Problems and Their Root Causes”
Quote (emphasis added): “Fluid temperatures above 180°F (82°C) can damage seals and accelerate degradation of the fluid. This means that the operation of any hydraulic system at temperatures above 180°F is detrimental and should be avoided. Fluid temperature is too high when viscosity falls below the optimum value for the system’s components. The temperature at which this occurs is dependent on the viscosity grade of the fluid in the system and can be well below 180°F.”

Machine Design – “Predicting the life of hydraulic hose”
Quote (emphasis added): “Temperature range recommended for typical rubber hose spans about –40 to 212°F [212° F = 100° C]. Fluid or ambient temperatures outside these bounds impact service life. Plasticizers leach out of elastomers faster at high temperatures, though the rate depends on the actual temperature and duration. Heat-related failure is evident when the cover shows signs of hardening and cracking, and the hose shape takes on a permanent set.
Temperatures below recommended will also shorten service life. This problem is evident when the inner tube shows signs of stiffness and cracks. Specials are available for either extreme: Low-temperature hoses for service to –67°F and high-temperature versions for applications exceeding 300°F. [300° F = 149° C]”

Jones’ slag is over 845° C, yet hydraulic fluid systems fail above 82° C.

The recommended highest temperature for standard hydraulic rubber hoses is 100° C, with special heavy duty hoses available for temperatures above 149° C.

Given the vast temperature differences between the slag and the maximum operating temperatures for hydraulics, is it plausible for Jones’ photo to be real? The temperature of the slag is over 10 times greater than the maximum allowable temperature for hydraulic fluid systems.

If there was molten metal in the ruins below,
the hydraulic systems in those orange grapplers would be destroyed.

Source

See Dr Wood’s site for more information:
http://drjudywood.com/articles/dirt/dirt4.html#cheetos
http://drjudywood.com/articles/dirt/...tml#hydraulics

*NIST / Camera Planet Photo*

Source (Page 86 of the pdf file, page 382 of the printed NIST document)

Jones cites NIST as the source of the photo above. But he fails to mention that NIST admitted doctoring the image. In addition, Jones cropped the photo and removed NIST’s caption that read “The intensity levels have been adjusted”. The following is the photo as it appeared in Jones’ paper:

Source (currently searching for copy of Jones' paper with this image)

Jones used the colors in the photo for scientific analysis, yet NIST admitted adjusting the intensity levels. Is this good science? On top of that, why did Jones hide the fact that it was doctored?

NOTE: Following Drs Morgan Reynolds / Judy Wood’s debunk, Jones removed the photo from his paper without notice or explanation!

Jones now uses the photo below, a still from the CameraPlanet Archive video:

Although the video starts several minutes after NIST’s photo was taken, it is peculiar that the molten flow switches windows.

The following is analysis by Drs Wood/Reynolds from their paper "Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Disintegrate? A peer-review of Steven E. Jones' 9/11 Research":

====================================
NIST acknowledges it "adjusted" the intensity of the photos somehow, so they were already doctored. Perhaps it was real phenomena but we strongly doubt it because
• No heat source is specified
• The liquid inexplicably appears to flow from a window rather than the floor and there is no explanation for what surface would support the flow
• The flow changes windows
• The aluminum cladding on the exterior displays no signs of heat or melting despite the fact that iron begins to melt at 1538° C and aluminum alloys begin to melt at temperatures under 660° C
• The flow disappears prior to destruction of WTC 2 as the video jumps.
We cannot explain how molten metal would pour from a window ledge and then move and pour from another window ledge, although NIST claims the flow performed such a feat within seven minutes of collapse. We need answers to these questions before we become convinced that the event was real and therefore deserves analysis.

====================================

Is CameraPlanet a reputable source? CameraPlanet released the amateur 9/11 video footage showing an aluminum airplane gliding into a steel/concrete building:

Another item of interest... the owner of CameraPlanet is a magician. Is he a visual trickery expert too?

*Workers Peering Into Hole*

This image was included in Jones’ September 2006 paper with the caption “Workers evidently peering into the hot “core” under the WTC rubble.”.

The image in Jones’ PDF (linked above) has “GEOEPOCHE 85” in the lower right corner, indicating it came from page 85 of a copy of the German magazine Geo Epoche.

Jones fails to properly source the photo. Geo Epoche is not mentioned anywhere in his paper’s references, so we don’t know what edition it came from.

However, the picture has been doctored. If the orange color was real the workers’ skin would have melted off their faces. As Dr Jim Fetzer said in comparison (paraphrased): “would you put your face over a boiling tea kettle?” That’s just a mere 212° F compared to Jones’ 1500°+ F orange image.

Here is the original photo, as archived on hereisnewyork.org. As can be seen, the workers are using search lights. They are not “peering into a hot core”:

Source

NOTE: Jones removed the photo from his paper without notice or explanation!

It should be noted that there are NO pictures whatsoever of molten metal in the ruins at Ground Zero.

Anyone having an interest in learning of Steven Jones’ research should go here.

Purpose of Fabricating Molten Metal Stories

Why would the 9/11 perpetrators fabricate a molten metal story? Perhaps it’s a cover for what really happened.

Notice the orange colored fumes in the photo below.

Source

If that were a steam explosion, the driver of the grappler would be severely burned. But who ever heard of orange steam anyway? Take a look at the Solid Orange Slag picture and notice similar orange fumes.

As Dr Judy Wood shows in her paper, the orange fumes are the result of molecular dissociation.

Why would the 9/11 perpetrators fabricate such a story when they know people will eventually catch on? The perpetrators are planning a police state, following the next false flag terror attack. When the police state is in full force, the public will be powerless. No new 9/11 investigation. I encourage everyone to read Andrew Johnson’s article “A Touch of “The Hidden Hand”? - Is the Next False Flag Attack on US Soil Near?” and to spread the information as far and as wide as possible. People need to work together to prevent this from happening.

Hopefully, this "wtc molten metal: fact of fiction" article helped to expose what's happening.

08-08-2007, 12:46 AM	#1 (permalink)
CB_Brooklyn Banned Location: New York City	WTC Molten Metal: Fact or Fiction? WTC Molten Metal: Fact or Fiction? Analysis of the Evidence If 9/11 was an inside job, the perpetrators obviously have total control of the media. In this case, would it not make sense for them to plant propaganda in the media to distract those who are already suspicious of the attacks? As Dr Judy Wood has asked, “If 9/11 was well planned, wouldn't the cover-up be even more well planned?” The perpetrators are experts at propaganda. Those who know 9/11 was an inside job also know the official story told by the media to be nothing but propaganda. Interestingly, the Washington Post says the military is targeting the “U.S. Home Audience” with a “propaganda campaign”. Americans have a bad habit of believing those who they consider trustworthy instead of examining evidence for themselves. As former Assistant Secretary to the US Treasury, Dr Paul Craig Roberts said, “Americans never check any facts. Who do you know, for example, who has even read the Report of the 9/11 Commission, much less checked the alleged facts reported in that document. I can answer for you. You don’t know anyone who has read the report or checked the facts.” Many still trust George W Bush simply because of the media. People don’t check facts. People don’t analyze evidence. *People don’t think.* How do we really know there was molten metal at Ground Zero? Just because a “mild mannered” scientist says so? Let’s take a look at the molten metal evidence piece by piece. The reader is encouraged to look at the information for themselves and to think for themselves. *Eyewitnesses / Statements* Leslie Robertson - Structural Engineer / Designer of WTC: On the Structural Engineers Association of Utah’s website, James Williams (SEAU President) described what Robertson said at an October 2001 conference: “as of 21 days after the attack, the fires were still burning and molten steel was still running”. Robertson received millions of taxpayer dollars and could be considered a member of the Global Elite. Who do the Global Elite represent, us or themselves? William Langewiesche - Only Journalist to Have Unrestricted Access to Ground Zero During Cleanup: In his book “American Ground”, Langewiesche said: “in the early days, the streams of molten metal that leaked from the hot cores and flowed down broken walls inside the foundation hole.” Did Langewiesche see this molten metal himself, or is he repeating statements from others? Do the 9/11 perpetrators control the information the media puts out? Ron Burger - Public Health Advisor at the National Center for Environmental Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: The National Environmental Health Association’s paper “Messages in the Dust” quotes Burger: “Feeling the heat, seeing the molten steel, the layers upon layers of ash, like lava, it reminded me of Mt. St. Helens and the thousands who fled that disaster.” Burger is on a government payroll. Is he trustworthy? Burger’s statement was published in a government document. Is it trustworthy? Ken Holden - Involved in Organizing Ground Zero Cleanup: The 9/11 Commission Report quotes Holden: “Underground, it was still so hot that molten metal dripped down the sides of the wall from [WTC] Building 6." Holden is on a government payroll and helped organize the cleanup of an inside job terrorist attack. Is he trustworthy? Is the 9/11 Commission Report trustworthy, or is it propaganda? Guy Lounsbury - Member of New York Air National Guard’s 109th Air Wing: National Guard Magazine article written by Lounsbury (excerpt): “One fireman told us that there was still molten steel at the heart of the towers' remains. Firemen sprayed water to cool the debris down but the heat remained intense enough at the surface to melt their boots.” If the temperature was hot enough to melt the firefighters’ boots, their feet would have been incinerated. When water comes in contact with molten metal, the result is a steam explosion: Wikipedia quote (emphasis added): “A dangerous steam explosion can be created when liquid water encounters hot, molten metal. As the water explodes into steam, it splashes the burning hot liquid metal along with it, causing an extreme risk of severe burns to anyone located nearby and creating a fire hazard.” A Google search reveals numerous government documents with warnings and safety information on this topic. Rest assured, the Fire Department of New York knows not to spray water anywhere near molten metal! Steam explosions are highly dangerous, as we learned in NYC in July 2007: Associated Press excerpt: "McCullough was driving a tow truck that was thrown into the air by the powerful geyser of steam. He landed in the crater gouged out by the blast and suffered third-degree burns over 80 percent of his body." Source and more information on Dr Wood’s site Look at the Ground Zero photo below. Note the fumes surrounding the workers. Is this really a steam explosion? *Are the workers boiled?* Source But what about the firefighters who claim to have actually seen molten metal? Perhaps the 9/11 perpetrators performed a PSYOP suggesting it was molten metal, and this idea got repeated around Ground Zero. After such a tragedy as 9/11 people don’t wish to reflect back and relive the event, so they latch on to the first answer they get.. See Dr Wood’s site for more information. (References for the witnesses above, as well as other quotes, can be found here and here.) *Official Government Thermal Map Image* Source The official government thermal map from 9/16/01 above shows Zone F to be the largest hot spot. But the following photo shows no large hot spots just seven days later, 9/23/01: Source Assuming the official government thermal maps to be authentic, we know most of the molten metal disappeared less than two weeks after 9/11. However, the US government thermal map images are likely doctored. As Dr Wood shows here and here, Zone F is the same area as this empty, damp hole in a FEMA picture filed 9/18/01. Where's the molten metal? Source *Solid Orange Slag* This picture appears in Steven Jones’ current (last checked August 1, 2007) September 2006 “Why Indeed” paper, which also states the photographer to be Frank Silecchia, and that the picture was taken on 9/27/01 according to the photographer’s aid. But is the picture authentic? We notice the slag being lifted by a metal crane. Note the close proximity between the slag and the exposed hydraulics. According to Jones’ paper (and confirmed by the charts he references), the color of the solid metal slag indicates a temperature over 845° C. Yet, mechanical engineering handbooks reveal hydraulics to fail at a fraction of the temperature of Jones’ slag: Machinery Lubrication – “Hydraulic Equipment Reliability: Beyond Contamination Control” Quote (emphasis added): “Hydraulic fluid temperatures above 82°C (180ºF) damage most seal compounds and accelerate oil degradation. A single overtemperature event of sufficient magnitude can permanently damage all the seals in an entire hydraulic system, resulting in numerous leaks. The by-products of thermal degradation of the oil (soft particles) can cause reliability problems such as valve-spool stiction and filter clogging.” Machinery Lubrication – “ Symptoms of Common Hydraulic Problems and Their Root Causes” Quote (emphasis added): “Fluid temperatures above 180°F (82°C) can damage seals and accelerate degradation of the fluid. This means that the operation of any hydraulic system at temperatures above 180°F is detrimental and should be avoided. Fluid temperature is too high when viscosity falls below the optimum value for the system’s components. The temperature at which this occurs is dependent on the viscosity grade of the fluid in the system and can be well below 180°F.” Machine Design – “Predicting the life of hydraulic hose” Quote (emphasis added): “Temperature range recommended for typical rubber hose spans about –40 to 212°F [212° F = 100° C]. Fluid or ambient temperatures outside these bounds impact service life. Plasticizers leach out of elastomers faster at high temperatures, though the rate depends on the actual temperature and duration. Heat-related failure is evident when the cover shows signs of hardening and cracking, and the hose shape takes on a permanent set. Temperatures below recommended will also shorten service life. This problem is evident when the inner tube shows signs of stiffness and cracks. Specials are available for either extreme: Low-temperature hoses for service to –67°F and high-temperature versions for applications exceeding 300°F. [300° F = 149° C]” Jones’ slag is over 845° C, yet hydraulic fluid systems fail above 82° C. The recommended highest temperature for standard hydraulic rubber hoses is 100° C, with special heavy duty hoses available for temperatures above 149° C. Given the vast temperature differences between the slag and the maximum operating temperatures for hydraulics, is it plausible for Jones’ photo to be real? The temperature of the slag is over 10 times greater than the maximum allowable temperature for hydraulic fluid systems. If there was molten metal in the ruins below, the hydraulic systems in those orange grapplers would be destroyed. Source See Dr Wood’s site for more information: http://drjudywood.com/articles/dirt/dirt4.html#cheetos http://drjudywood.com/articles/dirt/...tml#hydraulics *NIST / Camera Planet Photo* Source (Page 86 of the pdf file, page 382 of the printed NIST document) Jones cites NIST as the source of the photo above. But he fails to mention that NIST admitted doctoring the image. In addition, Jones cropped the photo and removed NIST’s caption that read “The intensity levels have been adjusted”. The following is the photo as it appeared in Jones’ paper: Source (currently searching for copy of Jones' paper with this image) Jones used the colors in the photo for scientific analysis, yet NIST admitted adjusting the intensity levels. Is this good science? On top of that, why did Jones hide the fact that it was doctored? NOTE: Following Drs Morgan Reynolds / Judy Wood’s debunk, Jones removed the photo from his paper without notice or explanation! Jones now uses the photo below, a still from the CameraPlanet Archive video: Although the video starts several minutes after NIST’s photo was taken, it is peculiar that the molten flow switches windows. The following is analysis by Drs Wood/Reynolds from their paper "Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Disintegrate? A peer-review of Steven E. Jones' 9/11 Research": ==================================== NIST acknowledges it "adjusted" the intensity of the photos somehow, so they were already doctored. Perhaps it was real phenomena but we strongly doubt it because • No heat source is specified • The liquid inexplicably appears to flow from a window rather than the floor and there is no explanation for what surface would support the flow • The flow changes windows • The aluminum cladding on the exterior displays no signs of heat or melting despite the fact that iron begins to melt at 1538° C and aluminum alloys begin to melt at temperatures under 660° C • The flow disappears prior to destruction of WTC 2 as the video jumps. We cannot explain how molten metal would pour from a window ledge and then move and pour from another window ledge, although NIST claims the flow performed such a feat within seven minutes of collapse. We need answers to these questions before we become convinced that the event was real and therefore deserves analysis. ==================================== Is CameraPlanet a reputable source? CameraPlanet released the amateur 9/11 video footage showing an aluminum airplane gliding into a steel/concrete building: Another item of interest... the owner of CameraPlanet is a magician. Is he a visual trickery expert too? *Workers Peering Into Hole* This image was included in Jones’ September 2006 paper with the caption “Workers evidently peering into the hot “core” under the WTC rubble.”. The image in Jones’ PDF (linked above) has “GEOEPOCHE 85” in the lower right corner, indicating it came from page 85 of a copy of the German magazine Geo Epoche. Jones fails to properly source the photo. Geo Epoche is not mentioned anywhere in his paper’s references, so we don’t know what edition it came from. However, the picture has been doctored. If the orange color was real the workers’ skin would have melted off their faces. As Dr Jim Fetzer said in comparison (paraphrased): “would you put your face over a boiling tea kettle?” That’s just a mere 212° F compared to Jones’ 1500°+ F orange image. Here is the original photo, as archived on hereisnewyork.org. As can be seen, the workers are using search lights. They are not “peering into a hot core”: Source NOTE: Jones removed the photo from his paper without notice or explanation! It should be noted that there are NO pictures whatsoever of molten metal in the ruins at Ground Zero. Anyone having an interest in learning of Steven Jones’ research should go here. Purpose of Fabricating Molten Metal Stories Why would the 9/11 perpetrators fabricate a molten metal story? Perhaps it’s a cover for what really happened. Notice the orange colored fumes in the photo below. Source If that were a steam explosion, the driver of the grappler would be severely burned. But who ever heard of orange steam anyway? Take a look at the Solid Orange Slag picture and notice similar orange fumes. As Dr Judy Wood shows in her paper, the orange fumes are the result of molecular dissociation. Why would the 9/11 perpetrators fabricate such a story when they know people will eventually catch on? The perpetrators are planning a police state, following the next false flag terror attack. When the police state is in full force, the public will be powerless. No new 9/11 investigation. I encourage everyone to read Andrew Johnson’s article “A Touch of “The Hidden Hand”? - Is the Next False Flag Attack on US Soil Near?” and to spread the information as far and as wide as possible. People need to work together to prevent this from happening. Hopefully, this "wtc molten metal: fact of fiction" article helped to expose what's happening.