I'm still confused. You posted a picture but you have yet to state what it is about the picture that makes it significant to you. Ok, so you wish the steel had been saved -- why? It's not a loaded question...it's an honest question. Is there something about the steel in that picture that leads you to a question? If so, what is the question? JB
I think a question has been raised on whether chemical explosives were used to bring down the WTC buildings. A check on the steel would have been able to answer that question.
i have no doubt this will help even the most confused out there: <object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/9UgDzT0xxeI"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/9UgDzT0xxeI" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>
Rat: >i have no doubt this will help even the >most confused out there: Nope, there is nothing in that video that relates to your picture so my question still stands unanswered... ***What it is about the picture that you posted that makes it significant to you?*** So far, your responses have not even touched on anything related to the picture. JB
i thought you wanted to see a 45 degree cut so i posted it. then you said thanks but no thanks, you wanted pictures specifically from 5p. what am i missing here??? it is perfectly reasonable for me to wish that they had saved the evidence at the crime scene. anyone else, is that stupid to want the evidence from a crime scene saved??? what am i missing turok??? now i am confused.
interesting shots at 00:03:15 and 00:03:40 into the video: <embed style="width:400px; height:326px;" id="VideoPlayback" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docId=5901090782702056152&hl=en" flashvars=""> </embed>
fires so hot they disintegrated the planes and the black boxes. they knocked off the protective coating/insulation of the steel beams and heated them up to the point the fantasy pancaking started. but riddle me this IHOP boy, why didnt they get Edna? things that make you go hmmmmmmmmm: <embed style="width:400px; height:326px;" id="VideoPlayback" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" src="http://video.google.com/googleplayer.swf?docId=6486111531873218021&hl=en" flashvars=""> </embed>
Rat: >i thought you wanted to see a 45 degree >cut so i posted it. then you said thanks but >no thanks, you wanted pictures specifically >from 5p. No, I didn't just ask to see any old 45 degree cut, I asked to see pics of the columns to which he was specifically referring. You respond with a picture containing an image of among other things, a single column that is cut at a 45 degree angle. Well, I don't know if this picture of yours is even one of the columns that 5P is talking about so I say to you (paraphrase) "let's let 5P post his pics before I comment". >what am i missing here??? Let's make this simple A: I can't comment on 5Ps pics because he HASN'T POSTED ANY B: I can't comment on your pic because in spite of my multiple requests, YOU WON'T SAY WHAT IT IS ABOUT THE PIC THAT BOTHERS YOU >It is perfectly reasonable for me to wish that >they had saved the evidence at the crime scene. Of course it's perfectly reasonable --- BUT THAT DOESN'T ANSWER MY QUESTION ABOUT YOUR PICTURE!!!!! Without an explanation from you regarding what you find odd in that picture, that picture adds NOTHING to your wish regarding saving the evidence. Does that cut look nefarious to you? -- I don't know 'cause you won't say. >what am i missing turok??? See A: and B: above. JB
http://www.debunking911.com/ironburns.htm The only likely source of the heat great enough to actually "melt" significant quantities of iron in the piles (or even just raise so much of it to red-hot or to 2000F) would be chemical energy (i.e., "combustion" of some sort). Professor Jones assumes that all the carbonaceous "combustible" matter in the "piles" would have burned away long before the time that the red-hot and molten iron was discovered (weeks after the collapse of the WTC towers). Perhaps it did, by weeks after the collapse. But Professor Jones obviously does not comprehend that the hot, red-hot and molten IRON IS COMBUSTIBLE matter. Jones has no clue because he has no conception of Steel Burning (iron oxidation) in air. The Truth is that: HOT STEEL WILL CONTINUE TO UNDERGO EXOTHERMIC OXIDATION REACTIONS WHILE EXPOSED TO AIR, CAUSING IRON TO INCREASE ITS TEMPERATURE UNTIL IT MELTS, FORMING POOLS OF MOLTEN IRON. Professor Jones' comments and conjectures about the origin of the alleged molten iron found within the three huge piles of combustible matter burning after the collapse of the WTC towers, distinctly prove that Professor Jones is oblivious of the fact that Iron Burns in air. For perspective, I found this children's educational webpage that further illustrates that "Professor Jones" (among the "9-11 Scholars") is an incompetent ignoramus because he ignores the scientifically provable (or disprovable) fact that Iron metal itself burns, and that when amassed in large piles can ignite fires (and can even melt itself). The article discusses child-safe experiments observing a very slow oxidation of iron (rusting at room temperature), but also mentions: "Sometimes a big load of iron in a ship can get hot. The heat can even set other materials on fire. Thatâs because the iron is rusting, which means it is burning very, very slowly. Iron rusts in a chemical reaction called oxidation. That means the iron reacts with oxygen gas from the air. Oxidation is the chemical reaction that occurs when anything burns in air. Like most oxidations, rusting gives off heat." http://www.highlightskids.com/Science/TryThis/h3TT1004_ironBurns.asp?subTitleID=159 Beyond the scope of this child-oriented article, it is important to understand that general rule in chemistry that most chemical reactions (e.g., oxidation of iron) are accelerated by higher temperatures. This is especially true of iron oxidation. This means, that the hotter iron metal in contact with oxygen is, the faster it will oxidize (burn). For hundreds of years, Blacksmiths took advantage of this well-known property of sulfur dioxide by "welding" iron parts together over fires of sulfur-rich charcoal, which lowers the melting point of iron at its surface. Sulfur Dioxide gas can be released by the burning of ANY ORGANIC substance, including wood, paper, flesh, fabrics, and especially plastics (carpets), and rubber (rubber is "vulcanized" by adding sulfur to it). Sulfur Dioxide gas, has a distinct impact on the nose, and is a respiratory irritant, because it forms sulfurous acid when it combines with water or moisture in the human body. Sulfur Dioxide can be further oxidized to form sulfuric acid (when added to water). High concentrations of Sulfurous fumes emanating from the piles at Ground Zero have been documented, and have been identified as a probable cause of respiratory ailments suffered by many rescue workers and cleanup crews. "One of the America's top air-quality scientists test the air around Ground Zero and tells NBC's Lisa Myers and the NBC Investigative Team he was shocked to find alarming levels of sulfuric acid and fine particles more than three weeks after the attack. (MSNBC, October 29, 2003)" And on and on and on.....