- Why does NIST state that a yellow stream of molten metal seen in some photographs pouring down the side of WTC2 was aluminum from the crashed plane, even though aluminum burns with a white glow?
NIST concluded that the source of the molten material was aluminum alloys from the aircraft, since these are known to melt between 475 degrees Celsius (900 degrees Fahrenheit) and 640 degrees Celsius (1,200 degrees Fahrenheit)—depending on the particular alloy—well below the expected temperatures (about 1,000 degrees Celsius or 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit) in the vicinity of the fires. Aluminum is not expected to ignite at normal fire temperatures and there is no visual indication that the material flowing from the tower was burning.
- Why didn’t the NIST investigation consider reports of molten steel in the wreckage from the WTC towers?
The condition of the steel in the wreckage of the WTC towers (i.e., whether it was in a molten state or not) was irrelevant to the investigation of the collapse since it does not provide any conclusive information on the condition of the steel when the WTC towers were standing.
They reported the WTC7 before it fucking happened. I’m not a flat-Earther or a moon landing denier, and before Covid, I wasn’t an anti-vaxxer. I’m tired of being fucking gaslit about shit that happened and being dismissed as a “conspiracy nut” when pointing out how the supposed evidence doesn’t add up.
So your an anti vaxxer now…? And thus a conspiracy nut now.
I’m confused, why would you be mad at being called what you are now if that’s your choice.
I don’t trust the Covid vaccine boosters or the flu vaccine. Do you know what negative efficacy means? The last few years has seen an actual decline in life expectancy in the US. Don’t take my word for it, Google it.
You seem to be hinting that the towers of the WTC in NYC weren’t destroyed by two planes that were hijacked by Al Quaida terrorists? That “somebody else” was responsible for this tragedy? That disproven conspiracy theory is an insult to the people that died that day, and their surviving relatives.
The post content is literally a refutation of one of those conspiracy theories?
Did they edit it to be something entirely different, or did you have AI summarize it for you or what’s going on?
No. Because the text I provided very much informs you that the source was aluminium and various other metals found at the crash site.
Ah, yes. The old, “a possible small discrepancy” leading to an extreme conspiracy that has no evidence whatsoever.
deleted by creator
Can you explain in 1-2 sentences what you’re trying to prove ?
Nothing. I was trying to prove nothing.
Success 💯
The World Trade Center was destroyed by Al Quaeda terrorists. There’s a lot of evidence which suggests many wealthy people knew it would happen beforehand and made moves to profit from it.
A massive amount of extremely high-risk puts were purchased against the only two airlines involved in the attacks. Every one of them ended paying out.
There’s also the fact that Building 7 and the section of the Pentagon targeted by the attacks were storing the evidence and personnel involved in the world’s largest financial crimes investigations.
The conspiracy isn’t what happened, it’s who knew it would happen and who benefitted from it.
Sad. You have fallen for some weird twist on the common conspiracy story. I’ve checked them all; there’s no evidence, it’s just stupid to believe this shit. Grow up, man, don’t get distracted from living a sane, productive life.
Yes, I’m aware of what the official report says. The FBI only concluded they couldn’t prove any connection to terrorism.
Every mathematician and data analyst the SEC hired to look at the trades said they were indistinguishable from trades made on advance knowledge. Despite this, the SEC concluded in their findings the trade patterns were “coincidence”. To this day, the portions of the report detailing the SEC’s basis for their conclusion remains classified or so heavily redacted as to only offer conclusionary information.
So, the SEC looked at all the evidence indicating advance knowledge, handwaved it, said it didn’t actually mean exactly what the experts said, then provided “trust me bro” as their only source. To me, that’s about as believable as Epstein killing himself. But if that’s good enough to count as proof in your mind, go ahead and believe what you want, no judgment from me.
The only sad thing here is how you treat people you disagree with.
The sad thing with you conspiracy theorists is that you pick some internet factlet and build an entire world on top of it and THEN everything else is made to fit. It’s due to a lack of Critical Thinking-ability (very prevalent in the USA). This also means that you can’t think critically about your own decisions in your daily life - e.g. healthcare or finances. The good news is that Critical Thinking can be learned; also later in life. So instead of digging into nonsense stories about the SEC and 911, start reading on Critical Thinking; it will make you a more successful, healthier, happier human being.
The steel in the towers structure didn’t have to melt to cause a collapse.
First, the buildings were hit by two, fully loaded, airliners which caused substantial structural destruction.
Then the fire softened the steel to the point of collapse. Metal doesn’t go from rock-solid to a liquid form in an instant.
But hey, here’s the proof: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2TMVDYpp2Q
As soon as anyone can prove to me that a fucking plane crashing into a tower (which I hope we all agree has happened) cannot possibly cause a collapse, I will start believing that conspiracy bullshit as well. In the meantime I will stick to the obvious answer.
I mean a blacksmith’s forge can easily get up to 650 C and that’s just powered by a small pile of coal.
It’s not the coal that makes it that hot. Anybody can ignite a normal coal fire in their grill and it won’t get hot enough to forge. The critical component of a blacksmith’s forge is the ability to force additional air, and thus, oxygen, into the fire.
Exactly. It’s not just the fuel, it’s the conditions it burns in.
Molten metals, especially above a certain temperature, primarily get their color from blackbody radiation. This is not the same as burning them, which, as your quote points out was not expected to be happening. From what I’ve read, aluminum will glow less brightly than steel.
I thought they said the molten stuff was also glass.
