Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
Sure.
However, the FEMA report did find that regions of steel in beams of the WTC had been subjected to "severe high temperature corrosion attack" and subsequent melting.[71] Further, the report found that temperatures of these regions of the steel beams investigated approached 1,000C degrees (1,800F), temperatures far lower than would be necessary for melting steel under ordinary circumstances.
( source ) |
These temperatures however contradict the official theory, since only substances on the order of thermate would have allowed the steel in question to react the way it did. This part of the FEMA report was entirely overlooked by NIST, basically because it doesn't fit their theory.
Original source:
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apc.pdf
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
Your telling me that dust collected "far and wide" (in Manhattan) is being used as evidence, and I'm trying to tell you that dust "collected" from any site a distance away from the WTC is most likely contaminated. You can't even be sure the dust being collected was from the WTC or another building.
|
The chain of custody had to be verified and re-verified. Regardless, how would an insurance office, a bank or a housewife all happen to have unignited thermate in their WTC dust?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
If it was vaporized, how do you know it was iron?
|
The iron was turned to vapor - liquefied droplets - then solidified. Vaporized doesn't mean "disappeared".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
Iron is in everything. Iron was smashed into a billion little pieces when the buildings fell. Not to mention the fireball.
|
The iron in question was separated from its still alloy. It wasn't part of the composants of orange juice, for example, and it was in a form that suggests it had been liquefied.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
You missed my point entirely. What I was saying is that no one takes microscopic samples of "normal building debris". And it's irreverent - A normal building isn't a city of fifty thousand people.
|
For all intents, the WTC were buildings, albeit large ones. They didn't stand outside the laws of physics and normal building construction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
The 9/11 Truth Movement have become so desperate for attention that they have over analyzed everything, and they are grasping at straws to prove there was explosives. Tiny iron particles aren't proof that there was explosives, it was proof that there was concrete.
|
I don't speak from or for the "9/11 Truth Movement" and I don't know why you bring that up.
Liquefied, spheroid iron is evidence of extremely high temperatures, not explosives nor of concrete.
FEMA and the New York Times both characterized the melted, eutectic steel as highly mysterious and warranting further investigation, which was not followed up on...
:D