Je suis Omar

NIST was the body charged with investigating. Simple scientific experiments that elementary school students, with supervision, could do. But not all the "scientists" at NIST.

Your source isn't from the RJ Lee Group, BlackDog.

But this one point, the issue of the molten steel/iron, is not garbage and speculation. Yet you go back into, bring up, garbage and speculation, instead of addressing the impossibility of molten steel/iron at the WTC site. You also ignore the boiling/vaporization of lead and the melting of molybdenum, both of which require much higher temperatures than the melting of steel.

How many posts are we at now, OGFT, where you have offered nothing remotely approaching science? That would be from your first posting on this thread. You made a big pretence that you were doing "science", but it became evident you were not, when you fled when it was pointed out how terrible your "source" was. From this last post of yours, or any post of yours, do point out your science.

Are you speaking about NIST, supposedly a scientific body, (but which was actually an arm of the Bush/Cheney government) the one that has refused to provide its "science" for peer review? The architects and engineers of AE911Truth put their science, their experiments forward, the ones that show not only that NIST is wrong but also the NOVAs, the nonsensical crap of Popular Mechanics, the ... are, have also been spectacularly wrong. You drone on and on about "peer review", but NIST has steadfastly refused to allow peer review. That's what one would expect in a totalitarian regime. Why are you so big on peer review and then you fail to note how NIST won't allow peer review? That's not science, from you [ ROTFLMAO ] or NIST. You drone on and on about science and experimentation, but NIST failed to do these incredibly simple experiments to defend their silly "molten aluminum" notion, experiments that high school students could do, precisely because they knew the implications and going there would completely blow apart their many years of planned, careful deception. Which "debunking" website have you taken this meme from? It is impossible for the molten metal seen flowing from WTC 2 to be aluminum. Back to square one. As has been explained above, but it obviously needs repeating. It is impossible for it to have been molten aluminum because the yellow white colors of the molten material, clearly illustrates that temperatures were reached in limited locales that were above and beyond the temperatures that are possible from jet fuel/office contents fires. The jet fuel/office contents fires were nowhere near hot enough to have melted steel/iron. This is something that everyone is agreed upon. Yet we have numerous examples of molten steel and molten iron at the WTC site post 9-11. The disconnect from reality is truly amazing.

I watched a bit, GH, but it just seemed to be filming of the event. It was an hour long as I recall - correct me if I'm wrong. If you could give a précis of what you felt was so pertinent, it might be worth a view. But I have to say I'm perplexed at what so many seem to be missing; whether it's on purpose or not, it is hard to tell. There was no chance, zero chance according to the official story for there to be molten steel, molten iron and certainly not vaporized lead or molybdenum because none of the available fuel sources, jet fuel and office furnishings could generate temperatures anywhere close to the temperatures needed to melt the aforementioned metals. And yet, there WAS evidence, lots of it, for molten metal, the steel framing components of WTC 1, 2 & 7. How do you explain the presence of molten steel and iron when it is an impossibility according to the official story? Please, Jacee, cybercoma, Michael, anyone who cares to, explain how it is possible for that molten metal to have existed. Some still exists.

How many would that be?

You've just described the point of the thread, in, unnn, let me check, ..., yup, two fairly succinct sentences. Now that wasn't that difficult, was it, msj?

When did this occur, DD?

How long are you going to go on parading your ignorance (non pejorative sense) on the molten steel or iron coming out of WTC 2? NIST's contention that it was molten aluminum was proven wrong. NIST's further contention that it was mixed up with organics was also proven wrong. It wasn't molten aluminum so what ELSE could it have been? Blacksmiths have for centuries been describing heated metals by their colors. In this case, aluminum isn't a possibility! It wasn't molten aluminum so what ELSE could it have been? Five posts from you, the fellow who claims he addresses the issues, and still there's nothing on the unexplained, unexplainable molten steel, iron, lead, molybdenum.

A number of scientists and engineers have analyzed the event. Even NIST made an attempt, which you naively clamped onto. But NIST was wrong. They could have performed these simple experiments to validate their hypothesis. After all, that was their job. They didn't. Now, there is a great deal of material that you haven't addressed. JBG has addressed it. What's holding you back?

That's not clear. Any competent junior high school teacher would suggest you collect your thoughts and rewrite what you are trying to express.

It should be very easy for you to produce one out of your "multiple times".

You "address" things like OGFT "addresses" things. Like you have above. This information, which you, still, studiously ignore, comes from FEMA, the USGS, RJ Lee Group - I trust you know you these folks are. Run back to your game of thrones, BD. Fantasy is obviously your number one choice.

Or this just quoted post of yours. But you having two entries to one for B_C2004 isn't really fair, is it? Let's wait until his/her next post.

Whose was the better "Oh look a squirrel!" post, Sharkman, this one of yours or the B_C2004 one that preceded this one of yours?

What hypocrisy are you referring to, Freddy? Please, in one post, try to be clear on what you mean.

Nope, jbg, even trillions of tons of jet fuel wouldn't do it. Hydrocarbons cannot attain the temperatures required to do these things in an open air fire like that of 9-11."because a building fire, even with a perfect mixture of air and fuel, could at most reach 1,000°C (1,832°F)" "Steel, which has a melting point of [1538 degrees C] 2,800 degrees Fahrenheit" "molybdenum (Mo) is known for its extremely high melting point: 2,623°C (4,753°F)." "Accordingly, whereas the 2004 report referred to high temperatures, the earlier report indicated that the temperatures were not merely high but extremely high, because for lead to boil and hence vaporize, it must be heated to 1,749°C (3,180°F)." Ibid

I hope that the moderators will allow you to express your opinion, Poochy. I hope that this stays. But of course you do realize that I have no direct control over that. I would even be willing to discuss this theory that you just laid down here. Start a thread and we'll have at 'er. But returning to the facts that I laid out for you to consider, before you edited your post. I shan't post them again here but I feel quite strongly that you feel the facts are what is important. I look forward to your reply on the facts.

Please explain what errors you see in the material and why you believe them to be errors.

* No legitimate fuel source was available on 9-11 to melt steel, create iron spherules, vaporize lead or melt molybdenum. *No legitimate fuel source was available that could have created the extreme temperatures necessary to do the above. * Examples of molten steel, molten iron, vaporized lead, melted molybdenum were all found in the WTC rubble. What conclusions do you draw from the above facts?

How many times are you going to studiously ignore the facts, BlackDog?

Removing the ex military element from policing would help a great deal.

Put down your shovel, Freddy, climb out of the hole and try again.

Shady, it's you who is trying to change the subject. The thread was started to educate you about the USA helping to establish PolPot and the Khmer Rouge. Something you, in your ignorance, non pejorative sense, denied. And then, after they had slaughtered around a million people, A MILLION PEOPLE, Shady!!, the USA supported them with food intended for real refugees, strengthened them, trained them and even supported them at the UN in their Faustian attempts to make them again the governing party of Cambodia. You seek to derail a discussion of USA direct involvement in the genocidal actions against the Cambodian people to dither on over some inane, meaningless questions?