hot enough

I know of all these things. If you have ever heard him speak, he has a very distinct foreign accent. He is not dumb. His story was modified when? almost into 2004, when the US official conspiracy theory finally got its act together and got everyone in line. The good professor described molten steel. What sense of twisted logic thinks that that is taking things out of context. He never withdrew that fact. Because he can't. Many others have described it. FEMA has pictures of molten/vaporized steel, which for some strange reason you deny. RJLee Group described molten iron [2,800F], vaporized lead [3,180F], molten molybdenum [4700F],

Do you consider Professor Leroy Hulsey a conspiracy theorist, segnosaur? How about the Aerospace engineer, Tony Szamboti, or the NASA scientist, Dwain Deets, or Dan Barnum, FAIA [Fellow, American Institute of Architects], or Neils Harrit, a 50 year professor of chemistry in Denmark, or ... ? Can circa 3,000 professional architects and engineers, all fully functioning members of their profession all be conspiracy theorists? Aren't you a conspiracy theorist? You believe in a conspiracy theory.

We only have to note that this is a 16 year old girl debating like the rational, normal, thinking adult she is and then compare hers to yours, OftenWrong. And still you have no sense of shame.

Nope, that isn't at all important to the issue at hand. That is for prosecutors and the court system. You stated, "What you actually see is not molten steel, but rather slag. Quite a difference". We are discussing molten/vaporized steel and the other molten metals that could not have been at WTC given the US official story about alleged hijackers with jet fuel/office furnishings - max 1,800F, in optimum burn conditions, which did not exist at WTC. A supporter of the US official theory states " However, it is highly unlikely that the steel at the WTC experienced temperatures above the 750–800°C range." [1,382 to 1,472F] http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html

The following is on Dr. Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl, one of the first scientists who was on the WTC site. He was shocked at how quickly the steel was being removed from WTC. That indeed was a shock to many fire and crimes scene investigators - why such a hurry to remove the evidence from a crime scene. This scientist found many examples of molten steel. Even one example is one too many because there was no legitimate or legal reason that it could be there. Jet fuel/office furnishings cannot melt steel [or molybdenum 4,700F, or vaporize lead 3,180F, or vaporize steel 4,800+F] ======================== September 19-October 2001: Structural Engineer Finds Evidence of Extreme Temperatures at WTC Dr. Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl examines steel from the World Trade Center. [Source: University of California, Berkeley] An engineer investigating the remains of the World Trade Center sees melted girders and other evidence that the towers experienced extreme temperatures on 9/11. Dr. Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl is a professor of civil and environmental engineering at the University of California, Berkeley. [CHRONICLE OF HIGHER EDUCATION, 12/7/2001; CBS NEWS, 3/11/2002] He arrives in New York on September 19 to conduct a two-week scientific reconnaissance of the collapsed towers, hoping to gain an understanding of how they had come down. His project is one of eight financed by the National Science Foundation to study the WTC disaster. [NEW YORK TIMES, 10/2/2001; BERKELEYAN, 10/3/2001; US CONGRESS. HOUSE. COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, 3/6/2002] He examines numerous pieces of steel taken from Ground Zero. [CHRONICLE OF HIGHER EDUCATION, 12/7/2001] Astaneh-Asl will describe the WTC as “the best-designed building I have ever seen.” [SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE, 10/22/2001] Yet he notices unusual warping and other damage in its remaining steel: At a recycling center in New Jersey, he sees 10-ton steel beams from the towers that look “like giant sticks of twisted licorice.” [CHRONICLE OF HIGHER EDUCATION, 12/7/2001] He shows the San Francisco Chronicle a “banana-shaped, rust-colored piece of steel” that has “twisted like toffee during the terrorist attack.” [SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE, 10/22/2001] He later recalls, “I saw melting of girders in [the] World Trade Center.” [PBS, 5/10/2007] Astaneh-Asl says that steel flanges have been reduced “from an inch thick to paper thin.” [BERKELEYAN, 10/3/2001] He finds a foot-long twisted shard of steel that is “like a piece of bread, but it was high-strength steel.” He comments, “I haven’t seen anything like this [before].” [BERKELEY DAILY PLANET, 10/20/2001] He finds “severely scorched [steel] members from 40 or so floors below the points of impact [by the planes].” He believes this is the result of the planes having destroyed the elevator walls, thereby allowing burning jet fuel to pour down into the building, igniting fires hundreds of feet below the impact floors. [CBS NEWS, 3/12/2002] Astaneh-Asl sees a charred I-beam from WTC Building 7, which collapsed late in the afternoon of 9/11. “The beam, so named because its cross-section looks like a capital I, had clearly endured searing temperatures. Parts of the flat top of the I, once five-eighths of an inch thick, had vaporized.” [NEW YORK TIMES, 10/2/2001] Other individuals will report seeing molten metal in the remains of the World Trade Center in the weeks and months after 9/11 (see September 12, 2001-February 2002), and data collected by NASA reveals dozens of “hot spots” (some over 1,300 degrees Fahrenheit) at Ground Zero (see September 16-23, 2001). But Thomas Eagar—an engineering professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology—later comments that the “temperature of the fire at the WTC [on 9/11] was not unusual, and it was most definitely not capable of melting steel.” [EAGAR AND MUSSO, 12/2001] Yet Astaneh-Asl will later put forward the “tentative” conclusion, “The collapse of the [Twin Towers] was most likely due to the intense fire initiated by the jet fuel of the planes and continued due to burning of the building contents.” [ASTANEH-ASL, 11/30/2003 ] Astaneh-Asl is a member of the team assembled by the American Society of Civil Engineers to investigate the World Trade Center site after 9/11 (see September 12, 2001), though he will resign from this because he disagrees with its decision to keep findings secret until the initial inquiry has been completed. [NEW YORK TIMES, 10/2/2001; ASSOCIATED PRESS, 9/6/2002] Entity Tags: World Trade Center, Thomas Eagar, Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl Timeline Tags: Complete 911 Timeline, 9/11 Timeline

I want you to understand how untruthful you are being, capricorn. Don't get angry, just think for a moment. I am quoting eminent scientists, diligent and brilliant researchers, dedicated individuals who have a deep love and respect for science. Is this what you are showing here with your remarks?

I'm glad we have got that settled. Might I then suggest you go to the cooking and sewing threads? Not sexist, for I would suggest the same to any male who offered such a stunning admission.

Please do explain.

But you are a denier of science, an anti-truth young lady. Are you proud of this?

I do understand. It means melted, in a molten state, flowing. And for steel to be vaporized it has to be boiled, which requires much higher temperatures. As described by Dr Barnett, below, which was an edit/addition to my reply to you which you may not have seen. "And Dr. Jonathan Barnett, a member of FEMA’s WTC investigation team, will describe steel members in the debris pile that appear to have been partly evaporated in extremely high temperatures."

Do you disagree with the info, capricorn? If so, how so, and why?

I did read it. And I saw the pictures of the molten/vaporized steel girders, one of which came from WTC7 and the other from either WTC 1 or 2. How did you miss them? "And Dr. Jonathan Barnett, a member of FEMA’s WTC investigation team, will describe steel members in the debris pile that appear to have been partly evaporated in extremely high temperatures."

The depths of the delusion. Pictures for you. https://www.fema.gov/pdf/library/fema403_apc.pdf More on the way.

Altai didn't say that it was falling at free fall. The twin towers did not fall at free fall speed. WTC7 fell at free fall speed. That is not possible unless there is a controlled demolition. A symmetrical collapse is NEVER possible from fires because fires, as every child knows, don't create conditions for symmetrical collapse. In fact fires have never in the history of steel framed towers caused a collapse. The twin towers fell at accelerating speed - another impossibility! For that to happen, the structural resistance below has to be removed. Again, only controlled demolitions could do that. If it had actually been a gravity collapse, it would have been halting, irregular, pieces falling off one side, then another. The concrete would not have been pulverized into micron size particles. Only explosives can do that. Gravity collapses cannot hurl multi ton pieces of steel horizontally for up to 600 feet/200 yards.

And why wouldn't they, moreover why shouldn't they?

As I mentioned: "A scientific paper shows that WTC1 would have self arrested within two floors. That study pointed out the large errors in the science that NIST relied on to come to their unscientific conclusions."

And what in your lengthy posts can you point to as illustrating you have expertise, segnosaur?

Occam's razor put the lie to the US story. It is a crazy, incredibly fanciful fable that only the highly gullible believe. It isn't simple at all, it is a mishmash of impossible events. Occam would laugh at this suggestion. [Yes, I understand.] Listen to how confused segnosaur's story is - "but the explanation of the official story (that hijackers caused several plane crashes, one of which lead to the collapse of the WTC) fits the evidence." "several plane crashes"; "one of which lead to the collapse of the WTC)" - gibberish! WTC7 - free fall, WTC7 molten/vaporized steel, WTC7 nanothermite found - none of these things can fit into the US official story, it is a fable, a fiction, a fairy tale and why sentient adults ignore these proven facts and continue in their delusions is one for generations of psychiatrists.

Altai isn't so naive as to be bought off with a piece of slippery propaganda. Yes, "people" believe "that Al Qaeda carried out 9/11 just because "The government said so"". This is the same government that told you that Osama bin Laden was the mastermind and you probably still believe that lie. You are wrong about your second point too. These organizations are scared s***less to go anywhere near discussing 911. The AIA hasn't once mentioned the WTC towers in their magazine since 911. But it would have been pretty good propaganda if you didn't have the problem of the NIST study being a fraud, WTC7 falling at free fall speed, molten/vaporized steel, nanothermite found in WTC dust, the twin towers falling at accelerating speeds - all these things and many more clearly point to the fact that the alleged 19 Arab hijackers had nothing to do with 9-11. A scientific paper shows that WTC1 would have self arrested within two floors. That study pointed out the large errors in the science that NIST relied on to come to their unscientific conclusions.

No one needs to know all the details [I'm curious, no personal attack here; what are ghetto details] just the ones that show that the US official story is a fraud. NIST's study is a fraud. NIST's study was done to cover up the controlled demolitions of WTCs 1, 2 & 7. 19 Arab hijackers did not do this. Aren't you shocked to find out the big bad boy, Osama bin Laden wasn't involved in 911. Just ask yourself, who were the people who lied to you about that?

That is small potatoes, Altai. We are dealing with the USA, the folks of death squads and worldwide torture chambers. And those are the nice things.

Not at all. I suggested with polite indirection that you could be not viewing this accurately. My apologies if I hurt your feelings. You really haven't seemed to be a shrinking violet.

That's what Altai pointed out, the American religion, false from the start to today.

Cheap shot?

Facts don't mean anything to you. It was Tuesday morning. The cheering crowds was another US propaganda myth. But let's turn this around. Consider all the cheering from Americans over the deaths of tens of millions their governments have slaughtered since WWII. The huge majority of Americans who supported the illegal invasions of both Iraq and Afghanistan, all because of US lies. Your perpetual whining is really really sickening considering the death and suffering that has been pretty much the sum total of the USA. And to top this all off, it wasn't the alleged hijackers that the US has falsely accused. The science says, unequivocally, it is impossible. Who could have done? Who is the only group that had access to the nanothermite which was found at WTC?