hot enough

The molten steel seen flowing out of WTC2 has been proven to be molten steel from the nanothermite that was used to blow up the twin towers. Liquid metal was seen pouring out of the South Tower during the final seven minutes before its collapse on September 11, 2001. Was it a combination of steel and iron, or was it aluminum and/or lead? What was the molten metal reported under the rubble of the Twin Towers at Ground Zero? And why is the identification of the molten metal important? Put another way, the evidence does in fact demonstrate that the observed molten metal was indeed molten iron and molten steel, and that it could not have been either molten aluminum or molten lead. Proof that the molten metal was in fact steel and iron allows us to draw three conclusions. First, it reveals that the official explanation for the collapse of the Twin Towers was certainly false. Second, it exposes misconduct by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), which ignored the National Fire Protection Association's investigative protocols in the NFPA 921 Guide for Fire and Explosion Investigations. Third, and most importantly, it provides clear-cut evidence of controlled demolition. This revelation justifies a true investigation of the collapses of the WTC skyscrapers. http://www1.ae911truth.org/en/affiliate-marketing-program/899-what-was-the-molten-metal-seen-pouring-out-of-the-south-tower-minutes-before-its-collapse-steel-and-iron-or-aluminum-andor-lead.html

Still no proof from Omni, never any proof from Omni. Such deep dishonesty. Prove there were ACTUALLY hijackers. Where are the photographs? Airports have CCTVs. Where is the DNA?

Prove there were ACTUALLY hijackers. You don't have a grasp of proof or honesty. Where are the photographs? Where is the DNA?

Prove there were hijackers.

Prove it, Rue.

How does this escape a guy who normally appears sensible? There has been no challenges, no peer reviewed science in any peer reviewed journals challenging the discovery of nanothermite in WTC dust. There was no peer review allowed by NIST for their "science" but you still, phantasmagorically, support their wacky theories, for which there is no scientific support.

=============

No doubt at all Michael. They are peer reviewed science, not theories. Why don't you make it known and discuss that NIST wouldn't do peer review. That and your support for same plus your distractions and your careening wildly off topic illustrates that you are a cargo cult scientist. The questions you refuse to address, the ones of hard science, tell it all. They prove there were no hijackers so come on, stop being delusional, who does that leave that owns the nanothermite.

However complex it was, it was done, of that there is no doubt. That will be the subject of a further investigation. One motive I already mentioned was the huge cost of taking out all the asbestos, a multi-billion dollar task. One could speculate on many other possible motives, - how good the new nanothermite works, ... , but as we can easily see they don't get us anywhere. Dealing with the present realities, on the other hand, does get us somewhere. 1) Are you denying that iron microspheres, molten molybdenum, vaporized lead, were found in WTC dust by RJLee? 2) Are you denying that FEMA found and studied the eutectic steel and published a report on same? 3) Are you denying the melted revolvers, the fused concrete and steel, the free fall of WTC7, the accelerating speed of the twin towers' collapse? 4) Are you denying the molten steel seen flowing from WTC2 minutes before its collapse? 5) Are you denying that the US government developed new nanothermite explosives in the 1990s? There are many published and debated issues written by real scientists in many journals. The NIST report has been challenged for good reason, it is fraudulent, it is bad science, as Richard Feynman noted, it is cargo cult science, similar in nature to that of religions. Real scientists don't hide their science. Do you think it's science to provide a "scientific" paper two days after a complex event like WTC? What scientist would ever do that?

Never a source for your lies, Rue. I wonder why.

They are named on the paper I have quoted here a number of times, Rue. You folks really are the most incredible deniers of reality. There are actually nine. This comports well with what the US Lawrence Livermore scientists have to say about the relatively recent discovery of the new super thermites, the nanothermites. Do you deny that nanothermite was produced by Lawrence Livermore Labs in the 1990s, Rue? =================== Energy Density vs Power, the Traditional Tradeoffs Energetic materials are substances that store energy chemically. For instance, oxygen, by itself, is not an energetic material, and neither is fuel such as gasoline. But a combination of oxygen and fuel is. Energetic materials are made in two ways. The first is by physically mixing solid oxidizers and fuels, a process that, in its basics, has remained virtually unchanged for centuries. Such a process results in a composite energetic material such as black powder. The second process involves creating a monomolecular energetic material, such as TNT, in which each molecule contains an oxidizing component and a fuel component. For the composites, the total energy can be much greater than that of monomolecular materials. However, the rate at which this energy is released is relatively slow when compared to the release rate of monomolecular materials. Monomolecular materials such as TNT work fast and thus have greater power than composites, but they have only moderate energy densities-commonly half those of composites. "Greater energy densities versus greater power—that's been the traditional trade-off," says Simpson. "With our new process, however, we're mixing at molecular scales, using grains the size of tens to hundreds of molecules. That can give us the best of both worlds-higher energy densities and high power as well." https://str.llnl.gov/str/RSimpson.html ================ 1) Are you denying that iron microspheres, molten molybdenum, vaporized lead, were found in WTC dust by RJLee? 2) Are you denying that FEMA found and studied the eutectic steel and published a report on same? 3) Are you denying the melted revolvers, the fused concrete and steel, the free fall of WTC7, the accelerating speed of the twin towers' collapse? 4) Are you denying the molten steel seen flowing from WTC2 minutes before its collapse?

War crimes are war crimes and terrorism is terrorism, capricorn. Note that you are doing what all you folks regularly do, deny stark reality.

I'm not walking away from anything, Michael, but you certainly are. You are also being purposefully deceptive. You're afraid to mention your "point". You are denying so many stark realities in favor of a highly speculative meme just so you can avoid the damning stark realities. That is lying by grand omission and all of you do it, with such incredibly craven cowardliness. 1) Are you denying that iron microspheres, molten molybdenum, vaporized lead, were found in WTC dust by RJLee? 2) Are you denying that FEMA found and studied the eutectic steel and published a report on same? 3) Are you denying the melted revolvers, the fused concrete and steel, the free fall of WTC7, the accelerating speed of the twin towers' collapse? 4) Are you denying the huge volumes of molten steel seen pouring out of WTC2 minutes before its collapse?

The Rebel is not a source. It's a wacko right wing wing of the Tea Party.

Two illegal invasions of sovereign nations, Rue. You are supporting the equivalent of what the Nazis did. All based on a false flag gigantic lie.

You are guilty of being complicit in the murders of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and Afghans. You are guilty of being a enthusiastic supporter of known war criminals and terrorists, known torturers who run torture chambers around the world. Known murderers who behead, dismember alive, napalm, "shake and bake", murder children, ... . Now that is christianity, big time.

The military were involved in an illegal invasion of a sovereign nation, the ultimate war crime. You are supporting war criminals and terrorists. What don't you understand about the US government in negotiations with the Taliban until August of 2001. What don't you understand about a false flag event, one on many US false flag events to lie their way into two illegal invasions, not to mention, Libya and Syria, more US terrorism.

From Omni's video: "We've got to engineer better buildings to give people more time to escape". =============================== There have been no changes to how buildings are constructed because everyone knows they were CDed. Insurance companies have not been telling clients to upgrade their buildings, and insurance companies are very risk adverse, because they too know the buildings were safe, that they was no chance for a fire induced collapse. NIST's attempt to proved the insulation was removed was a farce that they largely abandoned. The Cardington fires had zero insulation on the secondary beams and no collapses occurred even with higher temperatures than were recorded at WTC. Many steel framed high rises have burned much longer and much hotter and no collapses have ever occurred. Gravity collapses cannot free fall, nor can they accelerate throughout the fall. Muslims cannot suspend the laws of physics, only controlled demolitions can cause buildings to fall as they did. Gravity collapses cannot produce molten iron, molten/vaporized steel, molten molybdenum, vaporized lead. Only nanothermite can do that. Only thermate can produce the eutectic steel described by myriad scientists, including FEMA.

You believe it but you can't provide any evidence to show this wild, crazy conspiracy theory has any truth to it. Why are all you USGOCT supporters so nebulous. I believe you made one point and I showed you that it was fatuous. If you wish to discuss it further, repost. Or are you going to flee now for a few more weeks, months? A) Why do you support a wacky theory when the lead scientists for this wacky theory have repeatedly lied? 1) Are you denying that iron microspheres, molten molybdenum, vaporized lead, were found in WTC dust by RJLee? 2) Are you denying that FEMA found and studied the eutectic steel and published a report on same? 3) Are you denying the melted revolvers, the fused concrete and steel, the free fall of WTC7, the accelerating speed of the twin towers' collapse? 4) Are you denying the molten steel seen flowing from WTC2 minutes before its collapse?

What didn't happen? You are awful when it comes to science and being clear. But you know that, that is and has been your schtick since you arrived. 1) Are you denying that iron microspheres, molten molybdenum, vaporized lead, were found in WTC dust by RJLee? 2) Are you denying that FEMA found and studied the eutectic steel and published a report on same? 3) Are you denying the melted revolvers, the fused concrete and steel, the free fall of WTC7, the accelerating speed of the twin towers' collapse?

Provide your source.

Typical of Omni science and Omni debate. Were you able to remember that meme by yourself, it is roughly 20 words long, or did you have to have a confab with Wilber and the boys?

How come you can't discuss the molten iron microspheres described by the USGS, RJLee, FEMA, The molten steel flowing out of WTC2, the molten/vaporized/eutectic steel described by FEMA, the melted revolvers, the fused concrete and steel, the free fall of WTC7, the accelerating speed of the twin towers, any one of which blows apart the USGOCT myth?

BFD! That has nothing at all to do with the CD of the three towers. Now that is funny! Give it a whirl, Omni. Knock yourself out! Break a leg!

And you, Rue, the know-it-all for the USGOCT can't come up with any names of USGOCT scientists who have been published in peer reviewed journals? Why did you go to a wacky skeptics website? Why didn't you quote some of these USGOCT supporting scientists?