Model Could Squash 9/11 Conspiracies | Government and Political Conspiracies | Forum

A A A
Avatar

Please consider registering
guest

sp_LogInOut Log In sp_Registration Register

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —






— Match —





— Forum Options —





Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

No permission to create posts
sp_Feed Topic RSS sp_TopicIcon
Model Could Squash 9/11 Conspiracies
September 24, 2011
8:38 am
Avatar
greeney2
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 10245
Member Since:
April 9, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Many questions answered, and also official reports supported.

..New Twin Tower Collapse By Natalie Wolchover | LiveScience.com – Thu, Sep 22, 2011....tweet130Share18EmailPrint......More slideshows.
.Memorable moments at Ground Zero
25 photos - Sun, Sep 11, 2011At Ground Zero: The 9/11 anniversary
301 photos - Sun, Sep 11, 2011International 9/11 memorials
21 photos - Sun, Sep 11, 20119/11 anniversary photos by Flickr users
10 photos - Mon, Sep 12, 20119/11 Pentagon remembrance ceremony
21 photos - Sun, Sep 11, 2011...See more 9/11 photos »....Many 9/11 conspiracy theories revolve around explosions that were seen and heard in the World Trade Center's Twin Towers prior to their collapse. Despite scientific investigations that have explained the processes that brought down the skyscrapers, some conspiracy theorists suggest the plane impacts were just red herrings, to distract from the fact that 9/11 was an "inside job" — that explosives had been implanted earlier in the World Trade Center buildings and were what really brought them down.

Now a materials scientist has come up with a more scientific explanation for the mystery booms, and says his model of the Twin Towers collapse leaves no room for conspiracies. "My model explains all the observed features on 11th September: the explosions, molten metal coming out of the window, the time passing between the crash and the collapse, the fact that the explosions took place in a floor below the place it was burning, and the rapid collapse," Christen Simensen of SINTEF, a research organization in Norway, told Life's Little Mysteries.

As detailed in the new issue of Aluminum International Today, Simensen argues that molten aluminum from the airplane bodies chemically reacted with water in the buildings' sprinkler systems, setting off the explosions that felled the Twin Towers. [Did Nostradamus Really Predict the 9/11 Terrorist Attacks?]

Chain of events

When each jet cut its way into a building, it took with it parts of walls and ceilings, Simensen said. Steel bars in those walls would have gashed its fuel tanks, which would have caught fire. With the plane positioned somewhere in the middle of the building, blanketed in debris and with no route for heat to escape, the temperature would have rapidly escalated, reaching 660 degrees Celsius (1,220 degrees Fahrenheit), the melting point of aluminum — of which there was 30 tons in each plane fuselage — within an hour. The molten aluminum would then have heated up further to between 800 and 850 C (1,470 and 1,560 F).

"Then molten aluminum becomes [as liquid as] water and has so much heat that it will flow through cracks in the floor and down to the next floor," Simensen explained in an email. There was an automatic sprinkler system installed in each ceiling, and it was filled with water. "When huge amount of molten aluminum gets in contact with water, a fierce exothermic reaction will take place, enormous amount of hydrogen is formed and the temperature is locally raised to 1,200 to 1,500 C," or 2,200 to 2,700 F.

Chaos rapidly ensues: "A series of explosions will take place and a whole floor will be blown to pieces," he wrote. "Then the top part of the building will fall on the bottom part, and the tower will collapse within seconds." This is what Simensen believes happened in the two World Trade Center towers.

This isn't obscure chemistry, Simensen says; the U.S. Aluminum Association has recorded 250 accidental molten aluminum/water explosions worldwide since 1980. "Alcoa in Pittsburgh [the worldwide leader in aluminum production] has done a series of such explosions in special laboratory in order to understand what can prevent such explosions and what are the most dangerous situations," he wrote. "For instance they let 30 kilograms [66 pounds] of aluminum react with 20 liters [5.3 gallons] of water, which resulted in a large hole 30 meters [98 feet] in diameter, and nothing left of the laboratory."

The third tower

A third building, World Trade Center 7, fell eight hours after the others. Scientists explained that this happened because of fires that ignited in the building upon the collapse of WTC 1, but some conspiracy theorists take it as further proof that the impacts of the hijacked airplanes weren't what brought any of the buildings down.

Simensen says his theory does not challenge the accepted scientific explanation of the collapse of WTC7.

"The official governmental report said the collapse [of World Trade Center 1 and 2] was due to overheating steel bars in the buildings and did not mention anything about explosions. Their theory … can be used to explain why WTC7 … collapsed. This collapse took place after eight hours of fire and was much slower than the collapse of WTC 1 and WTC 2," Simensen wrote. [10 Ways 9/11 Impacted Science]

Fiery reaction

Simensen's new collapse model has not gained immediate acceptance by proponents of earlier models.

"Occam's Razor says that the simplest explanation is usually the best," said Thomas Eagar, a materials scientist at MIT who has also studied the fall of the towers. "I do not see any merit to this new, more-complex explanation. Any firefighter trying to extinguish a fire without having the water or the electricity shut off will tell you that there will be periodic explosions from inside the building. I don't need to invoke some water/molten aluminum theory to explain this."

Eagar also objects to the notion that the aluminum, if it did melt, would definitely have reacted with the water it encountered. Most of the time when water is sprayed on molten aluminum, "there is no explosion because the water turns to steam and excludes the oxygen, preventing the growth of the combustion," he said.

Along similar lines, Zdenek Bazant, a professor of mechanical engineering at Northwestern University who was first to model how fires could have caused steel columns in the towers to buckle (leading to the buildings' collapses), thinks that the official explanation suffices. "I've explained it in six papers in leading journals," Bazant said. In his opinion, all factors related to the collapse have been accounted for.

But not everyone in the industry agrees with the simpler, official explanation. Roughly 1,600 architects and structural engineers across the country, who have banded together in a group called "Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth," say it does not fully account for the buildings' collapses. With so many people looking for answers, Simensen's alternative theory is likely to receive further attention and study.

This article was provided by Life's Little Mysteries, a sister site to LiveScience. Follow us on Twitter @llmysteries, then join us on Facebook. Follow Natalie Wolchover on Twitter @nattyover.

•Top Ten Conspiracy Theories
•6 Hoax Videos Debunked
•Are We Safer Today than on 9/11?
...

September 24, 2011
12:47 pm
Avatar
Cole_Trickle
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 2730
Member Since:
April 9, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

As detailed in the new issue of Aluminum International Today, Simensen argues that molten aluminum from the airplane bodies chemically reacted with water in the buildings' sprinkler systems, setting off the explosions that felled the Twin Towers. [Did Nostradamus Really Predict the 9/11 Terrorist Attacks?]

😯 >>>> Laugh Laugh Laugh Laugh Laugh Laugh Laugh Laugh Laugh Laugh Laugh

Aluminum > plane bodies > chemically reacted with WT HOLY PHUCK--------------WATER.....THE ABSOLUTE ENEMY OF FIRE ITSELF......... Laugh Laugh Laugh Laugh Laugh Laugh Laugh Laugh Laugh

Go back to bed for Christ's sake!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! clear the bracket first..............it spoils the effort altogether. Laugh Laugh Laugh Where did I put my TAROT CARDS Laugh Laugh Laugh

Setting off the EXPLOSIONS THAT FELLED THE TWIN Towers....................HEHEHE...... WATER WITHIN THE BUILDINGS SPRINKLER SYSTEM................God damn------------WTF were those planes made of? Man and I though they were obliterated on impact.............silly me! :wall:

Laugh No........you can't make this stuff up!

Cole

September 24, 2011
6:00 pm
Avatar
greeney2
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 10245
Member Since:
April 9, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Look who responds so fast with a shaming personal attack, a few dozen happy faces, and condesending comments? Cole you claim to be the big researcher here but blew this off faster than doing a mircowave dinner. Your true colors never end, you really are threatened by anyone steering off your obsessions. Everyone is a ninny except you Cole!

Zolton who also claims he knows what happened, just keeps on posting new junk, including one that solved the JFK assasination, just ignored this.

September 24, 2011
6:55 pm
Avatar
zoltan2
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 512
Member Since:
September 2, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

"greeney2" wrote: Look who responds so fast with a shaming personal attack, a few dozen happy faces, and condesending comments? Cole you claim to be the big researcher here but blew this off faster than doing a mircowave dinner. Your true colors never end, you really are threatened by anyone steering off your obsessions. Everyone is a ninny except you Cole!

Zolton who also claims he knows what happened, just keeps on posting new junk, including one that solved the JFK assasination, just ignored this.

Poor Greeney what a life you have while spraying your venom to people. Is that all you do all day. If its not Cole, its Event Horrizon, if its not him its me.
Why do you bother to do this in your old age.
I never said I know what happened on JFK I just put out a theory that it can be possible.

Now concerning your post that you jumped to conclusion
You just did a copy and paste of someone's article on someone else.
I won't blast you for it life you do so for us when you blast us off for doing so.

This is not a conspiracy theory, nor is it proven fact.
Christian Simensen theorizes that a mix of molten aluminum from the aircraft bodies mixed with water from the sprinkler systems could have catalyzed secondary blasts that brought the World Trade Center towers to the ground.

It doesn’t dismiss the official report, but simply claims that it doesn’t tell the whole story.
He says the aluminum industry has recorded more than 250 water-aluminum explosions since 1980, and that at one point aluminum maker Alcoa did an experiment involving just 44 pounds of molten aluminum and 20 liters of water (along with a small quantity of rust, which exacerbates the reaction). The resulting explosion destroyed the lab and left a 100-foot crater. You can't extrapolate that under uncontrolled conditions inside the WTC towers just after the attacks.

September 24, 2011
7:01 pm
Avatar
greeney2
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 10245
Member Since:
April 9, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

So you think this has no credibilty or merit, but your photoshopped Globalhawk and its far fetched theory does?

I would like to hear you say, this model is totally false, and that you believe completly the Globalhawk theory.

September 24, 2011
8:57 pm
Avatar
zoltan2
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 512
Member Since:
September 2, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

"greeney2" wrote: So you think this has no credibilty or merit, but your photoshopped Globalhawk and its far fetched theory does?

I would like to hear you say, this model is totally false, and that you believe completly the Globalhawk theory.

I said its a hypothetical possibility but........

Even if Dr Christian Simensen believes powerful explosions were caused by a chemical reaction between molten aluminium from the aircraft and water ripped out the buildings’ internal structure.
Watch his video of his experiment to prove that. Its a farce. Its just a theory.

http://www.nrk.no/vitenskap-og...../1.7793083

The reaction that Dr. Simensen is referring to is one where molten aluminum “steals” oxygen from water, thereby producing hydrogen gas.
But for hydrogen to explode it must be captured (hydrogen floats upward in air even better than helium) and held in the proper ratio with free oxygen, and while there was certainly oxygen in the World Trade Towers there was nothing to prevent any hydrogen being created by the interaction of water with molten aluminum from percolating up through the ruined building and into the sky.
People where still standing where were the jets penetrated the towers

September 24, 2011
9:40 pm
Avatar
greeney2
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 10245
Member Since:
April 9, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

So you actually believe a globalhawk took out the Pentagon?

September 24, 2011
9:48 pm
Avatar
zoltan2
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 512
Member Since:
September 2, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

What about the enormous structural beams which were cut at perfect 45 degree angles in the basement exactly like demolitions experts would? And which could only have been done with explosives.
Explosives were heard even before the plane crash the tower.

I am not saying that there was not some terrorists on the plane as patsy but who really gained anything from this?
The supposed terrorist holed in caves or corporate America?
Bin laden was seen having a meeting in Pakistan in with top US brass a few days before 911.

September 24, 2011
10:09 pm
Avatar
greeney2
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 10245
Member Since:
April 9, 2009
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Spin it into another question, and don't answer it you want to.

Do you, or do you not, believe the Globalhawk theory?

September 24, 2011
11:55 pm
Avatar
zoltan2
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 512
Member Since:
September 2, 2011
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

"greeney2" wrote: Spin it into another question, and don't answer it you want to.

Do you, or do you not, believe the Globalhawk theory?

Again I said the it could of been a GlobaklHawk desquised as an American airline is a possibility or some other small plane

Watch Pentagon Before Collapse And Witness who says he saw a small plane

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iD0qpbwH ... _embedded#!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iD0qpbwH ... _embedded#!

Where is the debris of a 100 ton jumbo 757 jet liner

No permission to create posts
Forum Timezone: America/Los_Angeles

Most Users Ever Online: 288

Currently Online:
58 Guest(s)

Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)

Top Posters:

greeney2: 10245

bionic: 9870

Lashmar: 5289

tigger: 4576

rath: 4297

DIss0n80r: 4161

sandra: 3858

frrostedman: 3815

Wing-Zero: 3278

Tairaa: 2842

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 2

Members: 24230

Moderators: 0

Admins: 2

Forum Stats:

Groups: 8

Forums: 31

Topics: 8750

Posts: 123584

Newest Members:

mexican narco, Vivi-Zizi, Vincent, kitty, linkon old, ielts balle, Harrison Pike, Scully11, [email protected], Aaron Breuer

Administrators: John Greenewald: 592, blackvault: 1776