hecter wrote:Then please explain the bowing found on the side of the building.
The side of which building?
“The buildings have been investigated and found to be safe in an assumed collision with a large jet airliner [Boeing 707-DC 8] traveling at 600 miles per hour. Analysis indicates that such collision would result in only local damage which could not cause collapse or substantial damage to the building and would not endanger the lives and safety of occupants not in the immediate area of impact.“
“Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the jet fuel would dump into the building. (But) the building structure would still be there.”
Each tower contained:
• Over 90,000 tons of concrete;
• 47 Massive Steel Core Columns and
• 240 Steel Perimeter Columns welded together and connected by hundreds of steel joints, perpendicular cross trusses, thousands of large steel bolts and concrete-filled steel floor decking at each floor level;
• 100,000 Ton Heat Sink to absorb excess heat;
• Updated fireproofing and a fire control system designed to prevent “chimney effect” and suffocate fires by depriving them of oxygen.
4. Structural steel begins to melt at 1510 degrees Celsius (2750 degrees Fahrenheit) and only if that temperature is maintained over a long period of time. Burning jet fuel can only reach temperatures of 1120 degrees Celsius and decreases in temperature if the fuel feeding it is being depleted (as was the case in the Twin Towers). Therefore, the temperature from the burning jet fuel (commonly cited as the reason for weakening the structure) could not possibly have melted the steel-reinforced columns.
The actual temperatures of the WTC fires were only 650 degrees Celsius (1200 degrees Fahrenheit) which is dramatically insufficient to melt steel. Thermite (the incendiary explosive of which there was evidence at Ground Zero), however, typically reaches 2500 degrees Celsius (4500 degrees Fahrenheit).
“The fire is the most misunderstood part of the WTC collapse. Even today, the media report (and many scientists believe) that the steel melted. It is argued that the jet fuel burns very hot, especially with so much fuel present. This is not true.
Part of the problem is that people (including engineers) often confuse temperature and heat. While they are related, they are not the same. Thermodynamically, the heat contained in a material is related to the temperature through the heat capacity and the density (or mass). Temperature is defined as an intensive property, meaning that it does not vary with the quantity of material, while the heat is an extensive property, which does vary with the amount of material. One way to distinguish the two is to note that if a second log is added to the fireplace, the temperature does not double; it stays roughly the same, but the size of the fire or the length of time the fire burns, or a combination of the two, doubles. Thus, the fact that there were 90,000 L of jet fuel on a few floors of the WTC does not mean that this was an unusually hot fire. The temperature of the fire at the WTC was not unusual, and it was most definitely not capable of melting steel.” (Eager & Musso, 2001)
• F.D.N.Y reported “two isolated pockets of fire” near the impact zone in the South Tower.
• F.D.N.Y. also reported that it would only take two fire lines to extinguish the fires in the South Tower.
• The fires were compartmentalized and contained. The structure sustained the impact and sealed off the fires from expanding, just as it was designed to do:
“In fact, the Towers did what they were built to do.”
• FEMA conceded that the jet fuel was totally consumed within the first few minutes after impact.
• Yet FEMA would have us believe that:
“This was somehow enough to bring down the Tower’s 47-steel-column core, 236 exterior columns, and thousands of steel trusses, all at the same time.”
“In order for a floor to fall, hundreds of joints had to break almost simultaneously on 236 exterior columns and 47 core columns.”
As Professor Steven Jones notes, the official notion that Building 7 at the WTC collapsed as a result of fire is in violation of the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Buildings collapsing as a result of fire simply topple over – they do not collapse symmetrically into their own footprint.
• “High-rise buildings do not collapse due to fire, even after their fireproofing has performed its usefulness after a couple of hours.”
• Twin Towers’ destruction exhibited all the characteristics of destruction by explosions:
• Extremely rapid onset of “collapse”
• Sounds of explosions and flashes of light witnessed near the beginning of the “collapse” by over 100 first responders
• “Squibs” (focused explosions) 40 floors below the “collapsing” building seen in all the videos
• Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete and steel decking, filing cabinets & 1000 people – mostly to dust
• Massive volume of expanding pyroclastic dust clouds
• Vertical progression of full building perimeter demolition waves
• Symmetrical collapse – through the path of greatest resistance – at nearly free-fall speed — the columns gave no resistance
• 1,400 foot diameter field of equally distributed debris – outside of building footprint
• Blast waves blew out windows in buildings 400 feet away
• Lateral ejection of thousands of individual 4 - 20 ton steel beams up to 500 feet
• Total destruction of the building down to individual structural steel elements – obliterating the steel core structure
• Tons of molten metal found by FDNY and numerous other experts under all 3 high-rises “like lava from a volcano.” Streams of “molten metal which was still red-hot weeks after the event.” “Firemen sprayed water to cool the debris but the heat remained intense enough at the surface to melt their boots.” The fire was not completely extinguished until over 3 months after 9/11.
“Molten iron is the product of the incendiary Thermite, a cutter charge which is used in many controlled demolitions. There is no other conceivable source of molten metal found at the base of World Trade Center 7. Hydrocarbon fires burn 1700 degrees maximum. Molten metal, molten iron in this case, and most all molten metals burn- they need 2700 degrees to create them. We’re missing a 1000 degrees of energy, of temperature.”
• FEMA finds rapid oxidation and intergranular melting on structural steel samples• More than 1000 Bodies are unaccounted for — 700 tiny bone fragments found on top of nearby buildings
• Chemical signature of Thermate (high tech incendiary) found in slag, solidified molten metal, and dust samples by Physics Professor Steven Jones, Ph.D.
• Examination of the forensic metallurgy of WTC steel “reveal a phenomenon never before observed in building fires: eutectic reactions, which caused ‘intergranular melting capable of [b]turning a solid steel girder into Swiss cheese.’”[/b]
• Building 7 was typical of a classic demolition: “An implosion causing a vertical collapse at free-fall speed into a consolidated rubble pile.” WTC 7 was “straight-down symmetrical into its own footprint.
The only thing that can cause this is if all of the perimeter columns, in this case 81 of them, and 24 core columns, are cut at once. In fact, to bring the penthouse down, you have to cut the interior just a fraction of a second prior to the exterior, again which causes the exterior walls to fall, straight down rapidly. In this case, 6.5 seconds.” “The penthouse falling first is a telltale sign of demolition.”
• There is expert corroboration. The top European controlled demolitions expert confirms that WTC 7 was a controlled demolition. 27-year controlled demolitions expert Danny Jowenko states: “This is controlled demolition…it starts from below.” “They have simply blown away columns…A team of experts did this…This is professional work, without any doubt.”
“Once you get to the science, it’s indisputable. At Building 7, a 47-story skyscraper, not hit by an airplane on 9/11, it fell symmetrically, smoothly, at virtually freefall speed, into its own footprint – a perfect controlled demolition. There’s only graphic evidence for 2 or 3 fires in that building; 5th and 12th and maybe 13th floor. The official story tells us that the steel was softened. But if that was the case and this building fell due to fires, the fires, by their nature, creep from place to place leaving one area cool and burning another area. That would force an asymmetrical collapse. The building would tip over. So for the first time in history, fires have done what only a handful of demolition companies are capable of doing.”
-Richard Gage
Fire Protection Engineer Edward Munyak, P.E., Registered Mechanical and Fire Protection Engineer in the State of California currently employed as Fire Protection Engineer for the City of San Jose, California:
“I have collaborated with a research chemical engineer ( P.E. in CA also) and he has worked with NIST reports that positively show that the jet fuel contributed very little to the duration of the fires and that in fact all the fires were very weak in historical perspective. They were oxygen starved as evidenced by the black smoke. If you dig deeper into the NIST reports they confirm that steel temperatures were low.”
“My presentation showed that all three WTC “collapses” have no resemblance to any previous high rise fire, full scale fire tests in the UK involving much higher steel temperatures, or computer simulations using finite element analysis.”
“All three collapses were very uniform in nature. Natural collapses due to unplanned events are not uniform.”
15. Steven E. Jones, Ph.D. is a former Professor of Physics from Brigham Young University who resigned in order to research the events of 9/11 full-time. Dr. Jones conducted tests of debris samples from Ground Zero and determined the presence of thermate. Thermate, which is actually thermite strengthened with sulfur, is the state-of-the-art choice for building demolitions. Use of thermate also creates a distinct and traceable signature, much like a fingerprint at a crime scene. The scientific analysis of those samples conclusively identified a “Thermate signature” at Ground Zero.
a. Evidence that Twin Towers were brought down through the use of pre-positioned cutter-charges that employed high-tech explosives, not by impact damage and fires.
b. Analysis of the debris samples also determined the presence of significant amounts of manganese, iron and sulfur, which are a scientific fingerprint of the aftermath of the use of Thermate.
c. Use of the extremely hot-burning explosive incendiary Thermate also leaves a “heat signature.” The inability to reduce the temperature of the debris was the result of thermate use and could not have been from fire, which would have quickly cooled. The debris at Ground Zero literally kept burning for weeks, defying extensive attempts to cool its heat. Thermate burns so hot that it will cut and melt steel beams—fire is incapable of doing so. This was evidenced by:
Orange-to-red-hot pieces of molten metal were visible in the debris.
Infrared satellite photos taken weeks after the collapses still reveal hotspots in excess of 1000 degrees Fahrenheit.
Six weeks after collapse, Ground Zero debris was still hot enough to literally melt the boots of workers after short exposure to its heat. (Note: From video clip with Silverstein and DeMartini; cite below)
d. The sulfidation of the steel at Ground Zero is another characteristic that is concomitant with the use of thermate.
e. Evidence of molten metal; flowing and in pools
f. Observed Temperatures of approximately 1000ºC
g. The symmetric collapse of each building is also distinctively compatible with controlled demolition.
h. Concludes that the scientific evidence clearly refutes the official positions of FEMA, NIST, and 9-11 Commission reports that fires plus impact damage alone caused complete collapses of all three buildings.
Also see the scientific documentation of Kevin Ryan:
The Top Ten Connections Between NIST and Nano-Thermites, July 2008
More Evidence for Energetic Materials, May 2008
High Velocity Bursts of Debris From Point-Like Sources in the WTC Towers, July 2007 (pdf)
Also see:
http://74.125.45.104/search?q=cache:hpn ... =clnk&cd=1
and: http://www.wtc7.net/articles/stevenjones_b7.html
• Conditions inconsistent with typical building fires but consistent with conditions after buildings are destroyed by controlled demolition, including the use of Thermite/Thermate (state-of-the-art explosives used in building demolition) and concomitant materials and conditions consistent with a Thermite fingerprint.
• Large pools of molten metal were observed in the basement areas of both towers and Building 7. Evidence of molten metal and explosions accompanied by white dust clouds are products of the Thermite reaction.
• Extremely high temperatures in the fires at the WTC which are indicative of Thermate/Thermite explosions that burn markedly hotter than typical fires.
• The fireproofing in the buildings had been updated prior to 9/11 and was more than sufficient to contain fires much larger than those present.
• Extremely high levels of volatile organic chemicals as well as unusual species never before seen in structure fires.
• Very atypical debris. For months after the destruction at the World Trade Center (WTC) on 11th September, 2001, the fires at Ground Zero could not be put out, despite the following facts:
• Several inches of dust covered the entire area after the
destruction of the WTC buildings.
• Millions of gallons of water were sprayed onto the
debris pile.
• Several rainfall events occurred at GZ, some heavy;
• A chemical fire suppressant called Pyrocool was
pumped into the piles (Lipton and Revkin 2001).
“The characteristics of these un-extinguishable fires have
not been adequately explained as the results of a normal
structure fire, even one accelerated by jet fuel. Conversely,
such fires are better explained given the presence of
chemical energetic materials, which provide their own fuel
and oxidant and are not deterred by water, dust, or chemical suppressants.” (Kevin R. Ryan Æ & James R. Gourley Æ & Steven E. Jones; 2008)
See the scientific documentation by Kevin Ryan: Extremely High Temperatures During the World Trade Center Destruction, January 2008
Environmental Anomalies at the World Trade Center: Evidence for Energetic Materials, August 2008
More Evidence for Energetic Materials, May 2008
Kevin Ryan was the Manager of Environmental Health Laboratories, a division of Underwriters Laboratories. After publicly questioning the inconsistencies he identified in the official government report on the causes of the building collapses at the World Trade Center, Kevin Ryan was promptly fired as Manager. (Legal Defense Fund For Kevin Ryan: http://www.ultruth.com/)
Excerpts from Ryan’s letter (UL is Underwriters Laboratories, the company that certified the steel components used in the construction of the World Trade Center):
Testing by UL determined “that the buildings should have easily withstood the thermal stress caused by pools of burning jet fuel.”
“We know that the steel components were certified to ASTM E119. The time temperature curves for this standard require the samples to be exposed to temperatures around 2000F for several hours. And as we all agree, the steel applied met those specifications. Additionally, I think we can all agree that even un-fireproofed steel will not melt until reaching red-hot temperatures of nearly 3000F.”
“The results of your recently published metallurgical tests seem to clear things up, and support your team’s August 2003 update as detailed by the Associated Press, in which you were ready to ‘rule out weak steel as a contributing factor in the collapse.’ The evaluation of paint deformation and spheroidization seem very straightforward, and you noted that the samples available were adequate for the investigation. Your comments suggest that the steel was probably exposed to temperatures of only about 500F (250C), which is what one might expect from a thermodynamic analysis of the situation.
However the summary of the new NIST report seems to ignore your findings, as it suggests that these low temperatures caused exposed bits of the building’s steel core to ‘soften and buckle.’ Additionally this summary states that the perimeter columns softened, yet your findings make clear that ‘most perimeter panels (157 of 160) saw no temperature above 250C.’ To soften steel for the purposes of forging, normally temperatures need to be above 1100C. However, this new summary report suggests that much lower temperatures would be able to not only soften the steel in a matter of minutes, but lead to rapid structural collapse.”
“This story just does not add up. If steel from those buildings did soften or melt, I’m sure we can all agree that this was certainly not due to jet fuel fires of any kind, let alone the briefly burning fires in those towers.”
Test models of the WTC steel were tested by UL and those test models did not fail at temperatures much higher than those from the fires of 9/11. Ryan concluded:
• The temperatures were far too low to soften the steel.
• The floors could not have collapsed from the impact and fires.
• Up-to-date fireproofing had recently been installed in the Twin Towers:
“After the 1993 bombing, the fireproofing in both buildings was updated considerably.”
• The impact from a Boeing 767 could not have widely dislodged the fireproofing under any impact, let alone dislodge the fireproofing so far away from the point of impact.
17. In another peer-reviewed study, it was determined that seismic activity clearly identified explosions separate from the jetliner impacts:
“On September 11, 2001, the seismic stations grouped around New York City recorded seismic events from the WTC site, two of which occurred immediately prior to the aircraft impacts upon the Twin Towers. Because these seismic events preceded the collisions, it is clear they were not associated with the impacts and must therefore be associated with some other occurrence. None of the authorities charged with the responsibility for the investigation of the events of 9/11 have proposed a source for these seismic events, nor have they given a valid reason for the difference in times between the seismic events and the aircraft impacts. Only by consideration of the evidence of
basement explosions before the aircraft impacts, as experienced by William Rodriquez and 36 others, can an explanation be found for the fact that the seismic stations recorded seismic events originating from the WTC sites prior to the aircraft impacts.”
“This is neither theory nor hypothesis, but a statement of publicized facts regarding the timing of the aircraft impacts. There exist two separate precision data time sets that address when the aircraft crashed into the Towers. Both data time sets are based on UTC (Coordinated Universal Time, the world’s atomic clock system) and the sources that determined these times were prestigious, reliable and credible. There is no question regarding the precision and accuracy of the instruments used to record both data time sets, since their entire function depends and relies upon temporal accuracy, and therefore there can be no doubt that both data time sets are correct. The time data sets represent objective scientific data recorded by two separate, independent entities. The problem is the data sets have different impact times.”
CONCLUSION:
“Because these signals preceded the impacts there can be no doubt that the seismic signals recorded were not those associated with the aircraft impacts on the Towers. These signals were in fact the seismic spikes associated with the huge basement explosions reported by witnesses.” (Furlong & Ross; 2006)
18. MIT Scientist/Engineer Dr. Jeff King’s scientific study analyzing the WTC Collapse Forensics also determined that:
a. The black smoke in each building signified slow-burning inefficient fires in an oxygen-deprived environment.
b. The 47 Core Columns were hermetically sealed and absent of fuel for the fires. They were intentionally sealed to limit oxygen, prevent “chimney effect” and seal off to stop a fire.
c. The small puffs of smoke emanating from the sides of the buildings as they collapsed were signs of controlled demolition.
d. The immediate formations of large dust clouds as collapse initiated were distinctively compatible with demolition and were not compatible with collapse due to fires.
e. Concrete and other building materials were literally reduced to powder before hitting the ground, which is consistent only with demolition. If a building collapses due to fire or other hazards, concrete and other heavy materials are not reduced to powder.
f. It is noteworthy that there were reports of underground explosions in both towers.
g. Extensive damage visible in the lobby of the building prior to the initiation of collapse is further evidence of controlled demolition.
h. There are clear signs that explosives were used and that is, in fact, the only plausible explanation from the standpoint of the collapse forensics.
Officer Bartmer strongly discounts there being any major damage to Building 7 prior to the series of explosions that he says brought it down:
“I walked around it. I saw a hole. I didn’t see a hole bad enough to knock a building down, though. Yeah there was definitely fire in the building, but I didn’t hear any… I didn’t hear any creaking, or… I didn’t hear any indication that it was going to come down. “
“Yeah it had some damage to it, but nothing like what they’re saying… Nothing to account for what we saw… I am shocked at the story we’ve heard about it to be quite honest.”
The fires in WTC 7 were apparently the result of strewn debris from the Twin Towers. They were isolated fires and reportedly the sprinkler system, had it been working, should have extinguished them.
a. Since steel only melts at temperatures above 2700 degrees and building fires can only reach a maximum of 1700 degrees, the fires in WTC 7 clearly never reached temperatures high enough to threaten the structural integrity of the building.
b. A dip in the roof line of the building as collapse initiates is clearly visible in the videos of Building 7 on 9/11. A dip in roof line is a trademark of controlled demolition.
“During the last four decades, other towers in New York, Philadelphia and Los Angeles have remained standing through catastrophic blazes that burned out of control for hours because of malfunctioning or nonexistent sprinkler systems. But 7 World Trade Center, which was not struck by a plane, is the first skyscraper in modern times to collapse primarily as a result of a fire. Adding to the suspicion is the fact that in the rush to clean up the site, almost all of the steel remains of the tower were disposed of, leaving investigators in later years with little forensic evidence.”
None ever came. Instead, the fires at WTC7 were blamed on falling debris from the North Tower. This sounds logical until you actually start to think about it. In order for the (mostly) cold detritus of the North Tower to start a blaze in Building Seven, it would have to clear both Vesey Street and the very substantial WTC6 and break down the front wall. Well, okay, maybe that’s not impossible. But if it had happened that way, you couldn’t have predicted what came next.
The building as designed is sixteen times stiffer than a conventional structure. The design concept is so sound that the structural engineer has been able to be ultra-conservative in his design without adversely affecting the economics of the structure”
“The structural analysis carried out by the firm of Worthington, Skilling, Helle & Jackson is the most complete and detailed of any ever made for any building structure. The preliminary calculations alone cover 1,200 pages and involved over 100 detailed drawings.”
NO, the steel did not get hot enough to loose loadbearing capacity!
Do some research instead assuming you know everything or regurgitating the same debunker statements that are debunked again and again...
The WTC has a safety ratio somewhere in the ballpark of 200:1. Even if it lost half its strength, it still has a 100:1 safety ratio BEFORE the steel is actually loaded to its max capacity.
I think you'll find that steel loses 2 thirds of its tensile strength at about 500 c more that enough to cause collape also when steel RSJ's heat up they expand pushing out walls and supports
NO!! At 500C it only looses 1/4 of its tensile strength! At 600C it typically looses about 55%. And even if the building had lost 75% of its 200:1 safety ratio it still has a 50:1 ratio, that is NOT enough to increase the load past maximum load bearing capacity.
The WTC had sooooo many redundancies that even it half of the columns and beams were severed it wouldnt matter!
....
Fire Engineering Magazine determined that no large steel-reinforced building has ever collapsed as a result of fire. Fire Engineering also concluded that the investigation of 9/11 was “a half-baked farce that may already have been commandeered by political forces whose primary interests, to put it mildly, lie far afield of full disclosure.” See $elling Out The Investigation; Bill Manning, Editor-in-Chief, Fire Engineering;
http://www.fireengineering.com/articles ... ?id=131225
4. The temperature at which steel begins to melt is 1510 degrees Celsius or 2750 degrees Fahrenheit. That temperature or higher must then be maintained for hours before steel beams become molten steel.
The black smoke emanating from the buildings was a clear indication that the fires were oxygen-starved and that they could not possibly have reached the maximum temperature of burning jet fuel. The highest temperature of burning jet fuel is at least 700 degrees Fahrenheit shy from the temperature at which steel even begins to melt.
Kevin Ryan also thoroughly demolishes NIST’s later claim that “dislodged fireproofing” was the cause of the WTC collapse:
“We now know that US Government scientists were not able to produce evidence for ‘widely dislodged’ fireproofing within the World Trade Center towers on 9/11. Because of this, the distinction between the fire-based hypothesis of collapse and the demolition hypothesis centers on one question. Were the steel assemblies used to construct those buildings tested for fire resistance as required by the New York City code?
As I have stated many times in public, UL made it clear to me and others that they performed this testing. Of course I have their statements on the subject in writing, and I would have been a fool to have made such claims publicly without possessing such documentation.”
(Kevin Ryan; Letter to Frank Gayle, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) from Kevin Ryan, Site Manager, Environmental Health Laboratories, A Division of Underwriters Laboratories; November 11, 2004)
19. Even FEMA conceded that:
“The specifics of the fires in WTC 7 and how they caused the building to collapse remain unknown.”
15. Days later, NASA infrared satellite images identified hotspots in the debris exceeding 1300 degrees Fahrenheit.
Francis Albert (Frank) De Martini was a true 9/11 hero in addition to being an architect and the WTC Construction Manager. He was working in his office on the 88th floor of the North Tower when it was struck on 9/11. He died when the building collapsed – but not before helping over 50 other people escape safely:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDGInaB0eQM
http://www.historycommons.org/entity.js ... _martini_1
http://www.9-11heroes.us/v/Francis_Albe ... artini.php
This I think this last one is increadably telling. The guy who built the place had no idea it would collapse.
Do we all agree that the fire could not have burned hot enough to melt, or weaken the steel?
A) there wasn't enough stuff to burn, nor could anything burn hot enough
B) the fires were not visable through the windows indicating that they were small and local
C) the materials the buildings were made out of were made for EXACTLY this scenario
D) black smoke indicates lack of oxygen
E) updated fireproofing
F) the man who built the towers didn't flee
G) firefighters inside the towers report that the fires were small and easily containable
H) fire did not have access to the center supports of the towers/nor were they hot enough
I) NIST's own models failed to collapse
J) fires in the center of the tower would be extinquished from lack of oxygen
K) firefighters inside report that there were no signs that any of the towers would collapse
L) the building isolates local fires to starve them from oxygen
Anyway what I'm saying is that you're exactly right. Why did the metal bow? Why did they find so much molten metal,
especially IN THE BASEMENT? some could have come from the plane, but it could not have been the that hot, or ended up in the basement. Nor would it have burned so hot for so long. Fire stops being hot once their fuel/accelerant is used up.
If we compare the North and South Towers to Building 7, the story makes even less sense. Tower 7 was never hit with a plane, but it also collapsed on it's own footprint at freefall speed? There wasn't even any jet fuel to "weaken" any beams! No steel structure has ever collapsed do to a fire, especially a normal fire. Even FEMA has no idea how it happened. So how do we end up with molten metel and bowed steel in that building too?
And why did they ALL fall straight down so uniformly? If fire weakens steel on one side of a tower, wouldn't you expect the tower to lean that way and then give out on that side? The center of gravity could not remain perfect.
We know that fire could not even dream of weakening the steel in the center of the towers. It was thicker, had an even higher melting point, and was placed in a way that keep out oxygen and prevented it from becoming a fire chimny. So the fires couldn't possably have melted the center support beams. They would have to melt the smaller support beams on the sides of the towers(even though the fire could ever get hot enough!) BUT! If fire can't melt the center beams, why does the footage show the dip in the roofline? It's troubling because a dip in the roofline is not charactoristic of a steel building fire. But it is charactoristic of a controlled demolition, as the support beams are cut out above the bedrock. Those possable supprt beam explosions WERE RECORDED both on film and on seismograph.
Fire does not make any sense. Unfortunitly for me, I can't see metel becoming molten, or staying that way, unless there is another form of fuel. Thermite might just be the only logical conclusion. Especially after you sift through all the witness statements, and facts like the ones I just presented above^. The most important thing, IMO, is that the fires were simply not hot enough. And definitly not hot enough to turn the steel molten for days.
So, were they hoping that TV cameras are around to film it? Or were the news media in on it too? 
are registered trademarks of Backglass Heavy Industries.
.
