Mon, 03 Jul 2006 02:24:29 GMT, "Justin Case"
<NoFuckin'Way@UgottaBkidding.net> licked the point of a #2 Yellow
Pencil, and wrote:

[...]

You can't get to the truth if you ignore the evidence that doesn't fit with
your preconceived ideas.

Interesting, and prophetic statement.

I have seen enough video of molten metal pouring down the side of the tower
before it fell. There
are enough links to these videos for anyone who is trying to find the truth
to draw their own conclusion.

In the case of the 'molten steel', it's here..
http://www.911myths.com/html/wtc_molten_steel.html

Extremely bias, they don't even mention the videos of the metal pouring out
the sides.
I wonder why, if they claim to be searching for the truth.

Because it wasn't metal? At least not molten metal. 

Either way, it's ALL there for him IF he really wants to know the truth.

www.911myths.com

All you continue to do is cling to that unathoritive site, like it was your
holy Koran

Listen to reason, just for once.

>From Prof Jones paper

     " Dramatic footage reveals yellow-to-white hot molten metal dripping

>from the South WTC Tower just minutes before its collapse:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2991254740145858863&q=cameraplanet+
9%2F11.  Photographs capture the same significant event, clearly showing
liquid metal dropping from the South Tower, still hot as it nears the ground
below:

I read the whole thing. He's trying too hard. There were far too many 
conclusions lunged at, with almost no proper establishment of fact
before hand.

Who can deny that liquid, molten metal existed at the WTC disaster?  

It's easy enough to do. The videos show burnng, glowing material;
not molten steel. Liqquids at rhe point of starting a pour cling 
together, due to capillary action, and form a stream. It isn't until
liquid falls some distance that it begins to break apart and form
aerosols.

The
yellow color implies a molten-metal temperature of approximately 1000 oC,

Unless the material was a carbon-based fuel source such as ash from
paper, etc. Air rushing past the material would account for the bright
yellow color.

evidently above that which the dark-smoke hydrocarbon fires in the Towers
could produce.  If aluminum (e.g., from the plane) had melted, it would melt
and flow away from the heat source at its melting point of about 650 oC and
thus would not reach the yellow color observed for this molten metal.  Thus,
molten aluminum is already ruled out with high probability.  But molten iron
with the characteristics seen in this video is in fact consistent with a
thermite-reaction attacking the steel columns in the Tower, thus weakening
the building just prior to its collapse, since thermite produces molten iron
at yellow-to-white hot temperatures. (As some of the molten metal hits the
side of the building in the video clip above, the white-hot interior is
evidently exposed as the metal "splashes".)  Also, the fact that the liquid
metal retains an orange hue as it nears the ground (right photograph)
further rules out aluminum, and suggests a mid-flight thermite reaction
(typical of thermite).  The reader may wish to compare the dripping molten
metal observed on the corner of the South Tower just before its collapse
with the dripping molten metal from known thermite reactions:
http://www.checktheevidence.com/911/Thermite2.htm (backup available here:
http://www.veronicachapman.com/checktheevidence/Thermite.htm .)

Thermite needs to be placed by somone. The buildings would have had to
have been "salted." How long could an activity like that go on, before
somebody started asking questions?

          Finally, sulfidation was observed in structural steel samples
found from both WTC7 and one of the WTC Towers, as reported in Appendix C in
the FEMA report. It is quite possible that more than one type of
cutter-charge was involved on 9/11, e.g., HMX, RDX and thermate in some
combination.  While gypsum in the buildings is a source of sulfur, it is
highly unlikely that this sulfur could find its way into the structural
steel in such a way as to form a eutectic.  The evidence for the use of some
variant of thermite such as sulfur-containing thermate in the destruction of
the WTC Towers and building 7 is sufficiently compelling to warrant serious
investigation. "


This is a peer reviewed paper and if you have evidence that can counter his
claims
you should send him your rebuttal. I don't think your 911myths site will be
sufficient
however you can try, he might need a good laugh.

Fair's fair. I had one.



Widdershins

Really, I am more like the Van Gogh of astrology-
                          Eddieeeeeee, One ear Wollmann