Skip to comments.New heory Explains How Twin Towers Collapsed: Was Mixture Of Sprinkler Systems And Molten Aluminum
Posted on 09/21/2011 10:09:40 PM PDT by Ghost of Jesus Gil
Simensen claims that it is overwhelmingly likely that the two aircraft were trapped inside an insulating layer of building debris within the skyscrapers. This leads him to believe that it was the aircraft hulls rather than the buildings themselves that absorbed most of the heat from the burning aircraft fuel.
The SINTEF scientist believes that the heat melted the aluminium of the aircraft hulls, and the core of his theory is that molten aluminium then found its way downwards within the buildings through staircases and gaps in the floor and that the flowing aluminium underwent a chemical reaction with water from the sprinklers in the floors below.
Both scientific experiments and 250 reported disasters suffered by the aluminium industry have shown that the combination of molten aluminium and water releases enormous explosions, said Simensen.
(Excerpt) Read more at eurasiareview.com ...
Does it really matter at this point? Only the wackos believe “we” did it, and we know the buildings fell.
The math is simple:
Skyscraper + flying plane full of fuel = bad.
Don’t need a new theory!
Aluminum isn’t used in rocket fuel for no reason.
Yes powdered aluminum is used in solid propellant rockets it is finely divided & thoroughly mixed with a solid oxidizer & the two components are ignited if the mixture is wrong you get a fizzle .
Yes the ship caught fire & burned into a hulk due to the Brits not being up to speed on damage control / fire fighting.
I just found it interesting as this seems to really be a good article to shut up all the conspiracy types
That may be true, but once the the insulation burned off the steel structures of the World Trade centers the steel melted and the buildings collapsed.
lol! I don’t know how you shut up all the conspiracy types. They seem to find their way around all logic.
This is not a new concept:
“Aluminum and the World Trade Center Disaster”
F. R. Greening Ph.D.
Original Version (01.06): Jan 2006
This version (03.06): April 2006
This is incredibly stupid!
1. Any evidence of molten aluminum that “flowed” through the buildings? No
2. Chemical change between aluminum and water??? Nothing dramatic - aluminum oxide maybe - harmless
3. Molten metal + water = rapid steam generation. When confined or when inside molten metal, the steam causes “explosions” - No mystery - happens with molten lead, zinc, steel etc.
Theories this lame can only come from dillusional non-scientists.
Ping for later
Only the real wackos want to silence questions.
The math is simple: Shill + brain full of techniques = bad.
Now let some pointy headed intellectuals dissect that THEORY!!
From the article:
Additionally, Simensen added that The aluminium industry has reported more than 250 aluminium-water explosions since 1980. Alcoa Aluminium carried out an experiment under controlled conditions, in which 20 kilos of aluminium smelt were allowed to react with 20 kilos of water, to which some rust was added. The explosion destroyed the entire laboratory and left a crater 30 metres in diameter.
So, I guess who is delusional depends on whether Alcoa really carried out such an experiment with the result described.
You can’t shut them up. I’ve found that, at this point, any reasonable person who might have entertained these beliefs has gone out, done a little research, and figured out they were wrong, or been convinced that they were wrong by somebody they mouthed off about it to. Anyone that still believes it is a conspiracy will never be reasoned out of that belief because they are emotionally attached to it.
Agreed! You only need to look even conceptually at the mass and heat capacity of the aircraft hull embedded in each building vs the mass and heat capacity of the buildings themselves and the venting paths available, and you know that this is indeed a crackpot theory promoted by a crackpot non-scientist trying to generate some personal publicity.
The steel didn’t even need to melt, but simply get hot enough to weaken, to “lose its temper” in the original sense. Were blobs of melted aluminum found in the debris heaps that were the towers?
It’s amazing how people who think they know something come up with such boffos as “dillusional” [sic].
Sometimes called a thermite reaction.
Erm, no. Aluminum + Iron oxide (from the building)= thermite, which burns hot enough to dissociate water into its atomic components. At that point, the oxygen just contributes to the burn. I’m not a chemist, but I know enough about thermite and oxidizers to posit that there might be something to this theory. Metal fires are very real, and can be really ugly things.
In fact, an absence of blobs would give some credibility to this theory. There were aluminum planes, they had to go somewhere if no blobs were found. If this is right, that “somewhere” means “aerolized, mixed with oxygen, blown up and turned into grey dust”. Now, was some kind of greyish dust left in the debris? Was it perchance aluminum based?
Quite possible, an exothermic reaction.
It also didn’t help that the ship was full of modern plastic materials (upholstery, insulation, cable coatings, etc.) that, when burned, give off very toxic gases. The Brits were not prepared to deal with them. And frankly, neither was the US Navy, who, subsequent to the Falkands War, instigated a major ship refit program to get the materials out of USN ships. However, with the number of ships to be retrofitted, this effort took some time. IIRC, toxic gas from burning plastics also made fighting the fires aboard the USS Stark in 1987 (http://search.aol.com/aol/search?query=USS+Stark&s_it=client_searchbox) difficult as well.
One of the last photographs of the Sheffield shows the ship burnt out from stem to stern with the surviving crew mustered aft on the helo flight deck waiting to be evacuated. Very sad end for a gallant ship.
The steel didnt even need to melt, but simply get hot enough to weaken, to lose its temper in the original sense.
Thats all it took.
“combination of molten aluminum and water releases enormous explosions”
yep, I knew they blew it up /sarc (do you really need that?)
Do these people seem “dillusional?” This pdf takes a bit of time do load but it is worth reading.
1 more B.S. theory. The 10,000 gallons of K1 jet fuel combined with combustables, flamables, and the stack effect had nothing to do with it, it was the spinkler system. sarc. Science has really suffered in this country.
Ya know that sounds highly plauseable aided by the jet fuel which probably burst the oxygen tanks.
Powdered alumium and powdered rust with an oxidizer= thermit.
Potassium cloride and finely powdered aluminmum equal parts =flash powder. Solid magnesium burns hot (and bright)so will aluminum if flaked and it gets hot enough ,....
Aluminum does not tolerate contact with water when molten. It does not sizzle, it explodes.
I was in a whaleboat rescuing survivors the night of the Belknap fire (Boat Engineer, A-gang, USS Ricketts DDG5).
I remember seeing the superstructure the morning after and noting the extreme amount of damage from the aluminum melting. The forward smoke stack had actually melted and folded down upon a loaded ASROCK launcher. Had it been steel, some of the fire might have been contained and been easier to fight.
Well, it least the “aluminum” crackpots weren’t saying Bush did it!
Well, it least the “aluminum” crackpots weren’t saying Bush did it!
Yup. Done by most of us (very carefully) in college chemistry lab.
I was thinking the same thing. This sure does explain away many of the seemingly plausible arguments the conspiracy crowd have.
“I was thinking the same thing. This sure does explain away many of the seemingly plausible arguments the conspiracy crowd have.”
Maybe, maybe not...
It doesn’t explain everything like building #7 which fell around 5:20pm.
I believe that the Soloman Bros was under investigation at the time and miraculously ALL of the records were destroyed in that building.
Pretty convenient I would say...
Let take a quick look at an aircraft structure please. It is made of THIN aluminum:
- Skin TIN
- Longerons THIN
- Wing Spar thick
- Wing struts & skin THIN
90% of an aircraft is made of metal 3/32 or less in thickness.
There was no aircraft post impact. It was aluminum confetti with the exception of the engine cores and the landing gear which are hefty alloys.
So guess what was found post crash? Engine cores and landing gear. Momentum kept them going through the buildings, the rest...
As to this “blob” of aluminum... Nope. Not even close to probable. Confetti.... Think confetti.
Ah Ha, the entire chemical and metal industrial complex was part of the plan! But everyone knows that metal does not burn.
1. HMS Sheffield had a steel superstructure
2, All damage was from out of control internal fires
3. Externally, the ship lost a little paint. There was no superstructure or hull damage (other than the hole the missile went through)
(Until next time)
Don’t post much here...
Another day, another theory.
Commercial airliners cabin pressurization is run off of the engines, the emergency oxygen system is generated by a generating canister not a high pressure tank system.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.