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 ...
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.
Interesting.
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 didn’t 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...
http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/11576/New_911_Building_7_Collapse_Clearly_Shows_Demoliti/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U0GW6QXKyp0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7SwOT29gbc
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.