For the Unthinking Fuckwit from Purgatory Iron Works and His Idiotic “Jet Fuel” Demonstration

by Scott Creighton

“If it (9/11) was a conspiracy, I do not care.” Trenton Tye

OK. So we have another phony, “Redneck Dixon White” fuckwit over at Youtube, a guy by the name of Trenton Tye, who has put together a simpleton’s version of “the Truth” regarding what did or did not happen on 9/11.

Tye has taken time from his “busy day” of working on Youtube videos, a whole 2 minutes mind you, to show the public just how stupid “truthers” are when it comes to the steel in the Twin Towers.

I, on the other hand, have been researching and writing about those events for the past 8 years and have published over 100 articles of my own work on the subject.

Of course, his substance-free and DEEPLY FLAWED demonstration has been latched upon by several main stream media outlets as the end-all be-all “debunking” of the Truth advocates out here who say the key evidence in the demolition of the Twin Towers rests in the melted steel.

“Time for a metallurgical mic drop” Huffington Post

That is patently false and Tye knows it.

This article, which I will try to make into a video if my computer allows it, and which I will direct toward Tye himself, will pick his ignorant argument apart, piece by piece starting with the first thing that came out of his mouth:

1. “If it (9/11) was a conspiracy, I do not care.”

Many people do care, Tye, that’s why they spend years researching what happened that day. Because, unlike you, some of us (US) do give a shit about finding out who was responsible for the event that killed so many people in New York, Pennsylvania and DC that day and subsequently launched war after war across the Middle East killing scores more (US troops and civilians alike) and leaving 10 times that number scarred for life (US troops and civilians alike). And that’s too say nothing of the constitutional rights we all had to give up for the Patriot Act or the trillions of dollars of debt your kids will have to pay for the wars, you fucking imbecile.

It’s clear that you don’t give a crap about 9/11 because you spent a whole 2 minutes coming up with your “mic drop” video on the subject and in the process, you still managed to get most of what you said absolutely and completely wrong.

Research does have it’s advantages Tye, as you will soon see. And research comes from caring about something, which I guess explains why your pathetic 2 minute self-serving diatribe is so deeply flawed. You have to care about something in order to get it right.  Don’t you teach people that in your iron working “how to” videos?

2. Jet Fuel fires

Dimwit… jet fuel does burn at around 1,500 degs (1517ºF). However, according to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in their report of the collapse of the Twin Towers (the official basis of the official story by the way) the jet fuel burned off in the first few minutes after the planes crashed into the towers with much of it, burning in huge fireballs OUTSIDE the buildings. The fires were ignited by the fuel, they weren’t long term “jet fuel” fires. Big difference if you understand anything about open burn office fires as opposed to that forge you have in your fake shop.

“Based on its comprehensive investigation, NIST concluded that the WTC towers collapsed because: (1) the impact of the planes severed and damaged support columns, dislodged fireproofing insulation coating the steel floor trusses and steel columns, and widely dispersed jet fuel over multiple floors; and (2) the subsequent unusually large number of jet-fuel ignited multi-floor fires (which reached temperatures as high as 1,000 degrees Celsius, or 1,800 degrees Fahrenheit) significantly weakened the floors and columns with dislodged fireproofing to the point where floors sagged and pulled inward on the perimeter columns. This led to the inward bowing of the perimeter columns…” NIST, FAQ page

“As high as” does not mean the fires were continuously maintained at that temperature, like your furnace is and that is because “ignited” does not mean the fires were purely hydrocarbon fires (jet fuel) but rather, regular office fires that burned at temperatures modern steel framed high rises are designed to withstand.

Got it?

Try this on for size. I know it’s some more research into that thing you don’t care about, but since you made the video to get yourself some attention (or a TV show?), I figured you might be interested in that at least:

Although only limited video footage is available that shows the crash of American Airlines Flight 11 into WTC 1 and the ensuing fireballs, extensive video records of the impact of United Airlines Flight 175 into WTC 2 are available. These videos show that three fireballs emanated from W T C 2 on the south, east, and west faces. The fireballs grew slowly , reaching their full size after about 2 seconds. The diameters of the fireballs were greater than 200 feet, exceeding the width of the building. Such fireballs were formed when the expelled jet fuel dispersed and flames traveled through the resulting fuel/air mixture… Experimentally based correlations for similar fireballs (Zalosh 1995) were used to estimate the amount of fuel consumed. The precise size of the fireballs and their exact shapes are not well defined; therefore, there is some uncertainty associated with estimates of the amount of fuel consumed by these effects. Calculations indicate that between 1,000 and 3,000 gallons of jet fuel we re likely consumed in this manner .” FEMA report on 9/11, Chapter 2 –

For the record, that is from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) study on the collapse of the Twin Towers which proceeded the NIST report by 2 years. As you can see, even that report has to admit a large amount of the jet fuel burned off in the fireballs OUTSIDE the building and they later explained how the rest burned quickly, serving only to ignite, standard open burn office fires in the buildings.

In the end, by talking about “jet fuel fires” you do yourself and your viewers a grave disservice because you misrepresent the nature and intensity of the fires in the Twin Towers by a considerable amount.

Once again, here is a quote from the OFFICIAL RECORD of what happened:

The dominant fuel for the fires in the towers was the office combustibles. On the floors
where the aircraft fuselage impacted, there was a significant, but secondary contribution from
the combustibles in the aircraft. Most of the jet fuel in the fire zones was consumed in the
first few minutes after impact
although there may have been unburned pockets of jet fuel that
led to flare-ups late in the morning.” Under FINDINGS — “Characteristics of the Fires” in the NC STAR1-5 Executive Summary

Let me repeat that: “the dominant fuel for the fires in the towers was the office combustibles” which do not burn at 1,800ºF. A typical home fire burns at the significantly lesser temperature of around 1,100ºF which is higher than office fires because is there is no wooden structure in a steel framed building.

So the entire premise of your dishonest demonstration is born of pure ignorance and more than a little deception (I did notice you mentioned “some” carbon steel melts at 2,300ºF but of course, as you well know, that steel isn’t used in making steel framed high rise buildings, so including that number was a deliberate attempt to mislead your audience.)

3. Apples to Oranges

This is probably why you’re a wannabe TV star/iron worker and not an architect or an engineer (which, by the way, there are 2,400 of them who have taken the time to study the FEMA and NIST reports (I guess because they care) and concluded that the official version of what happened is clearly mistaken)

When you take out that tiny little 1/2″ bar of structural steel from the furnace (how long was it in there by the way?) in order to prove your point that it’s “a freaking noodle!”, sure it’s dramatic isn’t it?

But is it an accurate and fair representation or even a valid bit of experimentation?

Well, it might seem as if it had been, had some of us not already done the research (ah, never mind…) and seen through the mistakes you made by assuming the temperatures in the towers equaled that of your furnace….

But I guess it would be just as impressive in your case, if someone took an oak toothpick and broke it between their fingers and then used that to explain how they can do the same to a Grand Oak which is 60 inches in diameter.

This is the inner structure of the Twin Towers:

It was a massive structure consisting of 47 main columns and countless cross-members and bracing all consisting of A-36 structural steel. The columns themselves looked like this:

In the first 40 floors, the plate-steel in walls of the columns was 5″ thick. Above that, they were slightly smaller, reducing down incrementally as the building got taller culminating in columns made up of steel plate 2.5″ thick.

And you want to compare that to a little piece of 1/2″ bar-stock to make your simplistic, flawed comparison?

Doesn’t work, Tye.

Let me also take the time to explain this since you are obviously not inclined to do your own research and figure these things out:

What you see above, the structure designed to withstand fire, does so in a number of ways one of the most important being that it serves as a “heat sink”

What does that mean?

It means simply, the energy of heat is transferred across a great distance of steel, spreading the destructive potential of that energy, thus reducing the weakening effect you so gladly latched onto as your “proof positive” that we “Truthers” should just give up and go “find a job”

As you well know from when you weld, touching a 5 foot long pipe on the opposite end from where you are welding will burn you just the same as if you touched the weld and that’s because steel will conduct the thermal energy instantly across the length of the pipe.

The same holds true with steel structures in high rise buildings.

Why is that important?

Because, dimwit, the weaken point of A-36 structural steel (or any metal for that matter) references CORE TEMPERATURE of the steel, and not the surface temperature.

That means, NIST can say they detected areas of the core columns that were EXPOSED to temperatures ‘as high as” 1,800ºF but that does not mean the core of those columns REACHED 1,800ºF which is what they would have had to have done in order to become a “freaking noodle”.

The only reason you could bend that toothpick of a bar you used in that demonstration, is because the CORE of it reached that temperature. Had it not, you couldn’t have. And that’s a fact.

Had you attached about a hundred thousand pounds of steel to it as you heated it, you would have found that you still couldn’t have bent it “like a freaking noodle” because the energy from the furnace would have been dissipated across the entire structure like the heat sink effect of a massive core of 47 columns and the countless cross-members and support beams you just might find in the design of the Twin Towers if you cared enough to take a look.

Would you care to explain to me how the core temperature of a 5″ thick, 5 foot wide steel plate reaches 1,800ºF when exposed for 56 minutes to a fire burning at less than 1,100ºF?

I guess that would take longer than the 2 minutes you seem to be prepared to offer up to this issue.

In the end, had you bothered to read the NIST report, you would find that even 1,100 is WAY more than they found to have effected the structure for a prolonged period of time:

Only three locations had evidence that the steel reached temperatures above 250°C.
These areas were:

• WTC 1, east face, floor 98, column 210, inner web,
• WTC 1, east face, floor 92, column 236, inner web,
• WTC 1, north face, floor 98, column 143, floor truss connector

Other forensic evidence indicates that the last example probably occurred in the debris pile after collapse

Remember, these details from NIST only deal with the conditions inside the buildings PRIOR to collapse. At the point OF collapse and during the collapse, the NIST report tells us nothing.

There might just be an interesting reason for that.

4. 2003 RJ Lee Report

Lastly, I wish to conclude with this.

In 2003 Deutsche Bank was trying to be paid by an insurance company for the damage and clean-up of the dust and debris that blew through their windows at 130 Liberty Street, New York on Sept. 11th, 2001. With the windows blown out, 5″ of dust from the collapse of the Twin Towers covered everything in their offices and they rightly wanted compensation for it.

The insurance company told them to prove the dust came from the Twin Towers, which they insured.

So, Deutsche Bank contacted the RJ Lee Group and commissioned them to do a study basically identifying the fingerprint of the Ground Zero dust that covered lower Manhattan that day so they could indeed prove it came from the Twin Towers.

(Keep this in mind… this has NOTHING to do with studies by “Truthers”. Nor for that matter did ANY OTHER EVIDENCE I presented thus far (NIST, FEMA, photos from the construction of the Towers and now RJ Lee Group))

The RJ Lee Group study was release in 2003 in two parts, the first titled “WTC Dust Signature Report Composition and Morphology. ”

I would like to quote a little of that to you Tye, if you have the time to read it (or care enough):

Various metals (most notably iron and lead) were melted during the WTC Event, producing spherical metallic particles. Exposure of phases to high heat results in the formation of spherical particles due to surface tension. Figure 21 and Figure 22 show a spherical iron particle resulting from the melting of iron (or steel).”  2003 RJ Lee Group report page 17

“In addition to the spherical iron and aluminosilicate particles, a variety of heavy metal particles including lead, cadmium, vanadium, yttrium, arsenic, bismuth, and barium particles were produced by the pulverizing, melting and/or combustion of the host materials such as solder, computer screens, and paint during the WTC Event. Combustion-related products are significant WTC Dust Markers, particularly if seen in combination. However, it is worth noting that fly ash and partially combusted products can occur in trace concentrations in ordinary building dusts, but not in the concentrations observed in WTC Dust.”  2003 RJ Lee Group page 19

“The differences within the WTC Dust and typical background dusts include the fineness and evidence of heat, the size and concentration of the chrysotile, and the length and concentration of the mineral wool and other fibers, as well as the frequency of occurrence of spherical particles produced by fire and heat, char and soot, and other building products.”  2003 RJ Lee Group report page 19-20

Why is this significant and more importantly, why is it significant in terms of Tye’s childishly flawed demonstration?

It is significant because even in his mistaken demonstration of how “jet fuel” could in fact ‘weaken’ 5″ thick structural steel columns (in 56 minutes or less) Tye never explains one dramatically important clue to the mystery that is the collapse of the Twin Towers and that is the presence of massive amounts of melted metal. Flash melted as would be needed to produce the thousands of tons of metal microspheres found not only by the RJ Lee Report, but also by the USGS study done a year earlier.

“Iron-rich spherules were also observed in studies conducted by the RJ Lee Company and the USGeological Survey. In particular, a USGS report on the WTC dust provides two micrographs of “iron-rich spheres” and a “bulbous” or tear-drop-shaped silicate droplet.”

“Moreover, the RJ Lee report provides provocative data regarding the abundance of observed iron-rich spheres. A WTC dust sample acquired at 130 Liberty Street shows a “mean of composition” of “Fe spheres” of 5.87% which is very high compared with “Fe spheres” found in ordinary building dust of only 0.04%. As the report notes, the WTC dust has unusual identifying characteristics – in particular, the WTC dust in this sample has nearly 150 times (5.87/0.04) the amount of iron-rich spheres as ordinary dust.” “Extremely high temperatures during the World Trade Center destruction.”

What has to happen in order for those droplets and microspheres to form is they have to be flash melted, nearly instantaneously, and they cool while suspended in the air so they don’t form into little puddles or flat platelets.

That is why the RJ Lee Report concluded:

Combustion-related products are significant WTC Dust Markers,


Not jet fuel fires.

Not compression.

Not friction.

Not gravity.

Not even magic.


Now, since Tye here has clearly demonstrated along with his laziness, his lack of knowledge relating to even the OFFICIAL STORY of 9/11, allow me to interject a little knowledge of what COULD have produced what the RJ Lee Report and the USGS found.

Let’s start off by saying Tye isn’t exactly accurate when he uses A-36 structural steel as the template for all the steel in the Twin Towers.  Again, this information comes to us from NIST, the official source of the official version of what happened to the Towers.

“The composition of the trusses was not simply carbon and iron as has been suggested by many others.  That would be the main composition of A-36 structural steel. But as NIST points out, in the fabrication process of the trusses, the company that made them substituted a higher grade steel, a HSLA steel, for the parts of the trusses that were to be comprised of A-36 structural steel.  They also used ASTM A-242 steel in the trusses.  This could explain the reports of silicone, sulfur, and various other metals found in the “iron rich spheres”.” Scott Creighton

Here are the charts provided by NIST.

Taken from the NCSTAR1 report. ASTM A-242 steel in the trusses possess many of the elements found in the "iron rich spheres" including iron, carbon, silicone, sulfer...

Chemical Composition A572 Grade 50 steel

I provide these so when you go check out the detail in the RJ Lee Report, you will find much of the material they found melted into “droplets” or micro-spheres, did in fact come from the trusses of the Trade Center.

The heat required to achieve these results is tremendous. Far greater than anything Tye can create in his furnace and certainly much more than office fires or even Tye’s mythological “jet fuel fires” that even NIST and FEMA say didn’t exist for long after the planes hit the buildings.

RJ Lee and the USGS agree with me and the rest of the “truthers” even if Tye here doesn’t.

The RJ Lee study also found that temperatures had been reached “at which lead would have undergone vaporization”– meaning 1,749°C (3,180°F).

Another study was carried out by the US Geological Survey, the purpose of which was to aid the “identification of WTC dust components.” Besides also finding iron particles, the scientists involved in this study found that molybdenum had been melted. This finding was especially significant, because this metal does not melt until it reaches 2,623°C (4,753°F). Griffin

What could possibly have created that kind of heat in the Twin Towers as they came down due, mainly, to office fires (according to NIST)?

Years ago, I addressed that and with all due respect to Mr. Tye here, I leave it for you to review:

“The incredibly high temperatures required to create the spheres themselves as well as all the molten steel found under the rubble of Ground Zero can easily be explained by the use of PETN.  PETN is commonly used in the demolition industry and it is more than capable of creating temperatures in excess of 7,075 degs. Fahrenheit.  PETN is one of the most powerful high explosives used in the demolition industry.  The application of the PETN filled DET CORD would be as simple as reaching up into the ceiling tiles on each floor, and running the DET CORD like an electrician pulls cable, in the pre-existing ELECTRICAL DUCTS.  There would be no need for drilling or for finding a way to fasten the DET CORD to the underside of the metal floor pans.  The installation would fast, simple, and could be disguised as a “cable upgrade” for the security system (which took place in the months leading up to 9/11).” Scott Creighton

(The formula for kelvin to Fahrenheit is ((Kelvin – 273) * 1.8 ) + 32; note: 1.8 = 9/5.)

As it turns out, my estimation of the temperature created by the detonation of PETN was a bit low. It’s closer to 8,000ºF which is approaching the surface temperature of the sun at 9,941 °F

So, needless too say, a massive wave of super-heated air at 8,000ºF would create the evidence that both the RJ Lee Group and the USGS found in the dust which serves as significant markers for identifying the dust from Ground Zero. A massive wave created by something like PETN det cord placed in the floor systems of the Twin Towers like is done during a standard controlled demolition project.

It would also explain how the droplets and micro-spheres were suspended long enough to cool and form and how the super-heated metal would be blown into tiny particles in the first place.

Any of those questions answered by Tye’s ridiculous demonstration? No? I didn’t think so.

5. Conclusion

Trenton Tye’s  silly “debunking” video will undoubtedly be well accepted by most if not all of the eager main stream media outlets garnering him his much sought after attention.

But, as is usually the case in these self-serving, Youtube affected indignation videos, the substance of his argument is hollow to the core. Unfortunately, these days in this country, that means diddly squat. With the right “Redneck Dixon White” approach, you could probably convince a quarter of the population of the earth being flat, just so long as they had some form of ridiculously insipid “experiment” to prove it and just the self-righteous in your tone of voice.

Of course, the mic drop makes it, doesn’t it?

In reality though, the world isn’t as simple as “they hate us for our freedom” and we have all learned that since 9/11.

Nor is engineering as simple as some wannabe TV star bending a 1/2″ piece of steel in his little shop with an anvil and his pinky.

The funny thing is, as ignorant as Trenton Tye is even of the official theory of 9/11, I as a long time Truth Advocate and researcher into the events of 9/11 have never supported or respected one single theory or demonstration like the one Tye there does, as proof of the controlled demolition of 9/11.

In fact, no one that I know of who isn’t a fake truth advocate, has done so either. And that’s because when you take the time, because you care, to dig a little deeper and find solid evidence of an alternative explanation for something we are told is a given, you tend to er on the side of caution: you do your research and you painstakingly investigate your conclusions…

… before you open your mouth.

Thus a lesson Trenton Tye could learn from the Truth community might just be that’s always best to say nothing and be thought a fool, than open your mouth and remove all doubt.

Of course, he just wants to be on TV doesn’t he? And you don’t have to have an IQ for that, now do you?

mic drop drops mic


donation graphic


42 Responses

  1. he’s another IGNORANT TROLL, to be ignored!

  2. Thanks for this report Scott. I’ve been reading some of Phillip Marshall’s stuff but it’s a lot to read. Can you point me to a condensed version of what Marshall said and any ideas on what his big revelation might have been he was planning on releasing before his assasination.

  3. Ouch! Trenton Tye just got fucked in the ass with no vaseline.

  4. I guess this is where we are headed in USA if we haven’t already got there:

    “Thanakorn Siripaiboon, 27, was arrested earlier this week and charged with sedition, lese majeste and computer crimes for clicking “like” on a photo of the king and sharing it, plus an infographic on a corruption scandal, with around 600 friends.

    “He is under military custody,” Colonel Burin Thongprapai, junta legal officer, told AFP Saturday, adding that he would be remanded at a military court Monday.”

  5. Wow! four million views for a video that shows an absolute idiot bending steel rod after keeping it in the furnace. The funny part is that he bends the red hot steel back and forth quite a few times, and the rod is still intact.

    Even in much more elaborate videos made by people with three-digit IQs, no one ever mentions the infamous WTC asbestos, the clean up of which was never carried out. High quality asbestos is heat resistant up to 2500-2750 degrees. So, the flash heat of a jetful explosion wouldn’t have even touched the steel for most part, let alone turning it into spaghetti…

    • I saw a documentary on the building of wtc, on tv, way back before 911 and they stated and showed that they had to go back and spray on “new” insulation(thermite?) to the steel beams years after the buildings completion…Cant find the doc after 911

  6. Wow. you wrote all that for a clean up operation?
    I have had opposing views on your far out theory’s , but I seen this limp rod rebuttal and oh boy. WTF .
    Why now? What purpose? ps buzz but look way over here for some reason.

    • My sobering point is ,Why now? This vid is so cheap and beyond belief. The buzz part was me sorry. WAY OUT OF PLACE,NO?

  7. Steel at 350 degrees F is actually much stronger than steel at room temperature, thus the likely effect of the fires on the framework of the
    WTC would be to strengthen rather than weaken it.

  8. Scott, detcord is not going to be able to cut large steel beams as shown in the picture. Trees and chain link fences, yes. Beams, no.
    It would require custom manufactured linear cutting charges to cut all those beams like that.

  9. No one ever mentions the B25 that flew into the empire state building way back in the 40’s and that OLD buildings still there…One of the engines went all the way through the building out the other side, big fire….and its “riveted” built….

  10. Hi Scott,

    Your story was posted on the reddit conspiracy subreddit and has got decent traction. I thought you might be interested in this comment, which I think is constructive criticism.

    In response to your statement:

    “As you well know from when you weld, touching a 5 foot long pipe on the opposite end from where you are welding will burn you just the same as if you touched the weld and that’s because steel will conduct the thermal energy instantly across the length of the pipe.”

    A redditor (not a shill or troll by any means) says:

    “Bullshit. I work for a company that makes truck trailers by welding thick pieces of steel together (not as thick as the WTC, for sure). The heat does not dissipate “instantly” at all.

    This guy was totally right about what he was saying until that point.

    The heat does dissipate, and the more material, the more energy you need to inject at a faster rate to overcome the heat sink effect. But it certainly doesn’t distribute the heat evenly through the material instantly. If it did, welding would not be possible because by the time you got the weld pool (the pool of liquid metal that forms the weld) going, the rest of the material would also be liquid.

    The best way to think of it is as a bucket with a hole in it. That is the material to be welded. Then think of the welder as a hose pouring water into that bucket. Water will come out of the hole at a set rate that will not change unless the hole shrinks or grows. That is the equivalent of the “heat sink” effect.

    To fill the bucket (melt the material) you need to pour water into the bucket faster than the water flows out of the hole. That’s why an oxy-acetylene torch uses a flame that burns at more than twice the melting point of steel. The electric arc from a standard MIG welder is “burning” at between 6000o C and 8000o C, several times higher than the melting point of steel.

    Why such high temperatures? To overcome the heat sink effect. But it can be overcome.

    To cut a steel beam, you need to put enough heat into a very small area fast enough for the metal to start to melt in that small area. Then the gas pressure blasts the liquid metal away, forming a cut. To weld metal you need even higher temperatures because you are trying to melt only a very small proportion of the material (heat can destroy the strength of steel, as we know, so you want to keep it as localised as possible).

    The simple fact is, the fire in the WTC was only burning at around 600o C (as can be determined from the colour of the flames), and only had an hour to heat the WTC’s steel frame before it collapsed. The heat being put into the WTC steel by that fire was too low and too slow to overcome the heat sink effect.

    The most damning bit of evidence is that of all the beams tested, only one WTC beam showed signs of being heated above 600o C, and that only reached 800o C, just barely enough to start softening that beam. But the WTC could withstand the failure of several beams. That’s called “over-engineering” and “a safety margin”.”


    • I was not a certified welder,but I did weld on 5th Ave, in New York during the install for the GM on 5th show back in ’97 or ’98 so I know for a fact that guy is full of shit. I have done a good deal of welding and cutting work, and I can tell you, the heat sink with small pieces like that is almost instantaneous. My point is that a large structure like the interior columns of the Twin Towers would dissipate the heat energy over a vast area, and thus, reduce the effect of even that short burst of 1,500 deg temps from the short lived jet fuel fires.

      Thank you for your comment. You are absolutely correct.

  11. Thank you.

  12. “The WTC dust in this sample has nearly 150 times (5.87/0.04) the amount of iron-rich spheres as ordinary dust.”

    This is a key point that official story defenders miss…

    ‘Debunkers’ will claim these iron-rich spheres are either:

    ‘Iron-oxide’ spheres (different from the iron-rich spheres in composition) that formed from microscopic iron rust flakes (which have a lower melting point due to the thermodynamic size effect) as fires progressed; (in fact, Rich Lee of RJ Lee claimed this in a letter which was circulated around JREF forums…needless to say, it contradicts the report)


    ‘Fly ash’, which is a common part of building components.

    The presence of iron-rich spheres, I don’t think can be reliably sourced to fly-ash within ordinary building dust. The ratio of these spheres to ordinary dust is simply too large, and the composition is too different. Nor can they be formed from iron rust flakes, because:

    a. the composition is too different for that to be a good explanation; there must be another source for these spheres

    b. the spheres found were too large for the thermodynamic size effect to have occurred (I think the latter effect is observed with sub-30 microns samples, whereas the spheres are generally 60-80 microns in diameter?).

    Like you said, the trusses/floor pans are the best candidate for these microspheres. With the rapid propagation of the PETN detonation wave and the extreme heat generated, it’s easy to imagine that whole trusses/floor pans ended up likely this very quickly.

    Great article.


    • and if you look at the RJ Lee Report and works by Jones and Griffin that I linked to in the article, you find it’s not just metal from those sources, it’s not just metal in the first place. Plastics from computers, melted glass, metal from doors, metal from filing cabinets (Google filing cabinet 9/11 and you will see the condition of one of the few cabinets that remained in the end) and even melted material from the concrete itself (yes, the concrete melted with requires a great deal more heat energy than even the A-36 structural steel)

      It was a massive heat event which wasn’t even covered in the NIST report as they deliberately stopped their evaluation at the point of universal collapse, and as you can see, there is a good reason why they did.

      The RJ Lee report is possibly the best, hard evidence of a controlled demolition on 9/11 as there is. It is unmistakable yet rarely cited even by the “truther” crowd, and you can draw your own conclusions from that.

      And remember, there has never been a single test done by any agency or “truther” for that matter, to detect the presence of nitrates in the Ground Zero dust which would prove high explosives were used during the demo.

  13. Scott, what happens to structural steel members when they are heated?

    • thank you for the link. As some of you know, I have a background in construction and drawing, designing construction documents as well as project management. But I am certainly not a steel worker or metallurgist or structural engineer. I think you would need one to fully answer that question for you. However, I can tell you confidently, that heat transfers at quantifiable and predictable rates (as your link demonstrates) and those values are considered quite carefully in the design of modern, steel-framed high-rise structures. that’s why Shyam Sunder himself stated during his Building 7 press conference, that when that building came down (at free fall acceleration for 7 seconds, collapsing into it’s own footprint like a standard controlled demolition) it was the very first time office fires caused the collapse of a structure like that.

      In short, since the jet fuel was burned out in the first 5 minutes of the event (much of it outside the buildings) the heat values that Tye uses are inaccurate. It was not a hydrocarbon fire burning in those buildings for 56 minutes and an hour and 40 minutes on Sept. 11th. It was standard office fires. So regardless of what one thinks of heat transfer, the reality is, even if no heat ever moved from one beam to another, there could not have been sufficient heat anywhere in the building to bring the core temperature of 2 1/2″ thick steel plate columns to the point of failure.

      Perhaps we should take a look at the kinds of forges they use to manufacture steel of that size in order to get an idea of the energy needed to melt/shape A-36 structural steel of that magnitude.

      We can debate this all day long, but in the end, Tye’s bending of a 1/2″ piece of square-stock 3 feet long doesn’t prove office fires can weaken massive structural columns any more than breaking a twig proves I can chop down an oak with the edge of my hand. And that is just a fact.

      • “So regardless of what one thinks of heat transfer, the reality is, even if no heat ever moved from one beam to another, there could not have been sufficient heat anywhere in the building to bring the core temperature of 2 1/2″ thick steel plate columns to the point of failure.”

        hmm. i think we would need a structural engineer to talk to us about this. structural failures are not as simple as you make it seem here.

        • well, there are 2,400 of them over at AE for 9/11 Truth. I’m sure you can ask them if standard office fires can produce enough heat to cause massive structural steel columns to fail in such catastrophic ways that they did on 9/11. I think they will probably agree with me. Shyam Sunder doesn’t but at least he admits it never happened in the past.

          • 9/11 wasn’t just a “standard office fire”. you’re ignoring the massive dynamic force exerted by a Boeing 767 flying through the side of the building

            • NIST said in their study that the only contributing factor the planes served in the eventual collapse of the Twin Towers was as the vehicle by which the jet fuel that STARTED the fires was delivered.

              They accurately explained that if in fact the damage from the planes caused the collapse, it would have been immediately following the crash and not 60 minutes and 104 minutes or so after the fact.

              And though you say I am “ignoring” their contribution to the event, clearly I am not. And for that matter, neither did the engineers who designed the towers. They were made to withstand just an event, and in fact they did so.

                • I have read it, thank you. But since you mentioned it.

                  “Executive Summary NIST NCSTAR 1-6, WTC Investigation lxvii Figure E–11. WTC 1 probable collapse sequence. 1. Aircraft Impact Damage • Aircraft impact severed a number of exterior columns on the north wall from Floors 93 to 98, and the wall section above the impact zone moved downward. • After breaching the building’s exterior, the aircraft continued to penetrate into the building, severing floor framing and core columns at the north side of the core. Core columns were also damaged toward the center of the core and, to a limited extent, on the south side of the core. Fireproofing was damaged from the impact area to the south exterior wall, primarily through the center of WTC 1 and at least over a third to a half of the core width. • Aircraft impact severed a single exterior panel at the center of the south wall between Floors 94 and 96. • The impact damage to the exterior walls and to the core resulted in redistribution of severed column loads, mostly to the columns adjacent to the impact zones. The hat truss resisted the downward movement of the north wall, a nd rotated about the east-west axis. • As a result of the aircraft impact damage, the north and south walls each carried about 7 percent less gravity loads after impact, and the east and west walls each carried about 7 percent more loads. The core carried about 1 per cent more gravity loads after impact.”

                  Not what I call a catastrophic load displacement.

                  “Because there was effectively no wind on the morning of September 11, 2001, the capacity of the exterior wall provided to accommodate design wind loads was available to carry redistributed gravity loads. • The large dimensional size of the WTC towers helped the buildings withstand the aircraft impact. “

                  So the building withstood the effects of the plane impact pretty well, as far as I can from that report.

          • “I think they will probably agree with me”
            you seem rather certain that 2,400 structural engineers would agree with your statement. i am not sure from where you find this confidence.

            • because I have read the statements and studies of some of them. And I myself signed the petition as one of the 20,000 or so non-architect and engineer supporters of the petition (yes, my name is on there and has been for many years)

              so that is how I find the confidence to say that.

  14. […] For the Unthinking Fuckwit from Purgatory Iron Works and His Idiotic “Jet Fuel” Demonstration […]

  15. I noticed a number of comments on the video claiming the molten metal dripping before the demolitions was aluminum, and aircraft and building frames combined to creating an ad-hoc thermite mix that accounts for the thermite (or thermit as it used to be spelled) residue.
    Uncle Fetzer tried to push this story at a presentation he made in NH several years ago.
    A point I saw nobody clarify and debated with JF about was that aluminum has low EMISSIVITY, and iron and steel have high emissivity. The dripping metal was not aluminum.
    So they emit the same color at the same temperature, but iron glows very brightly, visible in daylight, whereas aluminum mostly reflects ambient light, looks silvery, and you would have to be in the dark to see anything but reflected light from it.
    Fester countered with a slide showing a crucible of molten aluminum being poured, which was bright but silvery, just like pouring mercury.
    That after claiming it was a MASER that did the damage, even though he couldn’t tell what that acronym meant.
    In Tom Swift, masers are destruction beams, but in reality, a maser is a precision microwave oscillator, and also an astrophysical phenomenon.
    Anyway good work. The mystery to me is if these people are stupid, or disinfo. Either way they are wrong, but these technical details tell the truth. Most people don’t know them, and don’t want to know.

  16. Scott, thank you for telling it like I could never do. I new the second I saw this dipshit demonstration he was full of shit, but then again I have worked with iron all my life. I`m good at ironworking, 35 years in the trade, I`m not good at putting words down to explain things so I`m just going to share this research and smile. Thanks again, it`s good somebody still gives a damn.

  17. While everything in this is accurate, there is a fundemental flaw. He wasn’t trying to debunk the twin towers, he was just fed up with the “jetfuel can’t melt steel beams” meme that keeps going around. But good on you for trying to assert yourself over someone who you feel was a moron.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: