No, The Collapse of the Twin Towers Did NOT Create the Molten Metal

When confronted with evidence that temperatures at the World Trade Centers were too high to have been caused by anything other than explosives, defenders of the government story argue that such temperatures were caused by "friction" or "pressure" from the gigantic buildings collapsing in on themselves.

In other words, they argue that tremendous gravitational energy was released by the collapse of the Twin Towers as parts of the buildings crashed into other parts -- which in turn generated sufficient heat to melt and even partially evaporate the Towers' strong structural steel, and to keep the metal at ground zero in a molten state for months after 9/11.

However, a professor emeritus of physics has proven that the collapses themselves could not have melted steel.

And Brent Blanchard told Dr. Steven Jones by telephone that he has witnessed hundreds of controlled demolitions, but has never seen molten metal at any of the demolition sites. (Blanchard is a recognized expert in controlled demolition).

And remember, not only was molten metal found under the mammoth Twin Towers -- which were 110-stories high -- but molten metal and partially evaporated metal were also found in the debris of World Trade Center building 7. Building 7 -- which collapsed later in the day on 9/11 -- was only 47 stories tall, and was substantially less massive than the Twin Towers. How could a falling 47-story building have caused molten and evaporated metal?

And yet, somehow, WTC7 apparently experienced equally high temperatures as the Twin Towers after collapse.

Specifically, here's a chart showing that WTC7 was as hot as WTC 1 and 2:

The following thermal images of ground zero (the first one showing an overlay of the demolished buildings), show that the debris under building 7 (the trapezoid-shaped building at the upper right) was about as hot as under the Twin Towers:

Let's put that in perspective:

If you need help getting oriented as to where WTC buildings 1, 2 and 7 were in the thermal photos, this aerial photo shows what the World Trade Center complex looked like from above after it was destroyed:

And the following aerial photo shows the unique shape of Building 7, to help identify it in the thermal images:

Are those arguing against demolition of the trade centers saying that the collapse of 47-story building 7 generated the same amount of friction and pressure as the collapse of the mammoth 110-story Twin Towers? If not, why were the temperatures at WTC7 as high as at the Twin Towers five days after the collapses?

For further images and source material concerning the chart, see the bottom half of this webpage.

As always Controlled Demolition

is THE smoking gun and is irrefutable evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.
While there is surely tons of other evidence none of it reaches the point of absolute certainty that CD does.
All the other evidence is the nail and CD is the hammer that drives it home.

Addin 'Em Up.

Damn GW. You are knocking them out of the park. Let the trial begin.

Pathetic attempt....

Yes this is good work, another pathetic attempt to explain away the high temperatures and the
molten metal has been debunked by good scientific analysis.

Lets wait for the next explanation and knock that one down too.

"Who controls the past controls the future, who controls the present controls the past"
George Orwell 1984

Hot Metal Elephant in the Room

"he has witnessed hundreds of controlled demolitions, but has never seen molten metal at any of the demolition sites". (Blanchard is a recognized expert in controlled demolition). Is he being honest?

What does this mean GW? What mechanism could have created such hot spots? We know they exist and they are not present at more conventional CDs, so what does this indicate?

7man ,

Dr. Jones thinks it indicates thermite or nanothermate or some permutation.


if nano-thermite then it was probably used as an explosive. Our 70 lbs of thermite at Truthburn stayed hot for over an hour.

You need to check if this phenomenon occurs following...

cases of arson, especially those proven to use thermite / thermate to assist the arson.


My research has resulted in me concluding that thermite / thermate were mainly used as incendiaries for the arson fire / intense smoke aspect, opposed to the metal eating properties (there is much evidence of metal being affected by sulfur / high temperatures but this is more incidental than planned).

If you check the hotspots, the WTC7 spots match where the SEC fires were witnessed (east and north face (eastern half), floors 7, 8, 12 and 13).

The same hotspot match can be noted for the north-east corner of WTC2 where molten metal is seen flowing from the north face / near eastern corner (approx floor 80).


Gordon Ross's demolition analysis makes the most sense to me (link to short 25min presentation video below)...


Best wishes


for those of us too busy to watch and read all of the excellent materials out there, what is the "most probable" demo scenario, in your opinion?

just a guess...

but from the available evidence:
1. smoke from the bases indicates to me that thermite may have been used to destroy the basement supports before the "three big explosions" that many witnesses report just as the tower came down... dust analysis confirms the presence of the incendiary
2. somehow the wields were attacked on the core columns causing them to break at the original manufacturing points, aerial photographs show the core columns all with square ends and close images show the many of the ends are smooth. Obviously explosives were used to turn the building contents into dust from the top down and to mask whatever reaction was used to destroy the cores.

Jumbo Jets Can Not Demolish Skyscrapers.