Support 911Blogger


9/11 Analysis with David Chandler Now Available

Cover Art for 9/11 Analysis
The new DVD, "9/11 Analysis with David Chandler" is completed and will start shipping on Monday Jan 3. It can be ordered at http://www.911speakout.org. It is available as a single DVD in a standard DVD case or in inexpensively priced bulk packs (in sleeves) in quantities of 25, 50, and 100 for mass distribution (marked "Not For Resale for Profit"). Contact davidchaler@gmail.com if you would like to order in wholesale quantities for resale or if you would like to feature the DVD on your web site.

The DVD is based on the many short analysis videos David Chandler has posted on the internet over the last several years. On the DVD these are woven together with an explanatory narrative (and at one point a little physics "chalk talk" is thrown in). This DVD is accessible to the general public, but it also has the potential to arouse interest in and address the questions of the science-educated segment of the public.

Production team: David Chandler (producer, narrator), John Parulis (videographer, editor), Laurel Burik (publicity), Steve Wilson (business manager)

PAYPAL?

We are not able to process your payment using your PayPal account at this time. Please return to the recipient's website to complete your transaction using their regular checkout flow.

Re: PayPal

We have had some orders come through PayPal and others have complained of the same thing you say. We are going through Kagi, an e-commerce service, and it's their account with PayPal. Try a credit card. PayPal is now owned by EBay. Why would you want to support Meg Whitman anyway?

Excellent!

although I wish the cover looked a little more... professional grade level, but that shouldn't matter.

It would be nice if "we" could figure out how to distribute 100,000 of these through colleges and universeity campuses across the USA while encouraging everyone to freely make copies and continue to distribute to friends and family, acquaintances, etc. This is just the kind of tool we've been looking for. Good for highschools also.

Great job! Thanks for this David and Co.!

I like the cover..

it says what kind of analysis is inside. I think the title lacks some description, should have something w 'physics' related analysis, but thats just nitpickin, its all really fine. I bought my copy a while back and I'm really looking forward to seeing it. David's work is top-notch and a copy should be sent to every physics dept in each HS, Jr College, State University, and University in the country.

dtg

Doing the "free copies" thing

Doing the "free copies" thing Robert hurts some of us who worked on this project. We are offering lower cost bulk orders. This important work is worth supporting with purchases and/or donations. There is important work ahead that needs to be supported.

John

Question Great Thermate Debate

Mr. Chandler,

Would you comment on this please? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DhHzMttUKO0&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL

It sounds like aluminum melted above 660 deg C will begin to glow orangish and only higher temperatures bring it to a white glow.

Best regards and keep up the good work!

Don't want to speak for David, but...

Please see here

Notice the maximum gas temperatures reported by NIST.

For the stream of molten metal to be aluminum, I would like to see some sort of experiment to confirm.

Meanwhile, we have:

- Molten metal which glows in daylight, presumably from fire temperatures way below that reported in Ryan's video, although NIST just asserts those temperatures could have occurred, contradicting themselves
- Molten metal which gives off white smoke, something that matches a thermitic reaction, but not aluminum.

Ryan asserts a lot when he shows pictures. I know these pictures. Do they really show a collapsed floor? Look closely.

Ask yourself if a pile of aluminum could stay in one place, and heated, while already molten, to near the theoretical maximum for office/hydrocarbon fires, patiently waiting to flow away until a floor gives way, the same floors alleged to have pulled in the perimeter, glowing while giving off white smoke. (aluminum oxide, presumably)

It has also been hypothesized that the substance could be lead from the large UPS batteries stored on that floor. This theory suffers the same difficulties as the aluminum explanation.

Again, I would like to see an actual experiment before I agree with Ryan. (RKOwens4)

By the way, RKOwens4 is known to be a vicious, vituperative and vindictive liar. His muzak-filled Youtube propaganda collection is no contest for more thoughtful research and actual experiments.

Anyways, NIST asserts the following in their report:

Closer inspection of Figure 9–32 shows what appears to be a shiny silver string (indicated by a red arrow) passing from the top to the bottom of one of the windows, 78-238, on the 78th floor. In the video from which this image was taken, the material actually appeared to be a liquid pouring intermittently from the top of the window and splashing at the window base. The liquid looked as if it was glowing. It was only observed during the six seconds that this video recorded this area of the tower. In Section 9.5, a flow of similar material from windows 80-255 and 80-256 on the 80th floor of the north face will be described. It will be hypothesized that the material was most likely aluminum from the aircraft that had melted and was pouring down through an opening from the floor above. This is also a plausible explanation for the current observation. If correct, it suggests that the pile of debris located on the 79th floor above this window may have contained aluminum from the aircraft. Recall that a pile of debris in this area of the 79th floor was present immediately following the aircraft impact. An intense fire had been burning on this debris since the impact that would have provided the heat necessary to melt the aluminum.

— NIST NCSTAR 1-5A, Chap 9, Appendix C, page 331

(...)

The intense fire in the northeast corner opening of the 81st floor is still present. An unusual flame is visible within this fire. In the upper photograph in Figure 9–44 a very bright white flame, as opposed to the typical yellow or orange surrounding flames, which is generating a plume of white smoke, stands out. The intensity of this flame is considerably brighter than normal flames. It was easily identified in numerous photographs and videos shot from long distances at which the surrounding “normal” flames were not visible. The brightness of the flame, along with the white smoke, suggests that some type of metal is burning. Metal combustion is known to generate much higher flame temperatures than hydrocarbon combustion, and, as a result, to burn much brighter. It is difficult to identify what type of metal is burning. Aluminum will burn, but in normal fires it usually melts instead because the metal surface is protected by an oxide layer that must be breeched before ignition can take place. Aluminum oxide melts at high temperatures that are not typically reached in normal fires. There were limited quantities of other metals on the aircraft that might also burn. Whatever the metal, the ignition of a metal fire is an indication of the significant heating of the debris that took place in the northeast corner of the 81st floor due to the prolonged intense burning in this area following the aircraft impact.

— NIST NCSTAR 1-5A, Chap 9, Appendix C, page 344

(...)

It has been reported in the FEMA report (McAllister 2002) as well as in the media that what appeared to be molten metal was observed pouring from the north face near the northeast corner prior to the collapse of WTC 2. This is the area where the sustained fires on the 81st and 82nd had been burning since the aircraft impact. The likely explanation for the observation of pouring liquid is that the material had originally pooled on the floor slab above, i.e., the 81st floor, and that it was allowed to pour out of the building when the floor slab in the immediate vicinity either pulled away from the spandrel or sank down to the point where the window was exposed. The puff of smoke and/or dust just prior to the first appearance of the molten material suggests that the ultimate event responsible for the release of the material occurred suddenly, in the process creating a pressure pulse that forced smoke and/or dust out of open windows over three floors.

The composition of the flowing material can only be the subject of speculation, but its behavior suggests it could have been molten aluminum. Visual evidence already discussed shows that significant wreckage from the aircraft passed through the building and came to rest in the northeast corner of the tower on the 81st floor, i.e., at the location where the molten material apparently originated. Much of the structure of the Boeing 767 is formed from two aluminum alloys that have been identified as 2024 and 7075 (NIST NCSTAR 1-3). The melting points for these alloys vary as the material melts. The Aluminum Association handbook (The Aluminum Association 2003) lists the melting point ranges for the alloys as roughly 500 °C to 638 °C and 475 °C to 635 °C for alloys 2024 and 7075, respectively. These temperatures are well below those characteristic of fully developed fires (ca. 1000 °C), and any aluminum present is likely to have been at least partially melted by the intense fires that had been in the area for nearly 48 min.

— NIST NCSTAR 1-5A, Chap 9, Appendix C, page 375-376

(...)

During the period between 9:45 a.m. and the start of the global collapse of WTC 2 at 9:58:59 a.m., there were numerous indications that significant changes were taking place within the tower. These included 1) repeated pressure pulses that pushed smoke and/or dust, and in some cases flames, from multiple open windows simultaneously over multiple floors, 2) flows of molten metal (assumed to be aluminum) from the tops of windows, 3) visible changes in the location of hanging objects, 4) sudden changes in fire location and intensity, 5) inward bowing of exterior columns, and 6) a large number of pieces of debris falling from the north side of the east face just prior to the collapse. The available evidence suggests that many, if not all, of the hanging objects were possibly floor slabs that had become detached from and settled down below the spandrel to which they were originally attached. Certain of the behaviors, such as the flows of molten metal, were temporally correlated with pressure pulses, and it is considered likely that the events responsible for changes in hanging object locations also generated such pulses.

— NIST NCSTAR 1-5A, Chap 9, Appendix C, page 396

(...)

As discussed above, the sources for the pressure pulses that created the wide-spread smoke and/or dust puffs observed on multiple faces of WTC 2 are unknown. There are numerous possibilities. However, it is possible that some fraction of these pulses could have been associated with structural changes in the tower, even though definitive visual evidence is not available to support such a hypothesis. There is evidence that some of the puffs were correlated with releases of molten aluminum, which could possibly be associated with local floor slabs movement (see below).

The sudden release of molten material (possibly aluminum) that began pouring from window 80-255 on the north side of the 80th floor at 9:51:51 a.m. provides evidence for the extensive heating that had taken place from the fire that had been burning in the area for nearly 50 min. The melting point range for the relevant aluminum alloys varies from 475 °C to 635 °C, and a great deal of heat would have been required to melt the large volume of liquid metal observed pouring from the tower. The sudden appearance of the flow at the top of the window was likely the result of the formation of a pathway from the 81st floor, where the aluminum possibly had pooled on top of the floor slab as it melted. This, in turn, suggests that the 81st floor slab possibly sank down or pulled away from the spandrel at this time.

(...)

During the 7 min between when the flow of molten metal was first observed and the tower collapsed, the amount of material flowing from the 80th floor increased and decreased repeatedly. At one point the flow shifted from window 80-255 to window 80-256. The change in the source window for the liquid suggests that the lowest local point with pooled aluminum somehow moved to the east. These observations suggest that the 81st floor slab in the immediate vicinity was possibly shifting almost continuously during this time, and, in the process, spilling more and more of the pooled liquid. A similar release of liquid occurred from window 78-238 on the 78th floor around 9:27 a.m. It is possible that this material came from the pile of debris immediately above on the 79th floor. Since this flow was observed for only a few seconds, it is not appropriate to speculate further concerning its source.

— NIST NCSTAR 1-5A, Chap 9, Appendix C, page 412,413,414

The Great Thermate Debate

The Grate Thermate Debate video is by Jon Cole. We are now partnering on http://www.911speakout.org.