please log in to view this image Ok let's get this clear Eddie, you said this photo was taken on the 12th? So how do you know that, why is it "Clearly in the immediate aftermath" and not after the clean up had commenced several weeks after 9/11, when demolition men cut the beams with acetyline torches? Are you suggesting that "impossibly awkward position with surrounding debris" was not safe for demolition men but was safe enough for a photographer?
To me the real irony of it all is that the state of Israel treats the Palestinians with little more respect than the Germans treated the Jews.Coach PursesCoach OutletCoach Factory Outlet
Look at it Dev, look at the rubble and the place still smoking. Its safe to say this is not after a clean up job. Theres no way I can possibly prove the exact date the picture was taken 10 years on as its impossible to find the original but it looks safe to say, it is taken in the days after 9/11. I am a fabricator and have worked with metal for years. I have plenty of experience with structural steel and using acetylene torches so I can assure you, it would be unsafe to go in and cut beam of that size in those surroundings. The surrounding area would have been cleared sufficiently to allow safe access to the beam, common sense should tell you that.
No that was molten steel that was burning, nothing to with the amount of rubble. Molten steel from high temperatures of 800 degrees. Just another one the physics defying anomaLIES on 9/11.
Eddie there is no way of knowing when that picture was taken, it is in fact impossible to say exactly when, so it could have been up to a month after 9/11 when fire crews were still on the scene. The fact is there are plenty of photos which show similar conditions to that which were taken weeks later. This was taken in October please log in to view this image This one in December please log in to view this image please log in to view this image I'm sure you'll agree that there was smoke in October and that it was still very dangerous looking in December. Another obvious problem arises when people start talking about thermite, there is no way to arrange thermite so that it cuts in a straight line, it burns eractically and generally downwards not sideways and even if they had a way of planting thermite so that it cut those beams, how were the beams accessed? They were surrounded by concrete and other building materials, they were not exposed or out in the open so someone would have to had taken Kango drills to get at the metal before planting the super thermite. please log in to view this image
Here's a metalworker cutting down beams in the weeks after please log in to view this image And here's a close up of one of his diagonal cuts. please log in to view this image
The amount of slag on the face at the bottom of the cut is not consistent with what it would look like if cut by torch. Most of the slag is blown inside the beam and and only a little is left on the outside edge of the cut as can be seen on some of the pics you posted. I just dont see how a torch could have done that. I found a webpage there that goes through a few of the pictures and apparently the clean up plan was not confirmed until 2 days after 9/11. There is a picture on http://www.jamesnachtwey.com/ that is confirmed to have been taken on the day of 9/11 and there is evidence of angle cut beams in the rubble. I dont know much about thermate so can only copy this description. "Thermate is a variation of thermite and is an incendiary pyrotechnic composition that can generate short bursts of exceedingly high temperatures focused on a small area for a short period of time. Because thermate burns at higher temperatures than ordinary thermite,[1] it has useful military applications in cutting through tank armor or other hardened military vehicles or bunkers. As with thermite, thermate's ability to burn without an external supply of oxygen renders it useful for underwater incendiary devices."
As for access to the buildings [video=youtube;YOsZFmqgO5k]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOsZFmqgO5k[/video]
[video=youtube;lGRRl24Cf8E]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGRRl24Cf8E[/video] Fire has never before this caused a steel building to collapse EVER! Even if the top did give way the design of the building ensures the top will never become part of the collapse
Plus a pancake collapse would be meeting resistance at each floor it met and so slowing its rate. The towers collapsed at near freefall speed! The towers were prepped for collapse
