Continually asserting something does not make it so.
we've got a few blurry low resolution photos of what looks like something that's glowing orange. There's two main hypotheses here:
A) It's yellow hot steel.
B) It's burning debris
I see white/yellow hot geometrically shaped objects being extracted from the rubble pile weeks after the initial collapse. From a rubble pile I might add where no office furniture remained in any way intact. Once again it boils down to "what are the odds" ? In the first picture below there is a very distinct shape of a C channel beam glowing in bright yellow to orange. By all accounts there was no identifiable office furniture within the rubble. It had all been completely pulverized by the force of collapse. This leaves us with one of two conclusions ( in that we agree ) Either this photo does in fact represent a C channel which has been superheated beyond anything expected in a simple hydrocarbon fire. Or by some miracle an office desk or other such geometrically shaped object survived the collapse, survived ten days, on fire, or at least at the flash point, after several significant rain events, and millions of gallons of water applied by the fire dep, to emerge at least intact enough to display geometric form, and before bursting into flame, managed to get its picture taken. I think the odds are against that later circumstance. While the mechanism for extremely high temp might not be identified, the evidence for its existence is substantial.
Take this image, a bunch of red glowing things, in what seems to be a reasonably well lit scene. One piece has some angles to it, and could conceivably be an I-beam,
Looks like a C channel to me or a piece or wood or folded wall-board,
The only thing that burns on sheetrock is the paper and that basically simply chars to ash or a bunch of things overlapping,
Bunch of things overlapping don't end up in a nice neet geometric shape most closely resembling a C channel. Very hard to tell from the super low resolution image. There's also no real indication of size,
actually there is a back hoe behind the scene for reference, I'd estimate this piece of C channel to be something like 16 heavy C, a common size for a high rise or exactly where this is, or which building the debris came from
Good point, why wasn't this site mapped, why is it we don't know the fall pattern of the steel, the guys removing the pile had plenty of time to record the build marks present on each and every piece of steel. Yet this simple inexpensive investigative tool was most obviously not used..
The original source of this is the LiRo newsletter, which reporduced it in more accurate colors.
Now the sensible thing here to determine which hypothesis fits best would be to compare it to existing photos here's a burning trash dump:
Which looks very similar, so would fit B very well.
I wouldn't be able to agree, I see no geometric shapes within that fire, I also see obvious hydrocarbon combustibles, open to atmospheric oxygen. The two photos are simply not comparing apples to apples
Underground coal fires do not burn hotter than about 500°C, and we have laboratory verifiable evidence of reaction temps that at a minimum were in the 950°C range. Roughly twice that. So again the facts do not match the examples given to refute them.
Perhaps you should take a step back and see how the "molten metal" fits into the broader hypothesis.
Ah but i"m not the one keeps mentioning molten metal That would be you guys. I'm the one suggesting that we can see geometric shaped most closely resembling steel which is glowing hot, still being pulled from the rubble pile weeks and months after the original collapse. Where did it come from?
An excellent question And if it was the result of a thermite demolition, then how much of it should there be?