Reply #334: Is Ruvolo a metallurgist?

[SDuderstadt]

Hint: no. That's the problem, Petgoat. Just because someone thinks something looks like something, that doesn't mean that's what they're seeing. Do you honestly think the average person can look at a pool of molten metal and divine its composition??? It's also silly to believe that any pools of "molten anything" are purely steel or aluminum or even lead, when it is far more likely that whatever was observed was a cocktail of various substances, including others not even mentioned.

And, you did what I thought you'd do. Your "source" is a conspiracy website. What's funny, id that there are probably as many references to "molten metal" or "molten material" as there are references to "molten steel". So, it's clear that many witnesses did NOT identify it as "molten steel". If, as you imply, it's easy to distinuish "molten steel", why do those witnesses not identify it as such?

More importantly, your "source" does PRECISELY what I've noted in other posts. It quote-mines, cherry picks and clips quotes of both context and contradicting words. For example:

Among others, your "source" cites Leslie Robertson as one of the witnesses making a claim of "molten steel". Small problem: Robertson says he not only didn't say it, he also goes on to say he would not have been in a position to know. The actual source is someone names Stephenson, who claims Robertson said it in a presentation, however, Stephenson's own notes from the presentation do not support his claim.

http://www.911myths.com/html/leslie_robertson.html


Your source also cites Peter Tully. Forget about whether Tully is qualified to identify specifically what he saw. In the same article when "Asked what could have caused such extreme heat (clarification:necessary to 'melt steel'), Tully said, 'Think of the jet fuel'.”. So, one of the very sources relied upon to make the claim that the material was, in fact, "molten steel" thinks it was obviously something other than thermite or demolition that created it.

I could go on and on using your own "source", Petgoat. But I think it's time to stop and ask a question. Did you bother to fact-check ANYTHING your source claims? I doubt it. The rub here is that you're being taken for a ride by these CT cites and you're not smart enough to realize or question it. Pathetic.