The Great Thermite Debate...

[William Seger]

43. First, "... none of the samples were from zones where such heating was predicted.”

Second, the claims are not at all symmetric: We know for a fact that there were intense fires, and we know from lab tests that office fires like that can produce air temperatures of around 1000 degrees C. On the other hand, we know that the thermite hypothesis was invented out of whole cloth for the sole purpose of allowing paranoid conspiracists to imagine a silent controlled demolition, even though no such demolition had ever been attempted, simply because their previously imagined conventional demolition surely did not occur. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence; mundane claims do not. The NIST claim that steel go hot enough to be weakened is credible without direct evidence, but in fact there is indirect evidence in the inward bowing of the perimeter columns.

But the biggest problem with your claim is the assertion that NIST's explanation requires columns that were heated above 600 degrees C. It does not, since their explanation for the onset of collapse is that sagging floor trusses pulled those perimeter columns inward until they buckled. You're falling for a "truth movement" strawman.