2. How hot was thousands of gallons of jet fuel burning on a select few floors.
Answer: Steel alloys generally melt around 2500F. Jet fuel burns at its maximum at 1796F. With 10,000 gallons of fuels, tons of conbustable fuels (paper, fabrics, walls, etc.), and time, and already weakened structure could be much further weakened by a raging inferno hot enough to bend steel without cracking it.
The 'melting point of steel' argument argument is so tired and so easy to debunk it is not even funny any more.
MrS
Krypton
Please refer me to any crediable evidence that 9/11 was a secret conspiracy orchestrated by the US government.
Because it doesn't appear their plan for world-domination is working. So I guess in the conspiracy wackos minds, the secret plan backfired! :rolleyes:
MrSquirrel
quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
Please refer me to any crediable evidence that 9/11 was a secret conspiracy orchestrated by the US government.
Because it doesn't appear their plan for world-domination is working. So I guess in the conspiracy wackos minds, the secret plan backfired! :rolleyes:
If that was aimed at me you misunderstood the aim of my comment.
I am not a conspiracy theorist. As a certified structural welder, I know a lot more about how steel reacts under different temperatures than your average "truther".
MrS
Krypton
Then what caused the structural failure of the twin tower?
Sunsnail
It's been said about 100 times in this thread that steel loses its strength at higher temperatures
colonelcrisp
600 to 800 degrees C will turn steel into gumbi.
Mr S, as a certified welder, you should know as well as i do how steel behaves at higher temperatures.
xstalkrx
ing c00ks...
MrSquirrel
quote:
Originally posted by colonelcrisp
600 to 800 degrees C will turn steel into gumbi.
Mr S, as a certified welder, you should know as well as i do how steel behaves at higher temperatures.
I do.
My original post was a response to the truthers, not to those who know how steel reacts.
You and Krypton are accusing me of having a position I do not have, in fact you are accusing me of supporting an asinine argument that is contrary to what I know from both a theoretical and observational experience.
I did not go into detail because it has been stated before in this thread, and it is a tired argument. Just as the tired argument that the WTC towers could not have fallen because the internal skeleton could not have possibly been damaged that much, when in fact, the towers had no internal structural skeleton, the outer walls were the ONLY vertical load members holding up the floors.
MrS
shevchenko135
It was clearely a set-up. No one can deny it. 911 set off a chain reaction of events afganisten(which everyone was behind because of 911) this war on terror then went to iraq which we knew from the begining was a load of bull. All this is the begining of the NWO. New World Order, I see this now as the United Nations and U.S acting as a police state for the whole world.
culorut
quote:
do you know why i discredit the "eye witness" testimony of a janitor? because he heard something..... if your in the woods and you hear a loud bang can you honestly say it was a gunshot or maybe it was a firecracker. my point is alot of the time people will fill in the blanks to make some stimulus make sense to them. ie they heard a bang, it was an explosion.... not only that but janitors dont have the best track record for being the sharpest tools in the shed.....
and further more, weather or not there were or were not basement explosions, the buildings collapsed from the top down not the bottom up.
He was not the only one who heard explosions for starters. He carried out victims which had their skin missing from their bodies yet the planes struck 70-80 floors above them. Yes he was a janitor but how the f**k do you know how smart he is? I know a few custodians personally, they make plenty of money and are very bright people. Very weak argument you have going on this one.
quote:
your out of your league on this one. loose change is about as factually acurate as a michael moore film... they show the footage and interviews that support their weak conclusions... its not objective at all.
frankly a bunch of web dorks armed with youtube and google videos is a mere fart in the wind compared to the studies and findings of the ASCE (american society of civil engineers) their independant sudy came to the same conclusions as the FEMA report. and in my mind that satisfys the issue.
And the NIST/FEMA/ASCE all conducted their reports and studies based on what information was given to them, what was not given to them to base their results on is what made all the difference. Hell NIST compiled an application to test what it would take to bring down the towers and could not make it happen using the real parameters, they had to use parameters far beyond what really occurred to make it happen.
