what about gasoline from the cars in underground car par?Was jetfuel the only thing burning in those towers?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charcoal#Production_methods
You don't really expect people to believe that gasoline in cars parked THOUSANDS of feet away had anything to do with the collapse do you? Or are you truying to say that Gasoline can melt steel? Cuz it only burns in open air at 500C, which isn't even remotely close to the temps needed to melt steel.
So your saying wood in the fires was turned into charcoal which then heated up to a high enough point to melt steel? Tell ya what, go outside, take 10 bags of charcoal, light em on fire and blow air at them, then take a very small piece of steel, like a screw or something, place it on top and let me know how long it takes to melt. My assumption would be that no matter how hard you tried, or how big your charcoal pile was or how much you blew at it, you will NEVER melt the screw.
you know becuase the molten metel only forms balls like that for a specific reason, duh, heat being one and another is how they cool, cooling set the kind of elements in the steel like a finger print its science would expect most of you to understand, thats why its so fucked up
first of all ti has a much high molten temp them steel, im not doing your homework for you i already kow it does and im not going to go to my text book to make you look stupider you can do that yourself
*Sigh*
If just a few floors collapsed then I could be OK with that, but when the whole building turns to dust? Not just once, not just twice, but three times at the same place, on the same day? the Odds of it being intentional are far greater than random chance of three buildings turning to dust and falling into their own footprints.*Sigh*
You've got to look at the WHOLE picture folks. It wasn't "just fire" or "just planes" that caused those buildings to collapse. It was the combination of events which took place that set events in motion, coupled with the structural design of these buildings which ultimately caused the collapse of the towers and building 7. "No other buildings in history........." Blah, blah, blah........THIS was unprecedented folks! The buildings collapsed in the manner they did not because of any one thing or other. It was the combination of ALL factors which caused it. Thermite does NOT make any sense and there is no scientific basis or proof of it so at this point it's pure speculation. Was there "molten steel" or "molten metal" of any kind? I was there and never saw any of this and never talked to anyone (and I talked to and personally KNOW a LOT of those firemen) who saw any of this. Were there a relative few people who claim to have seen things? Obviously, but it doesn't mean they were correct. I am in now way trying to challenge the credibility or experience of these guys. Many things can appear one way but in reality are something entirely different than their appearance. In any major event like this there will always be mysteries. Mysteries don't equal conspiracy. I could tell stories all day of the strange things I've seen in my years as a firefighter. Unexplained shit happens ALL the time in fires.
if you spent enough time in statistics and probability math class's you would know that this is a red flag to anyone who understands the laws or chaos or randomness
Apples and Oranges my friend.This building burned for 2 days, every floor consumed, Steel doesn't melt from ordinary fire.
lmfao!!!!!!! You act like it was just some normal sunny day and suddenly, without anything else occurring, the buildings just fell. HUGE JETS + HUGE FIRES + GRAVITY = CATASTROPHIC FAILURE OF THESE BUILDINGS!!!!!!!! lol!
That building that is on fire is totally consumed and none of the metal melted, and more to the direct comparison, the metal didn't even get soft enough to deform, not even a little bit. They are using the building right now. Ordinary Fire can't soften steel to the point of failure. BTW you cannot say "most of the other firefighters in this country" unless you have personally interviewed each and every single one of them and gotten real numbers to support your claim. I can say something with the exact same amount of authority as you did by stating that most metallurgists, demolition experts and Structural engineers agree that steel can't soften enough from an ordinary fire to collapse a skyscraper. WTC didn't slowly deform like a softening steel beam would, it literally exploded. WTC 7 didn't start collapsing where the damage was, it started collapsing where the damage wasn't. Go blow up 2 floors in the middle of a skyscraper and I guarantee, pancake collapse or not, the building will stay up.Apples and Oranges my friend.
Steel doesn't have to melt to cause a collapse and the towers were hit by HUGE FUCKING JETS!!!!!!!! Let's review shall we? 2 huge planes filled with fuel and people were flown, minutes apart, into the twin towers. Does anyone dispute this? Good! This caused MASSIVE damage and 2 very LARGE fires. What was the extent of the damage? We will likely never know because structural engineers were unable to inspect it before it collapsed. We can assume with some simple physics and a base understanding of how these buildings were constructed that the damage was obviously pretty bad. Does anyone dispute this? Good! All that was needed after these buildings were damaged, severely, by these 2 very LARGE jets was a fire hot enough to weaken some key structural elements. Asbestos and other fire retardants only slow down the heating of strucural beams, it doesn't completely mute the effects of the fire. It's been theorized (that's all that can be done since no inspection of structural beams could be conducted due to the ensuing collapses) that much of the fire retardant was sheered off at the point of impact/s rendering the insulating/fire retarding properties useless. It doesn't take much heat to cause steel to weaken and bend just slightly. The heat weakening already damaged structural beams along with the load of the building and contents above the points of impact could've also, very plausibly, caused these collapses, which is exactly what we saw that day. I'm sorry, but the collapsing towers and even building 7 collapsing is not where the mystery of 9/11 lies IMO. These things were no surprise to me and MOST of the firefighters in the country who are trained in building collapse. The fact that the buildings stood as long as they did is more a mystery to me than anything else.
I've talked to a large enough sampling that I'm fairly confident of what I speak. As I said before, apples and oranges. What kind of fuels were allowing this particular fire to burn? Was there office furniture, paint, JET FUEL, etc. in this building, because as I understood it was under construction and not occupied when this fire occurred? You cannot make a statement like "ordinary fire cannot soften steel to the point of failure". I've seen steel fail and buildings collapse as a result of "ordinary fire" (WTF is "ordinary fire" anyways? lmfao!!!!!!). Collapses happen all the time my friend, and fire is a leading cause of building collapses. I presume you didn't see my article that showed steel beams melted on top of charred, but otherwise unmoved wood beams?
Before any of this happened it was indeed a normal SUNNY day, But I am not acting like nothing happened beforehand, to say that I am is rather insulting. I think there is a preponderance of evidence that shows Skyscrapers can withstand airplanes flying into them and not fall and that fires that make the WTC fires look like a girl-scout campfire can't collapse a Skyscraper either, But you want us to blindly accept that they can, and do, even though it has never happened.lmfao!!!!!!! You act like it was just some normal sunny day and suddenly, without anything else occurring, the buildings just fell. HUGE JETS + HUGE FIRES + GRAVITY = CATASTROPHIC FAILURE OF THESE BUILDINGS!!!!!!!! lol!
When I speak of "fuel" I'm not talking of aircraft fuel, I'm speaking of fuel like a log is the "fuel" for a campfire. In any "ordinary fire" there can be hundreds if not thousands of different "fuels" burning at the same time.
do you realize that it takes days of burning a specific wood to get enough hot coals and then to have a blower of some kind in a controlled kilm or ofundry to heat steel to the point at which it can even be worked you my friend are uneducated and think that you communication degree will reason this out for you