First of all, how did fires cause a global collapse.
shaumei said:It would have leaned and fell.
shaumei said:Where do I begin with this bunch of lies. It is hard to deal with folks that want to believe the official story when it is so blatantly a lie.
First of all, how did fires cause a global collapse. We know the WTC towers were made to withstand a crash by a jetliner when built. They did withstand it.
What happened to cause all resistance to be removed in less than 56 minutes in the first WTC tower?
The jet fuel could not have gotten the steel hot enough to cause a global collapse. And even if it chemically was possible, it would not have come down in a controlled manner. It would have leaned and fell.
As the joists on one or two of the most heavily burned floors gave way and the outer box columns began to bow outward, the floors above them also fell. The floor below (with its 1,300 t design capacity) could not support the roughly 45,000 t of ten floors (or more) above crashing down on these angle clips. This started the domino effect that caused the buildings to collapse within ten seconds, hitting bottom with an estimated speed of 200 km per hour. If it had been free fall, with no restraint, the collapse would have only taken eight seconds and would have impacted at 300 km/h.1 It has been suggested that it was fortunate that the WTC did not tip over onto other buildings surrounding the area. There are several points that should be made. First, the building is not solid; it is 95 percent air and, hence, can implode onto itself. Second, there is no lateral load, even the impact of a speeding aircraft, which is sufficient to move the center of gravity one hundred feet to the side such that it is not within the base footprint of the structure. Third, given the near free-fall collapse, there was insufficient time for portions to attain significant lateral velocity. To summarize all of these points, a 500,000 t structure has too much inertia to fall in any direction other than nearly straight down.
TexasBred said:shaumei said:Where do I begin with this bunch of lies. It is hard to deal with folks that want to believe the official story when it is so blatantly a lie.
First of all, how did fires cause a global collapse. We know the WTC towers were made to withstand a crash by a jetliner when built. They did withstand it.
What happened to cause all resistance to be removed in less than 56 minutes in the first WTC tower?
The jet fuel could not have gotten the steel hot enough to cause a global collapse. And even if it chemically was possible, it would not have come down in a controlled manner. It would have leaned and fell.
OK Shamwow....Evidently you didnt' take time to even read the article:
As the joists on one or two of the most heavily burned floors gave way and the outer box columns began to bow outward, the floors above them also fell. The floor below (with its 1,300 t design capacity) could not support the roughly 45,000 t of ten floors (or more) above crashing down on these angle clips. This started the domino effect that caused the buildings to collapse within ten seconds, hitting bottom with an estimated speed of 200 km per hour. If it had been free fall, with no restraint, the collapse would have only taken eight seconds and would have impacted at 300 km/h.1 It has been suggested that it was fortunate that the WTC did not tip over onto other buildings surrounding the area. There are several points that should be made. First, the building is not solid; it is 95 percent air and, hence, can implode onto itself. Second, there is no lateral load, even the impact of a speeding aircraft, which is sufficient to move the center of gravity one hundred feet to the side such that it is not within the base footprint of the structure. Third, given the near free-fall collapse, there was insufficient time for portions to attain significant lateral velocity. To summarize all of these points, a 500,000 t structure has too much inertia to fall in any direction other than nearly straight down.
Larrry said:I looked on loose change and did not find any actual proof of the thermate. Do you have an actual test report?
The very next day after reading the NIST fact sheet in August 2006, a colleague and I
performed experiments with aluminum mixed with organic materials, mostly wood chips. The flow
was silvery and simply did not resemble the orange liquid which poured from the south tower. The
organics burned quickly when added to the molten aluminum. The ash floated on top of the aluminum
liquid.
Steven Earl Jones is an American physicist. For most of his career, Jones was known mainly for his work on muon-catalyzed fusion. In the fall of 2006, amid controversy surrounding his work, he was relieved of his teaching duties and placed on leave from Brigham Young University
"Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse?" was his first paper on the topic and was considered controversial both for its content and its claims to scientific rigor.
Steve said:form the "paper" page 18..
The very next day after reading the NIST fact sheet in August 2006, a colleague and I
performed experiments with aluminum mixed with organic materials, mostly wood chips. The flow
was silvery and simply did not resemble the orange liquid which poured from the south tower. The
organics burned quickly when added to the molten aluminum. The ash floated on top of the aluminum
liquid.
is this guy real? his suppositions border on the level of a kindergartner..
the "scale" of the experiment, and lack of controls would get him laughed out of any reputable lab..
equating a large airplane (with multiple burnable metals) and a complex office environment) to a pan of Aluminum and wood chips?
Steven Earl Jones is an American physicist. For most of his career, Jones was known mainly for his work on muon-catalyzed fusion. In the fall of 2006, amid controversy surrounding his work, he was relieved of his teaching duties and placed on leave from Brigham Young University
"Why Indeed Did the WTC Buildings Collapse?" was his first paper on the topic and was considered controversial both for its content andits claims to scientific rigor.[
Magnesium alloy developments have traditionally been driven by aerospace industry requirements for lightweight materials to operate under increasingly demanding conditions. Magnesium alloys have always been attractive to designers due to their low density, only two thirds that of aluminum. This has been a major factor in the widespread use of magnesium alloy castings and wrought products.
Results
WD-XRF results show that silicon, calcium, sulfur, magnesium, aluminum, iron, and carbon are the predominant elemental components of the dusts. The contents of volatile compounds in the dusts approach nearly 20% by weight.
the molten metal you see flowing is from the Military Grade Nano Thermate that was found in the debris.
Iron smiths (Blacksmiths) modern and ancient are aware that with a source of oxygen, glowing Iron Burns:
"With bellows blowing additional air through the fire, it can reach temperatures of about 3,000° Fahrenheit. Iron burns at 2,800°F,
The smith's fire contains too much oxygen to allow iron to melt; as it approaches its melting point the iron burns instead."
Blacksmiths work by heating pieces of wrought iron or steel until the metal becomes soft enough to be shaped with hand tools, such as a hammer, anvil and chisel. Heating is accomplished by the use of a forge fueled by propane, natural gas, coal, charcoal,
hopalong said:You have a DEGREE in what?
Or are you just like a lemming believing what abunch of kooks want you to believe
tin foil more tin foil for shamooooooo'
explain the building falling thru the path of most resistance at freefall speeds.
you simply cannot explain that.
Steve said:explain the building falling thru the path of most resistance at freefall speeds.
you simply cannot explain that.
first it was not free fall...
the collapse started about seven minutes before the dramatic "freefall" of the outer concrete facade every kook likes to quote..
when the molten metal you keep whining about started pouring out the 80th floor, that floor soon dropped to the 79th floor, and then a few minutes later the internal collapse started, followed by the dramatic collapse of the external concrete facing, then the internal collapse accelerates in the last few seconds,..
during the ten minutes before the final collapse it was evident by the flames engulfing entire floors that the building internal structure was collapsing..
a few questions come to mind after reading your commentshaumei said:Steve said:explain the building falling thru the path of most resistance at freefall speeds.
you simply cannot explain that.
first it was not free fall...
the collapse started about seven minutes before the dramatic "freefall" of the outer concrete facade every kook likes to quote..
when the molten metal you keep whining about started pouring out the 80th floor, that floor soon dropped to the 79th floor, and then a few minutes later the internal collapse started, followed by the dramatic collapse of the external concrete facing, then the internal collapse accelerates in the last few seconds,..
during the ten minutes before the final collapse it was evident by the flames engulfing entire floors that the building internal structure was collapsing..
Steve,
are we talking about the same building? I am talking about a STEEL BUILDING. ACTUALLY 3 OF THEM. Not a concrete building. The steel had to be removed. once the collapse began, all of the steel was removed to acquire freefall.
The steel was cut neatly by the way so it could be put on the trucks to haul it away to china so no one would examine it like a real crime scene. no tests were run for how it happened as they govt knew HOW it happened.
# 200,000 tons of steel
# 425,000 cubic yards of concrete
# 43,600 windows
# 12,000 miles of electric cables
each floor was basically an acre of 4inch concrete..
208 ft by 208 ft at base