See other 9/11 Articles
Title: Magnetic forces to blame for 9/11 tower collapse
Source:
The Independent
URL Source: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/s ... 911-tower-collapse-924509.html
Published: Jul 24, 2009
Author: Steve Connor
Post Date: 2009-07-24 16:54:32 by Lysander_Spooner
Keywords: None
Views: 1356
Comments: 119
Magnetic forces to blame for 9/11 tower collapse By Steve Connor Wednesday, 10 September 2008 Scientists can finally explain why the Twin Towers collapsed on September 11, despite the temperature of the fires being well below the 1,500C melting point of the steel girders holding up the buildings. The discovery that unusual magnetic forces within the girders made them weak at temperatures of about 500C explains away the conspiracy theories that have spread like wildfire since the disaster. Sergei Dudarev, of the UK Atomic Energy Agency, found that steel loses its strength above 500C because its molecules undergo a physical transition from one state to another due to magnetic fluctuations. "The steel didn't melt, it just became soft. It is an unusual state and the temperatures in the Twin Towers were high enough to cause it because the thermal insulation was knocked off the girders through the impact with the aircraft," he said. "Understanding how materials behave means we can find the right 'medicine' to make steel stronger at high temperatures... and if our work can be used for other applications, such as safeguarding tall buildings against disasters, so much the better," he said.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-40) not displayed.
.
.
.
#41. To: Shoonra (#5)
TAKE A LOOK AT THESE PICTURES OF THE BUILDINGS ON FIRE!
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/911_reichstag.html The 9/11 Reichstag Fire Reichstag Fire Reichstag fire, burning of the Reichstag (parliament) building in Berlin, on the night of Feb. 27, 1933, a key event in the establishment of the Nazi dictatorship and widely believed to have been contrived by the newly formed Nazi government itself to turn public opinion against its opponents and to assume emergency powers ... his propaganda minister, Joseph Goebbels, is supposed to have devised the scheme. ... On Feb. 28, 1933, the day after the fire, Hitler's dictatorship began with the enactment of a decree "for the Protection of the People and the State," which dispensed with all constitutional protection of political, personal, and property rights. Encyclopaedia Britannica Excerpt from History Channel documentary detailing evidence of Hitler's supporters burning down the Reichstag in 1933 5.6 MB RealMedia video The Reichstag fire was a disaster for Communists because they received the blame for starting it, but it was a dream come true for Hitler and his cohorts as it allowed them to turn Germany into a dictatorship. Did the Bush administration try the same trick on September 11, 2001? The victims of the 9/11 attacks have been disaster for Muslims because 19 Arabs were named as hijackers of the planes, but they've been a dream come true for the PNAC 'think-tank' whose 2000 Statement of Principles stated a "catastrophic and catalyzing event, like a new Pearl Harbor" would advance their policies, i.e. justify wars and "regime changes". "This is about control over Middle East oil. [The Statement of Principles] indicates that America is aiming for global leadership, both military and economically..." - Michael Meacher, UK MP WMV video download (831kB) The fact that Pearl Harbor was engineered by the US government to bring America into WWII would have been known by PNAC signatories... 10 [PNAC members] are now in the Bush administration. As well as Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz, they include Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage; John Bolton, who is undersecretary of state for disarmament; and Zalmay Khalilzad, the White House liaison to the Iraqi opposition. Other signatories include William Kristol, editor of the conservative Weekly Standard magazine, and Richard Perle, chairman of the advisory Defense Science Board. [ABC News 3/10/2003] ...so their statement actually referred to policy advancement through a governmentally orchestrated "catastrophic and catalyzing event" - Operation Northwoods is an example of this thinking. The "new Pearl Harbor" occurred on 9/11... Like his father, Bush tries to keep a daily diary of his thoughts and observations. That night, he dictated: "The Pearl Harbor of the 21st century took place today." [Washington Post] ...and now wars and "regime changes" are justified by the events of that day: U.S. President George W Bush ... defended the war in Iraq, telling Americans the United States was forced into war because of the Sept 11 terror strikes. [Japan Today 17/06/05] "The Pearl Harbor of the 21st century" effectively thrust PNAC's radical ideas to the fore... The terror attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and concerns that another similar attack might follow, gave Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld "a tremendous sense of urgency" in pushing his transformation effort ... . Rumsfeld said ... the Sept. 11 attacks underscored the importance of the transformation program he announced Sept. 10, 2001. [American Forces Press Service] ...so were the events of 9/11 governmentally orchestrated? "In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way." - Franklin D. Roosevelt There were many exercises prior to 9/11 which related specifically to the events of that day: NORAD conducted exercises with fighter jets simulating hijacked planes flown into the World Trade Center in the two years before the attacks. Pentagon planners also envisioned the attack on the Pentagon five months before it happened. WMV video download (936kB) On June 2, 2001 PNAC signatory Paul Wolfowitz predicted a military surprise: "Military history is full of surprises, even if few are as dramatic or memorable as Pearl Harbor. Surprises happen so often, that is is surprising that we're still surprised by it. ... Be prepared to be surprised. Have courage." [defenselink.mil] From July 26, 2001 John Ashcroft stopped traveling on commercial airlines: In response to inquiries from CBS News over why Ashcroft was traveling exclusively by leased jet aircraft instead of commercial airlines, the Justice Department cited what it called a "threat assessment" by the FBI, and said Ashcroft has been advised to travel only by private jet for the remainder of his term. [CBS News] World Trade Center staff received evacuation drills prior to 9/11: Ben Fountain, 42, a financial analyst with Fireman's Fund, was coming out of the Chambers Street Station, headed for his office on the 47th floor of the south tower. "How could they let this happen? They knew this building was a target. Over the past few weeks we'd been evacuated a number of times, which is unusual. I think they had an inkling something was going on." [People] On September 10 top Pentagon officials were compelled to cancel travel plans: On Sept. 10, NEWSWEEK has learned, a group of top Pentagon officials suddenly canceled travel plans for the next morning, apparently because of security concerns. [MSNBC 9/24/2001] Also on September 10 Willie Brown, the former Mayor of San Francisco, was warned about air travel: Brown received a warning about 10 PM on the evening of September 10 to be cautious about air travel. He was scheduled to fly to into New York City. Brown refuses to say exactly who gave him the prescient warning, citing only "my security people at the airport." [SFGate 9/12/2001] President Bush's cousin had a fortunate change of venue for a September 11 business conference: President Bush's cousin should have been in the World Trade Centre when it was attacked. Jim Pierce, managing director of AON Corporations, had arranged a business conference on the 105th floor of the South Tower where its New York offices were based. But his group was too large so they decided to move across the street to the Millennium Hotel. [Annova] An imminent attack was forecast... "The Director of the CIA warned that there could be an attack—an imminent attack—on the United States of this nature. So this is not entirely unexpected." [Memory Hole] ...maybe that's why FEMA was in New York on September 10. Last, but not least, the timing of the 9/11 attacks was a "Godsend" for the Bush Administration. I guess the above may be seen as coincidences, but why did planes flying into buildings prompt White House staff to start taking Cipro? In October [2001], press reports revealed that White House staff had been on a regimen of the powerful antibiotic Cipro since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Judicial Watch wants to know why White House workers, including President Bush, began taking the drug nearly a month before anthrax was detected on Capitol Hill. [WorldNetDaily]
I hear crickets. .
Any backyard griller can tell you that their grills never collapse to the ground at free fall speed despite grilling all day. Government stooges like you have a special place reserved for you in hell.
God is always good!
Wow, I must have made an impression for you to ping me so long after and I am sorry of replying to a post from July...... It is a fact steel does weaken when heated. I think I asked you blokes once if steel was not weakened by fire why is it fire proofed? I think one of you stated it was an insurance scam as a reply - I hope who ever it was was kidding but maybe not. Gore Vidal sums up my attitude best on 9/11 per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gore_Vidal: In May 2007, Vidal clarified his views, saying: I'm not a conspiracy theorist, I'm a conspiracy analyst. Everything the Bushites touch is screwed up. They could never have pulled off 9/11, even if they wanted to. Even if they longed to. They could step aside, though, or just go out to lunch while these terrible things were happening to the nation. I believe that of them. Stepping aside.....allowing the act to happen. In groups behind the 'Project for a New American Century' stated that they longed for a 'Pearl Harbor' like event to galvanize their agenda forward. Pearl Harbor like even is key - allow yourself to be attacked thus justifying interventionism. Not carrying out or micro-managing but just stepping aside and letting the hit happen. If that is what happened it is a lot easier to accept as a scenario than the ultra complicated and ultra involved theory that floors upon floors upon floors of high rise towers in Manhattan were mined by explosives weeks ahead of time (if not months) carried out by the gang that could not shoot straight. I really don't know what in a person's psyche needs for them to accept that complicated scenario to the point they become enraged that it could be any other kind of conspiracy like the one Gore Vidal contemplates.
"We have oil. We have Putin - all that Russians think they need." - Vladimir Dubin, senior researcher at the Moscow-based Levada Centre.
i could accept that scenario if it were not obvious that both towers exploded in plumes with everything pulverized. that could not happen from fire and weakened steel and collapsing of floor upon floor. and that's all i've got to say as i have no desire to get into another 911 debate with you. ;)
Then you might add that if you calculate the volume of the central columns alone, which is just simple geometry, you get what amounts to a giant heat sink. It's just incomprehensible that a couple of thousand gallons of jet fuel and a building fire that was nearly extinguished (according to extant radio transmission from fire fighters) caused the steel in that building to reach even the 500 degrees C claimed to weaken steel by these arguments. And what happened to those 47 massive pillars that supported the towers, anyway? They just disappeared. They completely disintegrated in Tower 1. They completely disintegrated in Tower 2. The verticals also failed completely in Building 7. Monumental coincidence, that.
Well, to be fair, that's not a good analogy. Backyard grills are built to withstand that kind of heat without collapsing. The heat is not near the melting poing of a grill.
MapQuest really needs to start their directions on #5. Pretty sure I know how to get out of my neighborhood.
Neither is the temperature of burning kerosene. In fact, burning charcoal burns at a much higher temperature that jet fuel does in an open flame burn at STP.
Sorry for your poor understanding of science. Also, all these years later not one person in the implosion demolition business has defended your scenario. To be honest, I think your views of implanted explosives, remote controlled drone planes, etc did much damage to the credibility of the more probable "let 9/11 happen" scenario" by labeling all 9/11 dissenters as kooks and forcing a man like Gore Vidal to defend himself against that label of conspiracy nut.
"We have oil. We have Putin - all that Russians think they need." - Vladimir Dubin, senior researcher at the Moscow-based Levada Centre.
You don't need to melt steel just heat it up enough for it to weaken. Like I said - why do they fireproof structural steel then? Insurance scam?
"We have oil. We have Putin - all that Russians think they need." - Vladimir Dubin, senior researcher at the Moscow-based Levada Centre.
What brought those buildings down is highly speculative. You'll notice that no one on this thread mentioned "implanted explosives, remote controlled drone planes, etc". The argument here is that the arguments officially put forth to explain the collapse of these buildings are lacking. Myself, I would gladly leave all of this alone, and I would sleep better at night if the "let 9/11 happen" scenario" were true. There are just legions of unanswered questions still hanging out there as far as collapse is concerned.
To bring about the post 9/11 world all you need is the event of the planes hitting the buildings. That is mind shattering enough. You don't need the towers to collapse to drive the point home. Every event that the bushies carried out after 9/11 would have been done regardless if one or none of the towers collapsed.
"We have oil. We have Putin - all that Russians think they need." - Vladimir Dubin, senior researcher at the Moscow-based Levada Centre.
We all know that there were other passports in that WTC Blaze ... and that's what did it ... hahahahaha Auto engines don't melt, fireplace grates don't melt, and neither did the beams in the WTC !
The U.S. Govt has become a tyrannical butcher; U.S. taxpayers are accomplices to international murder and mayhem. If you satisfy your fears by bowing to this butcher, you forfeit your humanity and possibly your soul.
Well, I hate venturing onto 9/11 threads honestly. So many people with so many emotions that it's hard to say anything, even a neutral statement, without being hounded. My post was simply suggesting that the analogy might be wrong. Grills are built to take the heat of glowing ember charcoals, even full flaming charcoals. I don't think buildings are built with that in mind (could be wrong). It just seemed like the wrong analogy for illustrating the point he was trying to make. The actual point itself I wasn't criticizing.
MapQuest really needs to start their directions on #5. Pretty sure I know how to get out of my neighborhood.
Well, I like your tagline ...
The U.S. Govt has become a tyrannical butcher; U.S. taxpayers are accomplices to international murder and mayhem. If you satisfy your fears by bowing to this butcher, you forfeit your humanity and possibly your soul.
See, that is a legit issue that makes me a 9/11 official party line doubter. But then if I bring it up I am labeled a kook because of the stigma associated with 9/11 conspiracists due to the demolitions in the towers belief which remains not credible. That is why I once and maybe still I felt that the more extreme 9/11 demolition by black ops theories were pushed and financed on the web by the Bush crowd as a way to shut up 9/11 dissenters.
"We have oil. We have Putin - all that Russians think they need." - Vladimir Dubin, senior researcher at the Moscow-based Levada Centre.
Not to belabor the subject, but I think the CIA/MOSSAD hired (arab) intel type contractors to blow the building up. I think they planted the necessary explosives when TRI-DATA did the 1993 clean up after that bombing. (TRI-DATA is owned by SYSTEMS PLANNING CORP.) On 9-11 I think the planes that hit the Towers were flown by remote control using devices manufactured by SYSTEMS PLANNING CORP. a company that had as its former CEO a man named DOV ZAKHEIM that had left to become the COMPTROLLER at the PENTAGON and was the Pentagon Comptroller on 9- 11, just one day after Rumsfeld announced that the PENTAGON couldn't account for 2 TRILLION DOLLARS ... there ya have it ... MEANS, MOTIVE and OPPORTUNITY !!!
The U.S. Govt has become a tyrannical butcher; U.S. taxpayers are accomplices to international murder and mayhem. If you satisfy your fears by bowing to this butcher, you forfeit your humanity and possibly your soul.
I have not seen convincing evidence that the steel in this building got anywhere near the 500°C claimed to cause the weakening spoken of above. Sorry for your poor understanding of science. I'm not a scientist or engineer, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe neither are you. I've studied physics and chemistry, so I'm not a complete dolt at these things. No reason to get personal here.
Yawn. Inevitably we get an endless redux of the same shabby shopworn tactics to buttress the "Official Conspiracy Theory®" over and over and over again. Does anyone who has looked at the situation seriously suggest that liquefaction was neccessary for the towers to collapse? NO. They do not and you can produce no reference or quote, from a credible researcher, to support your poor lame Straw Man. On the flip side neither can you produce any credible evidence or authoritative, based on actual engineering science, explanation as to how the towers collapse symmetrically, uniformly, within 1 hour, and how the initial collapse was initiated simultaneously in 360 degrees by fires localized in limited areas; which the one fire crew to reach the scene radioed back required only 3 Hose Crews to "knock down the flames". It is amusing to watch the "Official Conspiracy Theory®" morph over time and yet remain so much the same: "19Arabswhohateuscuzwe'refree" directed by a madman in the mountains of Tora Bora, with his "Magic Cellphone©", highjacked 4 airliners, in the most controlled airspace on the planet with box cutters and Pepper Spray, while striking such lightning speed and professional coordination as to prevent all 4 from broadcasting the 4 digit highjack code - following a final night of boozing and whoring while conspicuously leaving a Koran in a Bar (disregard that as these were fanatically devout Muslims to who such activities are prohibited by their fanatical religious laws), cast a spell to put NORAD to sleep, and then proceeded to leisurely crash 3 of those planes into massive structures built of interlocking reinforced steel girders (as much as 4 feet thick in places) causing them to tumble as though made of toothpicks neatly into their own footprints at nearly freefall speed. It is almost breathtaking each time I see someone travel again down and around the FruitLoop attempting to float the latest preposterous planted explanation to justify the "Official Conspiracy Theory®". We have gone from jet fuel to office fires to not even mentioning a source for the heat but just asserting that it somehow magically existed. Of course even NIST and FEMA have been forced to admit that the Jet Fuel, initially used to justify the collapse, all burned up in the first ten minutes, and that Class Alpha Office Fires don't get hot enough to weaken steel. And yet each and every time we get a defender of the "Official Conspiracy Theory®" they always come back to some form of "incredible heat weakened the steel" cause by yet another in a succession of preposterous mechanisms for localized fires to create a uniform, symmetrical, simultaneous, collapse in 360 degrees, while not accounting for the resistance of the underlying structure to collapse. For a theory to be valid it must account for uniformly, predictably, and reproducibly, ALL of the observed phenomena. Yours, as usual with all shills/government apologists, does not. Of course there was one thing uniformly demolished - your argument. The "nuclear explosion" quip is another delightful introduction of our old friend the Strawman. Unfortunately for your specious argument there exist a number of videos showing the recovery of molten debris up to 8 weeks after the Towers collapse. It is just so unfortunate for your childish petulant denial that the recovery of molten material from the Ground Zero was been recorded on more than one video. As well as having multiple witnesses attesting to the fact. I do not have to provide an explanation to simply show that your argument is false so don't even try that one. You are welcome to try and explain away documented evidence - that should be most amusing.
"An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you know and what you don't. ~ Anatole France
I have not seen convincing evidence that the steel in this building got anywhere near the 500°C claimed to cause the weakening spoken of above. Sorry for your poor understanding of science. I'm not a scientist or engineer, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe neither are you. I've studied physics and chemistry, so I'm not a complete dolt at these things. No reason to get personal here. Oh, it is absolutely necessary for a shill to get personal. It is one of their primary tactics in avoiding facts and issues. 5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule. This is also known as the primary 'attack the messenger' ploy, though other methods qualify as variants of that approach. Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as 'kooks', 'right-wing', 'liberal', 'left-wing', 'terrorists', 'conspiracy buffs', 'radicals', 'militia', 'racists', 'religious fanatics', 'sexual deviates', and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues.
"An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you know and what you don't. ~ Anatole France
Also, citing evidence of high rise fires for buildings NOT built like the WTC was where the outer shell was part of the structure over a boxed frame construction and did NOT have a plane of that size fly into them as an apples to apples comparison is just not acceptable. I can't take it serious as a comparison. That is common sense.
"We have oil. We have Putin - all that Russians think they need." - Vladimir Dubin, senior researcher at the Moscow-based Levada Centre.
The outside decorative "facade" (sic) was made of low grade metal similar to rebar. Rebar is the "mutt" of scrap steel with a very low melting point. I would bet this "molten steel" was the facade.
My self cleaning oven heats up to 600 degrees I believe. The oven has never melted at that temperture. The TC fire was way way above 500 degrees.
CIA/MOSSAD knowledge and involvement? I am without doubt (Dancing Israelis were actually arrested on 9/11 for terrorist suspicions let us not forget). Remote piloted drone planes? I don't buy it.
"We have oil. We have Putin - all that Russians think they need." - Vladimir Dubin, senior researcher at the Moscow-based Levada Centre.
If there are similiarly built buildings I wonder if they have been retrofitted to prevent another such occurrence?
Centigrade.
Also, citing evidence of high rise fires for buildings NOT built like the WTC was where the outer shell was part of the structure over a boxed frame construction and did NOT have a plane of that size fly into them as an apples to apples comparison is just not acceptable. I can't take it serious as a comparison. That is common sense. As with all Strawman Arguments you leave out any data not accounted for in the "Official Conspiracy Theory®" i.e., that these particular buildings were designed to withstand the impact of a Boeing 707 which is very close in size to the aircraft that did hit the towers. And did I adduce other fires into the argument? NO. So, you commit another related fallacy that of the Red Herring. What kind of plane hit WTC 7? Why did CNN report WTC 7's imminent collapse an hour in advance and BBC report that it had collapsed 25 minutes ahead of the fact? What heating mechanism are you employing to justify the simultaneous, symetrical in 360 degrees, uniform collapse of the towers? We've already ruled out the two Strawmen of Jet Fuel, and Paper Fires. What removed the underlying support columns which, at the very least, should have severely limited the rate of collapse? At this point in the game I have little time for shills, and brain dead apologists seeking to avoid the logical conclusions i.e., that the buildings were brought down intententionally and that the aircraft crashed into the buildings were merely cover to obscure the actual mechanisms by which the buildings were intentionally collapsed. 911 was a PsyOp to provide justification for war and the evisceration of the Bill of Rights.
"An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you know and what you don't. ~ Anatole France
No, the 707 is much smaller. Sorry. If you can't get that right what can I say about the rest of the assertions made? http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/b767.htm#at The 767-200 provides several advantages over the 707. Because of its wide-body configuration, the 767 offers 50 percent more floor space and nearly twice the volume of the 707. The 767 can carry a heavier payload, has a greater range and flies higher than the 707.
"We have oil. We have Putin - all that Russians think they need." - Vladimir Dubin, senior researcher at the Moscow-based Levada Centre.
There is only one minor problem with your misleading argument - the facts. As the following excerpt illustrates: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Other engineers are on public record as saying that the World Trade Center would even survive an impact of the larger and faster Boeing 747. The maximum takeoff weight for a Boeing 707-320B is 336,000 pounds. The wingspan of a Boeing 707 is 146 feet. The length of a Boeing 707 is 153 feet. The Boeing 707 could carry 23,000 gallons of fuel. However, the actual aircraft involved in the World Trade Center impacts were only flying from Boston to Los Angeles, and consequently, would have been nowhere near fully fueled on takeoff (the Boeing 767 has a maximum range of 7,600 miles (12,220 km)). The aircraft would have carried just enough fuel for the trip together with some safety factor. Remember, that carrying excess fuel means higher fuel bills and less paying passengers. The aircraft would have also burnt some fuel between Boston and New York. Government sources estimate that each of the Boeing 767's had approximately 10,000 gallons of unused fuel on board at the times of impact. To give you some idea how much jet fuel this is, an 11 foot by 11 foot by 11 foot tank contains 10,000 gallons (1 US gallon = 0.13368 cubic feet). So a novel way of destroying high-rise buildings is to load an 11 foot by 11 foot by 11 foot glass tank of jet fuel into a Ryder truck, drive it into the ground floor lobby, break the glass, set light to the fuel and walk away, the high-rise should collapse in about an hour (after all, 12,000 gallons of diesel was all it took to bring down WTC 7). Look mom, no explosives needed. ..."
"An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you know and what you don't. ~ Anatole France
I just want to know if the gov has made the retrofitting of similiar built structures a priority as it has been known to do in the past with various entities when they unexpectedly fail and there is a large loss of life.
In which engineering reference do I find "I would bet"?
"An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you know and what you don't. ~ Anatole France
No, no, no. It was because the terrierists ate a lot of spicy food the night before, and that extra gas blew the towers apart. Hell, it's about as good of an explanation as the one presented here.
Yea, they are not the same - not even remotely close. That is like saying a boxer who is 5'5" is close to body mass of a boxer who is 6' or even 5'9" Plug those numbers in an equation that calculates mass x velocity makes nonsense of you assertion that these airplanes are basically the same. Kinetic energy = 1/2 x mass x velocity x velocity (K.E.=1/2 x m x v 2). Force=Mass x Acceleration Let us pretend mass is 100 and velocity is 500 result = 50,000 Let us increase mass by a little 125 and velocity stays at 500 result = 62,500 That tells me increase in mass even slightly increases kinetic force by large degrees if speed remains the same.
"We have oil. We have Putin - all that Russians think they need." - Vladimir Dubin, senior researcher at the Moscow-based Levada Centre.
And cause the business community to spend money? The airlines did not want to upgrade cockpit doors for safety and lobbied against it - mostly Republicans took their blood money but some Dems did too.
"We have oil. We have Putin - all that Russians think they need." - Vladimir Dubin, senior researcher at the Moscow-based Levada Centre.
It would appear that THE CRICKETS HAVE LANDED. Related would be to ask where the Forensic Engineering Examination of the collapsed structure (standard when there is a loss of life) was published? Why did the Bush Junta stand adamantly opposed for nearly a year to an official examination of the events of 911? Why, when one was finally allowed, was it limited to exploring ONLY intelligence failures? Why has the Chairman of that Commission's Report distanced himself from it saying that the government routinely and repeatedly lied to the commission? There are considerably more valid questions than answers. That those questions remain devoid of official inspection is in and of itself a curious datum.
"An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you know and what you don't. ~ Anatole France
I assume by crickets you meant the sound of crickets because I was not responding. Beforse your post I already posted a reply @ #75. No crickets involved. This is not a conversation we are having across the lunch table to expect a real time response.
"We have oil. We have Putin - all that Russians think they need." - Vladimir Dubin, senior researcher at the Moscow-based Levada Centre.
Nice Strawman. Skyscrapers are not boxers. Neither are human bodies made of high grade structural steel. You have totally avoided the point of the data. The difference in size between the type of aircraft allegedly used as a missle was nearly insignificant compared to the specs for the kind of aircraft the building was designed to withstand an impact from. Independent engineers have asserted that the structures were robust enough to withstand an impact from a much larger and faster 747. All you are doing is attempting to obscure the data. You are hoist by your own Petard. You are a disinformation shill identified as such by your methods and tactics.
"An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you know and what you don't. ~ Anatole France
And cause the business community to spend money? The airlines did not want to upgrade cockpit doors for safety and lobbied against it - mostly Republicans took their blood money but some Dems did too. You are avoiding a perfectly valid question. The correct, and honest, response is "Yes or No"? I'll even repeat mininggold's question for you: To which I will append my relevant related questions: Related would be to ask where the Forensic Engineering Examination of the collapsed structure (standard when there is a loss of life) was published? Why did the Bush Junta stand adamantly opposed for nearly a year to an official examination of the events of 911? Why, when one was finally allowed, was it limited to exploring ONLY intelligence failures? Why has the Chairman of that Commission's Report distanced himself from it saying that the government routinely and repeatedly lied to the commission?
"An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you know and what you don't. ~ Anatole France
I just demonstrated that a small increase of mass changes greatly the force of impact so your statement is wrong.
"We have oil. We have Putin - all that Russians think they need." - Vladimir Dubin, senior researcher at the Moscow-based Levada Centre.
Comments (81 - 119) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#42. To: Shoonra (#5)
#43. To: Original_Intent, Shoonra, TwentyTwelve, christine, all (#39)
***** Crickets! *****
"The trouble with people is not that they don't know but that they know so much that ain't so." ~ Josh Billings
#44. To: Shoonra (#5)
#45. To: christine, Lysander_Spooner, Kamala, randge (#15)
Destro's wet noodle theory! ;)
#46. To: Destro (#45)
(Edited)
#47. To: christine, Destro (#46)
#48. To: RickyJ (#44)
Any backyard griller can tell you that their grills never collapse to the ground at free fall speed despite grilling all day.
#49. To: SonOfLiberty (#48)
(Edited)
#50. To: randge, christine, Lysander_Spooner, Kamala (#47)
#51. To: randge (#49)
#52. To: Destro (#50)
#53. To: randge (#52)
#54. To: SonOfLiberty (#48)
Well, to be fair, that's not a good analogy. Backyard grills are built to withstand that kind of heat without collapsing. The heat is not near the melting poing of a grill.
#55. To: noone222 (#54)
#56. To: SonOfLiberty (#55)
#57. To: noone222, randge (#54)
We all know that there were other passports in that WTC Blaze ... and that's what did it ... hahahahaha
#58. To: Destro (#57)
#59. To: Destro (#51)
You don't need to melt steel just heat it up enough for it to weaken
#60. To: Shoonra, a.k.a. Weasel Mike, TwentyTwelve, Wudidiz, christine, Jethro Tull, FormerLurker, IndieTX, Scrapper2, CadetD, farmfriend, Lysander_Spooner, Rotara, randge, ItIsTooLate, Happy2BeMe4um, all (#5)
(Edited)
It's not an unusual state. Any blacksmith can tell you that when heated at temperatures well below the level produced in the WTC fires, steel and iron weaken and become malleable. Some conspiracy nuts think that the only way steel can weaken is if it's heated to complete liquification; they were only demonstrating their own ignorance.
Strawman Argument
"Straw man" is one of the best-named fallacies, because it is memorable and vividly illustrates the nature of the fallacy. Imagine a fight in which one of the combatants sets up a man of straw, attacks it, then proclaims victory. All the while, the real opponent stands by untouched. And, by the way, some nut started the story of a pool of molten steel at Ground Zero, still liquid days after the collapse. Simply impossible. Even a nuclear explosion wouldn't have that effect.
Nuclear debris still producing radioactivity could, in a confined space such as a rubble pile, continue to generate sufficient heat, YEARS after the fact, to keep molten or near molten steel trapped near it in the rubble pile. Earth to Mikey/Shoonra - that is why Nuclear Piles require "cooling" water. They use it to, uh, prevent the pile from melting the containment vessel (as well as damp the reaction).
#61. To: randge, Destro, TwentyTwelve, christine, all (#59)
You don't need to melt steel just heat it up enough for it to weaken
Twenty-Five Ways To Suppress Truth: The Rules of Disinformation
#62. To: Original_Intent, randge, TwentyTwelve, christine (#61)
You don't need to melt steel just heat it up enough for it to weaken I have not seen convincing evidence that the steel in this building got anywhere near the 500°C claimed to cause the weakening spoken of above.
#63. To: Kamala (#30)
(Edited)
Many, many witnesses reported molten iron or metal at the WTC.
#64. To: randge (#59)
I have not seen convincing evidence that the steel in this building got anywhere near the 500°C claimed to cause the weakening spoken of above.
#65. To: noone222 (#58)
#66. To: Destro (#62)
Also, citing evidence of high rise fires for buildings NOT built like the WTC was where the outer shell was part of the structure over a boxed frame construction and did NOT have a plane of that size fly into them as an apples to apples comparison is just not acceptable. I can't take it serious as a comparison. That is common sense.
#67. To: belmontconservative (#64)
#68. To: Destro, randge, TwentyTwelve, christine, all (#62)
You don't need to melt steel just heat it up enough for it to weaken I have not seen convincing evidence that the steel in this building got anywhere near the 500°C claimed to cause the weakening spoken of above.
#69. To: Original_Intent, randge, TwentyTwelve, christine, mininggold (#68)
were designed to withstand the impact of a Boeing 707 which is very close in size to the aircraft that did hit the towers.
#70. To: Destro, randge, TwentyTwelve, christine, all (#69)
The maximum takeoff weight for a Boeing 767-200ER is 395,000 pounds.
The wingspan of a Boeing 767 is 156 feet.
The length of a Boeing 767 is 159 feet.
The Boeing 767 could carry 23,980 gallons of fuel.
#71. To: Destro (#69)
#72. To: belmontconservative, Kamala (#63)
I would bet
#73. To: Lysander_Spooner (#0)
Magnetic forces to blame for 9/11 tower collapse
"The real deal is this: the ‘royalty’ controlling the court, the ones with the power, the ones with the ability to make a difference, with the ability to change our course, the ones who will live in infamy if we pass the tipping points, are the captains of industry, CEOs in fossil fuel companies such as EXXON/Mobil, automobile manufacturers, utilities, all of the leaders who have placed short-term profit above the fate of the planet and the well-being of our children." - James Hansen
#74. To: Original_Intent, randge, TwentyTwelve, christine, mininggold (#70)
#75. To: mininggold (#71)
I just want to know if the gov has made the retrofitting of similiar built structures a priority as it has been known to do in the past with various entities when they unexpectedly fail and there is a large loss of life.
#76. To: mininggold, Destro, all (#71)
I just want to know if the gov has made the retrofitting of similiar built structures a priority as it has been known to do in the past with various entities when they unexpectedly fail and there is a large loss of life.
#77. To: Original_Intent, mininggold (#76)
It would appear that THE CRICKETS HAVE LANDED.
#78. To: Destro, randge, TwentyTwelve, christine, all (#74)
#79. To: Destro, mininggold, Kamala, randge, TwentyTwelve, christine, all (#75)
I just want to know if the gov has made the retrofitting of similiar built structures a priority as it has been known to do in the past with various entities when they unexpectedly fail and there is a large loss of life.
I just want to know if the gov has made the retrofitting of similiar built structures a priority as it has been known to do in the past with various entities when they unexpectedly fail and there is a large loss of life.
#80. To: Original_Intent, randge, TwentyTwelve, christine, mininggold (#78)
The difference in size between the type of aircraft allegedly used as a missle was nearly insignificant compared to the specs for the kind of aircraft the building was designed to withstand an impact from.
.
.
.