fire melts steel. 9/11 conspiracy theorists?

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

You cant still be trying to hold up and wave the NIST report are you? That would be kinda silly given the evidence.

What 'evidence'? I still have not seen any that proves your observation, let alone, any 'theory' you may believe in.

69charger wrote:

What 'evidence'? I still have not seen any that proves your observation, let alone, any 'theory' you may believe in.

They have 4 entire floors in storage that goes from recognizable steel beams into a ball of goo...I already posted video evidence showing it.

All this gazillions of pounds of material was pulverized into a fine dust mixed with concrete and asbestos. How exactly is that going to burn like a wildfire again? Where's the oxygen coming from in a blanket of dust that would essentially extinguish a fire?

I can't converse if your memory doesn't go past a couple weeks of retention.

The NIST report has you hypnotized it's kinda sad really.

69charger wrote:

First, you have to prove that it was molten steel and not some molten slurry of a hundred different metals found in the WTCs, which you haven't.

http://www.debunking911.com/ironburns.htm

Second, answer this question...

Again, where did all that energy go? It has to go somewhere. Where did it go?

All the energy based on the pancake collapse theory which was contrived from the NIST report which is essentially total crap to begin with? I'd bet the whole website you quoted treats the NIST report like holy scripture.

69charger wrote:

You didn't read what I posted, did you?



Guess that shoots your theory down

Back to business... answer this question...

Where do you think the billions of Joules worth of kinetic energy from two falling 110 story office buildings went to? It has to go somewhere. Where did it go?

You really don't get it do you?

You are hypnotized by the holy NIST grail. You take their theory then extrapolate and and run with it and also reinforce your beliefs by reading and citing others that do the same. Exactly the same as what you claim the CT'ers are doing.

You're polishing a turd and calling it gold. You missing it entirely from square one. Pancake collapse....so energy created how and going where again and doing what again and how exactly again....

You're fed disinformation from the get go and drawing further conclusions based on it. Do you even see or realize that?

69charger wrote:

YOU are the one not 'getting it'. NIST report or not, the laws of physics do not care either way.

We can agree the buildings did fall, correct?

So, for or the sixth time...

Where do you think the billions of Joules worth of kinetic energy from two falling 110 story office buildings went to? It has to go somewhere. Where did it go?

This is not a belief. This is physics. It is also a simple question.

you do realize you are fighting a losing battle don't you? You can ask these questions or even just basic common sense ones like what about the hundreds of people on the planes that died?? and none of the "conspiracy" guys will listen. All they will do is say that you are uneducated, blinded by some believe in something, drank some form of kool-aid or are just completely ignorant for not being able to "see the truth". I just don't even bother with these discussions anymore.

Staceb10 wrote:

you do realize you are fighting a losing battle don't you? You can ask these questions or even just basic common sense ones like what about the hundreds of people on the planes that died?? and none of the "conspiracy" guys will listen. All they will do is say that you are uneducated, blinded by some believe in something, drank some form of kool-aid or are just completely ignorant for not being able to "see the truth". I just don't even bother with these discussions anymore.

And surely you do realize that I can flip that around and apply it directly to the 'official theory' guys and the tons of unanswered questions we pose to them, which hold the same amount of common sense as yours, and remain unanswered. You guys don't have the market cornered on listening, truth, or common sense by far...no one does. It's best to just realize you can't force anyone to believe what you want them to or see it the way you're seeing. All you can hope for is level headed discussion. There's no need to get so angry or frustrated when some choose to see things differently.

69charger wrote:

YOU are the one not 'getting it'. NIST report or not, the laws of physics do not care either way.

We can agree the buildings did fall, correct?

So, for or the sixth time...

Where do you think the billions of Joules worth of kinetic energy from two falling 110 story office buildings went to? It has to go somewhere. Where did it go?

This is not a belief. This is physics. It is also a simple question.

Again. You still don't see it right in front of your eyes. You still believe what you are being told instead of actually thinking about it. That's the problem right there. You keep assuming the pancake collapse thing was real. This is where the problem lies. It's kinda funny...you've stuck yourself in a loop to the point where you're actually repeating yourself. Your interpretation of the impossible physics involved set forth by the NIST report is the problem.

The NIST guys themselves claim they only look at conditions leading up to the collapse...after that they say basically it's anyones guess. I suppose all the physicists around the world that that have shredded this same report have the same inability to comprehend? Who's physics makes sense? The essentially freak of nature concept outlined in the NIST report? I've already told you the forces are distributed throughout the structure itself like 5 posts ago....:rolleyes: If you're hanging the entire thing on where'd the energy go then...forget about it. It's pretty obvious where it went. Into the structure itself, and outwards into the environment in various forms also. Like really so what? You're also skipping the fact that NIST denied molten steel...then changed their story. Actually they keep changing their story. Not only that.... it still hasn't finished changing yet...

Seeing the pattern?

onelongsong wrote:

you're comparing an open fire compared to a chimney type fire in a building wrapped in mesh. the wtc fire would have been much hotter.

do people forget that the steel was liquid when it was formed into beams. or do they think beams are mined out of the ground?

Nobody on any side claims the heat was enough to melt the steel. You won't find anyone saying that. You're by yourself on that one.

http://prisonplanet.com/articles/may2007/010507ludicrousfreeway.htm


1. This was an open air environment where flames were able to reach their absolute maximum temperature; white-hot and shooting upwards of 200 feet in the air.

2. Those 200 foot flames were acting on a single support truss that was fastened to the two columns pictured here. That truss (and the connectors that fastened it to the columns) represents a small fraction of the steel that would have been found on a single floor of the towers or WTC 7. So again, far more heat focused on a single truss and no way to redistribute the load once that truss was weakened.

3. You'll notice that despite the intense fires ability to weaken the truss and connectors that there is NO mention of molten metal in the debris

4. You'll notice that the concrete roadway that "pancaked down" on the roadway below did not cause the lower freeway to collapse. Nor has the concrete disintegrated into a fine powder.

5. You'll notice the columns were not torn down by the collapse, nor did they evaporate into thin air, rather they are still standing (having only lost the the truss and connectors that held the roadway to them.)

So to quickly recap:

White-hot 200 foot flames acting on a single truss (and no ability to redistribute the load once weakened.)

No molten metal and certainly no thermate found
No column failure
No evaporation / pulverization of concrete
No "pancake collapse"

onelongsong wrote:

then it should be easy to duplicate the pancake collapse using your theory. that's how we do things. we make models and try to duplicate what happened. the problem is; no conspiracy theory has been able to duplicate the fall of the towers. implosion experts admitt that even with the access to cut beams and the tons of explosives needed; they couldn't bring down the towers with such control. experts that can find parts of exploded planes on the ocean floor; reassemble those planes and find exact causes cannot duplicate the towers fall.

however; a 10th grade student can recreate the fall using the guidelines of the official report. how do you explain that away?

The (cough) pancake collapse theory? Are you serious? You actually want me to respond to this?

I thought it was pretty clear already.