this regards conspiracy theories on how 9/11 could not have happened as explained by the govt. please watch this.
There is already a thread or two on this.
The steel didn’t melt. The steel was greatly weakened by the high temperatures causing the collapse.
Any scientist or engineer understands this.
The “melted steel” is a classic strawman argument. These conspiracy guys are completely dishonest.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
There is already a thread or two on this.
The steel didn’t melt. The steel was greatly weakened by the high temperatures causing the collapse.
Any scientist or engineer understands this.
The “melted steel” is a classic strawman argument. These conspiracy guys are completely dishonest.
[/quote]
What high temps?
Zap,
What happened to the steel further down, it should not have suffered much by way of heat at all?
I’m not a conspiracy theorist, but I’ll only grant that the steel where the plane hit could have become inordinately hot.
However, building 7 is much harder to describe with this theory.
What happened, I don’t know, but given how shoddy the engineering apparently was, we’d better find out before all the other tall buildings across the US start falling down due to the high percentage of fat people standing on all the floors!
[quote]vroom wrote:
Zap,
What happened to the steel further down, it should not have suffered much by way of heat at all?
[/quote]
They could not handle the impact of the upper floors falling on them.
It was the only steel that needed to be weakened.
Nobody fully understands what happened with builing 7. The fact that it collapsed is further evidence that it wasn’t all some grand conspiracy beyond the airplanes.
If there were explosive charges preplanted, why would they also know down building 7 unless they had an airplane hit it too?
I suspect it was destroyed because the impact of the collapse of the twin towers was passed to builind 7 and weakened it greatly.
[quote]
What happened, I don’t know, but given how shoddy the engineering apparently was, we’d better find out before all the other tall buildings across the US start falling down due to the high percentage of fat people standing on all the floors![/quote]
When they start jumping up and down we will have some serious problems!
[quote]jlesk68 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
There is already a thread or two on this.
The steel didn’t melt. The steel was greatly weakened by the high temperatures causing the collapse.
Any scientist or engineer understands this.
The “melted steel” is a classic strawman argument. These conspiracy guys are completely dishonest.
What high temps?[/quote]
Because I didn’t know off the top of my head how hot jet fuel burs I stole this from the Popula Mechanics website.
Jet fuel burns at 800? to 1500?F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750?F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn’t need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength–and that required exposure to much less heat. “I have never seen melted steel in a building fire,” says retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety. “But I’ve seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks.”
“Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100?F,” notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. “And at 1800? it is probably at less than 10 percent.” NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.
But jet fuel wasn’t the only thing burning, notes Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California, San Diego, and one of seven structural engineers and fire experts that PM consulted. He says that while the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832?F.
“The jet fuel was the ignition source,” Williams tells PM. “It burned for maybe 10 minutes, and [the towers] were still standing in 10 minutes. It was the rest of the stuff burning afterward that was responsible for the heat transfer that eventually brought them down.”
These 9/11 theorists are fucking insane.
I just checked out a website that claimed the planes were taken over by remote control and crashed into the building and then it goes on to explain why the planes couldn’t knock down the buildings.
Fucking nonsense!