So another sarcastic spam argument.
No the convo didn't go down like that. Nobody is claiming how the convo went down.
If that makes perfect sense to you, please leave the thread!
Every line seems to match your proposed explanation.
This part of the Forum is 'debate' not make up quotes and talk sarcastically.
I fear that some of government story supporters (blinking spirit n Tiax), and not taking my side seriously. This is not what you do in a debate. No matter how silly YOU THINK the other side sounds, it is you job in a debate to PROVE how it sounds 'silly'. Making up sarcastic quotes is not Proof FYI!!!
I would GUESS it would be more like this:
"How are we going to get a Rothchild central bank into these middle eastern countries and have then under the NWO/Illumanati/Elite business owners control."
"then we can also take control of the OPIUM and oil fields, and profit of that too!"
"We will create an event that allows us to go to war to destabilize these countries."
"the world trade centers have too much upkeep, and we can hide insider trading if they were to be destroyed"
"Well we can't be seen to destroy them, and we need a reason to go to the middle east. Why don't we use Al Qaeda that the CIA trained to hijack planes and fly them into it"
"Well the buildings are made to withstand a plane hit, so we better have explosives in them to take them down, and we can use the planes as a cover story"
"we also need to get rid of WTC7 so load that up with explosives too, then we can blame it on office fires from the tower collapse"
"we will also announce that 2.3 Trillion has gone missing from the Pentagon a day before, and hit that to cover it up"
Why use planes if you already have explosives, and people will figure out that a plane can't take down the building? If you have to destroy WTC7 too, why not just go with the trucks full of explosives story in the first place? If you have to hit the Pentagon, why use a cruise missile and tell people it's a plane?
Everything about this plane plan seems unnecessary to your proposed secret scheme. Everything would be much better for them if they didn't have the planes involved. So why use planes?
Afghanistan manages to export about $4 billion worth of opium a year. Why would the US government care about that piddly sum of money?
@Tiax
"Why use planes if you already have explosives"
cover story
"the trucks full of explosives story in the first place?"
How would the terrorists get these?
"If you have to hit the Pentagon, why use a cruise missile and tell people it's a plane?"
To fit the story of the hijackings, I am still open to change on this point!!
"Afghanistan manages to export about $4 billion worth of opium a year. Why would the US government care about that piddly sum of money?"
Piddly?? can you spare me $4 Billion? Most of the worlds opium comes from there, good to have control of that market. And the oil fields, and the banks, and then their government too. It was not just about Opium or not just about oil, it was for a few reasons!
I have answered your questions, Now can you please address what happened in this picture below as i have been asking for a while now!!!
@Tiax
"Why use planes if you already have explosives"
cover story
A cover story for what? How is "terrorists drove a truck full of explosives into the building at night" not a cover story?
"the trucks full of explosives story in the first place?"
How would the terrorists get these?
The same way they got the truck full of explosives they used the first time? Are you perhaps not aware of the 1993 attack?
"If you have to hit the Pentagon, why use a cruise missile and tell people it's a plane?"
To fit the story of the hijackings, I am still open to change on this point!!
But if you're in control of the hijacked planes, why can't you just actually fly one into the Pentagon?
"Afghanistan manages to export about $4 billion worth of opium a year. Why would the US government care about that piddly sum of money?"
Piddly?? can you spare me $4 Billion? Most of the worlds opium comes from there, good to have control of that market. And the oil fields, and the banks, and then their government too. It was not just about Opium or not just about oil, it was for a few reasons!
The US has spent way beyond $4 billion the war in Afhganistan. How would they come out ahead in this equation? Afghanistan has something like 80 million barrels of oil reserves. The US has something like 36 BILLION barrels of oil. Why would the US spend all that effort to acquire such a tiny fraction of our existing oil reserves, a few billion dollars worth of poppy production and the Afghanistan banking sector?
Nothing about your explanation makes any sense. You suppose that the US government is capable of orchestrating such a grand plot, and yet all of their supposed motives are idiotic and counter-productive. They create an overly complex "cover story" involving airplanes, when a perfectly good cover story about trucks of explosives is staring them in the face. They fire a cruise missile at the Pentagon when they already have control of hijacked airplanes. To secure oil and wealth they invade Afghanistan, one of the poorest countries in the world with very limited oil reserves, and spend over half a trillion dollars doing it.
"The article I read said ~10 minutes."
I would like to know how the jet fuel would have burnt for that long, was there fuel still in the tanks after it crashed?
"You didn't read the link. Read the link."
You didn't watch my video, watch the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fy9JCDchk34
Put an argument in words, then reference the link.
"It's not steel. It's aluminum."
-"The droplets on the outside of the center of the fall seem to be the color of aluminum siding to me"
Taken from the article, 'seems to be' is not proof.
More analysis is required, It is also 'seems to be' the same colour as iron too...
There should have been a number of private firms collecting evidence for the clean up.
Then in the picture near the bottom with the excavator the article says its iron, why change from aluminum?
@Tiax
"A cover story for what? How is "terrorists drove a truck full of explosives into the building at night" not a cover story?"
That is your made up quote
"Are you perhaps not aware of the 1993 attack?"
no please explain?
"why can't you just actually fly one into the Pentagon?"
You could, I'm not arguing you can't!
"The US has spent way beyond $4 billion the war in Afhganistan."
Yes the US is in debt, but private companies like Dick Chaney's Halliburton have gone up %700
The orchestrators of this don't care about the US debt, they are profiting from it privately in other ways, through the oil market, the opium market
"Why would the US government care about that piddly sum of money?"
You are right they wouldn't, other private people would.
"Nothing about your explanation makes any sense."
You have to prove that, that is your opinion, I will refer you to the argument video and hope you can learn something: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rItm9j4vg_Q (It does not discuss 9/11)
"US government is capable of orchestrating such a grand plot"
I will say its the Elite bankers that used some of the US government to orchestrate.
"idiotic and counter-productive"
Your opinion again, please watch the video and learn how to argue.
"overly complex" - opinion, watch the video
"when a perfectly good cover story " - opinion, watch the video
"they already have control of hijacked airplanes"
There was one that was taken back, and landed on the ground, Flight 93, so they did not have control of the planes.
Please learn to put an argument forth before responding with things like: 'overly complex', ' is garbage', 'Any elephant can fly', 'conspiracy', 'progress is impossible', 'he's winning'
In 1993, Islamic terrorists drove a truck full of explosives into the parking garage below the world trade center. Several people died and over a thousand were injured. How have you never heard of this? Given that this happened, don't you think it's a little silly for you to have asked "how would the terrorists get a truck full of explosives?"
In 1993, Islamic terrorists drove a truck full of explosives into the parking garage below the world trade center. Several people died and over a thousand were injured. How have you never heard of this? Given that this happened, don't you think it's a little silly for you to have asked "how would the terrorists get a truck full of explosives?"
So we are continuing with your sarcastic spam quote story still?
"it's a little silly" - opinion spam
Given that that did happen (would like a link), I would still not think it 'a little silly' to ask "how would the terrorists get a truck full of explosives?" in relation to your sarcastic spam quote story...
Actually it is a little silly responding to you. Even more than 'a little silly'.
But in relation to 9/11, they were not Islamic terrorists that set the explosives. -that is not the conspiracy, that is your sarcastic quote story.
According to Bollyn 9/11 was concipated in a small network of conspirators in New York, Washington, Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. The central figures in that conspiracy were Silverstein, Olmert, Netanyahu, Atzmon, Dov Zakheim (my addition, via Dick Eastman) and many others and was carried out by the Mossad (responsible for the technical realization of the 9/11 operation, consisting in software-manipulation and placing of explosives in the 9/11 target buildings).
Isreals Mossad would have driven these vans, set the explosives and stolen the tapes ~3weeks leading up to 9/11.
This video explains it better, I will have to rewatch soon it as I am only on mobile Internet. I will give you the head start to rebut some points. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fy9JCDchk34
This is a guy who caught the CIA bringing drugs into america, It is documented on the news him confronting the CIA.
@Lithl
"What words did I put in your mouth?"
This V
"Clearly, the wood is not burning at 900 degrees, and yet parts of the oven reach that temperature. By your logic, Typho0nn, this is not possible."
So are you saying that the difference between the burning temperature of jet fuel and the melting point of steel does not mean that the former cannot melt the latter? Because if that's what you're saying, bringing up the temperatures is a bit of a non-sequitur. If that's not what you're saying, then I haven't put any words in your mouth.
"The fire is not burning at 900 degrees in my oven."
The fire would be, the bricks spread the heat and cool it down so the oven does not reach 1000.
Again, you're not listening to me. The fire in my oven is burning at less than 500 degrees. The bricks in the over reach temperatures in the 700-900 degree range, depending on location. I have confirmed this with an IR thermometer.
This is a good point and can be used on the coulombs in the trade center as they are made of metal and good conductors of heat. The heat should have been dispersed up and down the 2inch thick coulombs not allowing them to even reach the temperature of a small office fire say 1000deg F
Metal is, generally, a good conductor of heat. (Although I don't know specifically what the steel in the towers was, carbon steel has a thermal conductivity in the range of 36-54 W/m/K.) On the other hand, a lot of other materials are terrible conductors. Concrete can get as low as 0.8 W/m/K. Air is, at best, 0.0457 W/m/K. While the superior thermal conductivity of a piece of metal can certainly allow one end to heat up quickly when a heat source is applied to the other end, in order for the metal to actually cool off, you have to consider the conductivity of the materials that surround the metal.
And again, unless you have a perfect thermal conductor, heat will build as long as heat is applied. The question is not whether a steel beam heated by a 1000 degree fire can go above 1000 degrees (it can), the question is whether a 1000 degree heat source applied for an appropriate duration can heat the steel beam enough.
Also, I can only assume you're writing your post on a phone or something with an autocorrect feature, because I'm pretty sure you mean "columns", not "coulombs". A coulomb is one ampere-second.
I fear that some of government story supporters (blinking spirit n Tiax), and not taking my side seriously. This is not what you do in a debate. No matter how silly YOU THINK the other side sounds, it is you job in a debate to PROVE how it sounds 'silly'. Making up sarcastic quotes is not Proof FYI!!!
It is not our jobs to prove you wrong, it is your job to prove yourself right.
So we are continuing with your sarcastic spam quote story still?
"it's a little silly" - opinion spam
Given that that did happen (would like a link), I would still not think it 'a little silly' to ask "how would the terrorists get a truck full of explosives?" in relation to your sarcastic spam quote story...
Really? You "would like a link" to one of the largest terrorist attacks on America in history? Would you also like a link to see if Pearl Harbor happened?
@Lithl
"The fire in my oven is burning at less than 500 degrees. The bricks in the over reach temperatures in the 700-900 degree range"
congratulations you have just broken the laws of thermal dynamics!!!!
"you have to consider the conductivity of the materials that surround the metal."
why, they were steel coulombs to the ground, they could have dispersed heat fast!
"It is not our jobs to prove you wrong, it is your job to prove yourself right."
Well that was the opening debate, I guess you have nothing else to add.
@Tiax
Thanks for the link and i agree with it, but we are still not going to continue with your sarcastic quote story, please present a argument!
@Mad Mat
"Dubai tower case, the visibility was a direct consequence of the fire mostly raging on the outside of the building, as it had been covered there with flammable material."
Why didn't it collapse or even to the side then?
" how hard is it to imagine the damage a large airplane, filled with energy dense and very flammable kerosene and flying very fast, will do to a building that is not designed with such stresses in mind? "
Not very I try all the time. It can been seen seconds later what damage was caused to the twin towers after a large airplane, filled.....
But an hour later is where our 'minds' change.
I do not believe that the resulting office fires could have warped the steel to an even collapsing point!
"If one critical part fails" .. " the others will instantly"
There is more than one critical part in the trade centers. Buildings are not designed with one critical part.
"How is that a response to what I said? Stop putting your words in my mouth."
I'm adding to your argument that a building does not have 'one' critical point.
I'm sorry you will have to describe the one critical part, and how it will effect the others instantly. When supposedly they were warped and would take a longer time to transfer the effect.
@Blinking Spirit
"Your argument is bad because you say things without evidence and because you ignore evidence of other things."
Instead of saying this you should point out where I say things without evidence, and then give evidence of the things I missed.
That's what I've been doing all along. What did you think all those "did it really?" and "how do we know?" questions were? In response to which, you gave me not one shred of corroborating evidence. Not one. Instead, you came back with, "well you asked simple questions, and got simple answers", as if failing to even attempt to back up your claims was somehow something to be smug about.
"uncritically accepting and repeating"
The government has lied to the people on a number of occasions, like the CIA running drugs, cought by Micheal C Ruppert. We are being quite the opposite and being super critical of the governments stories. So you saying 'uncritically' is an ad hominem attack as it does not address the argument and is your opinion on how we are interpreting things.
Here are some Engineers and Architects that are being 'uncritical' http://www.ae911truth.org/
You need to read more carefully. I said you were "uncritically accepting and repeating any statement that supports your desired position". That is to say, the factoids that make up the conspiracy hypothesis. For example, the jet-fuel-doesn't-burn-hot-enough-to-melt-steel claim -- when you first heard about this from some other conspiracy theorist, did you grant it even a moment's skepticism, or do a little of your own research into the science of thermodynamics? I know you didn't, because if you had, you would have discovered what Lithl has been telling you: that if heat energy can't escape a system fast enough, it just keeps getting hotter. But instead of investigating the melting point claim and learning for yourself why it's wrong, you accepted it uncritically and repeated it here.
You don't just need to be "super critical" of the "government story". You need to be super critical of your story, too.
""The Pentagon was hit by something which was not a passenger airliner""
I am looking for video evidence to prove this, do you have any? I am open to my mind being change, as can be seen by the edit in the first post!
The videos are not good but consistent with a 757. And there are more than enough photos of 757 debris and eyewitness accounts to make up for any lingering skepticism you might have over the low-resolution footage. (These took me less than ten minutes to find. Just saying.)
"Tall buildings really do collapse straight down when their supports are weakened"
Please explain how this happened in relation to 9/11, there have been many fires in multistory buildings that have not made it collapse, the twin towers are a special case.
What? Of course not every fire causes a multistory building to collapse. You keep complaining about people putting words in your mouth, so you probably shouldn't put words in others' mouths. As for what happens when a building does collapse, Highroller has already explained the physics. We're not going to play that game where you ask people to explain something, ignore the explanation, and repeat.
In previous posts It can be seen you attack me and not the argument, its recorded:
"And here you just swallow the official narrative?"
"Pssh. That's just what they want you to think."
And please check out this video... !!!!!!! It will help you respond reasonably.
No, a liberal arts education helps me respond reasonably. Getting patronized by a 9/11 truther who pushes a YouTube video like a Gospel... that just makes me laugh. But I'll make a deal with you. I'll listen to this forty-minute ramble in its entirety if you read Bertrand Russell's The Problems of Philosophy in its entirety. Then we can discuss which one is the better introduction to the methods of rational thought.
Without sarcasm, I might present the misleading impression that we're discussing a legitimately difficult topic like abortion or free will. If you want me to get serious, give me a serious challenge.
I love the "Jet Fuel Can't Melt Steel Beams" argument. It's the best example of how these people think. They never stop questioning anything that doesn't fit their conclusion, then stop thinking or learning the moment they find something on any simplistic level that sounds like it might support something related to their argument.
@Blinking Spirit
"San Lorenzan Bokononist."
"How in the name of all that's holy is this an attack on anyone or anything?"
Its called fraud (unless you believe in it, then that's a good enough reason to stop responding to you anyways) so I am no longer going to continue arguing with your sarcastic liberal arts degree :S Bye, and sorry I cannot continue with you.
@Mad Mat
"Why would it collapse?"
If 1 hour office fires are enough to collapse the trade towers, why wouldn't a 4 hour fire be able to collapse this?
"And you base this on what? Compared to all the physical explanations offered to you even in this very thread?"
So 1hr office fires we able to warp 2 inches of steel? Or was it the '10 minute'(3second) Jet-fuel explosion?
"You are putting words in my mouth, because I never said there was one critical part."
Check the other page you said:
"If one critical part fails (as in, it bends too much, it breaks or it's pushed out of its proper position), the others will instantly suffer from the increasing forces and likely fail as well. That's why collapses are almost always very sudden and much larger in scale than the direct cause would suggest."
I love the "Jet Fuel Can't Melt Steel Beams" argument. It's the best example of how these people think.
That 1/2 inch piece of steel, has been in a furnace for 30min, and it was not melted.
And see how it bent, not collapsed in on its self.....
And it has made an impact on me about you, and therefore you confidence is lost!
"It's the best example of how these people think." and how you think!!!! <3 that video lol
@Mad Mat
"It implies multiple critical parts."
So there are multiple critical parts, but if one of them fails, the all fail at the same time?
Imagine a Jenga tower. Technically there are a bazillion critical points of potential failure. They don't all have to fail to bring the tower down. Only one does and it tends to take several others with it due to shifts in support and weight.
(Note: before you ask, no this is not a direct parallel with the WTC towers, only an example of how something can have multiple points of failure but only one need fail to set off a chain reaction where multiple fail in quick succession)
That 1/2 inch piece of steel, has been in a furnace for 30min, and it was not melted.
And see how it bent, not collapsed in on its self.....
His example was him choosing to direct force on only one side. In an actual tower, the forces(particularly on horizontal crossbeams) are being applied on both sides, which would likely cause it to bend in the middle or "collapse in on itself".
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Proving god exists isn't hard. Proving god is God is the tricky part" - Roommate
How do you know the towers were hit differently typhoon? And how do you know about the way critical points relate to structural integrity? Surely you don't trust *official* reports or statements from professional architects or engineers, do you?
@Quirkiness101
"Imagine a Jenga tower."
Totally with you on that example and it falls to its side when one side is weakend...
And it can still be standing when pieces are removed!!
@Stairc
"Subscribed to this thread"
Cool you might learn something, if not about 9/11 at least how to argue!!! (I hope)
"How do you know the towers were hit differently typhoon?"
If you are going to ask questions like this when there is clear video evidence I am not going to respond to you either.
"And how do you know about the way critical points relate to structural integrity?"
Masters of Architecture, and what is your qualification?
"Surely you don't trust *official* reports or statements from professional architects or engineers, do you?"
This are 2 different things, 'official reports' and statements professional architects and engineers do not have the same views.
That is why i have linked this reference with over 2,400 signatures from Architects and Engineers: http://www.ae911truth.org/
KEY EVIDENCE
Rapid onset of destruction,
Constant acceleration at or near free-fall through what should have been the path of greatest resistance,
Numerous eyewitness accounts of explosions including 118 FDNY personnel,
Lateral ejection of multi-ton steel framing members distances of 600 feet at more than 60 mph,
Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete, and large volumes of expanding pyroclastic-like dust clouds,
Isolated explosive ejections 20 to 60 stories below the “crush zone,”
Total destruction and dismemberment of all three buildings, with 220 floors each an acre in size missing from the Twin Towers’ debris pile,
Several tons of molten steel/iron found in the debris piles,
Evidence of thermite incendiaries on steel beams,
Nanothermite composites and iron microspheres found in WTC dust samples.
Cool you might learn something, if not about 9/11 at least how to argue!!! (I hope)
Excellent. I love to learn.
"How do you know the towers were hit differently typhoon?"
If you are going to ask questions like this when there is clear video evidence I am not going to respond to you either.
How do you know the government didn't plant those videos or surpress the footage they don't like? Surely you don't trust the mass media, right?
"Surely you don't trust *official* reports or statements from professional architects or engineers, do you?"
This are 2 different things, 'official reports' and statements professional architects and engineers do not have the same views.
That is why i have linked this reference with over 2,400 signatures from Architects and Engineers
You seriously trust what a group of random architects and engineers have to say? How do you know they aren't all being bribed by people that want to turn the citizens against the american government? That'd be a lot cheaper than bribing the rest of the world's architects and engineers that have engaged in this.
"unevenly in multiple floors of a building?"
Fall to the side not collapse in on its self.
"Think about it, imagine you're lifting a heavy barbell over your head. Now imagine your arms"
Imagine one of your arms was hit, the barbell would fall to the side, not on top of you!
His example is somewhat imperfect. While the arm will lose it's ability to hold up the weight, the way it collapses is not at all comparable to a structure like the WTC and it's collapse. This picture is a better representation of what actually happens. The potential energy of the floors above the impact site are enormous. And once they can no longer be supported from below and start moving, their kinetic energy is enough to shatter anything they collide with.
"And how do you know about the way critical points relate to structural integrity?"
Masters of Architecture, and what is your qualification?
As an expert in the field, do you happen to know the shear strength of the floors within WTC 1 & 2? And just out of curiosity, what institute of higher education did you earn your degree at?
The US has spent way beyond $4 billion the war in Afhganistan. How would they come out ahead in this equation? Afghanistan has something like 80 million barrels of oil reserves. The US has something like 36 BILLION barrels of oil. Why would the US spend all that effort to acquire such a tiny fraction of our existing oil reserves, a few billion dollars worth of poppy production and the Afghanistan banking sector?
@Blinking Spirit
"San Lorenzan Bokononist."
"How in the name of all that's holy is this an attack on anyone or anything?"
Its called fraud (unless you believe in it, then that's a good enough reason to stop responding to you anyways) so I am no longer going to continue arguing with your sarcastic liberal arts degree :S Bye, and sorry I cannot continue with you.
> say your "mind is open to being changed"
> receive video, photographic, and eyewitness evidence that a 757 hit the Pentagon
> instead of changing mind or even acknowledging response, storm off in a huff over a literary reference
Frankly, I'm not surprised.
Well, I am surprised that you chose that line of all things as your pretext for getting out of the conversation, but I'm not surprised you found one. And all right -- I can't make you continue. But don't think you are leaving on the high ground. You have lost this debate.
(PS: You really broke out the loaded language, but it's not "fraud" unless I'm stealing something from you.)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
@Lithl
"The fire in my oven is burning at less than 500 degrees. The bricks in the over reach temperatures in the 700-900 degree range"
congratulations you have just broken the laws of thermal dynamics!!!!
What law of thermodynamics has my oven broken?
The zeroth law does not apply; nothing in the system is in equilibrium. Even if it did apply, it basically states that if A = C and B = C, then A = B.
The first law does not apply; my oven is not a closed system. Even if it did apply, it basically states that perpetual motion machines are impossible, and my oven is not a perpetual motion machine; it consumes finite fuel (wood logs) to be heated.
The second law does not apply; my oven is not a closed system. Even if it did apply, it talks about irreversible natural processes, and burning wood certainly is irreversible.
The third law does not apply; my oven's temperature is not approaching absolute zero.
"you have to consider the conductivity of the materials that surround the metal."
why, they were steel coulombs to the ground, they could have dispersed heat fast!
I am not aware of the specific kind of steel used in the towers' construction, nor the towers' blueprints. It is therefore extremely difficult to speak to just how heat would transfer throughout the structure. I find it extremely unlikely, however, that the heat from the 93rd floor (WTC 1) or the 77th floor (WTC 2) would reach the ground in any appreciable amount of time.
Also: even if the heat could reach the bottom of the structure, that's not going make it easier to get rid of the heat. You're either ending in a concrete foundation (0.8 W/m/K), soil (0.15 W/m/K), or a foundation with void boxes (0.0457 W/m/K), all substantially worse than the conductivity of the steel you're trying to disperse heat from. (Although I seriously doubt a void box foundation would be capable of supporting a skyscraper.)
Also, Typhoon has repeatedly claimed that just saying "terrorists set bombs in the building" would be a poor cover-up because it's not believable that terrorists could... Get their hands on bombs. I wonder why he thinks this is a less believable explanation than something he thinks is physically impossible.
typhoon, hi, sorry these guys are ganging up on you.
I'm kind of uninitiated into this realm of study so I have a somewhat naïve question that I hope you'll be able to help me with.
you keep mentioning the fact that the plane hit only one side of the tower(s) and that due to uneven heat distribution the tower would be expected to, without additional force such as a planted explosive, bend rather than collapse straight down.
I'm having some trouble imagining what this would look like... do you have any links to previous examples of buildings "bending?" I don't think I've ever seen that happen before!
if you can't that's ok, but are there any artist depictions of how this would look? maybe you could just sketch out how the process would look and post the picture itt?
I'm sorry for the question, I don't mean to derail the discussion and you're making a lot of good arguments, but this piece I just can't picture in my head.
thanks! sorry other posters for the intrusion!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Can we have Megiddo removed from the forum forever please?
i'm pretty sure i can find your ***** online within 3 minutes
@Stairc
"How do you know the government didn't plant those videos"
Not answering you any more.
@Blinking Spirit
"You have lost this debate."
-Nice of you to claim self victory, I'm still looking for the truth and open to change. And now not saying that it was not a plane!
"but it's not "fraud" unless I'm stealing something from you."
That is called theft
"wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain." - google
wrongful deception intended to result in personal gain.
-I am really done with this silly semantic games with you!! And not knowing how to debate like say I can't use the timeline in an argument.... and BLAHHHHHHHH!!!!! BYE!!!
@Lithl
"The fire in my oven is burning at less than 500 degrees. The bricks in the over reach temperatures in the 700-900 degree range"
"What law of thermodynamics has my oven broken?"
Thermal equilibrium, Which is the Zeroth law.
Fire is A, Air is B and Bricks are C.
But I think you are just measuring the fire wrong. Check the pic below!
"It is therefore extremely difficult to speak to just how heat would transfer throughout the structure. "
Why is it 'extremely difficult' when we know the what the coulombs were made of, the blueprints, we can re design the whole thing!
"I find it extremely unlikely, however, that the heat from the 93rd floor (WTC 1) or the 77th floor (WTC 2) would reach the ground in any appreciable amount of time."
It could be very possible for the heat to change the coulomb at the bottom 0.01c of a degree over 1 hour. That may seem little but when you measure from the ground going up the coulomb it will increase.
"that's not going make it easier to get rid of the heat. "
Well if it reaches the bottom or the coulombs in the floors below it means that the heat is dispersing. 2 inch thick steel would disperse the office fires quite well, they would even get to warping/buckeling/collapse in on itself point.
Why did they find pools of molten steel at the bottom during the cleanup? (pic below)
@urweak
"http://i50.tinypic.com/2ntza76.jpg"
They all snapped at once, this would have happened from demolition charges, not office fires/jetfuell ball
"The terrorists would make a bomb in a similar manner to the one used in the Oklahoma City Bombing by Timothy McVeigh."
Cool it could happen, is anyone arguing this happened in 9/11 except for that sarcastic quote story done by Tiax?
"As an expert in the field, do you happen to know the shear strength of the floors within WTC 1 & 2? And just out of curiosity, what institute of higher education did you earn your degree at?"
No I have not gone and tested it myself but I have reference, it is known by others 2,400+ on this site http://www.ae911truth.org/
Adelaide Uni
"To be fair, Afghanistan's wealth is in it's Minerals, not it's oil. I think people talk about oil because they equate the Middle East as being some kind of oil mecca."
Its for the private companies to profit, they don't give a ***** about Americas debt, they are just using it for their own benefit... pretty fascist!
" seems to " is not an argument, please watch this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rItm9j4vg_Q
This part of the Forum is 'debate' not make up quotes and talk sarcastically.
I fear that some of government story supporters (blinking spirit n Tiax), and not taking my side seriously. This is not what you do in a debate. No matter how silly YOU THINK the other side sounds, it is you job in a debate to PROVE how it sounds 'silly'. Making up sarcastic quotes is not Proof FYI!!!
Legacy: Dark Depths, Pox, Eldrazi Agro
Vintage: Dark Depths, Grey Orge
Pauper: Faerie Ninja
7pt Highlander: BW Combo
EDH: Horobi, (t)Toshiro, (t)Isamaru
Why use planes if you already have explosives, and people will figure out that a plane can't take down the building? If you have to destroy WTC7 too, why not just go with the trucks full of explosives story in the first place? If you have to hit the Pentagon, why use a cruise missile and tell people it's a plane?
Everything about this plane plan seems unnecessary to your proposed secret scheme. Everything would be much better for them if they didn't have the planes involved. So why use planes?
Afghanistan manages to export about $4 billion worth of opium a year. Why would the US government care about that piddly sum of money?
"Why use planes if you already have explosives"
cover story
"the trucks full of explosives story in the first place?"
How would the terrorists get these?
"If you have to hit the Pentagon, why use a cruise missile and tell people it's a plane?"
To fit the story of the hijackings, I am still open to change on this point!!
"Afghanistan manages to export about $4 billion worth of opium a year. Why would the US government care about that piddly sum of money?"
Piddly?? can you spare me $4 Billion? Most of the worlds opium comes from there, good to have control of that market. And the oil fields, and the banks, and then their government too. It was not just about Opium or not just about oil, it was for a few reasons!
I have answered your questions, Now can you please address what happened in this picture below as i have been asking for a while now!!!
Legacy: Dark Depths, Pox, Eldrazi Agro
Vintage: Dark Depths, Grey Orge
Pauper: Faerie Ninja
7pt Highlander: BW Combo
EDH: Horobi, (t)Toshiro, (t)Isamaru
A cover story for what? How is "terrorists drove a truck full of explosives into the building at night" not a cover story?
The same way they got the truck full of explosives they used the first time? Are you perhaps not aware of the 1993 attack?
But if you're in control of the hijacked planes, why can't you just actually fly one into the Pentagon?
The US has spent way beyond $4 billion the war in Afhganistan. How would they come out ahead in this equation? Afghanistan has something like 80 million barrels of oil reserves. The US has something like 36 BILLION barrels of oil. Why would the US spend all that effort to acquire such a tiny fraction of our existing oil reserves, a few billion dollars worth of poppy production and the Afghanistan banking sector?
Nothing about your explanation makes any sense. You suppose that the US government is capable of orchestrating such a grand plot, and yet all of their supposed motives are idiotic and counter-productive. They create an overly complex "cover story" involving airplanes, when a perfectly good cover story about trucks of explosives is staring them in the face. They fire a cruise missile at the Pentagon when they already have control of hijacked airplanes. To secure oil and wealth they invade Afghanistan, one of the poorest countries in the world with very limited oil reserves, and spend over half a trillion dollars doing it.
The article I read said ~10 minutes.
You didn't read the link. Read the link.
http://www.debunking911.com/moltensteel.htm
It's not steel. It's aluminum.
Sorry for the mix up!
"The article I read said ~10 minutes."
I would like to know how the jet fuel would have burnt for that long, was there fuel still in the tanks after it crashed?
"You didn't read the link. Read the link."
You didn't watch my video, watch the video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fy9JCDchk34
Put an argument in words, then reference the link.
"It's not steel. It's aluminum."
-"The droplets on the outside of the center of the fall seem to be the color of aluminum siding to me"
Taken from the article, 'seems to be' is not proof.
More analysis is required, It is also 'seems to be' the same colour as iron too...
There should have been a number of private firms collecting evidence for the clean up.
Then in the picture near the bottom with the excavator the article says its iron, why change from aluminum?
@Tiax
"A cover story for what? How is "terrorists drove a truck full of explosives into the building at night" not a cover story?"
That is your made up quote
"Are you perhaps not aware of the 1993 attack?"
no please explain?
"why can't you just actually fly one into the Pentagon?"
You could, I'm not arguing you can't!
"The US has spent way beyond $4 billion the war in Afhganistan."
Yes the US is in debt, but private companies like Dick Chaney's Halliburton have gone up %700
The orchestrators of this don't care about the US debt, they are profiting from it privately in other ways, through the oil market, the opium market
"Why would the US government care about that piddly sum of money?"
You are right they wouldn't, other private people would.
"Nothing about your explanation makes any sense."
You have to prove that, that is your opinion, I will refer you to the argument video and hope you can learn something: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rItm9j4vg_Q (It does not discuss 9/11)
"US government is capable of orchestrating such a grand plot"
I will say its the Elite bankers that used some of the US government to orchestrate.
"idiotic and counter-productive"
Your opinion again, please watch the video and learn how to argue.
"overly complex" - opinion, watch the video
"when a perfectly good cover story " - opinion, watch the video
"they already have control of hijacked airplanes"
There was one that was taken back, and landed on the ground, Flight 93, so they did not have control of the planes.
Please learn to put an argument forth before responding with things like: 'overly complex', ' is garbage', 'Any elephant can fly', 'conspiracy', 'progress is impossible', 'he's winning'
Legacy: Dark Depths, Pox, Eldrazi Agro
Vintage: Dark Depths, Grey Orge
Pauper: Faerie Ninja
7pt Highlander: BW Combo
EDH: Horobi, (t)Toshiro, (t)Isamaru
So we are continuing with your sarcastic spam quote story still?
"it's a little silly" - opinion spam
Given that that did happen (would like a link), I would still not think it 'a little silly' to ask "how would the terrorists get a truck full of explosives?" in relation to your sarcastic spam quote story...
Actually it is a little silly responding to you. Even more than 'a little silly'.
But in relation to 9/11, they were not Islamic terrorists that set the explosives. -that is not the conspiracy, that is your sarcastic quote story.
http://how911wasdone.blogspot.com.au/
Isreals Mossad would have driven these vans, set the explosives and stolen the tapes ~3weeks leading up to 9/11.
This video explains it better, I will have to rewatch soon it as I am only on mobile Internet. I will give you the head start to rebut some points.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fy9JCDchk34
This is a guy who caught the CIA bringing drugs into america, It is documented on the news him confronting the CIA.
Legacy: Dark Depths, Pox, Eldrazi Agro
Vintage: Dark Depths, Grey Orge
Pauper: Faerie Ninja
7pt Highlander: BW Combo
EDH: Horobi, (t)Toshiro, (t)Isamaru
Again, you're not listening to me. The fire in my oven is burning at less than 500 degrees. The bricks in the over reach temperatures in the 700-900 degree range, depending on location. I have confirmed this with an IR thermometer.
Metal is, generally, a good conductor of heat. (Although I don't know specifically what the steel in the towers was, carbon steel has a thermal conductivity in the range of 36-54 W/m/K.) On the other hand, a lot of other materials are terrible conductors. Concrete can get as low as 0.8 W/m/K. Air is, at best, 0.0457 W/m/K. While the superior thermal conductivity of a piece of metal can certainly allow one end to heat up quickly when a heat source is applied to the other end, in order for the metal to actually cool off, you have to consider the conductivity of the materials that surround the metal.
And again, unless you have a perfect thermal conductor, heat will build as long as heat is applied. The question is not whether a steel beam heated by a 1000 degree fire can go above 1000 degrees (it can), the question is whether a 1000 degree heat source applied for an appropriate duration can heat the steel beam enough.
Also, I can only assume you're writing your post on a phone or something with an autocorrect feature, because I'm pretty sure you mean "columns", not "coulombs". A coulomb is one ampere-second.
It is not our jobs to prove you wrong, it is your job to prove yourself right.
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
Really? You "would like a link" to one of the largest terrorist attacks on America in history? Would you also like a link to see if Pearl Harbor happened?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1993_World_Trade_Center_bombing
"The fire in my oven is burning at less than 500 degrees. The bricks in the over reach temperatures in the 700-900 degree range"
congratulations you have just broken the laws of thermal dynamics!!!!
"you have to consider the conductivity of the materials that surround the metal."
why, they were steel coulombs to the ground, they could have dispersed heat fast!
"It is not our jobs to prove you wrong, it is your job to prove yourself right."
Well that was the opening debate, I guess you have nothing else to add.
@Tiax
Thanks for the link and i agree with it, but we are still not going to continue with your sarcastic quote story, please present a argument!
@Mad Mat
"Dubai tower case, the visibility was a direct consequence of the fire mostly raging on the outside of the building, as it had been covered there with flammable material."
Why didn't it collapse or even to the side then?
" how hard is it to imagine the damage a large airplane, filled with energy dense and very flammable kerosene and flying very fast, will do to a building that is not designed with such stresses in mind? "
Not very I try all the time. It can been seen seconds later what damage was caused to the twin towers after a large airplane, filled.....
But an hour later is where our 'minds' change.
I do not believe that the resulting office fires could have warped the steel to an even collapsing point!
"If one critical part fails" .. " the others will instantly"
There is more than one critical part in the trade centers. Buildings are not designed with one critical part.
"How is that a response to what I said? Stop putting your words in my mouth."
I'm adding to your argument that a building does not have 'one' critical point.
I'm sorry you will have to describe the one critical part, and how it will effect the others instantly. When supposedly they were warped and would take a longer time to transfer the effect.
Legacy: Dark Depths, Pox, Eldrazi Agro
Vintage: Dark Depths, Grey Orge
Pauper: Faerie Ninja
7pt Highlander: BW Combo
EDH: Horobi, (t)Toshiro, (t)Isamaru
You need to read more carefully. I said you were "uncritically accepting and repeating any statement that supports your desired position". That is to say, the factoids that make up the conspiracy hypothesis. For example, the jet-fuel-doesn't-burn-hot-enough-to-melt-steel claim -- when you first heard about this from some other conspiracy theorist, did you grant it even a moment's skepticism, or do a little of your own research into the science of thermodynamics? I know you didn't, because if you had, you would have discovered what Lithl has been telling you: that if heat energy can't escape a system fast enough, it just keeps getting hotter. But instead of investigating the melting point claim and learning for yourself why it's wrong, you accepted it uncritically and repeated it here.
You don't just need to be "super critical" of the "government story". You need to be super critical of your story, too.
The videos are not good but consistent with a 757. And there are more than enough photos of 757 debris and eyewitness accounts to make up for any lingering skepticism you might have over the low-resolution footage. (These took me less than ten minutes to find. Just saying.)
What? Of course not every fire causes a multistory building to collapse. You keep complaining about people putting words in your mouth, so you probably shouldn't put words in others' mouths. As for what happens when a building does collapse, Highroller has already explained the physics. We're not going to play that game where you ask people to explain something, ignore the explanation, and repeat.
Requests for you to provide evidence.
Satirizing your lack of evidence.
Keeping a long post from getting any longer.
A wake-up call.
How in the name of all that's holy is this an attack on anyone or anything?
No, a liberal arts education helps me respond reasonably. Getting patronized by a 9/11 truther who pushes a YouTube video like a Gospel... that just makes me laugh. But I'll make a deal with you. I'll listen to this forty-minute ramble in its entirety if you read Bertrand Russell's The Problems of Philosophy in its entirety. Then we can discuss which one is the better introduction to the methods of rational thought.
Without sarcasm, I might present the misleading impression that we're discussing a legitimately difficult topic like abortion or free will. If you want me to get serious, give me a serious challenge.
I'm not debating Michael C. Ruppert. He is not here; he is not even alive. You have to make your argument in your words.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
I'm confident this won't make any impact on our Typhoon here, but Jet Fuel and Steel - The Experiment.
I love the "Jet Fuel Can't Melt Steel Beams" argument. It's the best example of how these people think. They never stop questioning anything that doesn't fit their conclusion, then stop thinking or learning the moment they find something on any simplistic level that sounds like it might support something related to their argument.
Remaking Magic - A Podcast for those that love MTG and Game Design
The Dungeon Master's Guide - A Podcast for those that love RPGs and Game Design
Sig-Heroes of the Plane
"San Lorenzan Bokononist."
"How in the name of all that's holy is this an attack on anyone or anything?"
Its called fraud (unless you believe in it, then that's a good enough reason to stop responding to you anyways) so I am no longer going to continue arguing with your sarcastic liberal arts degree :S Bye, and sorry I cannot continue with you.
@Mad Mat
"Why would it collapse?"
If 1 hour office fires are enough to collapse the trade towers, why wouldn't a 4 hour fire be able to collapse this?
"And you base this on what? Compared to all the physical explanations offered to you even in this very thread?"
So 1hr office fires we able to warp 2 inches of steel? Or was it the '10 minute'(3second) Jet-fuel explosion?
"You are putting words in my mouth, because I never said there was one critical part."
Check the other page you said:
"If one critical part fails (as in, it bends too much, it breaks or it's pushed out of its proper position), the others will instantly suffer from the increasing forces and likely fail as well. That's why collapses are almost always very sudden and much larger in scale than the direct cause would suggest."
That 1/2 inch piece of steel, has been in a furnace for 30min, and it was not melted.
And see how it bent, not collapsed in on its self.....
And it has made an impact on me about you, and therefore you confidence is lost!
"It's the best example of how these people think." and how you think!!!! <3 that video lol
Legacy: Dark Depths, Pox, Eldrazi Agro
Vintage: Dark Depths, Grey Orge
Pauper: Faerie Ninja
7pt Highlander: BW Combo
EDH: Horobi, (t)Toshiro, (t)Isamaru
"It implies multiple critical parts."
So there are multiple critical parts, but if one of them fails, the all fail at the same time?
"Because fires can be different?"
Both the twin towers came down the same even though they were hit differently
"Compared to all the physical explanations offered to you even in this very thread?"
What were the explanations?
Legacy: Dark Depths, Pox, Eldrazi Agro
Vintage: Dark Depths, Grey Orge
Pauper: Faerie Ninja
7pt Highlander: BW Combo
EDH: Horobi, (t)Toshiro, (t)Isamaru
Imagine a Jenga tower. Technically there are a bazillion critical points of potential failure. They don't all have to fail to bring the tower down. Only one does and it tends to take several others with it due to shifts in support and weight.
(Note: before you ask, no this is not a direct parallel with the WTC towers, only an example of how something can have multiple points of failure but only one need fail to set off a chain reaction where multiple fail in quick succession)
His example was him choosing to direct force on only one side. In an actual tower, the forces(particularly on horizontal crossbeams) are being applied on both sides, which would likely cause it to bend in the middle or "collapse in on itself".
How do you know the towers were hit differently typhoon? And how do you know about the way critical points relate to structural integrity? Surely you don't trust *official* reports or statements from professional architects or engineers, do you?
Remaking Magic - A Podcast for those that love MTG and Game Design
The Dungeon Master's Guide - A Podcast for those that love RPGs and Game Design
Sig-Heroes of the Plane
"Imagine a Jenga tower."
Totally with you on that example and it falls to its side when one side is weakend...
And it can still be standing when pieces are removed!!
@Stairc
"Subscribed to this thread"
Cool you might learn something, if not about 9/11 at least how to argue!!! (I hope)
"How do you know the towers were hit differently typhoon?"
If you are going to ask questions like this when there is clear video evidence I am not going to respond to you either.
"And how do you know about the way critical points relate to structural integrity?"
Masters of Architecture, and what is your qualification?
"Surely you don't trust *official* reports or statements from professional architects or engineers, do you?"
This are 2 different things, 'official reports' and statements professional architects and engineers do not have the same views.
That is why i have linked this reference with over 2,400 signatures from Architects and Engineers:
http://www.ae911truth.org/
With these key points which you's should try debunking - http://www.ae911truth.org/gallery/evidence.html
KEY EVIDENCE
Rapid onset of destruction,
Constant acceleration at or near free-fall through what should have been the path of greatest resistance,
Numerous eyewitness accounts of explosions including 118 FDNY personnel,
Lateral ejection of multi-ton steel framing members distances of 600 feet at more than 60 mph,
Mid-air pulverization of 90,000 tons of concrete, and large volumes of expanding pyroclastic-like dust clouds,
Isolated explosive ejections 20 to 60 stories below the “crush zone,”
Total destruction and dismemberment of all three buildings, with 220 floors each an acre in size missing from the Twin Towers’ debris pile,
Several tons of molten steel/iron found in the debris piles,
Evidence of thermite incendiaries on steel beams,
Nanothermite composites and iron microspheres found in WTC dust samples.
Legacy: Dark Depths, Pox, Eldrazi Agro
Vintage: Dark Depths, Grey Orge
Pauper: Faerie Ninja
7pt Highlander: BW Combo
EDH: Horobi, (t)Toshiro, (t)Isamaru
Excellent. I love to learn.
How do you know the government didn't plant those videos or surpress the footage they don't like? Surely you don't trust the mass media, right?
You seriously trust what a group of random architects and engineers have to say? How do you know they aren't all being bribed by people that want to turn the citizens against the american government? That'd be a lot cheaper than bribing the rest of the world's architects and engineers that have engaged in this.
Remaking Magic - A Podcast for those that love MTG and Game Design
The Dungeon Master's Guide - A Podcast for those that love RPGs and Game Design
Sig-Heroes of the Plane
His example is somewhat imperfect. While the arm will lose it's ability to hold up the weight, the way it collapses is not at all comparable to a structure like the WTC and it's collapse. This picture is a better representation of what actually happens. The potential energy of the floors above the impact site are enormous. And once they can no longer be supported from below and start moving, their kinetic energy is enough to shatter anything they collide with.
http://i50.tinypic.com/2ntza76.jpg
The terrorists would make a bomb in a similar manner to the one used in the Oklahoma City Bombing by Timothy McVeigh.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_City_bombing#Building_the_bomb
As an expert in the field, do you happen to know the shear strength of the floors within WTC 1 & 2? And just out of curiosity, what institute of higher education did you earn your degree at?
To be fair, Afghanistan's wealth is in it's Minerals, not it's oil. I think people talk about oil because they equate the Middle East as being some kind of oil mecca.
http://www.livescience.com/47682-rare-earth-minerals-found-under-afghanistan.html
BUWGRChilds PlayGRWUB
BUWGR Highlander GRWUB
UBSquee's Shapeshifting PetBU
BW Multiplayer Control WB
RG Changeling GR
UR Mana FlareRU
UMerfolkU
B MBMC B
> receive video, photographic, and eyewitness evidence that a 757 hit the Pentagon
> instead of changing mind or even acknowledging response, storm off in a huff over a literary reference
Frankly, I'm not surprised.
Well, I am surprised that you chose that line of all things as your pretext for getting out of the conversation, but I'm not surprised you found one. And all right -- I can't make you continue. But don't think you are leaving on the high ground. You have lost this debate.
(PS: You really broke out the loaded language, but it's not "fraud" unless I'm stealing something from you.)
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
The zeroth law does not apply; nothing in the system is in equilibrium. Even if it did apply, it basically states that if A = C and B = C, then A = B.
The first law does not apply; my oven is not a closed system. Even if it did apply, it basically states that perpetual motion machines are impossible, and my oven is not a perpetual motion machine; it consumes finite fuel (wood logs) to be heated.
The second law does not apply; my oven is not a closed system. Even if it did apply, it talks about irreversible natural processes, and burning wood certainly is irreversible.
The third law does not apply; my oven's temperature is not approaching absolute zero.
I am not aware of the specific kind of steel used in the towers' construction, nor the towers' blueprints. It is therefore extremely difficult to speak to just how heat would transfer throughout the structure. I find it extremely unlikely, however, that the heat from the 93rd floor (WTC 1) or the 77th floor (WTC 2) would reach the ground in any appreciable amount of time.
Also: even if the heat could reach the bottom of the structure, that's not going make it easier to get rid of the heat. You're either ending in a concrete foundation (0.8 W/m/K), soil (0.15 W/m/K), or a foundation with void boxes (0.0457 W/m/K), all substantially worse than the conductivity of the steel you're trying to disperse heat from. (Although I seriously doubt a void box foundation would be capable of supporting a skyscraper.)
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
Remaking Magic - A Podcast for those that love MTG and Game Design
The Dungeon Master's Guide - A Podcast for those that love RPGs and Game Design
Sig-Heroes of the Plane
I'm kind of uninitiated into this realm of study so I have a somewhat naïve question that I hope you'll be able to help me with.
you keep mentioning the fact that the plane hit only one side of the tower(s) and that due to uneven heat distribution the tower would be expected to, without additional force such as a planted explosive, bend rather than collapse straight down.
I'm having some trouble imagining what this would look like... do you have any links to previous examples of buildings "bending?" I don't think I've ever seen that happen before!
if you can't that's ok, but are there any artist depictions of how this would look? maybe you could just sketch out how the process would look and post the picture itt?
I'm sorry for the question, I don't mean to derail the discussion and you're making a lot of good arguments, but this piece I just can't picture in my head.
thanks! sorry other posters for the intrusion!
"How do you know the government didn't plant those videos"
Not answering you any more.
@Blinking Spirit
"You have lost this debate."
-Nice of you to claim self victory, I'm still looking for the truth and open to change. And now not saying that it was not a plane!
"but it's not "fraud" unless I'm stealing something from you."
That is called theft
"wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain." - google
wrongful deception intended to result in personal gain.
-I am really done with this silly semantic games with you!! And not knowing how to debate like say I can't use the timeline in an argument.... and BLAHHHHHHHH!!!!! BYE!!!
@Lithl
"The fire in my oven is burning at less than 500 degrees. The bricks in the over reach temperatures in the 700-900 degree range"
"What law of thermodynamics has my oven broken?"
Thermal equilibrium, Which is the Zeroth law.
Fire is A, Air is B and Bricks are C.
But I think you are just measuring the fire wrong. Check the pic below!
"It is therefore extremely difficult to speak to just how heat would transfer throughout the structure. "
Why is it 'extremely difficult' when we know the what the coulombs were made of, the blueprints, we can re design the whole thing!
"I find it extremely unlikely, however, that the heat from the 93rd floor (WTC 1) or the 77th floor (WTC 2) would reach the ground in any appreciable amount of time."
It could be very possible for the heat to change the coulomb at the bottom 0.01c of a degree over 1 hour. That may seem little but when you measure from the ground going up the coulomb it will increase.
"that's not going make it easier to get rid of the heat. "
Well if it reaches the bottom or the coulombs in the floors below it means that the heat is dispersing. 2 inch thick steel would disperse the office fires quite well, they would even get to warping/buckeling/collapse in on itself point.
Why did they find pools of molten steel at the bottom during the cleanup? (pic below)
@urweak
"http://i50.tinypic.com/2ntza76.jpg"
They all snapped at once, this would have happened from demolition charges, not office fires/jetfuell ball
"The terrorists would make a bomb in a similar manner to the one used in the Oklahoma City Bombing by Timothy McVeigh."
Cool it could happen, is anyone arguing this happened in 9/11 except for that sarcastic quote story done by Tiax?
"As an expert in the field, do you happen to know the shear strength of the floors within WTC 1 & 2? And just out of curiosity, what institute of higher education did you earn your degree at?"
No I have not gone and tested it myself but I have reference, it is known by others 2,400+ on this site http://www.ae911truth.org/
Adelaide Uni
"To be fair, Afghanistan's wealth is in it's Minerals, not it's oil. I think people talk about oil because they equate the Middle East as being some kind of oil mecca."
Its for the private companies to profit, they don't give a ***** about Americas debt, they are just using it for their own benefit... pretty fascist!
Legacy: Dark Depths, Pox, Eldrazi Agro
Vintage: Dark Depths, Grey Orge
Pauper: Faerie Ninja
7pt Highlander: BW Combo
EDH: Horobi, (t)Toshiro, (t)Isamaru