Research 9/11

[ConcreteSchlyrd]

and there is some purely scientific evidence concerning the collapse.

You're right. Intense heat and fire weaken metals and gravity is still a bitch.

[Tone]

You're right. Intense heat and fire weaken metals and gravity is still a bitch.

intense heat and fire doesnt cause steel frame buildings to collaspse and never has, especially demolition style with explosives

[ConcreteSchlyrd]

Has someone ever put tens of thousands of gallons of highly flammable jet fuel into a concrete and steel skyscraper and lit it on fire before? Have they tested that tone? Are you a fucking idiot?

[T3l Ca7]

Just between you and me, kz? The whole squad of Pallie were thrilled when they heard the news. They knew, deep inside, they were all a slightly smarter ass after all those intelligent people died on the sept 11th. If they were not dumb, a disaster like this will never become a good news.

[ConcreteSchlyrd]

Please, let all the idiots line up.

[Tone]

Has someone ever put tens of thousands of gallons of highly flammable jet fuel into a concrete and steel skyscraper and lit it on fire before? Have they tested that tone? Are you a fucking idiot?

yes they have dumbass

http://www.wtc7.net/buildingfires.html

In the mid-1990s British Steel and the Building Research Establishment performed a series of six experiments at Cardington to investigate the behavior of steel frame buildings. These experiments were conducted in a simulated, eight-story building. Secondary steel beams were not protected. Despite the temperature of the steel beams reaching 800-900 C (1,500-1,700 F) in three of the tests (well above the traditionally assumed critical temperature of 600 C (1,100 F), no collapse was observed in any of the six experiments).

keep it comming

[Tone]

Eyewitness Reports Persist Of
Bombs At WTC Collapse

http://www.rense.com/general17/eyewi...rtspersist.htm

[ConcreteSchlyrd]

I'm done here.

[T3l Ca7]

Make love, not war! ... then spread the AIDS


@_@

[Theif of Time]

First of all: Logic. Amazing thing, isn't it. Anyway, this is a site that displays logical fallacies (errors) and how to disprove them.

Correct me If I'm wrong, but the world trade centre was not eight stories high. These tests cannot be applied to it. Conc said Gravity is a bitch. So true. Would you concede that even one floor may have collapsed under both #1: The vertical weight of the floors above it #2 The impact of the plane (which is minimal due to design of building) and #3 the heating of the steel supports, and that the building falling on itself essentially crushed itself under its own weight?

Aside from all that, I personally am sceptical of the credibility of most things found on the internet.

[Kolar]

http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101.../anumbers.html
"1800°F
Estimated temperature of the fires ignited by the jet fuel"

1022°F = Temperature at which steel loses half its strength; it melts at about 2500°F

The fires were well above those tests. Added to this the impact, size and weight of the building...

Isn't it more plausible that the terrorist attacked the US and that this kind of attack, although planned for and measures were taken, was never conceived of as a real threat? Even if they were working with the Bush Admin to do this, would it be even easier and more economically realistic to just fly the planes into the buildings?

[Theif of Time]

Wow, it seems that there is contradictory facts on this thing called the internet? Wtf?

But I think Kolar is correct.

[Tone]

1022°F = Temperature at which steel loses half its strength; it melts at about 2500°F

The fires were well above those tests. Added to this the impact, size and weight of the building...

.... and nothing happens, as shown in the experiments above and the worse sky scraper fire ever, the interstate bank building back in 1989 and every other sky scraper fire. certainly witnesses and seismigraphs do not hear explosions and buildings do not crumble strait down as if demolished

[Theif of Time]

buildings do not crumble strait down as if demolished

On the contrary, they are built to collapse straight down, regardless of where the damage is sustained, rather than tip over and cause countless more damage.

http://tuftsjournal.tufts.edu/archiv...ures/wtc.shtml This being a journal, peer reviewed, such things generally have better credibilities than .com websites.

"The building still had to carry the massive loads of higher floors above the plane crash location.

"the heat could have weakened the floor systems above, as well as the floor-to-column connections. This combination caused the top-down collapse, producing a domino effect.

The exterior columns that formed the outside tube of the World Trade Center buildings guided the self-contained collapse within these buildings.

And, if you'll read Kolar's post, you'll see that 1800F is the estimated temp at which jet fuel burns. That is way above the temperature at which it loses half its strength. I've seen material strength vs temp data: after the half point (in this case 1022°F) the material gets significantly softer. Enough to support a building?
So saying that "Nothing happens" is quite ignorant. Unless of course, you suspect that his data is innaccurate.

[Tone]

On the contrary, they are built to collapse straight down, regardless of where the damage is sustained, rather than tip over and cause countless more damage.

http://tuftsjournal.tufts.edu/archiv...ures/wtc.shtml This being a journal, peer reviewed, such things generally have better credibilities than .com websites.


And, if you'll read Kolar's post, you'll see that 1800F is the estimated temp at which jet fuel burns. That is way above the temperature at which it loses half its strength. I've seen material strength vs temp data: after the half point (in this case 1022°F) the material gets significantly softer. Enough to support a building?
So saying that "Nothing happens" is quite ignorant. Unless of course, you suspect that his data is innaccurate.

did you know the second tower to get hit basically got nicked in the corner no where near the center beams and most the fuel spilled out of it on impact? the other tower to a direct hit strait in with all the fuel in their and fell second. im sure the excuse was that the impact on the second was lower