9/11 was an inside job

Status
Not open for further replies.
And all fires have hot spots. In one building there was molten metal seen dripping out of one corner, where a majority of the aircraft had ended up. This is logically aluminum, and the melting point of aluminum is around 1200 degrees F. A few hours of that near supporting beams, and all that was required is to lower the material's strength, not even get it glowing hot. We see plenty of examples of buckling sides before the collapse, and eventually one failure multiplied.
 
Rhaedas said:
And all fires have hot spots. In one building there was molten metal seen dripping out of one corner, where a majority of the aircraft had ended up. This is logically aluminum, and the melting point of aluminum is around 1200 degrees F. A few hours of that near supporting beams, and all that was required is to lower the material's strength, not even get it glowing hot. We see plenty of examples of buckling sides before the collapse, and eventually one failure multiplied.
Click to expand...

Good points. And the burning temperature of Aluminum is 6920°F! (it's used in rocket fuel)
 
psikeyhackr said:
Is everyone supposed to be impressed?
Click to expand...

Nope. I don't even expect you to read my replies; just search them for key words.

I presume you do not expect people to research what you say. They are just supposed to take you word. The fuel will only get to very high temperatures in a controlled burn where the air is properly mixed with the fuel. That will only happen under controlled conditions like in an engine or foundry.
Click to expand...

Complete nonsense. Crashes have resulted in fuel fires that have melted the (aluminum) aircraft, which meant the fire reached around 1200F. Ten minutes of research would have revealed this to you.

So according to the data for which I provided sources it will not raise the temperature enough for the metal to even glow in the dark.
Click to expand...

Reality disagrees with your guesses.
 
psikeyhackr

Er...what was all that supposed to show, that you were wrong at the start of AFT and you haven't learned anything since? Do you think error gets better with age? Or associates?

So the floors with trusses you talk about are not subsystems?
Click to expand...

The ONLY thing that got heavier toward the bottom was the gauge and strength of the perimeter frame pieces and the thickness of the core columns, 86 of the floors were identical and none of them supported any weight from any other floor, above or below. The frame and core were the only vertical weight bearing structures. There was no weight bearing concrete in that building above ground level outside of the floors designated for machinery(3 of them), and the basements are irrelevant to the collapse, in fact, all the floors more than several floors below the impact/fire areas have nothing to do with the collapses as by the time it reached them the energy was approaching the atomic bomb range(all that potential energy became kinetic).

After all of these years shouldn't the experts be able to tell us the tons of steel and tons of concrete that were on every level?
Click to expand...

Did you miss this, or just ignore it?

As an example of one of his falsehoods it is fairly easy to find how much concrete was in the Towers above ground.

One floor was an area of 208^2 feet=~40,000 square feet. The core was 138 by 78 or ~11,000 square feet. The concrete on the floor trusses was 4 inches(a third of a foot)deep giving us ~10,000 cubic feet of concrete on each of 86 floors at 110 lbs per cubic foot gives us about 5000 tons in the floors for each of the 86 floors which were identical in construction. The cores were 2/3 elevator shafts so it had 3500 sq ft of 6 inch normal concrete at 160 lbs per cubic foot gives us 272,000 lbs for a total amount of concrete for each floor of about 5236 tons.

Mechanical floors were easier, just multiply area(~40,000)times depth(.5) gives 20,000 times weight/cu ft(160) equals ~3.2 million pounds or about 16,000 tons(times three mechanical floors).

There was about 500,000 tons of concrete in either tower above ground, only about 50,000 of it structural.

That is the total of all concrete above the ground floor and with a little intelligence the distribution can be easily derived as well. Why couldn't psi get these results despite all his years of searching? Because he considers keyword searches to be thinking.
Click to expand...

There are about 5236 tons of concrete on each of 86 floors, 16,000 tons of concrete in each of the mechanical floors and no other concrete above ground level. This is derived from information contained in the NIST reports through simple arithmetic and logic. The same simple calculations can be done by your average 5th grader with similar information in there about the steel specs. You could have done this years ago(in theory, at least)but something tells me you are more interested in the talking point than in the information.

Grumpy:cool:
 
spidergoat said:
752 degrees F is still well within the range of temperatures that are possible in a fire. In fact I have read that 1000 degrees F is not at all impossible.
Click to expand...

And what is the specific heat steel?

And how many tons of steel were in the fire?

Just because a fire is 1000 degrees F does not mean the steel will reach that temperature quickly. That is the problem with the buildings coming down less than two hours after the impacts. Believers don't need to apply real physics and ask obvious questions. Just talking about the temperature of the fire without talking about the quantity of steel is complete nonsense.

psik
 
Only one floor had to be weakened, and there was a massive amount of flammable material in the building.
 
You're right, in fact, not even one floor. Enough supports to overload the others.

But each planes took out large parts of multiple floors. So there were various opportunities of failure.
 
Grumpy said:
Did you miss this, or just ignore it?

One floor was an area of 208^2 feet=~40,000 square feet. The core was 138 by 78 or ~11,000 square feet. The concrete on the floor trusses was 4 inches(a third of a foot)deep giving us ~10,000 cubic feet of concrete on each of 86 floors at 110 lbs per cubic foot gives us about 5000 tons in the floors for each of the 86 floors which were identical in construction.
Click to expand...

ROFLMAO

208^2 feet=43,264
138*78=10,764

43,264-10,764 = 32,500

4 inches(a third of a foot)

WOW! You can divide!

The concrete was poured onto corrugated pans. The thickness varied between 4 and 5 inches. I use 4.333 inches in my calculations, which is 0.361 foot. I have seen pictures of the edge.

32,500 sq. ft. * 0.361 ft * 110 lb/cu.ft = 1,290,575 pounds

That is 645.28 tons.

That is not 5,000 tons. That 208 feet is the EXTERNAL width of the building and the perimeter columns are 14 inches wide. So if you are claiming that each of those 86 concrete floors was 5,000 tons then your own data does not support your claim. Your data is wrong and your calculation is wrong and you expect me to read that crap.

I read it to explain its stupidity.

There was about 500,000 tons of concrete in either tower above ground, only about 50,000 of it structural.
Click to expand...

You need to do some more research. 500,000 tons is usually given for the total weight of the buildings including the steel and there was 100,000 tons of that in each tower. That 425,000 cubic yards of concrete comes to a little more than 300,000 tons per tower. Your CLAIMS are a bunch of crap and you don't check your data.

You can say whatever stupidly incorrect trash you want since some people believe whatever you say. :D

psik
 
Last edited:
psikeyhackr

So your claims that in all those years nobody knew how much concrete and steel was in those buildings is a lie, whether your math is correct or mine is those facts can be discerned by any competent mathematician(which I make no claim to be). Also, why keep claiming nobody knows the steel distribution, when it's plain that they do? All the information is contained in the NIST reports as well as information on how heat affects steel, what temperatures microscopic examination reveals the steel reached, damage and fire patterns, etc. Don't like my math ? Then do your own research.

Oh, and can a ten foot rod of steel be heated to a glow before you have to let go of the other end? Of course it can. There was more than ten feet between floors, so your claim that steel in the towers would carry the heat away before they became as hot as their environment is just another stupid, false claim.

Grumpy:cool:
 
Grumpy said:
psikeyhackr

So your claims that in all those years nobody knew how much concrete and steel was in those buildings is a lie, whether your math is correct or mine is those facts can be discerned by any competent mathematician(which I make no claim to be).
Click to expand...

I am not saying nobody knew. I can't read the minds of everyone on the planet. But the information is not readily available and people who must know what information is necessary to solve the problem are not demanding it. When has Richard Gage discussed the distributions of steel and concrete down the towers?

That is just great Grumpy. You are not saying my math is wrong but implying that yours may be correct even though grade school kids should be able to check it.

I guess the people who follow you can't do math for themselves. Presumably you rely on that.

psik
 
Last edited:
Hey, as long as you are ignoring the political ramifications of the massive failures of the Bush administration to heed the intelligence pointing to an immanent attack, it's all good.
 
psikeyhackr said:
Don't you love how Grumpy gets his data and math all wrong, but then you would not have noticed. :D

psik
Click to expand...


Looked right to me. He didn't have any small mounds of paper and washers to represent the frame of an enormous building with completely different dynamics, though.
 
markl323

sorry to interrupt. things have gotten a lot more serious:
Click to expand...

Yes, infowars has nearly reached critical mass in the echo chamber, prepare for the shock wave when all the Troother's heads implode simultaneously. The skull can only stand up to a certain level of vacuum, you know.

Grumpy:cool:
 
GeoffP said:
Looked right to me. He didn't have any small mounds of paper and washers to represent the frame of an enormous building with completely different dynamics, though.
Click to expand...

ROFLMAO

I am so upset that you can advertise that you can't do simple math.

:D :D :D

Believers do not require evidence. So you can't comprehend Potential Energy, Kinetic Energy, and yield strength.

An earlier report on Digital Journal found that the claims made in the documentary can be verified by reading the government reports themselves. The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the government agency charged with the investigation, did not provide any data -- no measurements or estimates -- of the mass or energy that would be required to bring down the buildings in about ten seconds. Normally a scientific report would present all the data that is used to construct a theory. The omission of data is a red flag to anyone familiar with scientific procedure. It appears that the investigators may have intentionally produced reports that the scientific community would reject.
Click to expand...

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/332051#tab=comments&sc=1530297#ixzz26NzSTG1P

But most of the so called "scientific community" has not said squat in 11 years.

psik
 
Grumpy said:
Yes, infowars has nearly reached critical mass in the echo chamber, prepare for the shock wave when all the Troother's heads implode simultaneously.
Click to expand...

One day soon we will have the following events coincide:

Another "Loose Change" movie
A new creationist movie, say "No intelligence allowed II"
A NEW REPORT by Rossi on cold fusion (sorry, "low energy nuclear reactions")
A blog post on who was really on the grassy knoll during the JFK assassination
Someone from Area 51 who has an authentic alien hat
A right winger with Obama's Kenyan birth certificate

And the implosions will begin.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top