What’s your point with a link to an article that talks about Stewart’s crash? We already knew he crashed.
By the way, one minor point in that article was wrong. It says the intercept took 20 minutes, when it was more like an hour and 20 minutes. Read the NTSB accident report summary and note the times, paying close attention to which time zone they refer to.
What relevance does thermite have to 9/11, again?
Very true. (Wild claims to the contrary notwithstanding.) More than half the victims in the towers have been identified through DNA analysis of nearly 20,000 tissue samples found in the wreckage. Claims that all the debris was casually dumped without being examined are ludicrous in light of those efforts.
It took them over a year to fully clear the site. They still have many of the more ‘interesting’ pieces (i.e. pieces that relate to the collapse) in several warehouses (or they did as of the NatGeo special in 9/11, since this was one of the things they examined).
So…yes, they kept and examined all of the relevant pieces that they could identify, and no, they didn’t hastily clear the debris and sell it to China or some other loopy shit like that.
-XT
That’s good, but I just have a simple question: can fire make steel soft?
In case this needs further elaboration, can heat make steel soft enough to bend before it actually melts? Or, alternately, does steel remain solid and strong right up to the moment it melts?
That’s basically the same question asked three times. I eagerly await your answer, since I have follow-up questions.
I think he’s saying that since thermite is hot enough to melt steel, we can look at the temperature of a thermite reaction to see what color molten steel is, and that video shows red-hot stuff. But it’s since been explained to him that the red-hot stuff in that video is not the part that’s hot enough to melt steel.
Let’s ask another question. Say during the building of either of the towers - before any fittings or anything were put in - there was a catastrophe at the top, would the whole framework have been expected to just collapse?
And by the way, ironbender, the fact that there were very high temperatures in the debris pile for days or weeks at the WTC, does not in any way indicate the use of thermite or explosives. Thermite contains all the chemical elements required for its reaction, so will react within a few seconds and be done. The only way that high temps could be sustained for days or weeks is by fires that require oxygen, and the oxygen was getting to them slowly. That’s why underground fires commonly burn for a long time.
Evidence of high temps in the debris pile is only evidence that there was combustible material in the pile. It cannot be evidence of thermite or explosives.
A military variant of thermite (nano thermite) could have been used to cut the main supports of the WTC. I’ve seen pictures of some of the core supports, and they do look like very sharp, well defined cuts. We will never get a chance to look at the WTC steel; most of it was rapidly melted down and shipped off to other countries.
The Payne Stewart link I posted was first reported by the Washington Post. I did not make up the facts I used in my posts.
The speaker in the video I linked to gives his own engineering credentials, as do many others that question 9/11.
As for the steel, I will agree that when the melting is taking place it will look white. That does not disprove my point. I’ve linked two videos that shows that once it starts to cool, it can look red, orange, and yellow. But still be liquid and flowing.
In fact, there are videos and pictures on the internet that show spots in the WTC looking just like the thermite video I linked.
There is no way an office fire can do that. That is not my opinion, that is fact.
Impossible to say for certain, but there are numerous examples of ironwork catastrophes that involve cascade failures. What kind of top-floor catastrophe did you have in mind? A single falling girder slams against some others?
To reiterate my earlier question - can fire make steel soft? I’m not talking flowing liquid, just bendable with much less force than at room temperature.
I’m familiar with the line of “reasoning”. I just want someone who promotes one of these theories to tell me just what thermite has to do with building demolition.
Cite for thermite being used to cut steel support beams laterally?
Cite for “most” of WTC steel being rapidly melted and shipped to other countries?
An inexplicable failure of all the supports on a couple of floors, on one side of the building, for example. Without the added element of fire-weakening, would the tower still be expected to collapse?
Also, regarding the actual event, if it was the weight of the debris above destroying everything below, why would any of the core’s stucture still be left standing? Or was that just the part of the tower the heat hadn’t reached and was therefore more resistant?
Did they fall at near free-fall speed like the WTC? It’s never happened before.
Well, I wouldn’t be shocked if it did.
I’m not clear on why the speed of the collapse is significant. How far from free-fall should it have been? What’s so unprecedented about this particular collapse?
And please answer the easy question - can fire make steel soft?
I said could have been used. No one really knows for sure right now. I can show you pictures of the steel core supports from the WTC. Nice clean, sharp cuts. The steel being shipped out was all over MSM. I can look it up for you, but do yourself a favor.
I know everyone is trying to discredit me on the basis of the color of metled steel. The engineer I linked to agrees with me. It can be red, orange, yellow, white depending on the temperature. It can also be any one of these colors and still be liquid and flowing.
There is no way an office fire fueled by jet fuel can do that.
According to www.asce.org when it reviewed the report it did. You realize your implicating this organization with over 120 000 members as part of the conspiracy now ?
Yes, fire will soften steel. I never said it wouldn’t.
Free-fall speed is important because the building can’t fall through its self without encountering its main structural members. This will cause resistance, and slow the speed of the fall down. This was especially the case with the WTC; the support was bundled tightly in the middle of the buildings. The outside was a facade.
Please show a picture and document that the damage was done during or prior to collapse. I have seen picture of beams with sharp cuts made during the cleanup, and I suspect this is what you are talking about.
This is entirely untrue. The outer shell of the WTC was structural. The gravity loads were split between the inner core columns and the outer structural beams.