# Skyscrapers on fire, not collapsing **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 12, 2010, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541 "2010-09-12T22:53:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![psikeyhackr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/97f17d/32.png) [@psikeyhackr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/psikeyhackr)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2010, 2:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/101 "2010-09-19T02:24:47Z")
Try finding ACCURATE information on the tons of steel and tons of concrete on every level of any skyscraper. Maybe you will eventually run across a table by Gregory Urich. But actually he admits his is wrong because he did a linear interpolation on the exterior wall panels. But without accurate distribution of mass data how could the airliner impact or fire or collapse be scientifically analyzed? How much did the south tower deflect when it was hit by an airliner doing 540 mph? **FIFTEEN INCHES** Now we are supposed to believe the whole thing practically crumbled to dust 56 minutes after impact when it only moved 15 inches and oscillated for four minutes after impact. But then there was the FIRE. So there were 10,000 gallons of jet fuel sometimes known as kerosene. If you could burn that with 100% efficiency, which cannot happen in an open air fire, you will only get so much energy. If you could put all of that energy into 1 ton of steel at 75 deg F it will raise the temperature to some specific level. But if you put it into 10 tons it will raise it to a lower temperature and if 100 tons then much lower still. So talking about the fire weakening the steel without talking about the QUANTITY OF STEEL is nonsense. So there are about at least three different reasons for wanting to know the tons of steel and tons of concrete that were on every level of the towers. So how is it our EXPERTS haven’t demanded it and made it available in NINE YEARS? Yeah we have a serious science education problem in the nation that put men on the Moon. [![]( " - YouTube") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0wk4qG2mIg) :smack: psik ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2010, 2:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/102 "2010-09-19T02:30:07Z")
> [@psikeyhackr](#): > > But then there was the FIRE. So there were 10,000 gallons of jet fuel sometimes known as kerosene. If you could burn that with 100% efficiency, which cannot happen in an open air fire, you will only get so much energy. If you could put all of that energy into 1 ton of steel at 75 deg F it will raise the temperature to some specific level. But if you put it into 10 tons it will raise it to a lower temperature and if 100 tons then much lower still. So talking about the fire weakening the steel without talking about the QUANTITY OF STEEL is nonsense. This is why nobody of any reasoning skills takes you guys seriously. It wasn’t the fuel alone that kept the fire burning, it was a significant amount of furniture and carpeting and whatnot that was set ablaze and accelerated by the fuel. But go ahead and ignore that if it’ll keep your little theory on life support. ---
**Author:** ![Mozart1220](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f1d935/32.png) [@Mozart1220](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mozart1220)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2010, 2:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/103 "2010-09-19T02:53:22Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > > [@psikeyhackr](#): > > > > But then there was the FIRE. So there were 10,000 gallons of jet fuel sometimes known as kerosene. If you could burn that with 100% efficiency, which cannot happen in an open air fire, you will only get so much energy. If you could put all of that energy into 1 ton of steel at 75 deg F it will raise the temperature to some specific level. But if you put it into 10 tons it will raise it to a lower temperature and if 100 tons then much lower still. So talking about the fire weakening the steel without talking about the QUANTITY OF STEEL is nonsense. > > This is why nobody of any reasoning skills takes you guys seriously. It wasn’t the fuel alone that kept the fire burning, it was a significant amount of furniture and carpeting and whatnot that was set ablaze and accelerated by the fuel. > > But go ahead and ignore that if it’ll keep your little theory on life support. Then we get to the inconvenient fact for YOUR 'little theory" and that is that the vast majority of the jet fuel was eliminated in the intitial explosions. the smoke coming from the towers was black. The fires were barely burning a few minutes after the impacts. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2010, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/104 "2010-09-19T03:09:09Z")
> [@Mozart1220](#): > > > [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > > > This is why nobody of any reasoning skills takes you guys seriously. It wasn’t the fuel alone that kept the fire burning, it was a significant amount of furniture and carpeting and whatnot that was set ablaze and accelerated by the fuel. > > > > But go ahead and ignore that if it’ll keep your little theory on life support. > > Then we get to the inconvenient fact for YOUR 'little theory" and that is that the vast majority of the jet fuel was eliminated in the intitial explosions. the smoke coming from the towers was black. The fires were barely burning a few minutes after the impacts. “Eliminated”? It _burned_ in the first few minutes and lit up a whole bunch of stuff already in the towers. “Barely burning” ? The first tower was billowing a huge amount of smoke when the second plane hit, and then both towers kept billowing and showing large and obvious flames until… …eh, what’s the point? You give no indication of caring. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2010, 4:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/105 "2010-09-19T04:46:36Z")
> [@psikeyhackr](#): > > But then there was the FIRE. So there were 10,000 gallons of jet fuel sometimes known as kerosene. If you could burn that with 100% efficiency, which cannot happen in an open air fire, you will only get so much energy. If you could put all of that energy into 1 ton of steel at 75 deg F it will raise the temperature to some specific level. But if you put it into 10 tons it will raise it to a lower temperature and if 100 tons then much lower still. So talking about the fire weakening the steel without talking about the QUANTITY OF STEEL is nonsense. > > So there are about at least three different reasons for wanting to know the tons of steel and tons of concrete that were on every level of the towers. So how is it our EXPERTS haven’t demanded it and made it available in NINE YEARS? > > Yeah we have a serious science education problem in the nation that put men on the Moon. > > psik It doesn’t take a Harvard degree to understand what happened with the WTC buildings. The floor joists sagged because of the heat of the fire. [THIS](http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/fig5.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/jom/0112/eagar/eagar-0112.html&h=321&w=600&sz=12&tbnid=t6Md_MdD_rqSpM:&tbnh=72&tbnw=135&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dfloor%2Bjoist,world%2Btrade%2Bcenter,picture&zoom=1&q=floor+joist,world+trade+center,picture&usg=__Mah4RYtoysJejkMFlghoGDr1aXk=&sa=X&ei=jZOVTPaPBuSQnwfy0dHKBw&ved=0CB8Q9QEwAw) is what a floor joist looks like. It’s not a massive steel beam. It’s not designed to carry the weight of the building. The joists serve 2 functions, to carry the weight of the floor, and to connect the outer and inner columns together so they maintain a vertical stance. As you can see from the picture we aren’t talking about tons of steel being heated, we’re talking about pounds of steel. The floor joists sagged in the fire, they didn’t fail entirely, they sagged. The sagging floor pulled the outer walls inward and they snapped under the tremendous weight from above. ---
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2010, 5:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/106 "2010-09-19T05:27:20Z")
> [@Mozart1220](#): > > > [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > > > This is why nobody of any reasoning skills takes you guys seriously. It wasn’t the fuel alone that kept the fire burning, it was a significant amount of furniture and carpeting and whatnot that was set ablaze and accelerated by the fuel. > > > > But go ahead and ignore that if it’ll keep your little theory on life support. > > Then we get to the inconvenient fact for YOUR 'little theory" and that is that the vast majority of the jet fuel was eliminated in the intitial explosions. the smoke coming from the towers was black. The fires were barely burning a few minutes after the impacts. So… what’s with all the [smoke](http://www.infowars.net/articles/September2008/110908Magnetic.htm)? And the orangey stuff that looks like fire? ---
**Author:** ![I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/i_love_me_vol.i/32/521_2.png) [@I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/I_Love_Me_Vol.I)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2010, 5:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/107 "2010-09-19T05:56:21Z")
> [@Mozart1220](#): > > The buildings were designed to withstand airpcraft impacts And yet, sadly, they did not. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2010, 6:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/108 "2010-09-19T06:04:27Z")
> [@I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](#): > > > [@Mozart1220](#): > > > > The buildings were designed to withstand airpcraft impacts > > And yet, sadly, they did not. While the building was designed to withstand the impact of an airplane the biggest plane at the time was probably a DC-8. Had the insulation not blown off the steel and they had dual water risers the buildings would likely still be standing. ---
**Author:** ![I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/i_love_me_vol.i/32/521_2.png) [@I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/I_Love_Me_Vol.I)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2010, 6:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/109 "2010-09-19T06:21:04Z")
> [@Mozart1220](#): > > Even NY firefighters can be heard saying “It was like one of those controlled explosions, you heard pop, pop, pop, as the buildings came down” Sorry, I know I’m reacting again to the same post some guy threw up two pages ago, and I haven’t even read the rest of the thread yet, but I want to comment on this because after I’d seen video of the first tower collapsing I recall thinking shortly after: _“Shit! That thing came straight down! It didn’t tip over to the side at all! Almost like some controlled demolition!”_ That’s what I thought shortly after seeing it fall, so I can understand some adrenaline-amped NYFD dude thinking something similar. Remember, this was unprecedented and heretofore, unimaginable. However, _before_ my above thought, _immediately_ after seeing the tower fall down I thought: _“Holy fucking shit! Some terrorists crashed a plane into the WTC killing a bunch of people. Now those fuckers have caused that tower to collapse killing how many more? 20,000? 50,000? I can’t believe this!”_ Notice how-- even though I noted how odd it seemed (wrongly, I now realize) that the tower would collapse in amongst itself, I at no point–then, or at any later date–ever considered the loony-wooooo000spin that it was all some bizarre, staged, effectively impossible, controlled conspiracy-theory “inside job” and so I must now join the Tea-Bagging Partiers. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2010, 7:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/110 "2010-09-19T07:33:29Z")
> [@psikeyhackr](#): > > Yeah we have a serious science education problem in the nation that put men on the Moon. Dagnabit! I just replaced that irony meter! ---
**Author:** ![Algorithm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/algorithm/32/12204_2.png) [@Algorithm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Algorithm)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2010, 7:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/111 "2010-09-19T07:46:17Z")
> [@Mozart1220](#): > > the smoke coming from the towers was black. Relevance? Hint: if you say anything about the color of the smoke reflecting the heat of the fires, you lose. ---
**Author:** ![fuzzypickles](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/9d8465/32.png) [@fuzzypickles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fuzzypickles)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2010, 8:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/112 "2010-09-19T08:15:06Z")
> [@psikeyhackr](#): > > Yeah we have a serious science education problem in the nation that put men on the Moon. As if we actually landed on the Moon… 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Mince](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecd19e/32.png) [@Mince](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mince)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2010, 8:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/113 "2010-09-19T08:41:46Z")
> [@Mozart1220](#): > > > [@Lobohan](#): > > > > Jesus merciful fuck, when did every uneducated guy on the street become an expert in skyscraper demolitions. :rolleyes: > > And building 7 was never hit by a plane, and was not effected by jet fuel. Because building 7 was not hit by an aircraft, in order for (whoever you believe orchestrated its collapse) to give a plausible reason for collapse, they needed _something_ to hit the building and start fires. Don’t you think, then, it was ridiculously wonderful serendipity that debris from the collapse of building 2 actually _did_ hit building 7, caused significant damaged, and started a fire? Do you believe the perpetrators controlled the debris from building 2’s collapse so that it hit building 7, giving them their excuse for collapse? Do you believe they were just extremely lucky? Why wait until 5:30 pm, when they surely knew many cameras would be focused on the building, instead of collapsing building 7 in the considerable dust cloud of building 1 or 2’s collapse where there would have been no witnesses? Building 1’s and building 2’s collapse each initiated at the precise point of aircraft impact. How did the explosives used to initiate collapse survive aircraft impact and subsequent fires? ---
**Author:** ![Mince](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ecd19e/32.png) [@Mince](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mince)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2010, 8:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/114 "2010-09-19T08:54:24Z")
> [@Mozart1220](#): > > The fires were barely burning a few minutes after the impacts. Then the several people who jumped from the buildings chose to do so because…? ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Miskatonic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr.miskatonic/32/310_2.png) [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2010, 12:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/115 "2010-09-19T12:10:11Z")
> [@Mozart1220](#): > > The fires were barely burning a few minutes after the impacts. Oh yeah, [barely burning.](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_rLV-ZuNPwJ4/SDTMGkt1P5I/AAAAAAAABh4/HlT2FZTlEKQ/s400/NorthTowerFireGJS-WTC27cropped.jpg) And all those people who jumped rather than burn to death were just overreacting, right? ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2010, 1:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/116 "2010-09-19T13:05:36Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > > [@I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](#): > > > > And yet, sadly, they did not. > > While the building was designed to withstand the impact of an airplane the biggest plane at the time was probably a DC-8. Had the insulation not blown off the steel and they had dual water risers the buildings would likely still be standing. Well, it’s conceivable that even without a collapse, one or both of the towers would have been so significantly damaged as to be deemed unsafe for further use and torn down. Or can you “decapitate” a damaged tower and rebuild the upper half? ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Miskatonic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr.miskatonic/32/310_2.png) [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2010, 1:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/117 "2010-09-19T13:22:55Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Well, it’s conceivable that even without a collapse, one or both of the towers would have been so significantly damaged as to be deemed unsafe for further use and torn down. > > Or can you “decapitate” a damaged tower and rebuild the upper half? The insurance companies for Meridian Plaza in Philly wanted to do just that, but the judges finally said tear the damn thing down and pay out your client. ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2010, 1:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/118 "2010-09-19T13:36:26Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > In fact, the reason airline passengers are instructed to turn off phones isn’t that they’ll interfere with aircraft communications (which are not only much higher signal power but also on a completely different frequency band) but because rapid switching between cells tasks cellular networks. > [@xtisme](#): > > The FAA doesn’t want you to use your phones on a plane, not because they won’t work but because there is a small chance it will interfere with the planes instrumentation. Does anyone have a cite for which of these is true? Or are they both true (communication vs. instrumentation)? ---
**Author:** ![Ibanez](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/a4c791/32.png) [@Ibanez](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibanez)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2010, 1:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/119 "2010-09-19T13:36:48Z")
> [@davidm](#): > > > [@Lute Skywatcher](#): > > > > They also gloss over the fact that the “planted” evidence overwhelmingly pointed at Saudis as opposed to, say, Iraqis. > > Exactly. If it was a false flag operation to justify the invasion of Iraq, they framed the wrong damned people! Also don’t forget they’re masterminds at pulling off the worlds biggest conspiracy but forget to plant and find WMD’s in Iraq. If they could do everything else but forget that. That’s a pretty big D’oh!!! ---
**Author:** ![Mozart1220](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f1d935/32.png) [@Mozart1220](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mozart1220)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2010, 2:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541/120 "2010-09-19T14:01:26Z")
> [@Mr.Miskatonic](#): > > > [@Mozart1220](#): > > > > The fires were barely burning a few minutes after the impacts. > > Oh yeah, [barely burning.](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_rLV-ZuNPwJ4/SDTMGkt1P5I/AAAAAAAABh4/HlT2FZTlEKQ/s400/NorthTowerFireGJS-WTC27cropped.jpg) > > And all those people who jumped rather than burn to death were just overreacting, right? Ever try breathing the smoke from a dying fire? I have when an apartment below me burned and I had to stand in lne to get to the window fire escape. It’s terrifying. We were on the 4th floor and I was actually thinking of taking my chances at the other window. And “barely burning” is reletive. What is a horrible thing to a human being is not much of a problem for steal and concrete. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/skyscrapers-on-fire-not-collapsing/553541.md?page=7)