# WTC7 collapse, new numerical results **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 11, 2019, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc7-collapse-new-numerical-results/840064 "2019-09-11T19:35:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2019, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc7-collapse-new-numerical-results/840064/141 "2019-09-13T18:52:28Z")
> [@LAZombie](#): > > Did you read your own cite? > > None of the changes were would have mitigated the fires. Saved lives, yes. But I did not read anything about reducing flammables and fires themselves. These two don’t have anything to do with reducing flammables and fires themselves? > [@](#): > > [ul] > [li]A higher standard for fire resistance in high-rise buildings more than 420 feet tall;[/li][li]More robust fire proofing for buildings more than 75 feet tall, which will be less likely to be dislodged by impacts or explosions;[/li][/ul] ---
**Author:** ![LAZombie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/b38774/32.png) [@LAZombie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LAZombie)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2019, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc7-collapse-new-numerical-results/840064/142 "2019-09-13T19:14:32Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > These two don’t have anything to do with reducing flammables and fires themselves? No, they don’t. They only require that there are greater protections from the fires not a reduction in the fires. True changes would be the reduction in flammable materials that posters and NIST are claiming fueled the massive fires in the 911 attacks. ---
**Author:** ![AlsoNamedBort](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alsonamedbort/32/3213_2.png) [@AlsoNamedBort](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AlsoNamedBort)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2019, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc7-collapse-new-numerical-results/840064/143 "2019-09-13T19:17:24Z")
> [@LAZombie](#): > > No, they don’t. They only require that there are greater protections from the fires not a reduction in the fires. > > True changes would be the reduction in flammable materials that posters and NIST are claiming fueled the massive fires in the 911 attacks. So, are you saying the International Code Council is in on it as well? ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2019, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc7-collapse-new-numerical-results/840064/144 "2019-09-13T19:17:35Z")
The problem with many of these 9/11 Truther debates is that the Truthers are always in the position of the challengers, and the people who believe the actual story (not sure the name for them - “normies?”) are in the position of the defenders. And the challengers are simply the ones who get to pick apart and ask questions away while the normies have to keep defending. So let’s flip the tables a bit. Here in this thread, \*\*LaZombie \*\*and \*\*namahoo \*\*are the CT-ers. Why don’t you tell us for a moment who you think really did 9/11, and then lay out your case for your theory? The U.S. government? Some secret faction or group? It’s not fair for us to be defending all the time, and you to be asking/challenging all the time. Tell us about your beliefs for once. ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2019, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc7-collapse-new-numerical-results/840064/145 "2019-09-13T19:18:36Z")
> [@LAZombie](#): > > No, they don’t. They only require that there are greater protections from the fires not a reduction in the fires. > > True changes would be the reduction in flammable materials that posters and NIST are claiming fueled the massive fires in the 911 attacks. You mean like jet fuel? I’ve always wondered why buildings needed tanks full of that stuff. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2019, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc7-collapse-new-numerical-results/840064/146 "2019-09-13T19:19:43Z")
> [@LAZombie](#): > > No, they don’t. They only require that there are greater protections from the fires not a reduction in the fires. > > True changes would be the reduction in flammable materials that posters and NIST are claiming fueled the massive fires in the 911 attacks. You mean the papers, furniture, computers, and all that stuff that you need to have in an office to make it an office? Yeah, I’m not sure why they’re not getting rid of that stuff. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2019, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc7-collapse-new-numerical-results/840064/147 "2019-09-13T19:22:45Z")
> [@LAZombie](#): > > No, they don’t. They only require that there are greater protections from the fires not a reduction in the fires. > > True changes would be the reduction in flammable materials that posters and NIST are claiming fueled the massive fires in the 911 attacks. I agree. There should immediately be a new law that limits the amount of jet fuel allowed in an office building over 400 feet tall. edited to add: darn you, **running coach**! ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2019, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc7-collapse-new-numerical-results/840064/148 "2019-09-13T19:42:59Z")
> [@LAZombie](#): > > Are gasoline, diesel fuel, jet fuel, and rocket fuel different in any significant way? While they are all combustible and dangerous, jet fuel may not burn efficiently without certain conditions such as pressure and proper vaporization. Jet fuel has a much lower volatility than gasoline. One could argue that much of the jet fuel never even burned but simply spilled away. Without some sort of containment, the fuel may have burned so quickly that could not do the damage that is claimed. That’s what I’m asking. > > I don’t have that answer and posting a link to a Living Color video doesn’t help. > > Beyond that, why was the fire so devastating? Doesn’t New York have fire inspectors that would mandate non flammable furnishings and limiting the amount flammable substances. It seems to me if the approved narrative is true, massive changes to the fire code are needed. Why haven’t they been changed? Why was the fire so devastating? Well, you are in luck! [Here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FVAzn1Yuz8) is a link to National Geographics brand new! (in 2009) video on they had done on simulating the WTC Tower 1 (North Tower) and how and why it caught fire and why it was so devastating. Basically, what you are saying above is sort of kind of right wrt jet fuel (JP-A is I think what would have been in the jets in question) wrt it not exploding in normal conditions. But the conditions were extreme, as what happened to the jet fuel tanks on the planes going into the towers. This video specifically goes over the simulation for the tower we are talking about that hit WTC 7, so it’s relevant to the thread. I’m certain that after carefully watching the video and gaining some understanding of the environment, including modeling of the fluid dynamic involved, you are now convinced…right?? ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2019, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc7-collapse-new-numerical-results/840064/149 "2019-09-13T19:46:01Z")
> [@running\_coach](#): > > You mean like jet fuel? I’ve always wondered why buildings needed tanks full of that stuff. It’s for when you absolutely positively need to burn the place to the ground to cover something up, or start a land war somewhere in Asia. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2019, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc7-collapse-new-numerical-results/840064/150 "2019-09-13T19:54:19Z")
Ok, just had to add [this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FzF1KySHmUA) (slightly newer…2015) video where the guy is talking about jet fuel and structural steel. Really more for the entertainment value, as I think mostly the 9/11 crowd has finally figured out how stupid they looked with the ‘jet fuel can’t melt steel’ argument. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2019, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc7-collapse-new-numerical-results/840064/151 "2019-09-13T19:55:26Z")
> [@LAZombie](#): > > No, they don’t. They only require that there are greater protections from the fires not a reduction in the fires. > > True changes would be the reduction in flammable materials that posters and NIST are claiming fueled the massive fires in the 911 attacks. What do you think really happened in regards to the 9-11 disaster? ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2019, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc7-collapse-new-numerical-results/840064/152 "2019-09-13T20:01:14Z")
> [@XT](#): > > Why was the fire so devastating? Well, you are in luck! [Here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_FVAzn1Yuz8) is a link to National Geographics brand new! (in 2009) video on they had done on simulating the WTC Tower 1 (North Tower) and how and why it caught fire and why it was so devastating. Basically, what you are saying above is sort of kind of right wrt jet fuel (JP-A is I think what would have been in the jets in question) wrt it not exploding in normal conditions. But the conditions were extreme, as what happened to the jet fuel tanks on the planes going into the towers. This video specifically goes over the simulation for the tower we are talking about that hit WTC 7, so it’s relevant to the thread. I’m certain that after carefully watching the video and gaining some understanding of the environment, including modeling of the fluid dynamic involved, you are now convinced…right?? Hey, its a Youtube video that supports what I already want believe! That’s all the evidence I need. We can close the thread now. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2019, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc7-collapse-new-numerical-results/840064/153 "2019-09-13T20:03:24Z")
> [@Buck\_Godot](#): > > Hey, its a Youtube video that supports what I already want believe! That’s all the evidence I need. We can close the thread now. Actually, it’s a National Geographic video that just happens to be on YouTube. The second video I posted is definitely a Youtube video that simply supports my joy at the use of the (to paraphrase the guy on the video) phrase ‘you people are morons’, which I fully support. Yes, we can close the thread now. Unless you had something to add? ---
**Author:** ![davidm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidm/32/225_2.png) [@davidm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidm)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2019, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc7-collapse-new-numerical-results/840064/154 "2019-09-13T20:05:07Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Former Strategic Air Command Crew Chief here. > Jet fuel is combustible. That’s ridiculous. If jet fuel were combustible there’d by planes exploding all over the sky. No one would be safe from falling debris. ---
**Author:** ![Horatius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/horatius/32/3572_2.png) [@Horatius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Horatius)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2019, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc7-collapse-new-numerical-results/840064/155 "2019-09-13T20:14:55Z")
> [@LAZombie](#): > > Did you read your own cite? > > None of the changes were would have mitigated the fires. Saved lives, yes. But I did not read anything about reducing flammables and fires themselves. Okay, so what does this say about your alleged conspirators? They were sophisticated enough to covertly wire two or three giant buildings for demolition, let 19 terrorist hijackers into the country, get the planes to hit the buildings right where the preplanted explosives were placed, and then cover up all the evidence that would have literally been strewn over many blocks of New York City while essentially every TV camera in the city were pointed at them. And yet, somehow they couldn’t get anyone to add a fake recommendation directed to “reducing flammables and fires themselves” that they blamed the collapses on. Does that seem reasonable to you? ---
**Author:** ![QuickSilver](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quicksilver/32/7832_2.png) [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2019, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc7-collapse-new-numerical-results/840064/156 "2019-09-13T20:20:48Z")
> [@Horatius](#): > > Does that seem reasonable to you? Take it easy, man. He’s just asking questions. ---
**Author:** ![Just\_Asking\_Questions](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba9def/32.png) [@Just\_Asking\_Questions](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Just_Asking_Questions)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2019, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc7-collapse-new-numerical-results/840064/157 "2019-09-13T20:52:28Z")
> [@snfaulkner](#): > > Here’s a test of a plane wreck that doesn’t even require full disintegration of the plane. See those huge flames? > > [https://youtu.be/G7lBeaceQKg](https://youtu.be/G7lBeaceQKg) Ironically, part of that crash was a test of a new anti-misting fuel additive that was supposed to _reduce_ risk of fire. The plane was supposed to hit the ground level and the fixed metal “wing cutters” were supposed to slice the tanks open. But the airplane came down “crooked” to the wing cutters and, well, you saw the result. Proving that there is no such thing as a “normal” crash. ---
**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 13, 2019, 10:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc7-collapse-new-numerical-results/840064/158 "2019-09-13T22:21:39Z")
> [@LAZombie](#): > > Are gasoline, diesel fuel, jet fuel, and rocket fuel different in any significant way? While they are all combustible and dangerous, jet fuel may not burn efficiently without certain conditions such as pressure and proper vaporization. It could be that “jet fuel may not burn efficiently without certain conditions such as pressure and proper vaporization”… I don’t really know. However in the particular case of the 9/11 planes into the WTC the jet fuel burned REAL efficient-like. It blowed up real good. Remember the huge fireball when the plane hit the building? So whatever the nuances and possibilities of the combustibility of jet fuel, whether that day was a freak occurrence or would happen every time, on 9/11 you witnessed on TV the combustibility of jet fuel. Unless you believe that the huge fireball was part of the “controlled demolition”? ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2019, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc7-collapse-new-numerical-results/840064/159 "2019-09-13T22:26:34Z")
> [@I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](#): > > So whatever the nuances and possibilities of the combustibility of jet fuel, whether that day was a freak occurrence or would happen every time, on 9/11 you witnessed on TV the combustibility of jet fuel. **Unless you believe that the huge fireball was part of the “controlled demolition”?** (bolding mine) I’ve actually seen that particular CT in the wild; a “Hollywood explosion” followed by conventional demolition charges. Never mind the fact that any conventional charges present would have been heard throughout lower Manhattan and probably across the river in New Jersey as well. ---
**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 13, 2019, 10:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc7-collapse-new-numerical-results/840064/160 "2019-09-13T22:36:07Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Not only do they not have rules for humungous passenger jets flying into buildings, would you believe they have no regs concerning massive meteor strikes?? But do they have rules for Cthulhu-ian crises? And what are the rules for flamethrowing mices? Would it matter if King Kong struck a match? While atop Empire State, swatting jet-fighters, natch! Is it alright to roast God on a spit? (Zeus, Yahweh, or Xenu, don’t matter a bit) How does the Fire Code protect us from ETs? Can they shoot 20’s Death rays, violating our Treaties? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc7-collapse-new-numerical-results/840064.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wtc7-collapse-new-numerical-results/840064.md?page=9)