Topic: 15 disturbing facts about 9/11
no photo
Tue 06/30/15 05:48 AM


1. Typical temperatures of flames. The "adiabatic flame temperature" of a given fuel and oxidizer pair indicates the temperature at which the gases achieve stable combustion. Smoldering cigarette: Temperature without drawing: side of the lit portion; 400 �C (750 �F); middle of the lit portion: 585 �C (1,100 �F)
2. Fire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire

So the fires raged on at 1800 degrees for hours in WT7?

A few desks and office furniture made a fire so hot it weakened steel beams?

When you stand six feet away from a raging campfire you can warm your hands. You cannot put your hands into boiling water. Water boils at 212 degrees.

How far away from the raging fires were the steel beams?


the falling debris ruptured a diesel tank... you didn't add that into the fact...










It would take a lot more than a tank full of diesel to heat up a steel beam enough to lose strength. If it did it would bend and twist, dropping in the melted area first. WT7 came down at free fall speed. Straight down.

no photo
Tue 06/30/15 05:51 AM


1. Typical temperatures of flames. The "adiabatic flame temperature" of a given fuel and oxidizer pair indicates the temperature at which the gases achieve stable combustion. Smoldering cigarette: Temperature without drawing: side of the lit portion; 400 �C (750 �F); middle of the lit portion: 585 �C (1,100 �F)
2. Fire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire

So the fires raged on at 1800 degrees for hours in WT7?

A few desks and office furniture made a fire so hot it weakened steel beams?

When you stand six feet away from a raging campfire you can warm your hands. You cannot put your hands into boiling water. Water boils at 212 degrees.

How far away from the raging fires were the steel beams?

and what has the boiling temperature of water,and the temperature of a Cigarette have to do with the Fires in the WTC?


Do I have to draw you a little picture or can you understand the collapse is about heat?

Conrad_73's photo
Tue 06/30/15 06:26 AM



1. Typical temperatures of flames. The "adiabatic flame temperature" of a given fuel and oxidizer pair indicates the temperature at which the gases achieve stable combustion. Smoldering cigarette: Temperature without drawing: side of the lit portion; 400 �C (750 �F); middle of the lit portion: 585 �C (1,100 �F)
2. Fire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire

So the fires raged on at 1800 degrees for hours in WT7?

A few desks and office furniture made a fire so hot it weakened steel beams?

When you stand six feet away from a raging campfire you can warm your hands. You cannot put your hands into boiling water. Water boils at 212 degrees.

How far away from the raging fires were the steel beams?

and what has the boiling temperature of water,and the temperature of a Cigarette have to do with the Fires in the WTC?


Do I have to draw you a little picture or can you understand the collapse is about heat?
could have sworn it were about Cigarette-smoking Red Herrings!

mightymoe's photo
Tue 06/30/15 08:26 AM



1. Typical temperatures of flames. The "adiabatic flame temperature" of a given fuel and oxidizer pair indicates the temperature at which the gases achieve stable combustion. Smoldering cigarette: Temperature without drawing: side of the lit portion; 400 �C (750 �F); middle of the lit portion: 585 �C (1,100 �F)
2. Fire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire

So the fires raged on at 1800 degrees for hours in WT7?

A few desks and office furniture made a fire so hot it weakened steel beams?

When you stand six feet away from a raging campfire you can warm your hands. You cannot put your hands into boiling water. Water boils at 212 degrees.

How far away from the raging fires were the steel beams?

and what has the boiling temperature of water,and the temperature of a Cigarette have to do with the Fires in the WTC?


Do I have to draw you a little picture or can you understand the collapse is about heat?


draw a picture, please... you seem to know how things can't happen better than me, so a few pictures might help...

mightymoe's photo
Tue 06/30/15 08:27 AM




1. Typical temperatures of flames. The "adiabatic flame temperature" of a given fuel and oxidizer pair indicates the temperature at which the gases achieve stable combustion. Smoldering cigarette: Temperature without drawing: side of the lit portion; 400 �C (750 �F); middle of the lit portion: 585 �C (1,100 �F)
2. Fire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire

So the fires raged on at 1800 degrees for hours in WT7?

A few desks and office furniture made a fire so hot it weakened steel beams?

When you stand six feet away from a raging campfire you can warm your hands. You cannot put your hands into boiling water. Water boils at 212 degrees.

How far away from the raging fires were the steel beams?

and what has the boiling temperature of water,and the temperature of a Cigarette have to do with the Fires in the WTC?


Do I have to draw you a little picture or can you understand the collapse is about heat?
could have sworn it were about Cigarette-smoking Red Herrings!


only if you boil them first...

HotRodDeluxe's photo
Tue 06/30/15 04:57 PM
WT7 came down at free fall speed.


And can you explain what that meme means to you?

a) It didn't come down at free-fall speed. The collapse took 17.5 seconds and free-fall was noted on the NW corner for 2.25 seconds at the 12.5 second mark. Free-fall was actually exceeded for those 2.25 seconds and that throws a BIG spanner in the claims of Gage and Chandler.

Straight down.


The curtain wall yes, and? What does this mean to you?

You seem to attribute some significance to these points.

metalwing's photo
Tue 06/30/15 06:46 PM


tomato stated >>>
"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." --Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

"In the size of the lie there is always contained a certain factor of credibility, since the great mass of people will more easily fall victims to a great lie than to a small one." --Adolph Hitler

"Strange times are these in which we live when old and young are taught in falsehoods school. And the one man that dares to tell the truth is called at once a lunatic and fool." --Plato

"The individual is handicapped by coming face-to-face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists." --J. Edgar Hoover


Oh...come on Tomato...posting 'quotes' from other humans has zero bearing on what Metalwing or Hotroddeluxe have stated!noway

Reading their post and looking at they're data explains loads of my doubt...


"We are on the verge of a global transformation all we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order." --David Rockefeller

David Rockefeller is a coconspirator, which is fashioning a "New World Order" under an "Authoritarian Global Government".

if you think these quotes have no meaning, then im sorry but your a fool.


and yes 2 people on a chat forum say im wrong, and while they both seem pretty intelligent, i'd rather believe actual people such as



Dr. Joel S. Hirschhorn, PhD, Professor of Metallurgical Engineering, "Clearing our minds of the fear of painful truths is essential to clearing our nation of destructive lies. Otherwise, we stay stuck in a delusional democracy. ... Scholars and professionals ... have established beyond any reasonable doubt that the official account of 9/11 is false." (source)

Dr. Joel S. Hirschhorn, BS Metallurgical Engineering, MS Metallurgical Engineering, PhD Materials Engineering, Professor of Metallurgical Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Madison 1965 - 1978. Senior Staff Member, Congressional Office of Technology Assessment 1978 - 1990. Testified more than 50 times before Congress on technology, science, and environmental issues. Former Director of Environment, Energy and Natural Resources, National Governors Association. Dr. Hirschhorn has been a consultant to industrial and chemical companies, DOE laboratories, state governments, and public interest organizations.

Dr. Hirschhorn says, "Scholars and professionals with various kinds of expertise—including architects, engineers, firefighters, intelligence officers, lawyers, medical professionals, military officers, philosophers, religious leaders, physical scientists, and pilots—have spoken out about radical discrepancies between the official account of the 9/11 attacks and what they, as independent researchers, have learned. They have established beyond any reasonable doubt that the official account of 9/11 is false and that, therefore, the official “investigations” have really been cover-up operations. Thus far, however, there has been no response from political leaders in Washington or, for that matter, in other capitals around the world. Our organization, Political Leaders for 9/11 Truth, has been formed to help bring about such a response. We believe that the truth about 9/11 needs to be exposed now—not in 50 years as a footnote in the history books—so the policies that have been based on the Bush-Cheney administration’s interpretation of the 9/11 attacks can be changed. We are, therefore, calling for a new, independent investigation of 9/11 that takes account of evidence that has been documented by independent researchers but thus far ignored by governments and the mainstream media."

Dr. Hirschhorn's essay, Painful 9/11 Truth, 9/4/07: "Many technical analyses cast doubt on the official explanation of the collapse of three World Trade Center buildings, including those presented by an impressive new group: Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. More difficult than discovering the truth, however, is convincing most of the public to accept the bitter truth. ... When it comes to 9/11, we face the strong belief that only al-Qaeda caused 9/11. But analyses by many experts reveal the collapse of the three WTC buildings was not caused by the two airplanes exploding into the twin towers. Without getting into details that one can spend many hours examining on a number of websites, the general view is that the buildings were brought down by controlled demolition. If correct, the immediate reaction is like a cosmic big bang. It would have taken considerable effort by a number of people with expertise and access to the buildings to rig them so that they could be intentionally collapsed when the two jets hit the towers. Tough questions flood in: Who could have engineered all this? Could foreign agents accomplish such complex actions - and if they did, why not take credit for it? If Americans did it, why would they intentionally inflict inevitable mass death and devastation? Worse, they seemingly knew about the plan to fly the jets into the towers. Post-9/11, why have the government and official investigations not come to the same controlled demolition conclusion? This makes sense if the government was involved. ... Like other groups, Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth wants a new, honest and comprehensive study that considers all the evidence for controlled demolition. As a former engineering professor with growing skepticism about the official WTC story I share their concerns. First, let the technical truth emerge. Then, if necessary, cope with the inevitable political, conspiracy and other questions. But let us not allow a possible painful truth block the primary task of determining once and for all what caused the collapse of the WTC towers and building no. 7. ... If those that believe the official 9/11 story - especially elected officials - trust their views, then let them support a serious effort to test the validity of the controlled demolition hypothesis. If they fear and reject doing so, then let us see that as suspicious and unacceptable. To sum up, horrific possible answers can cause us to shun a question. But clearing our minds of the fear of painful truths is essential to clearing our nation of destructive lies. Otherwise, we stay stuck in a delusional democracy."

sorry if i tend to believe someone like that, than 2 people of whom i dont know on a forum.

while hotrod and metalwing both seem intelligent, i must ask

what PHD's do you have and what university did you get them from?


I don't post personal information and neither should anyone else, but I have hosted Mingle meets and they (including Mods) have seen the diplomas on my walls. None of the people you quote have my experience and should you bother to go back to the old mingle threads, you can see where I posted all the engineering, physics, and material science relevant to this issue. The only persons who fully understand all the elements involved in the building failures are experienced structural engineers with heavy forensic experience... like me. I have the double advantage of having designed millions of square feet of structures of similar construction so I know how the materials are supposed to behave.

Instead of attacking the messenger, try learning from the posts. Do you understand the effect of heat on steel, what sheetrock is made from, how a truss fails?

no photo
Tue 06/30/15 07:21 PM
A tad off topic but MetalWing or HotRod...since you two seem to be the most well versed on this topic....any idea, offhand, on the amount of force imparted on the WTC towers from a jet hitting either one? Best I can find is that a 767 weighs a shade under 400,000 lbs and each hit each tower a lil under 500mph. The ft/lb force had to be tremendous.....and that doesnt include the force of what....8-10 thousand gallons of jet fuel igniting?

mightymoe's photo
Tue 06/30/15 08:01 PM
Edited by mightymoe on Tue 06/30/15 08:02 PM

A tad off topic but MetalWing or HotRod...since you two seem to be the most well versed on this topic....any idea, offhand, on the amount of force imparted on the WTC towers from a jet hitting either one? Best I can find is that a 767 weighs a shade under 400,000 lbs and each hit each tower a lil under 500mph. The ft/lb force had to be tremendous.....and that doesnt include the force of what....8-10 thousand gallons of jet fuel igniting?


you can use this to calculate without the fuel...

http://www.1728.org/energy.htm

it came up equal to 1.7 tons of TNT energy without the fuel blowing up...

(just the force of the plane hitting the building)

no photo
Tue 06/30/15 08:06 PM


A tad off topic but MetalWing or HotRod...since you two seem to be the most well versed on this topic....any idea, offhand, on the amount of force imparted on the WTC towers from a jet hitting either one? Best I can find is that a 767 weighs a shade under 400,000 lbs and each hit each tower a lil under 500mph. The ft/lb force had to be tremendous.....and that doesnt include the force of what....8-10 thousand gallons of jet fuel igniting?


you can use this to calculate without the fuel...

http://www.1728.org/energy.htm

it came up equal to 1.7 tons of TNT energy without the fuel blowing up...

(just the force of the plane hitting the building)
Thanks Moe shlda included you in my question lol....and wow at the force. And people wonder why the towers fell.

mightymoe's photo
Tue 06/30/15 08:09 PM



A tad off topic but MetalWing or HotRod...since you two seem to be the most well versed on this topic....any idea, offhand, on the amount of force imparted on the WTC towers from a jet hitting either one? Best I can find is that a 767 weighs a shade under 400,000 lbs and each hit each tower a lil under 500mph. The ft/lb force had to be tremendous.....and that doesnt include the force of what....8-10 thousand gallons of jet fuel igniting?


you can use this to calculate without the fuel...

http://www.1728.org/energy.htm

it came up equal to 1.7 tons of TNT energy without the fuel blowing up...

(just the force of the plane hitting the building)
Thanks Moe shlda included you in my question lol....and wow at the force. And people wonder why the towers fell.


thats actually metalwings area, he might know how to calculate the fuel as well... i found an easy way to figure the impact force, so i thought i would share...

InvictusV's photo
Wed 07/01/15 09:19 AM
I posted this before in one of the other thousand truther threads on 9-11.

Molten aluminum coming into contact with water can and does create steam explosions.

1 pound of molten aluminum has the explosive force of 3 pounds of tnt.

Foundry explosions occur fairly frequently. Even the smallest amount of water in a mold can cause a minor explosion.

Planes have tons of aluminum.

Conrad_73's photo
Wed 07/01/15 09:54 AM

I posted this before in one of the other thousand truther threads on 9-11.

Molten aluminum coming into contact with water can and does create steam explosions.

1 pound of molten aluminum has the explosive force of 3 pounds of tnt.

Foundry explosions occur fairly frequently. Even the smallest amount of water in a mold can cause a minor explosion.

Planes have tons of aluminum.

I can tell from experience,it Oodles of Fun!
And the real fun starts when Magnesium-rich ALU-Alloys start to burn!
And guess what plenty Office-Furniture is made of!bigsmile

Argo's photo
Wed 07/01/15 01:18 PM
all this stuff is great news for the few elite demolition companies in business today...
they will be saving tons of money and man-hours of work by adopting this new technique of razing skyscrapers.....

no longer will it be necessary to do any of that ground level preparation to compromise the integrity of those pesky core columns whatsoever..the new manual says, we can just take the elevator up to the upper portion of the building and fill a couple of floors with
fire accellerants (like thermite maybe) and explosives and hit the detonator switch...

then, when top 10 or 20% of the building falls twenty or thirty feet enough force will be generated to bring the remaining balance of the building straight down to groung zero just like a stack of pancakes...there will be no bowing outwards of the outer structure
support columns, no chance of the top portion falling off sideways or for that matter, the whole building falling sideways, no chance of any 20 or 30 story spike-like twisted mass of mangled steel and concrete to deal with either...clean-up will be a breeze....

the NIST along with the example of the twin towers falling identically within hours of each other, prove beyond a shadow of doubt, this new technique should become the
new standard throughout the demolition industry....

mightymoe's photo
Wed 07/01/15 01:22 PM

all this stuff is great news for the few elite demolition companies in business today...
they will be saving tons of money and man-hours of work by adopting this new technique of razing skyscrapers.....

no longer will it be necessary to do any of that ground level preparation to compromise the integrity of those pesky core columns whatsoever..the new manual says, we can just take the elevator up to the upper portion of the building and fill a couple of floors with
fire accellerants (like thermite maybe) and explosives and hit the detonator switch...

then, when top 10 or 20% of the building falls twenty or thirty feet enough force will be generated to bring the remaining balance of the building straight down to groung zero just like a stack of pancakes...there will be no bowing outwards of the outer structure
support columns, no chance of the top portion falling off sideways or for that matter, the whole building falling sideways, no chance of any 20 or 30 story spike-like twisted mass of mangled steel and concrete to deal with either...clean-up will be a breeze....

the NIST along with the example of the twin towers falling identically within hours of each other, prove beyond a shadow of doubt, this new technique should become the
new standard throughout the demolition industry....


laugh laugh laugh how silly...

no photo
Wed 07/01/15 04:38 PM

everyone seems to think that anyone who believes 9/11 was an inside job is "crazy". well watch this video, and tell me whos crazy...

the people who believe it was an inside job?

or the people who think it all happened the way our government claims it did?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbsZjW-m0x8

you can call me all the names you want, but the facts dont lie.


So many fallacies and BS rhetorical techniques, all in one place!

no photo
Wed 07/01/15 04:38 PM

video was published on june 8th 2015, and currently has:

3,300 likes
251 dislikes

if all this is BS, why is the majority clearly saying its not?


Argument from popularity? Seriously?



no photo
Wed 07/01/15 04:40 PM

well, my point was to bring attention to my OPINION that 9/11 was an inside job. and it seems to be serving its purpose.


That is an ignorant opinion, inconsistent with the facts, and which requires large amounts of cherry picking and BS reasoning to support.

no photo
Wed 07/01/15 04:44 PM

all this stuff is great news for the few elite demolition companies in business today...
they will be saving tons of money and man-hours of work by adopting this new technique of razing skyscrapers.....

no longer will it be necessary to do any of that ground level preparation to compromise the integrity of those pesky core columns whatsoever..the new manual says, we can just take the elevator up to the upper portion of the building and fill a couple of floors with
fire accellerants (like thermite maybe) and explosives and hit the detonator switch...

then, when top 10 or 20% of the building falls twenty or thirty feet enough force will be generated to bring the remaining balance of the building straight down to groung zero just like a stack of pancakes...there will be no bowing outwards of the outer structure
support columns, no chance of the top portion falling off sideways or for that matter, the whole building falling sideways, no chance of any 20 or 30 story spike-like twisted mass of mangled steel and concrete to deal with either...clean-up will be a breeze....

the NIST along with the example of the twin towers falling identically within hours of each other, prove beyond a shadow of doubt, this new technique should become the
new standard throughout the demolition industry....


What is your point?

Are you saying that the official explanation must be a lie, because proper demolition is hard and expensive, and yet fire brought a building down?

If so, you seem to be ignoring the most important part of a controlled demolition:

Control.

no photo
Wed 07/01/15 04:47 PM

http://investigate911.org/

everyone needs to go to this website and read EVERYTHING that is on there, and you will truly see what is happening to america. the people who have hijacked our government dont even lie about it, they flaunt is publicly thinking that americans are too stupid and lazy to ever catch on, and so far they are right for the most part.

once you read everything, it will all become clear what is being perpetrated against us, we can stop it, but we have to want to stop it!



Once you read this website, it becomes clear that some people have figured out a way to gain notoriety on the web:

Lie to gullible people, and use your lies to drive traffic to your website.