Let's Face It We Were ALL Duped

a reply to: Salander

Please tell us what temperature structural steel is reduced to 60 percent of its strength at ambient temperature. Do you have any idea how heat, temperature expansion/ contraction, and load ratings work with structural steel?

If office fires have no effect on structural steel, why insulate it in the first place? Why had the WTC just begone upgrading its structural steel fire proofing before the collapse?

originally posted by: Salander

originally posted by: pteridine

originally posted by: Salander

originally posted by: Pilgrum

originally posted by: Salander

Recall that the FEMA photographer is now "in exile" from the US in South America somewhere. Kinda like Snowden in exile in Russia for his truth telling.

That would be Kurt Sonnenfeld and it appears he's not in exile, he's fighting extradition to face the charge of murdering his wife. I'm not trying to discredit him - he's doing a magnificent job of that all by himself. There's a lot to suggest he's using this claim of secret evidence as a bargaining tool to aid his quest for sanctuary from justice in the USA.

About 200Mb or more of his ground zero pics were made available for download many years ago before his personal scandals and I've seen them. All they show is pretty much what you'd expect to see after 2 of the world's tallest buildings in one of the densest populated cities were struck by high speed heavy airliners, burned and collapsed to the ground (horrific & spectacular but we have no precedent for such an event on this scale)

Those pictures show twisted structural members inconsistent with a "natural" collapse.

How so? Heat and stress can easily twist steel.

Not the heat generated by burning office furniture.

Your argument seems to consist of "I can't believe it, so it isn't true." It is apparent that you have little knowledge of materials. The Liberty Bridge, in Pittsburgh, had a fire that was started by welders under the bridge deck. Tarps and PVC pipe caught fire. The link below shows a beam, twisted from being heated WHILE UNDER LOAD after about 20 minutes of a moderately sized fire. The bridge was minutes from collapse. It is amazing that the WTC lasted as long as they did.

cbspittsburgh.files.wordpress.com...

Many don't comprehend that steel is a plastic material. The WTC remained standing after the aircraft impacts even though many of its vertical supports were compromised. As the fires burned, the steel was heated and, when the load was too large for the remaining structure, it sagged, shifted the load off vertical, and collapsed. Here is the link, again, that shows strength with temperature www.engineeringtoolbox.com... You should note that at 1000F, a temperature that is said to have been reached by the fires, structural steel retains only 40 percent of its strength. Should you be able to understand this, you will have more knowledge than the rest of your demolition conspiracy fellow travelers, combined.

neutron & pteridine

Please gentlemen, let's keep it real, and let's keep it rational and adult.

What happened at WTC is clearly not described by the sophistry and nonsense that is the NIST report. Your posts above are rather as nonsensical as the NIST report itself.

originally posted by: Salander
neutron & pteridine

Please gentlemen, let's keep it real, and let's keep it rational and adult.

What happened at WTC is clearly not described by the sophistry and nonsense that is the NIST report. Your posts above are rather as nonsensical as the NIST report itself.

You are the one confused by the expulsions of debris during a building collapse.

What don't you get about no 140 db boom of charges setting off. No evident pressure boundary nor evidence of an over pressure event. No demolitions shrapnel nor demolitions fragments. No steel worked on by demolitions. No evidence of demolitions found during failure analysis of steel and floor connections.

Care to list your evidence?

Acting superior just makes you more laughable.

Evidence of inward bowing initiated by the cooling of steel and leading to collapse at the link with video: www.metabunk.org...

Care to actually list some facts for debate?

a reply to: neutronflux

You are the one confused by the expulsions of debris during a building collapse.

You are the one confused by supporting NIST Fantasy, Fiction, and Fraud.

Ignoring evidence is the only way to support the NIST report, as some on here well demonstrate.

#2 of 6: NIST's WTC 7 Reports: Filled with Fantasy, Fiction, and Fraud

PART 1: NIST and Popular Mechanics Fabricate Myth of WTC 7's "Scooped-Out" 10 Stories

www1.ae911truth.org...


#1 of 6: NIST's WTC 7 Reports: Filled with Fantasy, Fiction, and Fraud Print E-mail

www1.ae911truth.org...

25 Points of Specific Concern in the NIST WTC Reports

A White Paper on NIST's Omissions, Distortions, and Fraud

www1.ae911truth.org...

originally posted by: Salander
neutron & pteridine

Please gentlemen, let's keep it real, and let's keep it rational and adult.

What happened at WTC is clearly not described by the sophistry and nonsense that is the NIST report. Your posts above are rather as nonsensical as the NIST report itself.

Once again, all you can say is that you don't believe it. You have no basis for your statement but you claim our posts are "nonsensical." I have shown you photographs of girders on a bridge that were distorted after only 20 minutes of a moderate fire. I have shown that at 1000F, steel loses much of its strength. You have shown nothing.

Let's see some rationality from you, if you have any.

a reply to: pteridine

Once again, all you can say is that you don't believe it.

Pot calling kettle.

You have no basis for your statement but you claim our posts are "nonsensical."

Again, pot calling kettle.

I have shown you photographs of girders on a bridge that were distorted after only 20 minutes of a moderate fire. I have shown that at 1000F, steel loses much of its strength.

Can you tell us what gage that steel is on the bridge girders, and how much rust was on it?

How did you compare the bridge steel to the WTC steel?

Let's see some rationality from you, if you have any.

Pot calling kettle again.

originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: pteridine

Once again, all you can say is that you don't believe it.

Pot calling kettle.

You have no basis for your statement but you claim our posts are "nonsensical."

Again, pot calling kettle.

I have shown you photographs of girders on a bridge that were distorted after only 20 minutes of a moderate fire. I have shown that at 1000F, steel loses much of its strength.

Can you tell us what gage that steel is on the bridge girders, and how much rust was on it?

How did you compare the bridge steel to the WTC steel?

Let's see some rationality from you, if you have any.

Pot calling kettle again.

I see that you are also at a loss for argument and must resort to your usual tactics. The point being made was that steel, when heated under load, would distort at the temperature burning carbonaceous fuel. See how that works? The AE911 fraudsters are trying to convince the gullible that it can't happen because steel doesn't melt at those temperatures. What they fail to say is that it doesn't have to melt to be easily deformed. Steel can deform at the temperature of the office fires.
Do you have any actual basis for your position or are you still grasping at straws? Ask your pals at A&E about it and report what they say.

a reply to: Informer1958

Not able to state a fact and provide a supporting argument.

Please stop linking to conspiracy click bait, actually outline an argument, define facts to show you understand your arguments, and show you can think on your own.

a reply to: pteridine

I see that you are also at a loss for argument and must resort to your usual tactics.

Again, Pot calling kettle

The point being made was that steel, when heated under load, would distort at the temperature burning carbonaceous fuel.

Again you ignored my question.

How do you compare the bridge steel to the WTC steel? See how that works?

The AE911 fraudsters are trying to convince the gullible that it can't happen because steel doesn't melt at those temperatures.

Yet you cannot debunk A&E science, so ridiculing and calling A&E fraudsters, hoping to steer ATS members to ignore credible science.

The harder you push this narratives, the more you spark new ATSer's curiosity to go to A&E website to read their technol papers and forming their own "opinions". Thank you.

Steel can deform at the temperature of the office fires.

Not all steel.

In fact you failed to mention that the WTC was tested to withstand 2500 degree temperatures for many hours, however according to the fraudsters of the NIST investigation, they claim the WTC weaken within one hour, and caused the collapse from office fires. See how that works?

Do you have any actual basis for your position or are you still grasping at straws?

The fact is, you're demonstrating that you are grasping at straws and have no basis for you position.

a reply to: Informer1958

If not all steel cannot be formed through heat, how in the heck was it made into a building component? Was it born that way?

All steel becomes increasingly workable as it increasingly becomes heated. There is not a magical temperature!

You lost your mind!

a reply to: Informer1958

Are you saying all the steel in the WTC was poured liquid steel into a cast?

a reply to: neutronflux

Not able to state a fact and providefixed a supporting argument.

Right, and ignoring my questions, ignoring, credibal scientific evidence, ignoring sources,

Please stop linking to conspiracy click bait, actually outline an argument, define facts to show you understand your arguments, and show you can think on your own.

Click and bait? So now A&E is a click and bait website, because you say so?

Yet, you cannot debunk a single piece of their credibal science.

Do you have anything to add about my argument, or sources than you're un-debunked "opinions?

a reply to: neutronflux

Are you saying all the steel in the WTC was poured liquid steel into a cast?

Are you making that claim?

a reply to: Informer1958

Do you even no what cast iron is and why it's not used as structural steel.

Structural steel is rolled and pressed into shape at temperatures lower than melting point.

originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: pteridine

I see that you are also at a loss for argument and must resort to your usual tactics.

Again, Pot calling kettle

The point being made was that steel, when heated under load, would distort at the temperature burning carbonaceous fuel.

Again you ignored my question.

How do you compare the bridge steel to the WTC steel? See how that works?

The AE911 fraudsters are trying to convince the gullible that it can't happen because steel doesn't melt at those temperatures.

Yet you cannot debunk A&E science, so ridiculing and calling A&E fraudsters, hoping to steer ATS members to ignore credible science.

The harder you push this narratives, the more you spark new ATSer's curiosity to go to A&E website to read their technol papers and forming their own "opinions". Thank you.

Steel can deform at the temperature of the office fires.

Not all steel.

In fact you failed to mention that the WTC was tested to withstand 2500 degree temperatures for many hours, however according to the fraudsters of the NIST investigation, they claim the WTC weaken within one hour, and caused the collapse from office fires. See how that works?

Do you have any actual basis for your position or are you still grasping at straws?

The fact is, you're demonstrating that you are grasping at straws and have no basis for you position.

2500 degree temperatures for many hours? What is your source?

I don't have to grasp at straws; I follow the evidence without trying to confirm preconceived notions. If you have any evidence of demolition, many would like to see it. So far, all you have are opinions.....and pots and kettles, apparently.

originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: neutronflux

Yet, you cannot debunk a single piece of their credibal science.

They have no credible evidence.

a reply to: neutronflux

Do you even no what cast iron is and why it's not used as structural steel.

Did you know the sky is blue some days?

Do you even what the difference is of cast iron, and structural steel?

a reply to: pteridine

They have no credible evidence.

That is your "opinion".

Yet in all these years, you have failed miserably to debunk a single piece of A&E science.

Your "opinions" are not facts when it come to real debunking, has anyone told you that?

2500 degree temperatures for many hours? What is your source?

Wow! playing stupid are we?

originally posted by: Informer1958
a reply to: neutronflux

Do you even no what cast iron is and why it's not used as structural steel.

Do you even what the difference is of cast iron, and structural steel?

A little bit of carbon and small amounts few other elements, depending on the use.