Physics Prof Says Bombs not Planes brought down wtc, page 1

Originally posted by ZPE StarPilot
I don't know what video people are seeing, but I saw the top floors fall down through the lower floors. A live video. One at a time, the concrete floors broke away and fell to the next floor. Starting where the fires originated. No squibs, no base explosions, no explosions at all, during the collapse. Both towers.

We've all seen the same videos. We're just looking (or not looking) for different things.

For example, you claim that you saw no squibs or other explosions during collapse.

Well, take a look at these frames:

external image external image

There were taken from this video.

You can also find squibs such as these,

in this video.

I suppose it was because you weren't looking for these things, that you did not notice them when you saw the collapses on TV or wherever else.

Steel gets weak as temperatures rise, and brittle as temperatures fall.
Steel can lose half it's strength from only a few hundred degrees increase in temperature.
Steel melts at around 1370 degrees C (2500°F).
Jet fuel is combusted at temperatures typically greater than 2,600 F.

A) Steel weakens, loses strength, etc., but it does not have the catastrophic effect you would imagine, as skyscrapers are over-engineered so that they may hold up much more than their own weight. This is why no skyscrapers before or since 9/11 have ever collapsed due to fire, despite how insanely intense some of them were. If heat had the effect you suggest on the steel in these buildings, they would become death traps during office fires. This isn't the case.

B) Very, very few people on either side of the issue will tell you that the steel melted within the WTC, and those people are rather misguided. There is not even evidence of any glowing steel, ie glowing dark red, from a temp. of around 600 or so Celsius, let alone evidence of steel being melted (besides some mysterious puddles around the base). No pictures of heated beams in the debris, or during the fires, etc.

C) Jet fuel will not burn in open air at 2,600 degrees F or higher. Maybe in a jet engine; I don't know in that case. But in open air - no. Hydrocarbon fires rarely burn at, let alone above 700 or 800 degrees Celsius. Special conditions usually have to be met for a hydrocarbon fire to reach even those temps, and none of those conditions were met in the WTC on 9/11. In fact, there was poor ventilation in the towers besides near the windows (meaning lack of oxygen for fuel), near the windows the fires were exposed to the cold open air, and the air within the WTC was in no way pressurized or pre-heated. So to suggest that the fires within the WTC were even at 700 or 800 degrees Celsius is a bit of a leap.

In fact, if you look at the smoke coming from the buildings, it went from a grayish to a rich dark black in a matter of about 10 to 15 minutes or so after plane impact. This has been attributed to the consumption of most of the jet fuel from the crash, and a switch over to office materials for energy for the fires. Black smoke means poor burn. More technically, black smoke means there are uncombusted hydrocarbons in the smoke, or soot, which means the fire cannot make efficient use of its fuel, whether oxygen-deprived or etc. Futher, black, sooty smoke absorbs more heat than lighter smoke and carries it away from the fires. And seeing as how the smoke on 9/11 turned black, I wouldn't say there were exactly raging infernos of thousands of degrees in there. More like quickly weakening fires, with blackening smoke, struggling not to slowly die out.

Mod Edit: Image Size – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 12/11/2005 by Mirthful Me]