Proof we are all lying to ourselves

reply to post by bovarcher


Id say mostly C The CIA funded the Taliban before The Bushes did/does business with the Bin Lardens.and as i said before wasnt the Bin Lardens some of the first people to be flown to safety on 9/11?


And to the post above. I am digging im almost as up to my neck in it But not as much as George Bush will be soon hopefully. I hope they put a noose round his.


[edit on 4-11-2007 by N.B.A.Y.S.O.H]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by Disclosed
Your information is incorrect - FEMA states the following:

I guess you missed this one.

www.fema.gov...

The large quantity of jet fuel carried by each aircraft ignited upon impact into each building. A significant portion of this fuel was consumed immediately in the ensuing fireballs. The remaining fuel is believed either to have flowed down through the buildings or to have burned off within a few minutes of the aircraft impact.

I'm curious why you didnt finish that paragraph.....allow me.

" The heat produced by this burning jet fuel does not by itself appear to have been sufficient to initiate the structural collapses. However, as the burning jet fuel spread across several floors of the buildings, it ignited much of the buildings' contents, causing simultaneous fires across several floors of both buildings. The heat output from these fires is estimated to have been comparable to the power produced by a large commercial power generating station. Ove ra period of many minutes, this heat induced additional stresses into the damaged structural frames while simultaneously softening and weakening these frames. This additional loading and the resulting damage were sufficient to induce the collapse of both structures."

Yeah.....heat output comparable to the power of a large commercial power generating station....yep, sounds like a "normal office fire" to me.

Plus, it still shows that you were wrong when you said a majority of the fuel burned up OUTSIDE of the building. It clearly states a significant amount...but not a majority. Most fuel was consumed INSIDE the structures.

[edit on 4-11-2007 by Disclosed]

Originally posted by Disclosed

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by Disclosed
Your information is incorrect - FEMA states the following:

I guess you missed this one.

www.fema.gov...

The large quantity of jet fuel carried by each aircraft ignited upon impact into each building. A significant portion of this fuel was consumed immediately in the ensuing fireballs. The remaining fuel is believed either to have flowed down through the buildings or to have burned off within a few minutes of the aircraft impact.

I'm curious why you didnt finish that paragraph.....allow me.

" The heat produced by this burning jet fuel does not by itself appear to have been sufficient to initiate the structural collapses. However, as the burning jet fuel spread across several floors of the buildings, it ignited much of the buildings' contents, causing simultaneous fires across several floors of both buildings. The heat output from these fires is estimated to have been comparable to the power produced by a large commercial power generating station. Ove ra period of many minutes, this heat induced additional stresses into the damaged structural frames while simultaneously softening and weakening these frames. This additional loading and the resulting damage were sufficient to induce the collapse of both structures."

Yeah.....heat output comparable to the power of a large commercial power generating station....yep, sounds like a "normal office fire" to me.

Plus, it still shows that you were wrong when you said a majority of the fuel burned up OUTSIDE of the building. It clearly states a significant amount...but not a majority. Most fuel was consumed INSIDE the structures.

[edit on 4-11-2007 by Disclosed]

\

So the engineers who designed the towers to "withstand multiple impacts of jet liners" would not have considered all that fuel as a factor?

[edit on 123030p://upSunday by QuasiShaman]

So the engineers who designed the towers to "withstand multiple impacts of jet liners" would not have considered all that fuel as a factor?

No - Leslie Robertson, the chief designer said they did not consider the
fuel load of the aircraft. When the building was designed in late 1960's
there was no way to calculate the effects of fire on building structure.

Modern buildings are virtual fire traps containing large amounts of
combustible materials - synthetic (plastics) burn with 50 to 100% more
heat energy (12000 - 16000 btu/lb vs 8000-8500 for wood/paper/cloth)
FEMA did test burns on cluster of work stations to determine thermal output

The results indicate temperatures of 800 to 1000 °C, and a burning rate of about 15 to 30 kg/s. As mentioned before, it is quite possible that the temperature could have exceeded those values estimated here. For wood (15 MJ/kg) at 560 MJ/m2, the burning duration of the office furniture can then be estimated at about 86 to 171 minutes. The towers collapsed in 56 and 104 minutes. 19

72.14.205.104...:9Bi8yZqRi3gJ:www.era.lib.ed.ac.uk/bitstream/1842/1507/1/WTCLessonsLearned02.pdf+wtc+fema+fire+test+bu rn+office+furnishing&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=11&gl=us&ie=UTF-8

There were tons and tons of paper on each floor (which can consider as
"wood" in study) In addition most modern office equipment/furnishing
are made either whole or in part of plastics (computers, cubicle dividers,
chairs, desk tops, etc) which burn with much greater heat output.

Some studies done recently suggest the the fires alone could have
initiated the collapse without the massive structural damage from the
aircraft impacts.

Originally posted by Disclosed
Plus, it still shows that you were wrong when you said a majority of the fuel burned up OUTSIDE of the building. It clearly states a significant amount...but not a majority. Most fuel was consumed INSIDE the structures.

You might want to go back to school and learn what Significant means.

I guess you missed the big fireballs when the planes hit the buildings. Those big fireballs were the majority of the fuel being burned up.

Also we have lots of photos and videos that show the fires were burning out well before the towers collapsed. So we can state that the fires did not burn long enough to cause the amount of steel needed to weaken the buildings.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

You might want to go back to school and learn what Significant means.

So easy to prove you are wrong again:

www.webster.com...

" of a noticeably or measurably large amount "

Significant does NOT mean majority, like you stated.

Well, lets see now. The FEMA report says appx 3000 gallons was burned in the fireballs....and left appx 4000 gallons to burn on the impact floors. This is directly from the FEMA report.

Did they teach you that 3000 is MORE than 4000 at your school?

Who taught you math?

The fires? Looks like NIST mentions this:

In no instance did NIST report that steel in the WTC towers melted due to the fires. The melting point of steel is about 1,500 degrees Celsius (2,800 degrees Fahrenheit). Normal building fires and hydrocarbon (e.g., jet fuel) fires generate temperatures up to about 1,100 degrees Celsius (2,000 degrees Fahrenheit). NIST reported maximum upper layer air temperatures of about 1,000 degrees Celsius (1,800 degrees Fahrenheit) in the WTC towers (for example, see NCSTAR 1, Figure 6-36).

However, when bare steel reaches temperatures of 1,000 degrees Celsius, it softens and its strength reduces to roughly 10 percent of its room temperature value. Steel that is unprotected (e.g., if the fireproofing is dislodged) can reach the air temperature within the time period that the fires burned within the towers. Thus, yielding and buckling of the steel members (floor trusses, beams, and both core and exterior columns) with missing fireproofing were expected under the fire intensity and duration determined by NIST for the WTC towers.

[edit on 5-11-2007 by Disclosed]

Originally posted by Disclosed
Well, lets see now. The FEMA report says appx 3000 gallons was burned in the fireballs....and left appx 4000 gallons to burn on the impact floors. This is directly from the FEMA report.

Well lets see how mnay more times i can prove you wrong about there being such a large jet fuel fire.

1. Firemen who made it to the 78th floor reports only isolsted fires on (NO LARGE JET FUEL FIRES)

www.firehouse.com...

Battalion Seven: "Ladder 15, we've got two isolated pockets of fire. We should be able to knock it down with two lines. Radio that, Radio that, 78th floor numerous 10-45 Code Ones"

2. 9/11 Commission report states that 10 minutes after plane crash only isolated fires (NO LARGE JET FUEL FIRES)

9/11 Commission report, staff statement #13, page 8

Within ten minutes of impact, smoke was beginning to rise to the upper floors in debilitating volumes and isolated fires were reported, although there were some pockets of refuge.

So please tell me where all the jet fuel went to, if it wasn't burnt off on the EXTERIOR of the building?

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
1. Firemen who made it to the 78th floor reports only isolsted fires on (NO LARGE JET FUEL FIRES)

www.firehouse.com...

Battalion Seven: "Ladder 15, we've got two isolated pockets of fire. We should be able to knock it down with two lines. Radio that, Radio that, 78th floor numerous 10-45 Code Ones"

If you did any research at all, you would realize they only made it to the lowest possible impact zone. Tell me, what did Battalion seven say about the fires on floors 79-87?

So please tell me where all the jet fuel went to, if it wasn't burnt off on the EXTERIOR of the building?

You answered this question yourself earlier. Why are you asking for information you already have?:

The large quantity of jet fuel carried by each aircraft ignited upon impact into each building. A significant portion of this fuel was consumed immediately in the ensuing fireballs. The remaining fuel is believed either to have flowed down through the buildings or to have burned off within a few minutes of the aircraft impact.

Burned off within a few minutes of the impact. Igniting everything on each of the floors.

Originally posted by Disclosed
Burned off within a few minutes of the impact. Igniting everything on each of the floors.

No, it did not ignite everything on each of the floors. Not according to the firemen on the 78th floor. Or are you trying to say the jet fuel ran up the floors instead of down?

Also not according to all the photos and videos showing no flames comming out of the floors.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by Disclosed
Burned off within a few minutes of the impact. Igniting everything on each of the floors.

No, it did not ignite everything on each of the floors. Not according to the firemen on the 78th floor. Or are you trying to say the jet fuel ran up the floors instead of down?

You keep talking about the fires on 78. I asked about the fires on the floors above.

Are you saying that the plane ONLY hit the 78th floor? It didnt touch the 79-87th?



[edit on 5-11-2007 by Disclosed]

Originally posted by Disclosed
You keep talking about the fires on 78. I asked about the fires on the floors above.

No, you keep talking about all the jet fuel that caught everything on fire on all the floors. The jet fuel never made it below 78th floor.

The firemen who made it to the 78th floor saw only isoloated fires on the 78th floor, nothing below. So this proves that their was not that much jet fuel, and that it did not catch everything on fire below the impact area.

Also the 9/11 Commission report stated there were only isolated fires on the impact floors 10 minutes after the planes hit. No large jet fuel fires.

So you are proven wrong again about the jet fuel.



[edit on 5-11-2007 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
No, you keep talking about all the jet fuel that caught everything on fire on all the floors.

But yet the firemen who made it to the 78th floor saw only isoloated fires on the 78th floor, nothing below. So this proves that their was not that much jet fuel, and that it did not catch everything on fire below the impact area.

Also the 9/11 Commission report stated there were only isolated fires on the impact floors 10 minutes after the planes hit. No large jet fuel fires.

So you are proven wrong agaon about the jet fuel.

Why are you afraid to talk about the floors above 78? You DO realize that the 78th floor wasnt the only impact floor dont you?

What floor is the one in this picture?

www.oilempire.us...

Does that look like a small isolated fire? You do realize that each floor is 40,000 square feet. Thats a big damn fire.

Or this picture:

911guide.googlepages.com...

Does that look small and isloated?

We could also ask a retired fire chief of his assessment of the collapse:

vincentdunn.com...



[edit on 5-11-2007 by Disclosed]

Originally posted by Disclosed
Why are you afraid to talk about the floors above 78? You DO realize that the 78th floor wasnt the only impact floor dont you?

Why don't you stay on the subject of the jet fuel? You stated there were 4,000 gallons of jet fuel that ignited the floors. There must not have been that much jet fuel to not even make it past the 78th floor?

I have several photos with time stamps showing no flames showing from the buildings well before the buildings collapsed.

i114.photobucket.com...

i114.photobucket.com...

i114.photobucket.com...

i114.photobucket.com...

i114.photobucket.com...

Why don't you ask all the fire chiefs that were there at the scene?


[edit on 5-11-2007 by ULTIMA1]

reply to post by ULTIMA1


ULTIMA1...

What is your fixation with the 78th floor? How many floors were involed in the impact itself. Are you saying that ONLY the 78th floor was involed....so that is the only floor that fuel could possibly be on?

Why are you obsessed with the 78th floor?

Plane hits upper floor... fuel flows DOWN .... fuel comes into contacts with surfaces and lingers while excess continues to flow down.... net result is less fuel burning on lower floors than on upper floors.

Also - it doesn't take much fuel to create fireballs the size you see in the impact footage. Only vapor burns - and only when mixed with the proper amount of air. A mere 20% of the fuel load of those craft could have caused the fireballs seen, easily.

I play with fire a lot - trust me... you can scare the bejesus out of yourself with a couple hundred milliliters of JP7 (pretty similar to kerosene - what we use in most jet engines).

As for bombs in the WTC... I thought we went over this years ago.... please show me the seismic evidence for this.

Why do you think NORAD did nothing to protect the skies over America? During the time the airplane was coming in towards the Pentagon, there was a young man coming in, telling Cheney: "the plane is 50 miles out, the plane is 30 miles out" and so on. When he got down to "the plane is 10 miles out", the young man also said to Cheney:

Well, take a look at our military at that point in time. We were (and still are) merely a shadow of what we were while in contest with the USSR. We didn't have the capability to scramble fighters. Beyond that - assume we DO scramble a couple 16s in the air from the Air National Guard. In the event this is a prolonged attack, we just cached in all of our bargaining chips by having two aircraft flying in zone five afterburn to catch up to this airliner - one airliner. While there could be dozens more aircraft planned to be used in an attack. You're scrambling a limited resource into the air with little idea of what the big picture is.

The best thing to do is scramble to make all operational aircraft combat ready and get a CAP routine established as well as obtain definite vectors of hostiles. Generally - you do not fire your only bullet until you know what it is, exactly, you are shooting at - and how many there are. Rushing in half-cocked is a bad, BAD idea. Especially when you have already been caught ill-prepared.

Like it or not - the Military is here to protect everyone - not kill every bad guy they can. Sometimes that means you have to sit back and sort out what is going on and what you have available to you before you take action. I know this is hard to grasp/accept - but we're not here to make stupid mistakes and risk getting even more people killed because we acted out of emotional instinct. It's easy for civilians to see this, after the fact, and say "why didn't you kill the bad guy?" - but it's not so easy when it's happening, and you're in the military, making the decisions, and trying to figure out not just how many bad guys there are - but who they are, and what they might be planning and expecting you to do.

And I would really like to see the verification of a (presumed radar operator) in direct communication with Cheney. Suffice to say that makes absolutely no sense with regards to chain of command ... or combat in general.

Originally posted by Disclosed
Are you saying that ONLY the 78th floor was involed....so that is the only floor that fuel could possibly be on?

No, i am saying there is no way there could have been 4,000 gallons of fuel (as you stated) left after the intial explosion becasue nothing made it down past the 78th floor.

Also none of the fire chiefs present believed the towers would completly collapse. They were only worried about the floors above the impact area might collapse if the the fires would have burned for several more hours (WHICH THEY DID NOT).

Originally posted by Aim64C
Plane hits upper floor... fuel flows DOWN ....

What fuel flowed down? If the firemen on the 78th floor saw no fuel fires.

I was a crew chief in the Air Force and i worked with JP-8. So you do not need to tell me about jet fuel.

Originally posted by ULTIMA1
No, i am saying there is no way there could have been 4,000 gallons of fuel (as you stated) left after the intial explosion becasue nothing made it down past the 78th floor.

Also none of the fire chiefs present believed the towers would completly collapse. They were only worried about the floors above the impact area might collapse if the the fires would have burned for several more hours (WHICH THEY DID NOT).

The 4,000 gallon estimate is the FEMA estimation, not mine. Plus, are you saying that floors 79-83....each 40,000 square feet.....could not dispurse that fuel?

Wow....just wow.

Nobody thought the towers would collapse, period! However, the combination of the aircraft inpacts, plus resulting fires, started a chain of events that led to the eventual collapse. That is what is stated in the NIST reports (if you bothered to do any research).

Originally posted by Disclosed
The 4,000 gallon estimate is the FEMA estimation, not mine. Plus, are you saying that floors 79-83....each 40,000 square feet.....could not dispurse that fuel?

Nobody thought the towers would collapse, period! However, the combination of the aircraft inpacts, plus resulting fires, started a chain of events that led to the eventual collapse. That is what is stated in the NIST reports (if you bothered to do any research).

But you are sticking to the 4,000 gallon estimate. The plane struck the South tower from the 77th floor to the 85th floor.

So if most of the fuel is in the wings and the lower wing hit on the 77th-79th floor, why did the firemen see no fuel fires from the 78th floor down?

Here is a drawing for you to go by.
i114.photobucket.com...

I have read the NIST reports, they keep changing the reports. First they stated the buildings collapse by pancake theory, now they have changed and said no it wasn't by pancake theory.

Also the NIST reports have not been peer reviewed so there is no way of knowing how correct those reports are.






[edit on 5-11-2007 by ULTIMA1]

Originally posted by ULTIMA1

Originally posted by Aim64C
Plane hits upper floor... fuel flows DOWN ....

What fuel flowed down? If the firemen on the 78th floor saw no fuel fires.

I was a crew chief in the Air Force and i worked with JP-8. So you do not need to tell me about jet fuel.

Um - maybe the fuel carried onboard the aircraft - you know... the one that flew into the tower... carrying fuel for a transcontinental flight... it also just departed from the airport....

The plane impacted what floors, again? It didn't all get dumped into one floor. And it had a few floors to flow down.

Given the structural damage, I would say it's very reasonable to say that fuel probably flowed through cracks/holes in the concrete and down stairwells - causing the scattered fires seen on the 78th floor - as this is the lowest floor the fuel got to.

However, go up a floor - the picture will change. Go up another - again, it will change. Also - heat rises - which means that flammable material ABOVE the impact zone can and will be set on fire - whether in direct contact with fuel or not.

Awesome - I'm an Avionics Technician for the Navy. How was the ChairForce for you? I'm aiming to put in at least 20. It's been a blast for me, so far.