It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

FEMA says melted steel at WTC 7

page: 19
17
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 01:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999

Uneducated huh? I tell you what go grab any 100 people off the street, and I will grab 100 members of the military. Guaranteed there will be more college graduates among the military members. Not to mention their IQ scores will most likely be higher than the civilians. The idea that the military is full of "uneducated" people is the biggest bunch of BS around. (and usually put forth by extremely arrogant and misinformed people)


What are you going to do? Round up a 100 officers with known college attendance and get someone in to test their IQ?

Can we get back to topic now? Your claims are so absurd. Perhaps we should just ignore them until they finally project sense and sensibility.




posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 01:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Griff
 


From Air Force Tech data the combustion chamber temperatures on the GE engines used in the F-16C block 32 aircraft is 2700+ degrees F. Thats in excess of the temps that will cause steel to soften and melt. It is only the design of the engine that routes air through the combustion chamber to help insulate the steel from the temps.

Again, whether you continue to use wikipedia or to maybe wake up and listen to someone who works on aircraft or not, is up to you.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 01:39 PM
link   
reply to post by OrionStars
 


Who said officers? Oh, you did...I was speaking of enlisted members. Your arrogance continues to amuse me.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 01:40 PM
link   
reply to post by OrionStars
 


Prove what? that he worked in a water testing lab? since you are so plugged into UL, you should be able to find that out yourself.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
Im going to have to dumb down my posts I guess....


As if they weren't dumb enough already with the name-calling.


For someone in a department, not even connected to the department he chooses to speak for....is CRAZY.


More name-calling. This is obviously not a medical diagnosis.


He has no experience testing construction materials, he did not have ANY files concerning construction materials, he wasnt an employee at the time of the construction of the WTC and yet he choose to speak out AS a representative of his company....now, either he is a moron or he is nuts or he is seeking to make money.


But you don't consider the possibility than he also may just be right about the 2-hour ratings, regardless of whether UL did it, and regardless of this lone individual's qualifications. That's why he said it. Because he was freaking RIGHT. That steel HAD to be CERTIFIED. It doesn't MATTER what the name of the company is that did it. That's BESIDE THE POINT.



Let me just ask you this, Swampfox. Was the steel certified, or was it illegal?



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 



I knew people would take offense to what I said. That is why I said "no offense" and things like "they have earned my respect in more ways than one." etc. I really ment no offense.

Maybe if you grabbed 100 officers. Which, BTW, officers need to have a college degree.

But, you said the guys working in the engine shop. I will not go any further because I will NOT degrade the people working for the military.

But, my post still stands that most people in the military are the uneducated. Again...no offense to our soldiers out there.

Before it is said....yes, I tried to join the Army.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
From Air Force Tech data the combustion chamber temperatures on the GE engines used in the F-16C block 32 aircraft is 2700+ degrees F. Thats in excess of the temps that will cause steel to soften and melt. It is only the design of the engine that routes air through the combustion chamber to help insulate the steel from the temps.


Yes, and that 2,700+ degrees is the most efficient burn temp. NOT an open air fire.


Again, whether you continue to use wikipedia or to maybe wake up and listen to someone who works on aircraft or not, is up to you.


About as much as you listen to a structural engineer when it comes to buildings and failures etc.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 01:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
Was the steel certified, or was it illegal?


Either or leads to a conspiracy of some sort.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 01:50 PM
link   


But you don't consider the possibility than he also may just be right about the 2-hour ratings, regardless of whether UL did it, and regardless of this lone individual's qualifications. That's why he said it. Because he was freaking RIGHT. That steel HAD to be CERTIFIED. It doesn't MATTER what the name of the company is that did it. That's BESIDE THE POINT.


And so far from what Orion was originally posted its funny. And yes, it does matter which company did it in regards to what Orion was posting. Because he was using bad information as a basis for his allegations.

Was the steel illegal? I do not know and without seeing the test results of the company that made the steel or the company that certified the ste, it would be insane for me to risk my career for me to step out and speak as a representative of my company. Kevin Ryan, without any personal knowledge or access to any files concerning the subject choose to speak on it and claim that on his (lack) of knowledge that the WTC was demolished.

NOW, if an employee of the steel company that forged the beams came forth with documentation that his company had provided shoddy steel...that would be different.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 01:51 PM
link   
Kevin Ryan has filed a wrongful termination suit against UL. No one does that, without the credentials, experience, and solid physical evidence to prove he or she is wrongfully fired.

No lawyer will take a case to court on consignment that lawyer cannot win before going to court. Even on consignment, some legal expenses must be paid at the time accrued, i.e. copies of depostions, the cost to have a key-punch operator and/or transcriber recording and transcribing testimony from plaintiffs and defendants, travel to interview witnesses, etc..

911review.com...



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Griff
 


Yes the guys in the engine shop, of which 6 out of the 10 have degrees relating to their job. They know their stuff.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by OrionStars
 


You are kidding right? I mean NO ONE in the United States file frivilous lawsuits........



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 



Then supply proof that JP-8 can melt steel in an open air fire. Otherwise, no they don't.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 01:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 


I am not, and you cannot prove differently. I just posted a link to Kevin Ryan's confirmation that UL did test the steel. Because Kevin Ryan used personal and professional ethics to become a whistleblower, is why Kevin Ryan was fired from UL. Mr. Ryan would have no knowledge of what was tested if UL had not tested the WTC complex steel.

Looks like the one being thoughtlessly, rudely wrong is you.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999
And so far from what Orion was originally posted its funny. And yes, it does matter which company did it in regards to what Orion was posting. Because he was using bad information as a basis for his allegations.


Well address this, correct him, and then DROP IT, because there are more important reasons for discussing this than who said what and where they work and all the other trivial BS. A circus clown can say "F=ma because Einstein said so", are you going to jump on that and "debunk" the clown's equation? Of course you aren't, because the equation is RIGHT. And so is the point that the steel has to be certified, or else it is illegal.



Was the steel illegal? I do not know and without seeing the test results of the company that made the steel or the company that certified the ste, it would be insane for me to risk my career for me to step out and speak as a representative of my company.


Ok, well you know you only have 2 possibilities:


1) It was certified.

2) It was not certified.


I hope you don't feel as though you had to personally build the towers to be qualified to THINK about this one. Both are problematic. One would suggest the towers should not have fallen as soon as they did. The other suggests a massive conspiracy during construction.



[edit on 18-1-2008 by bsbray11]



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by OrionStars
 


No, you posted a letter he wrote. That is not proof that the UL lab tested and certified the WTC steel preconstruction.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 


Again. Do you have a written statement from UL specifically stating that they did NOT certify the steel used in WTC construction?

Plus, as bsbray and myself have pointed out. It doesn't matter if it was UL or not.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 02:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 


I did not say that. Do not turn my words into something I neither intended nor meant.

Again, what is in it for you to consistently, relentlessly force feed the lies in the "official" reports to everyone else? You have been repeatedly told many of us reject the "official" reports directly due to lack of consistency, accuracy, and truth. Yet, you continue force feeding and ignore what others keep telling you. We have substantially provided valid proof to refute those inconsistencies, inaccuracies, and falsehoods.

If you want to rely on lies, that is up to you. However, we do not. So stop insulting us and our intelligence by continuing to ignore requests to cease and desist. If you can validly prove your claims, please immediately do so. Rationalizing and insulting the opposition does not validly prove you have done so.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 02:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by OrionStars
If you want to rely on lies, that is up to you. However, we do not. So stop insulting us and our intelligence by continuing to ignore requests to cease and desist. If you can validly prove your claims, please immediately do so. Rationalizing and insulting the opposition does not validly prove you have done so.


You know. You make a good point. Swampfox has yet to produce ANY source of his claims.

What happened to 9/11 madness and all that?

Either start producing sources for your claims swampfox or I will be forced to complain about you. Since you are derailing my thread with NONSENSE.



posted on Jan, 18 2008 @ 02:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Swampfox46_1999
 


You obviously did not note the date. Plus, UL opened themselves for both a law suit and criminal action against them.

NIST had to agree the steel was certified above standard. Had they not, UL could have been sued for not certifying as safe the steel they tested. When it causes deaths, that leaves UL open for criminal charges, at the very least wrongful death due to criminal negligence.

That normally leads to civil tort actions - class action or otherwise. In the process to protect UL, NIST confirmed what Kevin Ryan stated. UL did the testing for WTC complex steel and rated it higher than normal standards.

The entire argument is not about whether or not steel was tested for the WTC complex by UL. UL did that, and never denied it. The argument was how high the certification was for fire only. UL says they do not test for fire ratings for certification. Kevin Ryan says they did and do. Kevin Ryan is telling the truth. It is a part of metallurgy testing by every lab testing materials and issuing or holding certifications.

It is best to understand the specifics of disagrement, before people start telling everyone else everything they know about nothing concerning the specifics of a topic.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 16  17  18    20  21  22 >>

log in

join