Originally posted by jlm912
Attributing the fireballs to jet fuel - I can follow that
I do not see, though, how jet fuel could have blown the elevator doors open. Maybe the elevators themselves falling had something to do
with it? I'm not sure how the doors were built, so I'm not writing that off as a possibility.
There's not very much information on which doors were opened or not. In some cases elevators were said to be 'blown out of their tracks' but I
expect this is more to do with the initial impact forces than anything else. No explosive or fuel explosion should be able to do that.
Jet fuel on practically every level? That I haven't heard and don't quite follow how that could happen? Most elevator shafts for the lower
half of the building didn't even extend up to the impact site nor did most elevators at the impact site run all the way to the base. I mean, I could
possibly see some seepage if the impact site maybe flooded with fuel, but if fires were as rampant as claimed I don't follow how it could've lasted
long enough to hit every floor let alone heat the columns up as "sufficiently" as is presumed.
The problem is that people want you to imagine the elevator shafts as simple sealed shafts with no way in or out. In reality they were complex
mechanical spaces with a lot of open space as there were huge Mechanical Equipment Rooms in the towers. Imagine turning a fire hose on in the top
floor of an apartment block and then saying you only expected it to run down the stairs. It'll find any little nook and cranny as it is driven down
Besides, I'm not claiming that I saw this, it's all from the eyewitness accounts. I can find Gravy's spreadsheet if you like, it had an excellent
There were too many victims at windows and at the impact site to believe so easily that fires were that widespread. It's definitely more
understandable as a claim for 7 - there was deep, black smoke coming from 3 of the four sides.
It's funny, this has been a thorn in my side for years. It's always been a common 'truther' argument that EDNA CINTRON WAS STANDING WHERE NIST
SAYS 10000000 DEGREE FIRES WERE BURNING
They just don't though. The floors were 12 feet between slabs, and NIST predicts high temperatures within a few feet of the ceiling, and not
throughout the entire floor. I can run you through what they predict and where if you like, but they have a huge database of fire pictures that makes
it easy to see just how large and violent the fires were.
As for the hijacker list, my point with that was the FBI screwed up quite a bit at first. They did eventually connect names of Saudis who've
been missing since shortly prior to the attacks, but aside from the flight manifests, and the few who made it on camera the night before, there's not
much else to go on saying they were actually there.
Oh sure, it's worse than you know too. They did actually include some pictures of people who were alive and living in the original lists. They
definitely screwed up. With regard to the passenger lists, I guess you can believe that they're falsified if you like, but for me it is just another
connecting part in the whole story.
I'm not even claiming it's completely illogical to go along with that list, I just don't find it "concrete" beyond any doubt. Does that
make sense, yet? All they had were circumstantial names.
Sure, but it's not like they stopped investigating within a week. The 911 commission report, although untrusted by some, contains the summary of
thousands of smaller investigations and details, and since 911 we've had huge
amounts of documents released to places like 911Myths that give
you much more detail.
Random example: The 'insider trading' at the stock market was dismissed by the FBI after some time because they found a newsletter advocated those
positions and it had no terrorist connections. Some years later they accidentally released the name of that newsletter. I can find you people
claiming the 'insider trading' was real and definite and the FBI cooperated etc etc. It's just fear and hysteria magnified by
ignorance and time (no offence intended, you seem to be taking a critical approach which is always good to see)