Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
The fuel for the fire was jet fuel and a lifetime supply of office furniture and paper.
|
Right. In other words, nothing that would melt steel.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
Steel starts to weaken at 400 degrees. The fire was three times that.
|
First of all, it depends on the alloy used to make the steel. But iron itself melts at about 1300 celsius, which is about 2250-2500 Farenheit.
The fire was not three times the temperature it takes to begin to melt iron. According to NIST it wasn't, at it's hottest, even half that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
This is not open to debate. The buildings were in fact airtight. The only openings in the building were the entrances at the bottom, and at the top. You couldn't open up a window; The entire building was air tight. Even the elevator doors were air tight, so each floor was air tight.
|
Eh.... when the planes smashed into them, the buildings were no longer air tight.
Even before this, the buildings did not manufacture their own breathable air - a submarine is air tight, but no office buildings are...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
And before you ask how fireballs went down elevator shafts to other floors, the elevators were compromised at the point of impact and followed the path of least resistance - to the lobby and the sky lobbies.
|
In theory, there's nothing wrong with that story.
How they could have managed to blow apart all your air-tight connections to air-tight floors without losing strength or energy and then somehow blowing apart generators and concrete floors in the basement however is another story.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
You have no proof that any explosives in the building. We discussed thermite at length and determined that it was used in welding, communications trunks, electrical connections, and power sub stations - and then we discussed the fact that the WTC was built over a CON ED sub station.
|
I don't claim I have any proof to anything. However, there is proof of military grade incendiaries, and the presence of residuals that could only be present if such were used.
"We" didn't determine anything about thermite. You found a link to Wikipedia that mentioned thermite is used in exothermitic welding - railroad ties and thick-cable electrical network building. You didn't show any proof that it was used to build the WTC or any building in NYC, or that raw thermite was kept on the premises in case of the need for repairs.
The whole point of thermite welding is that it's dangerous and generates huge amounts of dangerous heat; that it's easier to weld a tie at the site of the accident than to drag it back to a shop. There's no indication that it's convenient to use thermite in building construction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
In order for explosives to have been used, someone would have needed tons of it. It would have taken dozens of people weeks to do it, and you can't hide it.
|
I don't know about "tons" of it - from the incendiary element found in the dust, explosives wouldn't be needed in such large amounts to destroy the building; their use would have been to "move" or shift the parts that were cut by the thermate.
I don't know how many people or days or weeks would be needed to set up the destructive elements. However, the WTC itself was shut down completely recently before the "attacks". Until there's an actual investigation, all that stuff is complete speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rochard
You got nothing more than a handful of half baked accusations that are completely false.
|
Who the heck did I accuse of what? lol I don't believe the government theory and accusation, and apart from my own "common sense" of what I saw that day I have some basis for backing up my disbelief.
What, exactly, do you guys have apart for the "common sense" that a plane and kerosene "could" do what the buildings were designed not to do in precisely that scenario.
All I hear from you guys is "could" "should" and all sorts of speculation. I still haven't heard any facts.