Quote:
Originally Posted by MediaGuy
It wasn't my original argument. "Bend" Weaken" "soften" are all terms for the same result on steel after hours of exposure at those temperatures... none of the steel at WTC was exposed to these temperatures fo this amount of time.
The steel in question did not in fact confront those temperatures. Find a quote. Temperatures at WTC werre regular office-fire temperatures....
|
Steel bends / melts / softens at 500-600 degrees. Fire in the WTC was 1800f.
<
"Common Sense" rears its ugly head again. It has nothing to do with reality.
[/QUOTE]
Common sense rules. In this case, it's pretty difficult to separate those steel beams without cutting them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MediaGuy
The dust that was deposited across Manhattan on the day of the event/s did not result from welding done on beams days and weeks later.
|
What do you mean across Manhatten? So this dust wasn't even at the WTC site? It was found "some place in Manhatten"? Well, that's proof that explosives were used "some place". But whatever.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MediaGuy
Nope. It means there were temperatures hot enough to create liquid iron and turn it into a mist that solidified when they were away from those temperatures.
|
What makes you think it was liquid iron? Could have been anything. In fact, I thought it was glass with aluminum.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MediaGuy
Iron micros-pheres in the amount they were detected is not justified by normal buliding debris.
|
Says you. You don't seem to understand that Iron is everywhere. It's in concrete, concrete that was pulverized and smashed by tons of god only knows what. Saying there was "too much to be justified by normal building debris" is hog wash. There was not "normal building debris" at the WTC site. Nothing about it was normal - and generally speaking no one goes around looking at "normal building debris" to measure microscopic bits of anything.
There is nothing not normal about what they found at the WTC site. Period.