I understand the concept [of fire weakening steel] extremely well.
I also know BS when I see it. That's the difference between myself and the skeptics on this forum.
I think that there is a nearly zero chance that you understand properly.
And this is an opportunity for you to learn something hugely important regarding the collapse of the towers.
Why don't you provide "what you understand" as it applies to the collapse of the towers.
I'll help you get started.
There are, of course, three main effects.
Please comment on the strength of each effect, as they pertain to the collapse of the towers.
Once you are done with that, please show how the info in your list explains why the towers collapsed "due to fire", while most fires in other tall buildings failed to cause collapse of those other buildings.
If you get it correct, I'll simply congratulate you.
If you get it wrong, I'll simply explain it ti you.
Of course, if you don't really understand, & I have to explain it to you, you'll thank me for helping you with a key concept.
And then you'll incorporate your new knowledge into a better, more complete understanding of the cause(s) of the collapses.
And you'll then realize why Truthers' (& especially Gage's) assertion that it is "a deep mystery why the towers collapsed due to their fires while other buildings did not" is a specious, incompetent argument.
Of course you will ...
__
PS. Note that, if you participate in this little exercise, then I will be doing exactly what you requested:
False Flag said:
Why don't you do this, and I think this is extremely reasonable. Take any one of the claims they make in any one of their videos and prove they are wrong. No, don't use your opinion to say they are wrong, use a legitimate, credible source to prove they are wrong.