• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Anomolies at ground zero

Docker said:
#

I agree with NISTs report. I think it's brave of them to admit they don'y know why it collapsed and had to make up evidence.

You have read the whole report, All 10,000 pages?
Click to expand...

I don't remember them ever saying they made up evidence, strawman.

Wanna prove it?
 
this about sums it up, taken from AW's post:
The modeling suggests a peak total rate of fire energy output on the order of 3–5 trillion Btu/hr, around 1–1.5 gigawatts (GW), for each of the two towers. From one third to one half of this energy flowed out of the structures. This vented energy was the force that drove the external smoke plume. The vented energy and accompanying smoke from both towers combined into a single plume. The energy output from each of the two buildings is similar to the power output of a commercial power generating station. The modeling also suggests ceiling gas temperatures of 1,000 °C (1,800 °F), with an estimated confidence of plus
or minus 100 °C (200 °F) or about 900–1,100 °C (1,600–2,000 °F). A major portion of the uncertainty in these estimates is due to the scarcity of data regarding the initial conditions within the building and how the aircraft impact changed the geometry and fuel loading. Temperatures may have been as high as 900–1,100 °C (1,700–2,000 °F) in some areas and 400–800 °C (800–1,500 °F) in others.
 
So, let's say the scientific consensus is that smoking can cause lung cancer.

And let's say someone who smokes, dies of lung cancer.

Can we say that smoking killed that person?
 
1 fireman on his own reached the 78th floor using an elevator tha tbrok soon after. Called in lots of dead bodies and that there 2 fires on this floor. What about the floors above 78? He hadn't checked them yet? Of course he was alone and other firefighters were well below him using stairs to carry up to 100lbs of equipment each. How do I know this?

1. It is in the 9/11 commission report.

2. Fire chiefs reported it.

3. It has been in several documentaries not claiming conspiracy with comments by other firefighters
 
I've worked on thermal reactors that produced 1000°C+ temps!!!
THAT IS VERY HOT!!!! OUCH@@@!!!!!!!!!! :(
 
Docker said:
Stop side stepping. Have you read all 10,000 pages?

I asked you to show me your evidence for why the towers collapsed, you ignored the post.
Click to expand...

Well, a plane hit the towers. That severely damaged the structural supports and fire from the jet fuel weakened the steel. Then the weight was too much and it collapsed.

Oh and the fireproofing was knocked off.
 
Garb said:
Well, a plane hit the towers. That severely damaged the structural supports and fire from the jet fuel weakened the steel. Then the weight was too much and it collapsed.
Click to expand...

Speculating much?

Very scientific analysis, by the way.

Have you read all 10,000 pages?
 
Docker said:
Everybody knows the source I am citing. I am not going to redo your inadequate research for you.
Click to expand...
yes, "2 isolated pockets of fire" the NIST temperature model actually shows this as well

the 78th was only impacted by the wingtip, and was a skylounge so there were fewer combustibles, the worst fires were on the floors above
 
Docker said:
Stop side stepping. Have you read all 10,000 pages?
Click to expand...
Odd, that's what you've been doing since first posting here;
make an outlandish claim
we ask for proof/evidence/source of why you are claiming such
then you answer with "im not going to do your homework for you" or "I've already stated the proof in another thread" or "I dont have to provide proof" or "I dont have a source".

So who is sidestepping? Not us.

I asked you to show me your evidence for why the towers collapsed, you ignored the post.
Click to expand...
NISt, FEMA, and the 9/11 commssion.
plus the reports from several firefighters
a report from a controlled demolitionist
a report from engineers and had them published via the ASCE website.

What's your evidence?

None that i"ve seen thus far.
 
Docker said:
Speculating much?

Very scientific analysis, by the way.

Have you read all 10,000 pages?
Click to expand...

Well it is kind of common knowledge that a plane hit the towers and that this plane didn't dissapear out of thin air.

What if I didn't? Does this prove your claims ture then?
 
Docker said:
Firemen reached the impact zone and reported minor fires that they could put out.

I think I shall accept a professional firemans analysis over yours.
Click to expand...

When what the firemen said resembles what you claim, then you may have a point.

The fact is: The firemen who reported 'minor fires' (actually they said they needed two engines, hardly 'minor') were bot at the impact point. It was doubtful if any firemen got to that point.

So what the firemen said was accurate. What is not accurate is where you claim they were.

http://www.911myths.com/html/no_wtc2_inferno_.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom