Merged National Geographic Special - "9/11 Science and Conspiracy" Debunks Thermite Myth

[kylebisme]

I didn't see it, and I was there for months. Something like this would have been talked about by anyone who was there.

Did you go down bellow, like this guy speaks of? I doubt most did.

Why do you think this Kyle? What science have you used to arrive at this conclusion.

My conclusion that the office products and such you mention wouldn't have fueled hotspots starting at the temperatures reported? I'm basing that on the widely reported temps of fires containing such products. What reasoning do you have for implying otherwise?

What does planets sustaining life that have to do with your assertion that thermite can cut sideways?

If you would be so kind as to first answer my question, I'd be happy to reciprocate by answering yours.

Many things in an office fire go BOOM.

I was responding to others claims that there were no booms.

I cannot, as I am not an engineer or an explosive tech.

I didn't ask an engineering or explosives question, it was a simple question of Newtonian physics.

NIST has analyzed the collapse...

From what I've seen from them, they only developed an explanation for initiation of the collapse. Can you support your clam that they analysed the collapse itself?

It makes sense if you make some non-reality-based assumptions about thermite. Assume that thermite is so intensely hot that it instantly melts any steel with which it comes into contact, and that the only reason it doesn't free-fall vertically through steel is that it takes time for gravity to pull it down through the steel it just melted to get it into contact with the solid steel it hasn't touched yet. Taking these assumptions, if you hurl burning thermite with incredible speed at a piece of steel then it will slice through the steel like a white-hot knife through warm butter.

Actually, I was just suggesting that in the right setup it could cut deep enough to weaken the structural integrity of the beam enough for it to collapse under the weight it is supporting.

You do realize that they did not START real fire fighting until 2 weeks AFTER the collapse right?

That has no bearing on the point you were responding to.

the vast majority of the debris was whisked off w/out being investigated.

See the FEMA report here, section D.4.

 

[triforcharity]

Oh, I can think of many more things that go boom also in a fire, this just ebing the things that make REALLY LOUD BOOMS!!

Here is another thing.

Commercial toilets. Something about commercial toilets, when they are heated, go boom.

Also, a small local collapse could go boom. Think about it. One of those floor pans had to weigh in around 2000 pounds or so. How much of a boom would that make??

but, of course, the LEAST likely thing to be present in the towers explains the booms perfectly.

 

[WildCat]

My conclusion that the office products and such you mention wouldn't have fueled hotspots starting at the temperatures reported?

This is awesome! Please, do tell exactly what it is you think fueled the fires in the pile. I'm sure it will be much more plausible than the hundreds of acres of flammable office contents we know were in the pile!

 

[kylebisme]

but, of course, the LEAST likely thing to be present in the towers explains the booms perfectly.

Again, I was simply responding to others claims of no booms. Interesting note about the toilets though, I'd be intrested in understanding how that works.

This is awesome! Please, do tell exactly what it is you think fueled the fires in the pile. I'm sure it will be much more plausible than the hundreds of acres of flammable office contents we know were in the pile!

If you can acquire the remains left by the fires for me, I'd happily do my best to explain what fueled them.

 

[NutCracker]

Why can't you see I never claimed it was an inside job? Delusional?

Anyway, that's it for me for now. Sleep calls.

Well, I forgot that there are about as many theories as there are 9/11 morons. My Bad.

Well then, I don't care too much what particular brand of insanity you sympathise with: please explain how your "free fall" (which it wasn't) implies that WTC* collapse due to the use of therm*te/conrolled demolition.

You see, you can't.

Edited by Tricky: 

Removed incivility

Please keep it civil here folks.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Tricky

 

[WildCat]

If you can acquire the remains left by the fires for me, I'd happily do my best to explain what fueled them.

Desks, chairs, paper, carpets, computers, boxes, etc etc, you know, things that are in office buildings like the WTC.

Or is it your contention that the WTC was completely bare and unoccupied on 9/11?

Now don't be shy kyle, let's hear you pwn us with The Truth™.

 

[JohnG]

Wouldn't it have been simpler to crash planes into buildings?

 

[beachnut]

... My conclusion that the office products and such you mention wouldn't have fueled hotspots starting at the temperatures reported? I'm basing that on the widely reported temps of fires containing such products. What reasoning do you have for implying otherwise? ...

This is not the only thing you got wrong about 911. Is your conclusion a question or do you waffle on all 911 topics?

 

[BigAl]

Did you go down bellow, like this guy speaks of? I doubt most did.


My conclusion that the office products and such you mention wouldn't have fueled hotspots starting at the temperatures reported? I'm basing that on the widely reported temps of fires containing such products. What reasoning do you have for implying otherwise?

I think that Dr. Quintiere, has very real data that proves you wrong. See [1], below.

Dr. James Quintiere, Professor, Dept. of Fire Protection Engineering, Univ. of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742. E-mail: jimq@eng.umd.edu
​

So do Professors Corbett and Barnett.

Glenn Corbett, professor of fire science at John Jay College of
Criminal Justice says that fire and damage caused all collapse at WTC.
relevant expertise. John Jay is part of the City University of New
York, emphasizing criminal justice and fire science.
http://www.jjay.cuny.edu/

http://audio.wnyc.org/bl/bl091407e.mp3
(Colbert starts 5 minutes into the audio)

Corbett trains NY firemen and is involved with setting fire
codes. It's his job to understand what happened so as to
teach firemen how to stay alive and to make buildings safe.

Prof. Jonathan Barnett, Fire protection engineer
Professor Jonathan R. Barnett, Ph.D.
Center For Firesafety Studies
Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Worcester, Massachusetts, USA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eWpOfUMz6SE
(WTC5 WTC7 40 seconds.)
http://www.asce.org/pdf/bio_jbarnett.pdf

[1]

TITLE: Scale Modeling of the 96th Floor of World Trade Center Tower 1

J. Perf. Constr. Fac., Volume 21, Issue 6, pp. 414-421 (November/December 2007)

James Quintiere, Professor, Dept. of Fire Protection Engineering,
Univ. of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742. E-mail: jimq@eng.umd.edu


ABSTRACT: This paper presents an experimental investigation of the
World Trade Center Tower 1 (WTC1) collapse using a 1/20-scale
model. The WTC1 fire on the 96th floor is reconstructed on a small
scale, and structural members including the floor trusses and the
exterior wall subsystem are built and tested under scaled fire
load. Scaling rules are used to determine the values of the
insulating material on the structural systems. This experimental
study demonstrates the use of scaled models to investigate a
real-world fire disaster. Results from the experimental
investigation are compared to analytical results and visual evidence
compiled in the National Institute of Standards and Technology
report on the investigation of the collapse of WTC towers. This
study helps engineers and researchers better understand the fire
behavior and the associated structural response in WTC1, and a more
solidly grounded collapse hypothesis can therefore pursued.

 

[Grizzly Bear]

Again, I was simply responding to others claims of no booms. Interesting note about the toilets though, I'd be intrested in understanding how that works.

If anything any kind of explosion would be because most toilets are made of porcelain, a ceramic material. If you're familiar with how ceramics are fired in a kiln, then you'd also be aware that occasionally they'll also explode in them. To be honest I'm not sure to what extent this applies to the WTC, however it's a plausible scenario.

 

[kylebisme]

please explain how your "free fall" (which it wasn't)...

If you insist on arguing that building 7 never achieved free fall, please explain how you came to that conclusion. I have previously substantiated my claim of building 7 achieving free fall by citing the conclusions of the NIST video analysis.

Or is it your contention that the WTC was completely bare and unoccupied on 9/11?

No, that is not my contention by any means, and I am at a loss as to how one could rationally take my statements to suggest anything of the sort.

I think that Dr. Quintiere, has very real data that proves you wrong.

Then please please present it directly here. I'm listing to the radio program you linked at the moment, and at least so far it has not addressed the contention I raised.

 

[BigAl]

If you insist on arguing that building 7 never achieved free fall, please explain how you came to that conclusion. I have previously substantiated my claim of building 7 achieving free fall by citing the conclusions of the NIST video analysis.

WTC7 was 610 ft tall. Freefall from that height is about 6.1 seconds.

The final collapse of WTC7 was about 15 seconds by this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4k6GMddY-lQ

 

[kylebisme]

I didn't not suggest the whole collapse was free fall, only that free fall was achieved during the collapse, as reported by NIST. Do you dispute that conclusion?

 

[BigAl]

I didn't not suggest the whole collapse was free fall, only that free fall was achieved during the collapse, as reported by NIST. Do you dispute that conclusion?

Even if true, which it's not, so what?

 

[WildCat]

No, that is not my contention by any means, and I am at a loss as to how one could rationally take my statements to suggest anything of the sort.

I'm at a loss to see why you don't think the hundreds of acres of office material in the pile is insufficient to account for the fires. You certainly haven't explained why you think this is.

But let's not beat around the bush kyle, you think therm*te is responsible, yes? If so, do explain how therm*te keeps the pile hot for weeks, you'll be the first truther ever to do so!

 

[WildCat]

I didn't not suggest the whole collapse was free fall, only that free fall was achieved during the collapse, as reported by NIST. Do you dispute that conclusion?

I certainly dispute your reading comprehension skills.

 

[alienentity]

I didn't not suggest the whole collapse was free fall, only that free fall was achieved during the collapse, as reported by NIST. Do you dispute that conclusion?

This is an interesting question. It begs the further question, if the brief period at freefall acceleration (of the remaining facade) occurs about 10 seconds into the overall collapse, that means it was approx 66% of the way thru the collapse, and represents roughly 15% of the duration of the collapse. This is based on a 15 second overall collapse (the upper bound is about 18 seconds, lower bound is about 14s).

If that was caused by explosives simultaneously removing support of the exterior columns, as hypothesized by every truther from Nantucket to Walla Walla, how is it that
a) No explosions were seen on the exterior columns
b) No demolition explosives were heard precisely at or before that moment of freefall?

I haven't heard one coherent answer from a truther yet. How bout you, Kyle?

Care to take that one on, or just dodge it like everybody else?

 

[kylebisme]

Even if true, which it's not...

Are you claiming NIST did not report free fall being achieved during the collapse, or are you disputing their conclusion that it had? If it is the former, I've already proved that is true here. If you are taking issue with the conclusion itself, then please explain what fault you find in it.

 

[kylebisme]

I'm at a loss to see why you don't think the hundreds of acres of office material in the pile is insufficient to account for the fires. You certainly haven't explained why you think this is.

I explained that it is the reported interval temperatures of the fires which the items you list do not account for.

But let's not beat around the bush kyle, you think therm*te is responsible, yes?

No. Rather, I know terrmite can cause fires with the initial temperatures reported, I am not claiming to know if that is what is what did it or not.

 

[kylebisme]

It begs the further question, if the brief period at freefall acceleration (of the remaining facade) occurs about 10 seconds into the overall collapse...

How did you derive this figure?