Coast to Coast AM Debate, August 21 2010

[grandmastershek]

2,000 feet? So they moved people back to a distance that was over three times the height of the building? Exaggerate much? I can recall reading distances of 300 feet up to maybe 600 feet being mentioned for the pre-collapse exclusion zone depending upon what source you wanted to go by. 2,000 feet puts you well into the Hudson river.

Does it matter anyway? People were right under the towers when they collapsed and not a single pop. Truthers are just grabbing at any straws they can get their mitts on.

 

[Christopher7]

Daryl?

http://whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/wtc7_med2.wma

 

[Christopher7]

Hydrocarbon fires will burn anywhere from 1500 deg. F - 2100 deg.

Please verify with a reliable source. The hottest temperatures I have seen from a reliable source are ~1,800^oF

The hotter a fire burns, the faster it uses up it's fuel supply. An office fire can only burn at max temperatures for about 20 minutes.

F. Could the steal weaken to a point of failure at 1500 deg.

How long would would it take to heat up a steel column?

 

[Christopher7]

Could the steel have heated to 650deg.C with a jet fuel fire? Absolutely.

Not.
The people who make jet fuel say it burns at ~500-600^oF in open air.
JET A-1
Flash point 38°C
Auto-ignition temperature 210°C
Freezing point -47°C (-40°C for JET A)
Open air burning temperatures 260-315°C (500-599°F)
Maximum burning temperature 980°C (1796 °F)
Density at 15 °C (60 °F) 0.775-0.840 kg/L
http://mepetroleum.com/jet_fuel.htm

Without a doubt. In fact, NatGeo even demonstrated that jet fuel can, and will, reach 2,000 deg. F in less than 4 minutes.

Proof that the NatGeo piece was a fraud.

I did the math a few pages back. I guess you missed it.

About half of the jet fuel burned up in the fireball. That leaves ~5,000 gallons. The area of one floor was ~40,000 sq ft.
5,000 ./. 40,000 = .125 or 1/8 gallon per sq ft.

 

[Christopher7]

They would have, considering the dogs were trained specifically to detect incendiaries.

False. The dogs were trained to detect barium, an ingredient in military grade thermate.

 

[Christopher7]

They already figured out that the building was going to collapse.

There was no reason to think WTC 7 would collapse. The debris damage was actually insignificant.
NCSTAR 1A pg 55 [pdf pg 97]
The initial westward progression and the overall speed of the collapse was not sensitive to the extent of the estimated structural damage to WTC 7 due to the debris from the collapse of WTC 1. When the global collapse was nearly complete, there was some small sensitivity to the extent of the initial damage in the southwest portion of the building.

The normal office fires were far less severe than other high rise fires.

They knew it was going to be imploded.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rY6rSLXSsdc

The explosions were on the lower floors that could not be seen.

They could not be heard either.

An explosion can be heard in the video above and this one [at 0.11]
It helps to turn up the volume [and the bass if you can].
The camera was ~2,250 feet away = 2 second delay.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrnmbUDeHus&feature=player_embedded

You will now quote from the deniers playbook:
1) Other things make loud noises.
2) Explosion does not necessarily mean explosives.

You will never admit that those sounds could have been explosives because you are in denial. You will insist that there is no way they could be explosives and than claim there were no sounds of explosives. If nothing else, y'all are very consistent.

 

[Christopher7]

2,000 feet? So they moved people back to a distance that was over three times the height of the building? Exaggerate much? I can recall reading distances of 300 feet up to maybe 600 feet being mentioned for the pre-collapse exclusion zone depending upon what source you wanted to go by. 2,000 feet puts you well into the Hudson river.

The scale is there on the street map I posted in the lower left hand corner. It's ~2,250' from camera 3 to where column 79 was.

http://a.imageshack.us/img827/5109/streetnames.jpg

 

[grandmastershek]

False. The dogs were trained to detect barium, an ingredient in military grade thermate.

Quote mine much?

"In the case of thermite/thermate that chemical is Barium Nitrate. Sulfur is also one of the compounds we train for that are found in thermate and explosives either as an initial component or as a by product of detonation.

Thermate is the specific name for the formulation used by the U.S. military. It is used as an incendiary device (the Barium nitrate increases the incendiary effect) and can be used for welding. Thermite itself is essentially iron oxide and powdered aluminum (or magnesium in some applications) with an initiator, usually strontium nitrate, another chemical we train for. "

They were trained for numerous chemical signatures regarding thermite, thermate, or whatstheflavoroftheweekmate. All the leapfrogging between thermite, thermate, & superduperthermite just proves 1 thing....un-falsifiability.

 

[grandmastershek]

There was no reason to think WTC 7 would collapse. The debris damage was actually insignificant.
NCSTAR 1A pg 55 [pdf pg 97]
The initial westward progression and the overall speed of the collapse was not sensitive to the extent of the estimated structural damage to WTC 7 due to the debris from the collapse of WTC 1. When the global collapse was nearly complete, there was some small sensitivity to the extent of the initial damage in the southwest portion of the building.

The normal office fires were far less severe than other high rise fires.

They knew it was going to be imploded.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rY6rSLXSsdc

An explosion can be heard in the video above and this one [at 0.11]
It helps to turn up the volume [and the bass if you can].
The camera was ~2,250 feet away = 2 second delay.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrnmbUDeHus&feature=player_embedded

You will now quote from the deniers playbook:
1) Other things make loud noises.
2) Explosion does not necessarily mean explosives.

You will never admit that those sounds could have been explosives because you are in denial. You will insist that there is no way they could be explosives and than claim there were no sounds of explosives. If nothing else, y'all are very consistent.

Good job Chris. Not 1 that sounds like a CD. a slight pop on one and another where you need to augment your sound for what I don't know because I heard nothing. Not to mention 1 quote from NIST while ignoring all the firefighters testimonies.

Yes, we will look at the more likely cause of a pop or bang when there is no evidence to support a bomb. It's called Occam's Razor....the bane of all twoofdom. Crying abotu the deniers playbook only illustrates you know there are answers....you just don't like them. Sorry...9 years of fail.

 

[grandmastershek]

The conspiracy theory about 19 nut-jobs getting by the most sophisticated military in the world and flying a plane into their headquarters is a fairytale that you embrace.

Except there is evidence.

http://www.fallacyfiles.org/equivoqu.html

Keep swinging for the fences.

 

[BadBoy]

EVERY professional controlled demolition involves window removal. If you set off explosives in a structure that still has windows, you create a lethal hazard from shrapnel.

Funny that neither windows exploding, nor shrapnel injuries outside the ordinary collapse radius, were observed. These two items alone rule out explosive demolition, along with about a million other observations, yet the morons cling to it like a drowning man to a life preserver.

As I had suspected. Instead of windows being blown out spectacularly, we see windows getting broken by the structure deformation.

 

[Christopher7]

Quote mine much?

Correction noted - thank you.
"In the case of thermite/thermate that chemical is Barium Nitrate. Sulfur is also one of the compounds we train for that are found in thermate and explosives either as an initial component or as a by product of detonation."
There are many sources of sulfur that have nothing to do with incendiaries. Training dogs to detect sulfur would result in a lot of false positives unless they were trained to detect barium and sulfur together.

Although thermate is the only known explanation for liquefied Sample 1 from WTC 7, the dogs did not detect the sulfur that caused this melting.

 

[beachnut]

There was no reason to think WTC 7 would collapse. The debris damage was actually insignificant.
NCSTAR 1A pg 55 [pdf pg 97]
The initial westward progression and the overall speed of the collapse was not sensitive to the extent of the estimated structural damage to WTC 7 due to the debris from the collapse of WTC 1. When the global collapse was nearly complete, there was some small sensitivity to the extent of the initial damage in the southwest portion of the building.

The normal office fires were far less severe than other high rise fires.

They knew it was going to be imploded.


...
You will never admit that those sounds could have been explosives because you are in denial. You will insist that there is no way they could be explosives and than claim there were no sounds of explosives. If nothing else, y'all are very consistent.

You are quoting NIST; using NIST to support the idiotic CD delusion. Good job! Outstanding! Perfect. wow

They knew! They; or was it them (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0047573/)? And, Gage makes up lies, failing to present rational evidence, any evidence.

There were no sounds of explosives; I thought 911 truth was using the invisible residue kind of termite; you know the delusional insane thermite theory of Dr Jones. Yes the same Jones who said the US caused the earthquake in Haiti. Has he been committed yet?

Gage is putting his money on thermite; no sounds like explosives from thermite. Are you debunking Gage again?

 

[Christopher7]

Good job Chris. Not 1 that sounds like a CD. a slight pop on one and another where you need to augment your sound for what I don't know because I heard nothing.

Thank you for a new denial statement, at least you are original.
There was a ka-boom on the first video and the sound of an explosion on the second. You are willfully deaf as well as willfully blind.

It is necessary to turn the sound up at 0:11 in the second video as the camera and reporter were over 2,000 feet away and there were many buildings in between to dampen the sound. This whole "No boom" argument has been debunked. There are sounds of explosions on several of the videos but they are hard to detect because of the directional mics reporters use that are set to pick up voices a few inches away and minimize everything else.

Not to mention 1 quote from NIST while ignoring all the firefighters testimonies.

You are ignoring the numerous firefighter and survivor statements of explosions. Some said it looked and sounded like a CD. One said the explosions sent people flying.

Yes, we will look at the more likely cause of a pop or bang when there is no evidence to support a bomb.

More likely IYO. Denying evidence of explosions/explosives by saying there is no evidence of a bomb is circular logic and it is idiotic.
Like I said, you will never admit that those sounds of explosions could have been explosives. That is in your deniers playbook.

 

[Tony Szamboti]

No, absolutely false Tony. I don't care if we didn't have a single piece of steel available, fuel loading and heat can be calculated to within a few dozen degrees fairly easily. I do it day in and day out.

Hydrocarbon fires will burn anywhere from 1500 deg. F - 2100 deg. F. Could the steal weaken to a point of failure at 1500 deg. F? Yes, absolutely.

You are an educated man Tony, but why does this not sink in?

You are talking potential air temps and air temps do not equate directly to steel temps in a structure which is on fire. Anyone worthy of debating this issue knows that.

If what you are saying occurred it would have been evident on the steel and it is impossible to simply claim it would be regardless.

Why wasn't the steel from the collapse initiation zones saved for analysis in the investigation? Many fire professionals were appalled that it wasn't.

 

[beachnut]

You are talking potential air temps and air temps do not equate directly to steel temps in a structure which is on fire. Anyone worthy of debating this issue knows that.

If what you are saying occurred it would have been evident on the steel and it is impossible to simply claim it would be regardless.

Why wasn't the steel from the collapse initiation zones saved for analysis in the investigation? Many fire professionals were appalled that it wasn't.

Gage says thermite did it; wait, it was explosives. Wait! Gage does not stand behind any of his implied delusions. Was this your best support for Gage's claims and delusions? This is it?

Many fire professionals were appalled that it wasn't.

Name them. List them.

 

[Sam.I.Am]

So you got your 2,000 foot distance from the location of the camera. That is nowhere close to being "Everyone" at ground zero at that time. There were hundreds of people chomping at the bit waiting for WTC 7 to collapse so that they could go back in to look for survivors, many had to be physically held back from getting closer. Most of those were well within 1,000 feet and on the south side of the pile where they were told to wait. No large buildings in the way to block the sounds of explosions. No wailing sirens or other street noises to cover up suspicious noises. And most tellingly, no reports from the people standing the closest to WTC 7 about anything that sounded even remotely like a CD. Let me guess, all of those people were in on it too, or will you claim that they feared for their pensions instead making them accessories after the fact?

 

[Christopher7]

So you got your 2,000 foot distance from the location of the camera. That is nowhere close to being "Everyone" at ground zero at that time. There were hundreds of people chomping at the bit waiting for WTC 7 to collapse so that they could go back in to look for survivors, many had to be physically held back from getting closer. Most of those were well within 1,000 feet and on the south side of the pile where they were told to wait.

Source? Remember that they kept moving people back so you will need a 5:20 pm time conformation with your 1,000 feet claim.

No large buildings in the way to block the sounds of explosions.

The buildings need not be large to block the sound of explosions on the lower floors. You are grasping at straws.

 

[BadBoy]

I or H sections have deep channel rails eminently suitable for the painting on of multiple layers of nanothermite Glenn. Then a nice thick coat of fireproofing and Bob's your uncle..

PS. Did you never read about the fact that they had 'upgraded'- read 'thickened' the fireproofing on the floors that had fire in WTC1 ? Nanothermite ignites at about 460-odd degrees and they were afraid the jet fuel would ignite it prematurely.

The big problem with this Bill (actually theres quite a few problems with it), is that the truthers CD scenario requires simultainious removal of core colulmns, according to them - to create the FFA.

Something like slow burning thermite isn't going to do this. It would be a very varied result in terms of column removal.

Also, the structure would collapse well before the columns were melted due to thermite, since as we know their structural integrity would fail progressively as the thermite burned. Hardly a sudden removal of the core columns. More an inexact slow degredation of their structual performance, relatively speaking compared with a building primed for CD.... and they wouldnt all get to that point at the same time.

er, kind of like what would happen if uncontrolled fires had been burning for a long time! wow

 

[Christopher7]

The big problem with this Bill (actually theres quite a few problems with it), is that the truthers CD scenario requires simultainious removal of core colulmns, according to them - to create the FFA.

Something like slow burning thermite isn't going to do this. It would be a very varied result in terms of column removal.
Also, the structure would collapse well before the columns were melted due to thermite, since as we know their structural integrity would fail progressively as the thermite burned.

You know nothing about what nano-thermite can do so stop making false statements like that.