• 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.

Witness describes explosions at North Tower

Trifor hasn't come up with any source for his assertion about gas lines, yet he made the claim as if he knew what he was talking about. JREF newbies should take note that this is a common bee dunker tactic -- simply making **** up. Often as outright lies, under the guise of self-proclaimed "expertise", and often as guesses that they hope you won't call them on.


Why whats that behind Barbara Kafka in this windows on the world getty image? Why its a hood with an Ansul system. Now why would they need that in a kitchen with no open flame?

http://www.gettyimages.com/detail/72852101/Hulton-Archive
 
Yeah, I guess "schlepping" tanks up in the elevators would be such a chore. Much easier to run a line up half a kilometre into the sky. And the restaurant would obviously fail if it had to use crappy ol' electricity. It would be the laughingstock of New York, according to bee dunkers.

Electric burners are terrible for controlling heat. Find a decent chef that will use them.

I'll bet a few bucks that you won't.
 
There isn't even that one. With the building on fire it's hardly beyond the pale to think that something could have exploded (other than a bomb), but the sound in that clip is super hinky. I say it was dubbed in.
If it was real, it could have been cars cooking off. Ever hear a tire explode?
 
Wtc7 was rated as a class A building for re-insurance purposes-
NO NATURAL GAS SERVICE ALLOWED - PERIOD !
Yo google-fu be suckin like a leach.

http://www.liquida.com/video/a6da295b1/michael-lomonaco-ode=to-windows-on-the-world/

Go to 3:17. That's a gas cooking top. It's square. Electric are round.

Gas lines feeding gas-operated systems are safer than propane tanks. I mentioned before that there is a greater chance of catastrohic explosive events from propane tanks than from gas lines.
 
There isn't even that one. With the building on fire it's hardly beyond the pale to think that something could have exploded (other than a bomb), but the sound in that clip is super hinky. I say it was dubbed in.

Where is the link to the video so i know which explosion exactly you are talking about?
 
Why whats that behind Barbara Kafka in this windows on the world getty image? Why its a hood with an Ansul system. Now why would they need that in a kitchen with no open flame?

Sorry, bro. We had those in every mess hall I worked in, including in areas that had never seen a natural gas pipeline.

They are usually filled with sodium-or-potassium bicarbonate. Smothers a grease fire without spattering crap all over the kitchen.


It also makes iteasier to clean up because it saponifies grease.
 
Maybe it would be stupid cause if the building catches fire the gas pipes would blow up creating even more fire and potentially creating a raging inferno that could trap people and burn them to death and blow them out the windows of the freaken building if they exploded.

Let me see lets build a really huge tall skyscraper with a big restaurant at
the top and run gas pipes up and down the building just to service a stupid god damn restaurant but oh no thats really safe isnt it dont worry about the people in the builing that could burn to death get trapped die if the gas pipes decide to break open leak gas everywhere filling up the place and explode why not just use power to heat the coils on the ovens and stoves dont you think that i a much safer option that running gas lines up and down a tall building?

By the way using gas pipes potentially gives any nutcase a way to kill people destroy blow up the building and set it on fire im sure it wouldnt be to hard
to sabotage the gase lines if you could get past security and access the gas pipes, lookout someone let the pyromaniac terrorists into the building. Not to mention a disgruntled ex employee hell bent on revenge on the people who fired him when he worked in the building sabotaging the gas pipes.

See looks lots of reasons not to run gas pipes up very tall tall buildings.

:eek::eek::eye-poppi:eye-poppi

Well, what would it matter if it was in a 1 story building or a 110 story building? The dangers would be the same.
 
Well, what would it matter if it was in a 1 story building or a 110 story building? The dangers would be the same.

"Fire science professor" saying that fire in a 110-storey building poses the same dangers as fire in a one-storey building.
 
"Fire science professor" saying that fire in a 110-storey building poses the same dangers as fire in a one-storey building.


...and? Granted there would be different dangers trying to escape the fire, but how would the fire itself be different?
 
Propane being less explosive, but still VERY explosive.

Either way, I have not found anything that tells me there were not NG/Propane lines in any of the WTC buildings.

I honestly don't think there were gas lines in the buildings. I cannot see any reason to have NG on any of the floors below.

Steam lines, yes. They would heat water, HVAC, etc, for all the tennant needs. Presumably, steam would be made in the basement levels, perhaps even one big plant to serve both towers.

And I think the kitchen for the restaurant was in the basement, and food was whisked up the express elevators, perhaps also involving some kind of IR plate warmers and/or insulated carts.

An electric kitchen would indeed suck it sideways, but could be used for soups and such, and lessen the load on the runners from the basements.

Also, when you read the NIST report, there is absolutely zero mention of gas mains being severed by the plane impacts and adding to the fires, or any mention of safety devices kicking in and preventing that. None.

Just sayin'
 
Seymour,

I could be absolutley wrong. I'm still looking into confirming where the location of the kitchen would be in the WTC, and if there were gas for the appliances.

If I am wrong, I will certainly admit it.
 
As far as I'm aware, the kitchen at the top of the Prudential Center in Boston is on the same level as the restaurant. So, assuming I'm not wrong, it's not unheard of to have gas lines running up for a restaurant.

But I could be wrong.
 
Don't think it matters per se. Gas lines are one of many components that you often find installed in large office buildings. If Ergo wants to throw a fit over that detail, he's free to do it, but it doesn't really answer anything concerning why anyone should think explosions of any kind are unusual in a large fire like that.

Electrical components are a given, since transformers, and wiring are needed to power the building in the first place. It also needs equipment to properly mangae the power usage to prevent overloading the lines.

Gas depends on whether or not it was required for a particular application. Kitchens are common applications for stove tops and ovens. It's also common for water heating, and HVAC applications (in many cases for interior heating).

Chemicals such as hair spray and certain types of cleaners are flammable and the containers may explode. The plane had oxygen tanks as well, which aren't typical concerns in a building fire that were present then.

This comes in before anyone needs to start arguing about how people often use simile and metaphor references. Not to say those are irrelevant when it comes to truther arguments, but even where the explosion reports refer to actual "explosions" truthers don't ever want to admit that they were placing more significance on the explosions than was ever justified, and never even attempted to justify why the more mundane culprits couldn't have been a factor in some of the reports offered by witnesses. The bickering over one single element out of the many proves my point.
 
Last edited:

Back
Top Bottom