On 9/11, WTC7 Collapse Was Firemen's Concern (controlled demolition debunked)

[jaydeehess]

Watching Kreel post reminds me of the A&E program "Jail". Its fascinating to watch the self inflicted damage those people do to themselves.

Yes, steel regains SOME of the strength it loses as its cools.
HOWEVER, if the steel buckled crept or sagged when hot as happens COMMONLY in office fires, then when it cools it DOES NOT return to its original geometry AND therefore can NOT supply the same structural ability it had.

In addition it does not return to the same molecular state it had prior to being heated UNLESS you take specific steps to ensure that it does(your steel sword makers for eg.). I once cleaned up a cottage after it burned during a forest fire. I was helping the family who owned it as I was a friend of their son. I picked up what had been a .22 cal rifle and aside from the fact that the stock was gone, burned away, the rifle looked like all it needed was a good cleaning. My friend's father told me to try and bend the barrel. I did and bent it into a "U" with little problem. It took about the same amount of strength it would have to bend a wire coat hanger. Tell me again Kreel that steel regains its original strength once it cools and then demonstrate that you can bend a pristine .22 rifle barrel.

Second, the towers were not the giant heat sink you wish it to have been.
First of all the evidence that steel simply conducts heat as well as you suppose, does not exist and in fact the numerous cases of bent steel structural members in numerous office fires absolutely contradicts such nonsense.

Add to this the fact that fires were raging on consecutive floors and thermodynamics dictates that the heat generated in the middle floors would have no chance of being dissipated through the columns to cooler areas. Add in also that this steel was insulated to retard heat flow. On fire floors where insulation was abraded off by the aircraft impact that played much less in slowing heat getting to the steel BUT if that heat was to be dissipated at lower levels, with intact insulation, then the insulation WOULD slow that dissipation of heat out of the steel.

For a heat sink to work it MUST be able to conduct heat AND dissipate it in a cooler zone.

ETA: I was wrong. "JAIL" is on Spike TV

 

[TSR]

While it is cooling it's regaining strength. Yes, I believe that. How do you think they made steel blades? They heated the steal, shaped it, cooled it, and like magic it's strong again. I think you missed the point, buddy.

.
No, not like magick: the processes of annealing. normalizing, quenching and tempering blades is well known and documented.


Tell us, how were these to be accomplished at the WTC on 9/11?
.

 

[KreeL]

The cooler zones were everywhere, including the majority of the building below. Your conjecture won't work on me. I only believe what I know, and I don't make up extreme temperatures when there is no evidence of such.

 

[332nd]

The cooler zones were everywhere, including the majority of the building below. Your conjecture won't work on me. I only believe what I know, and I don't make up extreme temperatures when there is no evidence of such.

Oh that's right! You seem to have forgotten to show what NIST said the temperatures were! How hot did they say the fires were again?

 

[KreeL]

Add to this the fact that fires were raging on consecutive floors and thermodynamics dictates that the heat generated in the middle floors would have no chance of being dissipated through the columns to cooler areas.

So the report from the 78th floor by a fireman that two pockets of fire could be put out with two lines means what to you?

 

[jaydeehess]

The cooler zones were everywhere, including the majority of the building below. Your conjecture won't work on me. I only believe what I know, and I don't make up extreme temperatures when there is no evidence of such.

See my post above.

Your suppostion of heat sink capability is ridiculous.

 

[TJM]

So the report from the 78th floor by a fireman that two pockets of fire could be put out with two lines means what to you?

That you're an accomplished quote miner.

 

[jaydeehess]

So the report from the 78th floor by a fireman that two pockets of fire could be put out with two lines means what to you?

That on the absolute LOWEST level of any fire floor in either tower that there were two pockets of fire involment.

What does that have to do with the 20 floors above that?

ETA:For that matter what's that got do do with the part of my post you quoted?

 

[332nd]

So the report from the 78th floor by a fireman that two pockets of fire could be put out with two lines means what to you?

That that's as far as they got.

What does it mean to you?

& don't forget you have some questions waiting.

 

[KreeL]

He was assessing the fires in the impact zone. Isn't that where you said the fires were? Evidently they burned out just like I said. Except for the two small pockets, of course. That's IF you believe the fireman.

 

[TJM]

Hey KreeL, have we been pwned yet? The other forum wants to know.

 

[jaydeehess]

That that's as far as they got.

What does it mean to you?

& don't forget you have some questions waiting.

I shall predict that you have given KreeL the opening to shift the subject.

Edited by jhunter1163: 

Do not change user names to insult.

 

[jaydeehess]

He was assessing the fires in the impact zone. Isn't that where you said the fires were? Evidently they burned out just like I said. Except for the two small pockets, of course. That's IF you believe the fireman.

Like I said, self inflicted damage Kreel..
IF YOU bothered to actually read the whole quote from said fireman you would know that he says they had two fire areas ON the 78th floor. There is no indication that they meant that these were they ONLY fies burning in the building and why would you even try to say such a thing with the absolutly enormous amount of video evidence that fires were burning over most of the 20+ floors above the 78th?
In-freaking-credible!

NOW back to steel regaining all its strength perhaps.

 

[KreeL]

There is nothing here that disputes my point. Someone trying to say that steel doesn't conduct heat, someone else saying that steel doesn't regain strenght when cooling, and someone else who doesn't believe the fireman. You guys need to go back to bedunking the no-planers. I think there is already a thread for you to enhance your skills.

 

[jaydeehess]

Didn't twoer two begin its collapse on the 82nd floor? Why is Kreel attempting to say that with two areas of fire involvement 4 floors below, that fires on that floor were burned out.

 

[Edx]

While it is cooling it's regaining strength. Yes, I believe that. How do you think they made steel blades? They heated the steal, shaped it, cooled it, and like magic it's strong again. I think you missed the point, buddy.

No I think you did, go look at those pictures I posted and tell me if that steel is going to regain strength when cooled.

 

[Edx]

He was assessing the fires in the impact zone. Isn't that where you said the fires were? Evidently they burned out just like I said. Except for the two small pockets, of course. That's IF you believe the fireman.

Oh i wonder what quote-mine you are referencing here!!!!

 

[jaydeehess]

There is nothing here that disputes my point.

Actually eeverything disputes your ridiculous assertions

Someone trying to say that steel doesn't conduct heat,

Who was that? I see people saying that steel does not conduct heat and manage to dissipate it with such efficiency that it cannot heat up.

someone else saying that steel doesn't regain strenght when cooling

Well that's not what I said. I said that it will reagin sone of its strength but certainly not the same geometry and thus not the same structural integrity. I also dispute YOUR notion that it would regain all its original abilities.

, and someone else who doesn't believe the fireman.

Who was that? NO on has ever said they do not believe that fireman. Please point out who you imagine has said that.

 

[332nd]

He was assessing the fires in the impact zone. Isn't that where you said the fires were? Evidently they burned out just like I said. Except for the two small pockets, of course. That's IF you believe the fireman.

So you think the plane (a jetliner remember?) just hit one floor? Do you understand how big a 767 is?

Oh & you might want to answer those other questions. Your scrambling trying to change the subject only shows you've realized how ignorant your statements are.

How would the steel in the towers & 7 regain enough strength to ward off collapse after the fire was gone?

How would the steel in the towers & 7 not weaken after a jet crashed through it?

How hot did the NIST say the fires were?

 

[KreeL]

So let's start over. More accelerant = rapid tinder emolation. Rapid tinder emolation = fires burning out rapidly. Fire burning out rapidly = steel regaining strength when fire moves on. Fireman says two pockets of fire = two pockets of fire left that can be put out with two hoses.

Does that sum it up?

My point is, there was no towering inferno here. NIST agrees with me.