Another Question for Heiwa : Amazing Fireproof Steel

[Crungy]

Terral,

This month's issue of Structure magazine contains a couple of interesting fire related articles; http://www.structuremag.org/issue.aspx The professional engineers who authored the articles give their email addys. Why not contact them and shower them with your genius?

Reconsidering Fire Resistance Requirements for Tall Buildings
World Trade Center 5 Failure Analysis


Here's the SFPE guidlines for peer review.
http://www.sfpe.org/upload/peer_review_guidelines.pdf
Why don't you or Jones write up a paper and submit.

 

[sts60]

Titanium, aluminum, whatever.

Until Terral stops repeating the same fundamentally and demonstrably wrong claims - especially, but not exclusively by any means, the claim that steel structural members must melt in order for steel structures to collapse - there's simply no more point in engaging him than any other deranged individual.

For benefit of any newcomers, one can point out (again) the demonstrated falsehood of such claims - the numerous examples of steel-framed structures collapsing in ordinary fires (without impact damage); the juvenile silliness of the "pull it" claims; the fact that FDNY observed unambiguous collapse indicators in the heavily damaged and burning WTC 7; claims that everyone who rejects the inside-conspiracy is an Administration stooge; etc., etc. I encourage any lurkers who have questions about such issues to come out and post, but I don't plan to waste time with the hopeless cases who simply keep regurgitating the same sheer denials of reality, undeterred by all efforts to educate them.

I'm reminded of the locally-famous Lurkers and Viewers thread over on apollohoax. A staunch Apollo hoax believer claimed the silent majority of "lurkers and viewers" supported him and his assertion that we were all gubmint shills and "disinfo agents". I invited all "lurkers and viewers" to chime in. 19 new posters appeared, and every one of them rejected his claims, but the one line out of that thread that really sticks with me is appropriate here:

I think you guys spend way too much time fighting with mental patients.

 

[AZCat]

I'm reminded of the locally-famous Lurkers and Viewers thread over on apollohoax. A staunch Apollo hoax believer claimed the silent majority of "lurkers and viewers" supported him and his assertion that we were all gubmint shills and "disinfo agents". I invited all "lurkers and viewers" to chime in. 19 new posters appeared, and every one of them rejected his claims, but the one line out of that thread that really sticks with me is appropriate here:

I think you guys spend way too much time fighting with mental patients.

This claim is quite common on another board where I and several others post regularly. I don't think it really matters, because regardless of the quantity of silent supporters of the truth movement, they still have no evidence.

 

[Apollo20]

AZCat:

What PHYSICAL evidence does NIST have for its hypothesis that fires in the towers heat-weakened the steel sufficiently to initiate total collapse of the buildings?

 

[Darat]

The buildings collapsed....

 

[Disbelief]

AZCat:

What PHYSICAL evidence does NIST have for its hypothesis that fires in the towers heat-weakened the steel sufficiently to initiate total collapse of the buildings?

Isn't that only a cherry pick of their hypothesis? Would you not have to add something about airplane damage and dislodged fireproofing (which, I am fully aware of your statements on the topic)?

 

[westprog]

My case has been presented to my complete satisfaction

Well Q.E. Bleedin' D.

 

[Apollo20]

Darat:

I can see why you have 31,428 posts!

You are a veritable paradigm of pithyness!

 

[AZCat]

AZCat:

What PHYSICAL evidence does NIST have for its hypothesis that fires in the towers heat-weakened the steel sufficiently to initiate total collapse of the buildings?

I'm not sure how your questions relates to the point I made in my post. The "truth movement" needs to have evidence to support its claims, regardless of the validity of the NIST investigation. Even if the NIST had done a hack job that isn't evidence of either wrongdoing or thermite/thermate.

 

[rwguinn]

stick to Chemistry, Doc.
What you know about structural mechanics would be a smaller book than "The collected wisdom of G.W. Bush"
What you DON'T know about how modeling and correlation works would fill several libraries.

 

[Apollo20]

AZCat:

You asked about evidence, I ask the same question of NIST.... but particularly with regard to PHYSICAL EVIDENCE, something the last poster apparently fails to understand!

 

[X]

Post deleted. He's been suspended, so reporting him for repeatedly referring to those who disagree with him as "Loyal Bushies" is a moot point.

 

[Disbelief]

Post deleted. He's been suspended, so reporting him for repeatedly referring to those who disagree with him as "Loyal Bushies" is a moot point.

Is he heading for a "death by mod?" This way he can say that he is being silenced by debunkers since he has so little defense and is continuously getting his head handed to him.

 

[Max Photon]

I've got your fancy physical evidence right here

Senor Apollo Viente,

You don't think NIST provided sufficient physical evidence that the WTC towers collapsed because fires heat-weakened steel?

You obviously must have been in the shadow of the ambiguity-reducing deception ray-gun, because it is supposed to be so obvious to all why the towers fell, that physical evidence is superfluous - heck, anti-American.

Why can't you be more like Darat, Gravy, Beachnut, or Rwguinn?

 

[X]

Is he heading for a "death by mod?" This way he can say that he is being silenced by debunkers since he has so little defense and is continuously getting his head handed to him.

I hope not. I want him to answer my post showing that steel can indeed be locally heated to relatively high temperatures.
(It's the one with a picture of a sword being forged.)

 

[beachnut]

AZCat:

What PHYSICAL evidence does NIST have for its hypothesis that fires in the towers heat-weakened the steel sufficiently to initiate total collapse of the buildings?

As stated, a fallen building. NIST seems to know more about building failure than you do about NTSB - but you will say it is a wash. Good morning sir, have a great day. Relax, as long as your are in Canada, the terrorist are less likely to appear, they hate cold and green as much as Americans. if in need of more bs, just ask

I think you should ask the question, did UBL think the aircraft would destroy the fire suppression systems of the WTC? Did UBL come up the idea to increase the KE of the aircraft? Did UBL know the WTC were checked for low speed impact aircraft?

I think you and 9/11 truth are after the wrong people. I think you and 9/11 truth need to ask UBL all the stupid questions.

This thread has proven our CT minded ship builder, does not understand gravity, fire, or steel. Are you joining him?

 

[tsig]

AZCat:

What PHYSICAL evidence does NIST have for its hypothesis that fires in the towers heat-weakened the steel sufficiently to initiate total collapse of the buildings?

What PHYSICAL evidence do you have that it happened any other way than debris damage and fires.

Please be the first.

 

[Architect]

On a somewhat related note, I've come to the conclusion that the towers would not have collapsed (at least not when and in the manner that they did) had core columns not been severed. This is just based on some back of the envelope calculations, but the exterior columns become unstable and pull inwards to failure at roughly 600c and a 6kip inwards pull.

This is the question which intrigued Arup and, of course, Edinburgh University. Not that Truthers ever pick that up, what with it requiring serious thought and everything. And it's really the only item open to question in the engineering community. Weird, eh?

 

[Apollo20]

Beachnut:

You know I think it would be better for President Bush to ask UBL these questions, perhaps after a little waterboarding to help jog his memory - that is, of course, after Bush has hunted him down and brought him to justice as he promised the American people he would do!

 

[tsig]

Beachnut:

You know I think it would be better for President Bush to ask UBL these questions, perhaps after a little waterboarding to help jog his memeory - that is, of course, after Bush has hunted him down and brought him to justice as he promised the American people he would do!

Politics have nothing to do with facts. If your hatred of Bush cannot be contained please take it to the Political Forum.

Now; what physical facts leads you to disbelieve that damage plus fire and gravity caused WT7 to fall.