Moderated The NYPD and Molten Concrete

[yankee451]

Just when you think Truthers couldn't get anymore disgusting. Besides that, you didn't address any of the post. Why not?

I did address it. It's not my problem if it went over your head.

 

[Andy_Ross]

There was plenty of metal to melt in the towers. Copper (miles and miles of cable) Aluminium and lead all spring to mind.
How would a firefighter seeing molten metal know what metal he was seeing?
We have a whole thread on this somewhere.

 

[fess]

When does the building get to break the weak points on the jet.

In case you didn’t notice, it did.

ETA; Sorry, I see this was addressed.

 

[LSSBB]

You are very willing to forgive people who began rumors that resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people.

The reason the molten steel lie is significant is because it isn't just an isolated indiscretion. When FEMA, NASA, the USGS, the FDNY and the NYPD as well as dozens of media outlets AND the ironically-named 9/11 Truth Movement ALL sing the same tune and that tune is a blatant lie, it takes a gigantic leap of faith to keep telling yourself it was all an accident.

Talk about a preponderence of evidence!

Mighty mountain you're making out of that molehill. Here's my reponse, you'll like it because it's Youtube, not "TeeVee" and won't "brainwash you".

 

[fess]

Looks pretty hollow to me.

That 1/3 of a second won't mean much after the cockpit is wiped out on impact and the rest of the fuselage tube walls acting like a long cookie cutter of thin aluminum. You guys make it sound like the air in the cabin makes the jet a battering ram.


Hollow Inside

[qimg]http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/mexico-city-jet-crash.png[/qimg]

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Southwest-Airlines/Boeing-737-8H4/2137913/L/

Still on this hollow fuselage lie… eh? Using your analogy, I suppose the passengers were issued wooden orange crates for seating. Where does all of the luggage and cargo fit? The cabin floor is not part of the structural strength? Not to mention the various bulkheads, stringers, ribs, and other structural members that give the fuselage its strength.

Any idiot looking at your picture of a B-727 can tell you it is by no means hollow. No more hollow than a B-757/767.

It should have been going the speed of sound, that would have obliterated that blast barrier, eh?

Hollow and No Match Concrete.

Utter stupidity at its best. How fast was this aircraft going when it hit the blast barrier?

 

[abaddon]

You are very willing to forgive people who began rumors that resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people.

The reason the molten steel lie is significant is because it isn't just an isolated indiscretion. When FEMA, NASA, the USGS, the FDNY and the NYPD as well as dozens of media outlets AND the ironically-named 9/11 Truth Movement ALL sing the same tune and that tune is a blatant lie, it takes a gigantic leap of faith to keep telling yourself it was all an accident.

Talk about a preponderence of evidence!

Nope. You made stuff up, now you have to roll the hard six, and support your claims.

Your continuing attempts to reverse the burden of proof are becoming tiresome.

 

[fess]

If you were tasked with faking a jet crash, wouldn't you prep the site?

Oh, I might try to “prep” the area if it weren’t that thousands of people may get a little concerned about me removing three floors of trusses, sheeting, and concrete. How did they get all of that material out of the building?

 

[marplots]

I would like to point out that most of a missile, by the time it reaches the target, is hollow. The tube can also be made of aluminum. This isn't rocket science... or maybe it is.

 

[fess]

Maybe they pulled the 300 lb glass panes out with chewing gum.

Still having trouble with vertical and horizontal strength are you? I explained this to you in very simple terms previously so even you could understand it.

 

[yankee451]

I would like to point out that most of a missile, by the time it reaches the target, is hollow. The tube can also be made of aluminum. This isn't rocket science... or maybe it is.

The penetrating warhead is capable of punching through hardened bunkers and weighs 900 lbs and measures 12x60 inches.

the gouge in the below image is in a column measuring 14 inches. Based on the column size, that gouge looks to be about 12 inches wide, which means it could easily have been caused by a dense metal penetrating warhead of the same diameter.

The warhead concept was a 1000 pound dense or ballasted penetrator. The warhead would either be designed with a dense metal case or contain dense metal ballast for maximum penetration. The warhead would be filled with advanced insensitive explosive to compensate for the reduced charge weight. This concept used the Hard Target Smart Fuze (HTSF), an accelerometer based electronic fuze, which would allow control of the detonation point by layer counting, distance or time. The accelerometer senses G loads on the bomb due to deceleration as it penetrates through to the target. The fuze can distinguish between earth, concrete, rock and air.
http://www.dyess.af.mil/library/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=17954

Lookie here - more 12 inch gouges:
http://yankee451.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/left-right-closeup-1.png

Edited by LashL: 

Changed oversized image to link, as overly large images mess with the formatting of the thread.

 

[marplots]

The penetrating warhead is capable of punching through hardened bunkers and weighs 900 lbs and measures 12x60 inches.

the gouge in the below image is in a column measuring 14 inches. Based on the column size, that gouge looks to be about 12 inches wide, which means it could easily have been caused by a dense metal penetrating warhead of the same diameter.

I'm trying to make sense of that image. Are you saying the missile skipped along, bending and gouging steel beams and then, what? made a hard left turn to go into the building?

Everything looks bent inward to me. I'd expect stuff to be bent outward if there was a military style explosion, but maybe not?

 

[yankee451]

I'm trying to make sense of that image. Are you saying the missile skipped along, bending and gouging steel beams and then, what? made a hard left turn to go into the building?

Everything looks bent inward to me. I'd expect stuff to be bent outward if there was a military style explosion, but maybe not?

It detonated.

 

[Redwood]

Originally Posted by yankee451
I have already admitted several mistakes and this is another. I stand corrected.

Me too. Baby steps.

 

[TJM]

It's good to know you guys are working so hard to keep me honest, I'm not in this game to be right, but to learn the truth and I appreciate your perspectives. This is the closest thing to a peer review I am going to get, so thank you.

You're welcome.

So back to the really hot fires.

Rumors of fires so intense they could melt steel were started by the FDNY, NYPD, FEMA, etc. and were continued by the Truth Movement. I'm still waiting for someone to tell me why they would all be singing the same song.

They weren't. 9/11 truthers, apparently too stupid to understand the concepts of hyperbole, simile and metaphor, took first responder quotes literally.

These rumors came from the authorities, as seeen in this video:
http://911conspiracy.wordpress.com/2010/01/24/molten-steel-extreme-temperatures-at-wtc/

Great video with many examples of my point above, thanks Steve.

The media, the authorities, and the "Truth Movement" all singing the same tune until today when virtually everyone takes for granted the towers fell because of really hot fires.

Well there's also the teensy detail of severe structural damage along with fire, but that's quibbling, right?

But there weren't any.

No?

I may have fallen for Steve WarRan's false lead about Dun and Bradstreet, but that doesn't mean the buildings were fully occupied, it just means I need to be more careful. I've been corrected on a few things already, so don't stop now.

I'll give you this Steve - I've worked in commercial real estate for coming up on 24 years and I've never had any building at 100% capacity. Ever. My current account has over 70,000 square feet available and another 52,000 coming up by the end of Q3 this year. That translates to 5 floors. So no, no building is ever fully leased and I expect the WTC was no exception.

If the buildings were fully occupied, where are the floors to the left and right of the hole? Where is the raging inferno of office material on the nonexistent floors?, and even if a jet could do such a thing, in order to bend the panels like that, they couldn't have been backed by three acres of concrete each. I stand corrected on Dun and Bradstreet. Where are the floors?

You're looking into a smoke filled gash created by a 767. What stood there before was obliterated. Do you really expect to see intact structure there?

 

[Andy_Ross]

I notice that Yankee seems to always dismiss the Kamikaze attacks on US and British ships for some reason.

Why is this?

Aluminium Aircraft were deliberately crashed into steel warships and they
punched holes in the sides and decks.
They were smaller than the aircraft that hit the towers and the ships were stronger.

 

[LSSBB]

I notice that Yankee seems to always dismiss the Kamikaze attacks on US and British ships for some reason.

Why is this?

Aluminium Aircraft were deliberately crashed into steel warships and they
punched holes in the sides and decks.
They were smaller than the aircraft that hit the towers and the ships were stronger.

He dismisses it because he doesn't apparently want to hear about it.

 

[yankee451]

He dismisses it because he doesn't apparently want to hear about it.

Tell him it's because I'm waiting to hear why a Kamikaze is like a 767 and how the hull of a warship is like the twin towers.

I have researched Hinsdale, as well as other vessels struck by suicide planes; eventually the true-believers will point to the Kamikazes as proof of something. I want to hear what you think that something is.

 

[Andy_Ross]

Well, one is an aircraft made of aluminium, the other is a ship made of a hull made from continuous steel plate backed by forged steel ribs and horizontal steel decks etc.


A 767 is an aircraft made out of aluminium and the towers are made out of hollow steel columns.

If an aluminium aircraft can crash into a steel ship and break through the continuous steel of the hull, why can't a much bigger and heavier aircraft break through the columns of the building?

 

[marplots]

There's an obvious difference. Saudi's and Japanese. You have to be a better pilot to hit a ship.

 

[yankee451]

9/11 truthers, apparently too stupid to understand the concepts of hyperbole, simile and metaphor, took first responder quotes literally.

They took themselves seriously enough to make a museum exhibit about it; that's a bit more than hyperbole. Dozens of news paper articles, endless comments on the news about the hotspots, NASA's images of the ground 1300 degrees, but no, simple office fires wouldn't do that.

Well there's also the teensy detail of severe structural damage along with fire, but that's quibbling, right?

The fires were not hot enough to melt or even weaken that much steel, especially over such a short time, and if the "severe" structural damage wasn't enough to bring them down immediately, it wouldn't be enough to bring them down an hour later. It's a paradox, a conundrum.

You're looking into a smoke filled gash created by a 767. What stood there before was obliterated. Do you really expect to see intact structure there?

Yes. As stated before, the hollow tube of the fuselage was 17 feet in diameter.

The hole is twice that size.