Support NeoGAF

[Particle Physicist]

Concrete reinforced steel encased in fireproofing material will not lose structural integrity. Espcially considering the fact that the fires were only centered around a corner of the building, that doesn't explain why the entire building fell evenly, and perfectly straight all the way down.

The claimed 800C fires in the WTC took down two entire skyscrapers in just over an hour, yet a fire raging nonstop for 20 hours was not enough to collapse a 32 storey bulding completely engulfed in flames in Spain this past february, using inferior materials than the wtc no less? I'm sorry, I don't believe it.

er. the airplanes crashing into the buildings weakened the internal structures of those floors. who cares if the planes crashed close to the corner of the building, they were still flying at high speeds and are massive objects.. simple F=mv . the building code and structures were created to sustain high heat, yes, but not the massive sideways force of a plane flying full-speed ahead. the reason why the building fell downward and did not topple has already been explained countless times in this thread.

 

[Hitokage]

Look, burning jet fuel may not be enough to melt steel, but it didn't need to melt it. Metal expands and softens when heated. There's no such thing as a point where metal all of a sudden changes from perfect solid into liquid. All the burning fuel needed to do was bring the internal skeleton to the point where it couldn't support the floors above it. Throw in a ruptured outer support and congratulations, you have an imploding building.

Ignore basic science and there's no limit to where you can go.

 

[bionic77]

Besides the fact that I'm not going to argue and make a big deal out of this, since this is my opinion and I dont want to force things on people the same way i wouldn't want people to do to me..... where the hell did you get that from? Thats the first I've EVER heard that. Thats not disputable, given the fact that people saw it happen. Nowhere has anyone said anything like that.

Anyway, I don't claim to be an expert at shit, but I have done research on things, and not just from "some random shitty website" or whatever. I'm not satisfied with what I was told, so I made an effort to try to research some things, nothing more.

I was actually referring to the original link and I was under the assumption that the guy thought that the WTC was not hit by airplanes and was actually brought down by explosives? Did I go wrong there? If not, what is the guy's theory then if I misunderstood it?

 

[Cauliflower of Love]

One thing I've yet to seen countered is the two readings on a seismographic(name of those damn things). Interesting to mention that the pentagon strike didn't trigger any seismic reading.


Oh yeah, also the WTC 7 building collaping from fire damage...heh.


God damn all these sites, I got away from them for awhile. :lol


edit: Cause I am little stupid....

 

[Nerevar]

One thing I've yet to seen countered is the two seperate 2.ish magnitude "earthquakes" that happened on the commencing of the towers falling. Interesting to mention that the pentagon strike didn't trigger any seismic reading.

:lol

No offense muncheese, but that is, by far, the dumbest thing I've ever read. Common fucking sense dude.

 

[Cauliflower of Love]

:lol

I meant plane's striking, not starting to fall(that was a something else)

 

[Nerevar]

:lol

I meant plane's striking, not starting to fall(that was a something else)

even that though makes sense. Just think of the difference in torque between the planes crashing into a nearly 1400 foot tall building with a base of roughly 1 acre and one crashing into a building roughly 80 feet tall with a base of roughly 29 acres. That's a huge difference in the torque created at the base of the building.

 

[pj]

Look, burning jet fuel may not be enough to melt steel, but it didn't need to melt it. Metal expands and softens when heated. There's no such thing as a point where metal all of a sudden changes from perfect solid into liquid. All the burning fuel needed to do was bring the internal skeleton to the point where it couldn't support the floors above it. Throw in a ruptured outer support and congratulations, you have an imploding building.

Ignore basic science and there's no limit to where you can go.

Plus, I've heard that the heat shielding actually worked against the towers. Near the areas where the planes struck, the heat shielding was knocked off, which allowed the fires to directly heat the steel, then, heat conduction made the temperature of other connected parts of the structure hot, but since they still had heat shielding, it couldn't escape, further weakening the structure.

 

[fse]

http://www.propagandamatrix.com/articles/july2005/110705bombingexercises.htm

this is some weird shit.

 

[xsarien]

Look, burning jet fuel may not be enough to melt steel, but it didn't need to melt it. Metal expands and softens when heated. There's no such thing as a point where metal all of a sudden changes from perfect solid into liquid. All the burning fuel needed to do was bring the internal skeleton to the point where it couldn't support the floors above it. Throw in a ruptured outer support and congratulations, you have an imploding building.

Ignore basic science and there's no limit to where you can go.

Pretty much spot on, but I'm a pedantic dipshit.

The tower skeletons were on the outside, the supports were on the inside. The buildings were cool like that.

 

[Vormund]

Plus, I've heard that the heat shielding actually worked against the towers. Near the areas where the planes struck, the heat shielding was knocked off, which allowed the fires to directly heat the steel, then, heat conduction made the temperature of other connected parts of the structure hot, but since they still had heat shielding, it couldn't escape, further weakening the structure.

Basically the force of the impact blew away the heat shielding, which then left it unprotected. A regular fire wouldn't have done that.

I remember them (them = doco) showing that the size of the plane also was large enough to take out the middle structure.

 

[therock07]

http://www.newsforthesoul.com/icke.htm listen to this dudes interveiw if you got time.