9/11 Conspiracy debunkers!!?

Question

Ok Prove Science wrong with your obvious all knowing intelligence that you get from Fox News.Steel melts at 2777 degrees Fahrenheit, but jet fuel burns at only 1517 degrees. Was this special fuel in these planes?? Even if the impact of the planes knocked off the protective fire safe foam the steel would have never melted. Period. You can even check this info.

Answer 1

No one is saying the steel melted. The problem is that steel gets dangerously soft at relatively low temperatures.

Jet fuel burns at 800 to 1500 deg F, & when mixed with furniture, rugs & paper NIST estimated it would reach 1830 deg F. Steel loses 50% of its strength at 1100 deg F. At 1800° it loses over 90% of its strength

==> This is why all steel buildings are fire-proofed by coating the steel with plaster.

Instead of encasing each column in heavy concrete, (normal fire proofing) the WTC designers relied on 'sprayed on' fire proofing . Unfortunately, this did not get applied to the steel completely & a lot more got knocked off by the jets

The NIST replicated the fireproofing and conditions during impact and found the fireproofing easily blew off.

When you heat steel it becomes like soft taffy & you can't hold up 100,000 tons of weight on soft taffy. Remember: The steel beams are not just sitting there for cosmetic reasons. The beams are supporting fantastic amounts of weight.

On top of this, numerous supports were knocked out by the jets, & this was extremely important. The steel softened from the fierce fire. Then it bent as 100,00 tons pressed down on it. The floors sagged. This pulled in the outside columns.

==> Photographs show the columns bending inward. This is absolute evidence of steel weakening.

Then the columns snapped (broke) inward & the remaining column sprang outward. This causes\d the building to then collapse.

==> If this could not happen, then everybody wouldn't be wasting their money "fireproofing" steel.

See: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/wtc/......... for a nice movie explaining what happened.
........

Answer 2

Ive seen so many specials on this an actually believe it was a conspiracy. it looked like a controlled demolition to me and if you look close enough you can see small explosions happening just below the falling floors and witnesses reported hearing many explosions before the collapse. not to mention the building fell in like 7 seconds or close to that, if the the steel just softened then most of the building would still be standing. also, at the time of impact the planes lost most of their fuel in the explosion and huge fireball. and how come no black boxes were recovered?? their made out of the some of the strongest materials known to man but none were recovered, but they did find one of the "terrorist's" ID or passport, or whatever it was? so they cant find the black boxes with all the flight data and voice recordings, made out of the strongest materials known to man, but have no problem finding some ID made out of what.....paper.

and how about the pentagon? many pilots have said its nearly impossible to pull of that maneuver as it has been explained. and pictures taken right after the crash doesn't reveal any plane or any part of a plane? wheres the wings, fuselage or even an engine, well there nowhere to be seen.

so im not a debunker of the conspiracy and actually agree with you and love to argue these points. could go on and on with even more evidence but the wife is bugging me and its movie time.

do a search on you tube for 911 conspiracy's and watch some of the documentarys on there, even if you dont believe in the conspiracy its still facinating and the evidence is overwhelming.

Answer 3

You seem to have omitted aircraft grade aluminum for some unknown reason. It burns intensely at high temperatures and was the cause of the loss of a British Frigate to an Exocet Missle several years back in the Falkland Islands.

You have obviously also never been around a blast furnace which uses jets of fresh air to fan the flames of a normally mild fire into super intense blasts of heat. Hmm-m, something like what you get when you start a massive fuel fire 50 stories up in the air...yeah, about like that. Especially when you toss in elevator shafts to the ground and air ducts to the basement where air is at higher pressure than air fifty stories up. Sounds like a blast furnace to me.

Obviously you were nowhere near the 9-11 disaster, and had no relatives in that crisis. You also have never been close to a major fire in an industrial complex I suspect. Temperatures there run far in excess of those you mentioned, and things which look strong are turned into melted puddles of junk in short order. That being the case, I am wondering why I am even wasting my time with your silly question.

We lost over 3,000 hard working American and Foreign people in that disaster in the blink of an eye. It is not appropriate to cast doubt on their loss, or the grave implications that it had upon the freedoms for which we stand in America. We are a proud people and we will not permit useless slaughter like this to occur again. And, in case you haven't gotten the message yet, we are prepared to fight to insure that it doesn't. God bless the United States of America.

Answer 4

Its interesting stuff, but as far as controversy goes I find the pentagon crash more interesting. I'm not sure what to think, but I do think it is very relavent to entertain these questions

But The extra weight of a jumbo jet making it top heavy + the structural damage from the impact of plane could have toppled the towers. Damaged steel could have lower breaking point from heat? Was their anything in the building that could have burned at 2777 degrees? thats my two cents

Answer 5

A bajillion pound plane nailing the steel supports crosswise at a bajillion miles an hour can't be real good for said supports either. And there was other stuff in the building that probably burned hotter than jet fuel.

Answer 6

You're right about the numbers.

But, you've forgot one little detail - the steel in the WTC didn't melt. It doesn't take much heat to bend steel. If it did, then we'd never be able to work with it.

As far as the puddles of metal in the ruins that people saw, first off, that might not necessarily have been metal. And if it were, it was very likely aluminum.

Answer 7

Steel changes it crystalline structure at about 1300F.

It changes from a very strong elastic substance (below 1300) to a easily bendable substance (above 1300)

It loses most all of its strength when this temperature is reached and the crystalline stucture changes.

So jet fuel has 200 degrees above the phase change temperature.

Go ahead and search (Iron Carbon Phase Diagram)

Answer 8

I always thought that there was a conspiracy, but after watching Loose Change, I'm sure of it. You can see the individual explosions. A puny plane versus a well-built steel reinforced building...please. Those buildings fell so perfectly and quickly--nothing adds up. Oh and Fox New is completely unreliable and biased = IRRELEVANT.

Answer 9

Ok hot shot.

Let's PRETEND all that thermite and demolition theory is right.

Where is the proof that US gov did it. How do you know if it is not done by Al Qaeda? How do you know who did what? Where's the proof that US gov insiders placed thermite, explosives?

How do you know Al Qaeda isn't the one who set up demolition explosives? How do you know who placed those explosives if there were such scheme?

You got nothing other than 'gov cover up'

If you say they're good at hiding things then this allow you to make any claim and simply say 'gov is covering it up.'

If you're right about demolition how do you prove that US gov did it? Because nobody has. They 'proved' thermites, demolition, but nobody proved 'who' did it.

Which makes this whole thing pseudo science.


Not to mention WTC contained other metals than just steel. You're telling us WTC only had steel? No aluminum? No electrical currents arching?


Proving how crime is committed is not same as proving WHO did it.

Answer 10

Sure. You would only ask this question if you just listen to the conspiracy theorists. If you read any reports you would realize that nobody ever claimed that the steel "melted". They said that it softened, like butter softens before it melts. Once it softened, the weight of the floors above the softened part caused the collapse. Does that enter your brain successfully?