Try this little experiment at home, in the outdoors, with enough
access to lots of sand so you can douse the flames.
Make a little steel bridge, with bricks under each end holding
up a long, thin piece of steel (you can use a thin steel bar, or
flat section, or a steel ruler).
Put a few bricks or dead weights at the middle of the span of
that bridge, to heavily load it, just to the point where if you add
more weight, the bridge would buckle up and collapse.
Like this: (ignore the dots)
............BB
_________________... (thin steel)
BB........fire.........BB..
(B = Bricks)
Then put a big metal tray of kerosene or aviation grade jet fuel
under those central bricks, and light it up with burning piece
of cardboard or newspaper to create a big fire (like a bonfire).
Now wait to see what happens.
Does the bridge collapse due to the heat of the fire?
You could also try this fire experiment with a vertical steel
column that is very heavily loaded.
2007-11-13
21:16:43
·
17 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Military
I have tried this experiment at home,
myself, and YES, the fire did last for
more than one hour... (I used a very big
steel baking tray to hold all the kerosene
and it created a LOT of black smoke,
that even the neighbours were worried
and almost called the fire & emergency
rescue services)...
But try this experiment in an open field,
with access to lots of sand, and a shovel,
so you can tip out the tray or shovel lots
of sand over the fire, to snuff out the
flames. It really is very hard to put out,
unless you are prepared.
Go on! See if the overloaded steel
bridge or column will collapse due to
the heat from a fire.
You owe it to yourself to know what fire
really does to steel. Don't believe me,
just believe your own experiment !!!
I don't care if you think I am a nutty kooky
conspiracy theorist. Go and see the
results for yourself, if you really believe
that steel turns soft, pliable & rubbery
in a big air fire.
Believe your own eyes!!!
2007-11-13
21:35:32 ·
update #1
Look up any foundry handbook, or
engineering materials properties table,
and you will learn that the actual melting
temperature for steel (iron + carbon) is
1532 C.
You need temperatures of 1532 C to
create liquid steel.
Yet where did this molten steel come
from?
Molten Steel on 9/11 created by under 250 C open air fires?:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JithuVAIb7Y
How did all 3 WTC buildings lose their strength?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qa7PN-8T2VY
Building 7 was not hit by any plane or seriously damaged:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZ9BofDUXv0
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2073592843640256739
Flight 93 - where is the wreckage and debris? :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-59kouBgO_s&NR=1
Pentagon - where is the 80 tonnes of jet plane debris? :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rgyq2H7PpO0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lSeaZLYViwU
Watch 9/11 Mysteries (all 3 videos) at:
http://911weknow.com
MOLTEN STEEL!!!!
2007-11-13
21:42:37 ·
update #2
Like I said, don't believe me, or the
opinions of other people, look for the
scientific hard evidence yourself.
Believe your own fire burning experiment
and see if steel really does weaken
enough to collapse due to the heat of
air fires.
Why? Because you owe it to yourself
to know the truth, not propaganda from
Popular Mechanics or from the mass
media (whose owners are profiting from
the middle-east wars).
Just believe your own eyes, and see if
your overloaded steel bridge will indeed
collapse due to an open air fire.
If it collapses or you get molten metal,
then I will admit that I am wrong and
mistaken... but I have tried these tests
myself, and that is why I encourage you
to prove it to yourself.
Don't believe the opinions of other
people, just try the steel burning tests
for yourself and come to your own logical
conclusions.
Then compare what you have learned,
to the evidence of molten metal,
shredded steel and concrete powder
on 9/11.
2007-11-13
21:54:20 ·
update #3
Oh and one more thing... if you use
concrete blocks, instead of bricks
(like Besser blocks), let me know if the
concrete blocks explode suddenly, or
convert to fine powder, after exposure
to open air fire.
Remember, you can use as much fuel
as you like, and burn it for as long as
you like.
Try it!
And for those who think that all the
molten metal dripping out of the South
Tower must be liquid aluminium:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JithuVAIb7Y
then try to liquify, or melt, aluminium in
that same kerosene or jet fuel air fire.
Roll up some aluminium foil, and hold it
over the flames, and see if it drips off
like a liquid.
(Melting temperature for aluminium is
about 550 - 600 C)
Go on and see if you can get molten
aluminium or steel from your air fire!
eg. Try to hold a steel or aluminium frying
pan, or cooking pot, or spatula over the
flames, or perhaps, try to melt your
steel tongs or car engine pistons in that
open air fire. Go on!
2007-11-13
22:02:05 ·
update #4
I am talking about fuel whose ONLY
source of oxygen is from open air, NOT
explosives that have built in Oxygen in
the chemical propellants, like gunpowder
or Thermate (Fe2O3 + Al). I am only
talking about burning plain hydrocarbon
fuels.
For those who think that the office
materials could have created molten
metal, think about the those office
materials are made of (eg. plastic is
mostly made from hydrocarbon or oil,
like a very low grade hydrogen fuel that
burns with oxygen in the open air).
Paper is a fuel that burns at Fahrenheit
451F = 233 C.
The fact is, when you don't have much
oxygen in the open air, you cannot get
very high temperatures. That is why your
aluminium frying pans do not melt when
exposed to gas stove flames. The
melting temperature of aluminium is
about 550 C - 650 C, and even when
exposed to air fire, it does not turn into
liquid. The melting temperature of steel
is 1532 C (don't believe me? Look up
any foundry handbook)
2007-11-13
22:17:59 ·
update #5
Somebody said:
"You left out one little control in your experiment....... simulating having a several thousand ton object slam into it at 500+ miles an hour. The trade center buildings didn't just spontaneously combust and then collapse."
WRONG!
A typical passenger jet plane, like those
UA 767 planes, would weigh around
80 tons (not thousands of tons) - and the
Twin Towers survived each plane
crash (they were designed to do
so anyway).
The South Tower stood standing strong
for about 56 minutes, before collapsing
at freefall speed. (Look at the collapse
videos. You see explosions happening
first, before falling movement of the
upper structures). Something had to
have removed the strength of those
columns, before any downward falling
could happen.
Look at all the photos, showing many
explosions popping out of the buildings,
several floors below the collapsing
levels! This cannot be from built up air
pressure because their were so many
leaks & gaps
2007-11-13
22:26:10 ·
update #6
(the upper collapsed levels were not
even air tight, so how could air pressure
build up and pop our windows and
walls about 10-20 floors below the
collapsing levels?)
Look at the photos:
http://www.members.shaw.ca/truth911/truth911/towers.htm
http://truth911.net
Try the steel burning experiments for
yourself, and prove to yourself that open
air fire REALLY CAN weaken steel, to
cause it to buckle and collapse.
Don't believe me, just believe what you
see with your own eyes and your own
honest tests.
(For the fire, do not add extra oxygen,
like a strong breeze from an electric
fan, or a pump, or even an oxygen supply
from an oxygen tank, like they use in
oxyacetylene cutting or welding)
Just use plain open air as the only
oxygen source, and see what happens.
Forget everything others have told you
and try this experiment at your next BBQ
or cook-out, when you have open fires,
and bricks & see if your steel hotplate
will really sag or collapse.
2007-11-13
22:31:54 ·
update #7
Are you in kindergarten?
This experiment doesn't even come close to approximating 9-11.
Just say NO! to unfounded conspiracy theories!
2007-11-13 21:38:53
·
answer #1
·
answered by Bad M 4
·
6⤊
1⤋
I read through popular mechanics and even posted a few questions that some didnt choose torespond to.
More facts to raise suspivion was the fact that it took the white house
4 YEARS to launch an investogation
that was under funded and understaffed.
And led by a bushy
And there is no way that the temperature could have risen so extreeme by the "rugs" and paper" that would have been burned up and not truly contributed to a longlasting temperature raising and sustaining level.
And somehow the debris hit building 7 -- which feel exactly like the other 2 buildings.
and initially the lease holder denied it all, then later claimed the firedepartment did in fact tell him to drop it
but it fell in such a way that it was pre prepped...no one can argue that?
And the reason all buildings fell straight down--COULD be the debris would be easier to clean up.
Had they fallen to the side...debris would be harder to collect
and evidence would show the state the melted metal was in.
that would be hard to justify....so a straight down demolition was needed to keep it all hidden.
Why bush and chnney just had to be questioned together?
Everything around the 9/11 aftermath is clearly open to suspect.
Hopefully there will be an investigation --real investoigation occuring after this ruthless bush leaves office.
WHO PROFITTED THE MOST FROM 9/11?
For a job that would cost in the hundreds of millions, the lease holder made billions!!
and got out of the work he was going to have to put into building 7
theres someone who should be tried!!!!
2007-11-13 21:59:35
·
answer #2
·
answered by writersbIock2006 5
·
0⤊
4⤋
Typical building fires, including the twin towers, are at 1000-1100 deg C. Steel loses 90 % of its strength at 1100 deg C.
As absolute proof that these temperatures were achieved, we have hundreds of photos of the floors & perimeter columns of the towers bending just before collapse.
There was “…inward bowing of the exterior columns, reaching an observable maximum of about 55 in. near column 316 on the 96th floor. The inward deflection appeared to extend over the entire south face of the building at this time, and was visible between the 94th and 100th floors.”
From: NIST (National Institute of Science & Technology) NCSTAR 1-3 Section E.3.5
http://wtc.nist.gov/NISTNCSTAR1-3.pdf
2007-11-16 14:03:58
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
I am with you on this and there are so much unanswered question around 9/11, it drove me nuts for some time. But eventually I let it go. The mystery of 9/11 will never be totally solved.what really pisses me of is, that 9/11 was sold as attack, instead of total incompetence and failure of the administration, which got 121 warnings (official 9/11 report) And then to trump it, instead of firing everybody without pension, they start wars with the public screaming for blood. I can never get over that.
2016-04-04 00:18:33
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I tried something silimar in my lab but I dont think I can reach the 1370 degrees C it takes to melt steel. The burning temp of jet fuel is what...about 980 degrees C? Even so, I dont know much about the structure of the building to conspire about what really happend. What's done is done and i'm sure whatever the reason they know Americans and their limited smarts cant figure it out anyway...but they will go to war over it, and Im sure thats what hey counted on.
2007-11-14 00:19:56
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
Does the fire last for more than an hour? is it channeled through several flights by walls which create a furnace effect? Does the bridge stand exposed to weather such that the top can sway up to 17 feet in any given direction? best yet... did a 125 ton hunk of steel slam into this bridge moving at hundreds of miles an hour?
Conspiracy theorists amaze me at their blindness to variables...
2007-11-13 21:27:35
·
answer #6
·
answered by promethius9594 6
·
5⤊
1⤋
You left out one little control in your experiment....... simulating having a several thousand ton object slam into it at 500+ miles an hour. The trade center buildings didn't just spontaneously combust and then collapse.
2007-11-13 22:17:53
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
Please do not forget the Natural gas Lines that ran through the WTC to run heaters and cookers and the 6 Inch Line that ran to Windows on the World restuarant. Plenty of Air Lines under pressure as well!
try a real engineering site as well.................
Barbarians made steel weapons in open fields with fire wood and some clay.............
2007-11-13 22:02:25
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋
Of course they weaken. Why do you think early machine guns were water cooled. Why did Bren guns have interchangeable barrels that were rotated by the team to prevent overheating.
Something you may have overlooked is if any rifle etc gets overheated enough it will start to ignite the ammo in the chamber then the mag.
2007-11-13 22:05:49
·
answer #9
·
answered by Sid B 6
·
3⤊
1⤋
Yes, steel does weaken when exposed to an ordinary open air jet fuel fire. I've seen it.
2007-11-13 22:05:47
·
answer #10
·
answered by gunplumber_462 7
·
2⤊
1⤋