Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Seaver
Not a complete lack of evidence, it's been posted numerous time. I'm not riding his coat-tails, I've posted my evidence and you conspiracy theorists ignore them so I dont post them again.
|
What you did was flame, and in that post you did not support your personal attack on Fatsom. Disagreement can happen without disrespect. I know you're a very intelligent and mature person, so I was surprised when I read your post. My response was intended to point out that you didn't actually have content in your post, just flame. That's not appropriate for TFP.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Seaver
So you're suggesting I post evidence that fire is not hot? That we can not melt steel with fire? How about I post evidence that fire occurs and is not simply a government conspiracy. Jet fuel burns hot. Mixed with paper, carpet, and all sorts of flamable things inside the building it's going to burn hotter. With a giant hole in the side of the building plenty of air will flow in to feed the fire. With concrete floors that heat energy will be concentrated, and the only thing for it to do is give it's heat to the building itself.
|
Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F. I belive carpet, paper, desks, etc. burn much cooler than jet fuel (please, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong). Are you suggesting that the temperature at which jet fuel, carpet, paper, desks, chairs, houseplants, computers, etc. all burn is cumumlative? If so, that could explain the 1500C temperature, but it would lead me to a state of confusion that I may never come back from, as it goes against my basic understanding of the nature of fire.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Seaver
So for that theory to hold true you'd see the flash effects of controlled demolitions along with the dust. You don't make explosions without a flash, it simply does not happen. Unfortunately for that theory there were no flashes, showing good evidence for the dust theory.
|
*IF* demolitions explosives were used, then one could assume that they would be used in the interrior of the building, the rimary support of the building. This would help the building to fall into it's footprint, explain why the buyilding fell so fast, explain the way the outer supports exploded outwards, and a lack of flashes. Still, I am unconvinced. I don't know how the building collapsed, I am just prety sure I know how it didn't collapse. That's kinda the bottom line.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
I think you missed a few words in this post, but have you ever worked a bellows?
Your arms move slowly, the air moves very fast. This is because the air is channeled and under pressure. I don't know about you but I think several thosand pounds of falling concrete will create a good deal of pressure. Not to mention that as things break they will shatter at supersonic speeds due to the nature of crack propagation, which would shoot debris out VERY fast with 'explosive' force. Its why an instron machine needs a shield when testing materials in compression.
Edit:Pounds should be TONS
|
I do understand that. What I don't understand is how that pressure was channeled out of a few windows instead of equally across several floors.