I suppose blast furnace to melt steel is bullshit all you need is chairs and tables if there was molten steel under the rubble If there was I wasn't there but if I saw that I'd be scratching my head
Seems to me it takes this thing called O2 to feed fires. Under the rubble I doubt there was so much oxygen the that what organic matter was left could smolder at best not melt steel like a blast furnace. State puppy propagandist this stooge. People are sad in that you tell them the same lie often enough the start to believe it. This guy is a state paid liar.
Richard Riggs is trying to say that kerosene, paper, furniture, and carpeting burning in an oxygen-starved environment can reach the blast furnace temperatures required to melt structural steel?
I love how every fucking idiot without an argument brings out the conspiracy theorist card! We give you proof and you come back with that bullshit?! You deserve a shit economy, job market, and 10 dollar a gallon gas.
The question should be "u mad patriot's?", and to that I say fuck yes I am mad. I am mad that the media can brainwash fucking idiots like ZhakoT into thinking steel buildings can be brought down at the speed of gravity by fire!!! Fuckin idiots!
@14thSgtStedanko well said... It blows my mind when I state the physics problems with the official story to some. They look at me ,and say "so you think Bush killed 3000 people?" They focus on that, and the amount of people that had to be involved. I understand it is a crazy thought, but We have to eliminate the impossible, then after that. ( No matter how improbable) has to be the answer.
@MrEmerye Thanks man, I really appreciate it. The media is a truly powerful brainwashing tool. I can only hope that the few of us that are awake can help wake up others before it is too late.
The outer facade fell by itself, the inner portion collapsed dragging the facade down after the fact. The top of the building weighed more than the bottom once 50-odd floors had collapsed into one gigantic mess. I have a real desire to show you how good molten steel feels, c'mere fuckwad.
WHERE IS THE JUSTICE?!?!!?!?!?!?!?!?!? why cant there be a force, a power, an authority to bring these people in higher powers to justice for crimes againt there own country? much more the result in loss of lives in the iraq and ahgan wars? i was told today its in the millions of lives lost. SOMEBODY DO SOMETHING!!!!
ergo, for 2.3 seconds, there was NO RESISTANCE to the collapse.
the average fall speed for the total collapse has NO bearing on the measurement. that'd be like saying "my average speed for the total journey was only 55 miles per hour so could not have been speeding officer".
Richard Riggs a Debris Removal Specialist, is that a fancy term for "garbage man"?
This clown failed to learn that oxygen starved fires emitting black smoke and do not reach temps high enough to melt high carbon structural steel. Military grade thermite however does reach temps far exceeding the melting point. This is why three months later the steel was still flowing like a river.
9-11 was 100% Mossad-CIA operation with the goal of starting wars and destroying our constitutional rights.
@ThePassiveFist LEt me Quote "Thermite is a pyrotechnic composition of a metal powder and a metal oxide, which produces an exothermic oxidation-reduction reaction known as a thermite reaction." Think a little before you speak...again that is. The reaction dies out fairly quickly and wouldn't last what.. 6 weeks.
yes - the substance is called Thermite, the reaction is called the Thermite reaction.
you stated that Thermite is the reaction while glossing over or ignoring the fact that it is also the substance.
now that we have that out of the way, the Thermitic reaction would have stopped as soon as the available thermite had been used. the heat generated, and insulated by tons of rubble, would have stayed there for weeks.
the incredible heat could not possibly have been generated by office fires
...or even jet-fuel fires. everyone can see that the bulk of the jetfuel was consumed in the initial impacts. and you still have not explain how there was molten steel/iron under WTC7. because you can't. admit it.
While we're on WTC7, the 2.3seconds of freefall is still completely unexplained by NIST. NONE of the official story matches reality. Physics cannot be suspended or altered for one day.
and since all we want is an independent investigation, WHY ARE YOU SO AGAINST IT?!?
@ThePassiveFist Oh give it a rest, You're really picking at the bottom of the barrel to be claiming i'm incorrect because of how I used the word. And no, even under the rubble the reaction would have simple stopped, the heat would have diminished, specially with all the water being poured on the rubble. Thermite was never the reason, and there was never thermite there. No traces, Nothing. Single people making videos saying there was, doesn't mean there is.
Me give it a rest? i said we could leave the wrod-play semantics behind now that it was agreed we weren't disagreeing, just talking about different things. and you keep saying there's no evidence, but there is. denying it does not make it disappear.
Peer-reviewed scientific papers are not 'single videos'
Google the words "peer reviewed paper on thermite in 9/11" and you'll find the papers concerned.
quit swallowing the bullshit the media feeds you. to quote Carlin: "it's bad for you"
And I'm still waiting (will probably be, until the day i die) for someone, ANYONE, to come up with a credible, scientific explanation for 2.3 seconds of freefall in WTC7.
Freefall = no resistance.
no resistance = no buckling, no crushing, NOTHING holding the building up.
NOTHING explains this away. go ahead, try. i am waiting, as is every other person who has at least a rudimentary understanding of physics.
ALL supporting columns failed, almost simultaneously.
@ThePassiveFist Alright, 1 - There was no free fall, because A - scientifically impossible even with Thermite, even with planted explosives so you'll never receive an answer to that because that just isn't what happened. The inner part of the tower fell slower compared to the outer part of the tower as we see in other videos. Once the tower is finished collapsing after 14-15 seconds of falling, up to 40 stories of the Core is still left standing for a short period. There was never any free fall
even NIST admits freefall, after David Chandler called them out on it. Even THEY admit it, and yet you refuse to.
There was freefall. 2.3 seconds of it. EVEN IF the whole interior of the building collapsed before the outer shell fell WITHOUT DAMAGING THE OUTER STRUCTURE AT ALL (Seriously, you buy THAT shit?)
What was left STILL FELL AT FREEFALL SPEED.
I'm done with you. someone with their head so far up their own ass will never see anything other than their own shit.
@ThePassiveFist No, NIST figured out that there was never any "Free fall". Everyone figured that out, that one theory was demolished shortly after the Conspiracy came out. Oh and wait, assuming NIST said this you'll believe them say this but you won't believe them say there was never any thermite? you only hear what you want to hear eh, people like you that make other people fucking stupid "Don't believe the government maan, its all fake man, thermite and bombs and planning" Get ahold of urself
I see and hear everything that I get this involved in. I've EXTENSIVELY looked over ALL the debunking vids and websites i can find. but you see, being an intelligent, skeptical person, i only believe that which makes sense. The official story didn't, and still doesn't. if i was at ANY stage shown some credible explanation for what happened on that tragic day, I'd be the first to admit i have been misled. You, obviously, can't.
@ThePassiveFist So, A massive 200 Ton jet with tons of jet fuel crashing into a steel and cement building 80 stories high at 500mph, causes extensive damage leading to the collapse... This isn't believable? But a "Thermite melted the steel, or controlled demolition" etc that makes sense? Being intelligent? when you still to this day have no real idea how everything happened you're still piecing it together with thermite bullshit? Jesus, people need PHysics Lessons around here.
The Jets did damage, but did NOT cause the collapse - even NIST says as much. and the jet fuel, burned up after a short while.
You seem to 'know all the answers' but you don't even know what the official report states, so how can you defend it, let alone try to debunk the reasons i doubt it?
I agree. people do need physics lessons. but not the people you're implying.
@ThePassiveFist Oh yes, Call me a Moron and tell me i'm living under a Rock because I believe 200 tons + 500mph + tons of jet fuel = Demolished building. Yet you're the one believing in all these other issues that make no sense and never hold up in the end, and the worst part is when you're proven wrong you change your story and go "oh well no it was this then". Its simple, Extreme heat from jet fuel, plus core damage from the jet made the building very unstable, and that was it. The end.
I could believe that jet planes impacting the building could cause the damage and cause the towers to collapse, if it happened like that.
however, the collapse itself happened FAR too long after the impact and fire. if the damage done was going to cause the collapse, logic dictates it would happen during or only slightly after impact.
i would expect to see the top collapse onto the lower floors, and a gradual, halting collapse. NOT the explosive ejection of material we actually do see.
the idea that a (relatively, compared to the rest of the building) small section of floors falling onto the structure (which gets stronger and more solid as you get further down) could cause a _TOTAL_ disintegration of steel and concrete that we witnessed is unbelievable to me, and to thousands of others, some of whom are more educated and more qualified to comment than me.
i would have expected to see far more floors still standing, or at least core columns rising hundreds of feet into the air
@ThePassiveFist Well I thank you for replying without resulting to insults. As the videos all dictate most of the debris is shot outward because yes, there is far too much material underneath for it to go straight down. seeing the various angles via video you can see a LOT of material blowing out the sides more than going straight down, Than after the 10-12 second mark as the smoke and debris hits the ground you can see the middle section of the tower still there
@ThePassiveFist As seen in Computer Simulations the initial impact did cause a lot of structural damage to the core, destabilizing the tower. They said the tower would have held if it wasn't for the thousands of pounds of jet fuel burning, not all the jet fuel burnt right away, there was still residual fuel in parts of the tanks and the office furniture etc was burning away also. The initial explosion exposed the steel, and long hot burn weakened the steel, and so began the collapse
@sacr3 The building should have tipped over in the direction of the destruction and not destroy itself on the way down. As building get close to the ground the beams are actuallty stronger and not weaker. So the top cannot destroy the bottom.
@ctcole77 Do you realize NIST said the building did fall at freefall for a few second and approximately 100 feet. Free fall for that distance means all resistance was removed beneath the structure. This cannot be done by fire. These people are asking what happened to the resistance for that distance.
@captwasabi .... How can anyone respond to an individual that writes this "The average temperature of a house fire can range between 1100-1500 degrees, more than enough to both weaken and melt steel at
1130 and 1315 degrees respectively" . Have you ever used a frying pan, or lit a fire in a stove... Even if you dropped out of school at 4th grade , real life experience should have been an indicator that the statement might
People will grasp at any aregument, despite how flawed the science is, in order to support their own beliefs of "new world orders" and other evil empires. Just as we had Free Mason witch hunts and the current movement to villify vaccinations as being the cause of austism despite all the science to the contrary, we will forever have moronic turds who insist that the World Trade Center attacks were an inside job. You are fools to believe this. End of fucking story.
@ryconster really assmaggot? A house fire can reach temperatures between 1100 and 1500 degress. Steel with 2.1% carbon by weight melts at 1130 and is completely molten at 1315. These temperatures are well within the ranges one would expect from an office fire with all the combustible materials there. Don't presume to be arrogant enough to question my intelligence when you obviously have none to speak of yourself.
@ryconster I seriously doubt you have a bachelors in anything that relates to this. As it is, you're a moronic, sad and rather pathetic little fuckstick who wants to insist that the govt was behind some horrid conspiracy when we see time and again that govt's simply cannot keep secret. Afghan wars documents on Wikileaks anyone? As for your molten steel, it was proven to be aluminum. And what 3,000 people? You care to show your proof of that claim or are you just making up more facts? Pathetic.
@ryconster And by the way, steel weakens by 50% at 1100F, well within range of your temp claims. how easily you are proven wrong using your own words. With a major impact damaging the buildings structural integrity coupled with the additional weaking of its support due to the sustained fires and the build style which placed the majority of the building structural system on the exterior walls you have a perfect recipie for an implosion. Buhbye jackass.
@ryconster that's right. Keep flailing away. You just shoved your own foot in your mouth. Care to try your knee now too? Keep grasping at straws as your faulty logic and half-cocked theories are easily proven wrong. What shool did you get your "degree" from? I want to make sure I don't send my son there.
"oxygen starved" why is there lacking oxygen outside? LOL, no oxygen outside. funny shit.
So the big hole that the airplane made didn't let oxygen in. ROFL, funny shit from a dumbass foreigner.
we should tell fire fighters they don't have to put the fire out, because theres no oxygen. I wonder how fire starts in the first place, with "starved oxygen"
what a stupid fuck truther, probably believes everything the JEW richard gage says too
And why didn't they track down the important one that had no radio communication with the control tower few years back when it was radio silenced for 2 hours?
your not american, that would explain why your so stupid to think candles burn less than 1500 degrees.
dumb like richard gage, fires can't be hot. I wonder how people cook food, with fire. stupid truthers. especially foreigner truthers. because they care about the united states, and use our internet. LOL
"dont recall us topping the iraq govt back then tho"
ROFL, and your the dumbass. A majority of Iraq army surrendered. They basicaly had jeeps and pos tanks. No nightvision, no stealth fighters, no new tanks.
wow, your stupid like all truthers.
so why did we invade iraq two times? we didn't take enough oil the first time. is that the lie. ROFL retards
False flag operation. See "Demolition Expert Debunks the Debunkers." Even other countries know it was a controlled implosion, and an inside job. Give it up shills.
@roxxphatcox You're a moron. A house fire can reach 1500 degrees at sea level. Are you truly that fucking stupid? Gravitational pull of the sun? I guess you do believe someone is that stupid. You certainly are.
@roxxphatcox No, it's not physically impossible you homunculus troglodyte. Steel weakens at 425C and loses half of it's strength at 650C. At this point the building collapses. Now, we know (at least some of us do) that an increase in pressure results in an increase in temperature. The WTC rubble was roughly 1MM Tonnes. Feel free to figure out how much of a temperature increase that correlates to.
@roxxphatcox You're a fucking moron. What do you expect a building to do when part of it's structural frame is removed and more of it is greatly weakened? Fucking float on dreams and farts? Let's compare windsor and WTC, the Windsor wasn't hit by a fucking plane and the Windsor used an entirely different building style than the WTC. Go ahead and feel safe in your apples to dogs comparison but the Windsor does not apply here. You're a fucking moron.
@roxxphatcox And here's a little someting from the Windsor which I feel is relevant "The Windsor Tower was completely gutted by the fire on 12 February 2005. A large portion of the floor slabs above the 17th Floor progressively collapsed during the fire when the unprotected steel perimeter columns on the upper levels buckled and collapsed." Sound familiar? Also, the Windsor fires didn't burn as hot as WTC because the Windsor had no furnishings. Moron. Die in a fire.
@captwasabi And YES it is physically IMPOSSIBLE to create the kind of
pressure you are refering to. A high-rised steel framed homogenous structure
consisting of 90%+ Air does not create consistent pressure over a timeperiod.
If you had any Idea how this even remotely works you would light yourself on
fire this instant in shame. Alot of the steel beams explodes outwards like a big fountain, and they don`t land neatly in a timed fashion to create pressure. Oxygen
@roxxphatcox You're so fucking stupid it's pathetic. You're talking about a traditionally built steel structure in which the support is on the inside of the building, essentially a covered steel frame. With the WTC the structure was on the OUTSIDE like a straw! So when the planes struck the building they reduced the structurial integrity. when the steel supported got weakened they remaing supports went.
@roxxphatcox The jet fuel was the ignitor you fucking moron. The average temperature of a house fire can range between 1100 and 1500 degrees, more than enough to both weaken and melt steel at 1130 and 1315 degrees respectivly. It wasn't just the jet fuel burning moron. Carpet, curtains, office furniture and the like. 1585 is easily within reach. In less than 4 minutes a house fire can hit 1100 degrees. Please stop talking cause you are as dumb as a fucking brick.
@roxxphatcox You are so fucking stupid they should create an asshole award for you. Steel begins to soften around 425°C and loses about half of its strength at 650°C. Based on what you just said the flames were sufficiently hot to, over the period of several hours that the 90K liters of jet fuel burned, significantly reduce the structural integrity of the building. Now shut the fuck up already. You say the physics is very simple then you must be dumber than dirt.
@captwasabi Your saying 90k liters of jet fuel burned over a period of several hours:
I`m not sure what fires you are refering too since the WTC 2/1 fires 56/85 mins.
And the fact that most of the jet fuel burned off at impact further questions your
random statements. "steel begins to soften around 425 and lose half its strength at 650C" : So how can there be molten steel and fused steel/concrete that requires
@roxxphatcox I'm going to ignore the majority of your stupidity and simply remind you that the fires burned for three months. I know this because I live in NYC and saw, each morning, in the west (I live on Long Island) a plume of smoke from ground zero.
That show "mythbusters" was about to do a story about this one. We shut that fown pretty quick and let the producers know that if they ever tried to even touch this subject, they would all meet with an untimely death.
i'm a retired cia operative. Be thankful not too many normal people take yr conspiracy theories seriously. The day they do, you will all be hunted down and either killed or drugged and tortured until you go insane. Count yr blessings nerds. We have the biggest smartest nerd (Bill Gates) and nerds in the world working for us and we can find all of you if we wanted to.
wow, fires burning underneath the buildings rubble? is there some kind of secret oxygen furnace down there or something??? sure you could have THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS of litres of oil or something down there, but that would never burn without oxygen... idiots..
@swiftarrow01 Oh mu god you are such a fucking idiot. First, did you realize that a piece of wood can simply ignite on it's own if placed in a sufficiently high enough pressure system. Did you ever learn that an increase in pressure leads to a related increase in temperature? As for no fire existing without oxygen try looking into thermolysis idiot.
--thats a good idea,the next time I need to cut through some steel,I won't have to rent a cutting torch,i'll just make a nice bon fire with some carpet and an old recliner
@blunted15 Man its crazy, i used to run boilers for a government building, we used natural gas and propane to light the fires and keep the old people warm and create steam. sheesh good thing they didn't use paper and carpet, the boilers would've melted! LMAO
@blunted15 Yes because I stated that Thermite couldn't possibly last more then 1 day due to it being a chemical reaction, it automatically means that I am some robotic person following the governments every will. I follow facts, Facts show there was NO traces of ANY thermite, and thermite again can not last more than a day, maybe 2. Its a chemical reaction that will burn itself out. God damn man.
Not if it doesn't get ignited. you can put thermite into a mixture and spray it onto a surface, and if there's not enough heat to ignite it all, it will hang around almost indefinitely.
That's like saying paper will only hang around for a few days.
where are these facts you speak of? INDEPENDENT research was done by at least 3 labs around the world and they all came to the same conclusion. the OFFICIALS never even LOOKED. not seeing something doesn't mean it's not there.
Richard Riggs says there was molten metal. A simple follow up question would have told us if his story is hearsay. Q: Did you see molten metal at ground zero? If he answered "yes" it would not be hearsay. If he said, "no, the guys told me" then it would be hearsay. Of course, an investigator would follow up with "Who told you there was molten metal at ground zero?" Riggs does NOT appear to be a 911 "truther" because he accepts at face value the claim that WTC fires melted steel.
3 QUESTIONS 911 TRUTHERS DON'T WANT YOU TO ASK THEM:
Why did Scholars for 911 Truth split into two groups?
Why are there NO professional/academic peer reviewed journals or papers substantiating 911 truther theories?
In a world (and nation) of Bush haters, why has no one taken your absolute proof" to the courts to convict the guilty conspirators? It only took 5 years for Jim Garrison to bring charges on the Kennedy assassination (clearly a much smaller conspiracy than 911).
Google "black smoke" + "insufficient oxygen" and find hundreds of references including academic chemistry papers.
Black smoke from a hydrocarbon fuel fire means incomplete combustion. If there is enough oxygen, the hydrocarbon burns completely, producing carbon dioxide (and water) instead of black smoke and soot.
The words "idiot" and "dumbshit" add little to your credibility.
Uh, actually jet fuel burn at 860 degrees Celsius, which i well over half the temperature needed to melt steel. But nobody in any of the reports said anything about steel melting, at 625 degrees celcius steel begins to lose it strength and if pressure is applied to it the steel will warp. That's a fact. If that's true, then it's very possible that the combination of one of the worlds biggest jet liners colliding into the tower at top speed along with the burning jet fuel can cause a collapse.
Seriously Darkit? You actually think the building would just collapse just like it would under a controlled demolition. Ever seen a building collapse naturally? It falls to the SIDE
Ok, well explain the piece of the building that start falling off and collapsing in the minute following the collapse of the building. And it didn't fall straight down, it did collapse on it's side, something that wouldn't happen in a control demolition. Where's my proof? Debris from site 7 was scattered over two city blocks. Some controlled demolition. THe truth movement i about making money, not exposing Bush. If you believe the deniers you really need to do your research.
Here are the videos that have all the proof
Heres the proof of explosives
watch?v=xvw0_i1rGns
More explosives
watch?v=V0tzmGgWggg&feature=related
Firefighters and demolition crew cleaning up fires and molten metal 6 weeks AFTER the incident
watch?v=t-XA0Rv1Ng8
The best and Damning compilation of evidence that will bring justice to all in the future
watch?v=tIx2CVRxRXg
^enough evidence to put ANYONE in prison.
DarkDragon187II 3 months ago
I suppose blast furnace to melt steel is bullshit all you need is chairs and tables if there was molten steel under the rubble If there was I wasn't there but if I saw that I'd be scratching my head
busabaybe 4 months ago
what a crock of bullsh!t
vengencefrom1979 4 months ago
Seems to me it takes this thing called O2 to feed fires. Under the rubble I doubt there was so much oxygen the that what organic matter was left could smolder at best not melt steel like a blast furnace. State puppy propagandist this stooge. People are sad in that you tell them the same lie often enough the start to believe it. This guy is a state paid liar.
Jimbofx911 5 months ago
0:23
What kind of BS explanation is this?
Richard Riggs is trying to say that kerosene, paper, furniture, and carpeting burning in an oxygen-starved environment can reach the blast furnace temperatures required to melt structural steel?
Yeah - right.
bushputz 6 months ago
Hey 9/11 Truthers! I Made this new forum
website so we can all talk about 9/11
truth. Please visit
discuss911truth(dot)webs(dot com)
If it's not working for you, please
message me on here and I'll link you :)
XxRushx 6 months ago
there was no molten steel. this guy is an idiot. it was molten aluminum.
breadsped98 6 months ago
Comment removed
leeking007 5 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@breadsped98 Oh? and what color is molten aluminium ? and just what was spewing out of the south tower corner HOT SHIT?
leeking007 5 months ago
I love how every fucking idiot without an argument brings out the conspiracy theorist card! We give you proof and you come back with that bullshit?! You deserve a shit economy, job market, and 10 dollar a gallon gas.
The question should be "u mad patriot's?", and to that I say fuck yes I am mad. I am mad that the media can brainwash fucking idiots like ZhakoT into thinking steel buildings can be brought down at the speed of gravity by fire!!! Fuckin idiots!
14thSgtStedanko 7 months ago 2
@14thSgtStedanko
everything falls with the "acceleration" of gravity fucking idiot
taledarkside 7 months ago
@14thSgtStedanko amen
cooldaddyy 4 months ago
@14thSgtStedanko well said... It blows my mind when I state the physics problems with the official story to some. They look at me ,and say "so you think Bush killed 3000 people?" They focus on that, and the amount of people that had to be involved. I understand it is a crazy thought, but We have to eliminate the impossible, then after that. ( No matter how improbable) has to be the answer.
MrEmerye 3 months ago
@MrEmerye Thanks man, I really appreciate it. The media is a truly powerful brainwashing tool. I can only hope that the few of us that are awake can help wake up others before it is too late.
14thSgtStedanko 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
For more about molten steel and the recent proof that WTC engineer Leslie Robertson said he saw molten steel, see my video:
The 9/11 "Deep Mystery" and the Crazy Engineers.
watch?v=DF4C6qtU_Fc
In 2006 Robertson denied that anyone had seen molten steel. In 2002 he said he'd seen it himself.
punxsutawneybarney 9 months ago
umad conspiracists?
ZhakoT 10 months ago
The outer facade fell by itself, the inner portion collapsed dragging the facade down after the fact. The top of the building weighed more than the bottom once 50-odd floors had collapsed into one gigantic mess. I have a real desire to show you how good molten steel feels, c'mere fuckwad.
aarontsmall1975 10 months ago
Google "China Syndrome at the WTC"
WTCnucleardemolition 11 months ago
WHERE IS THE JUSTICE?!?!!?!?!?!?!?!?!? why cant there be a force, a power, an authority to bring these people in higher powers to justice for crimes againt there own country? much more the result in loss of lives in the iraq and ahgan wars? i was told today its in the millions of lives lost. SOMEBODY DO SOMETHING!!!!
mucbeanz 1 year ago
So what exactly does this video prove?
VitalSigns1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
JFK on 911: watch?v=DxnpujfanUM&feature=related
iamr8 1 year ago
Sick of the back and forth with Cole.
Fact. WTC experienced 2.3 seconds of freefall.
ergo, for 2.3 seconds, there was NO RESISTANCE to the collapse.
the average fall speed for the total collapse has NO bearing on the measurement. that'd be like saying "my average speed for the total journey was only 55 miles per hour so could not have been speeding officer".
ThePassiveFist 1 year ago
Comment removed
ThePassiveFist 1 year ago
yeah right
StijnMartens 1 year ago
so....some assholes think that molten steel can come from burning chairs, desks, carpets and lack of oxygen while dismissing the thermite theory.
vengencefrom1979 1 year ago
@vengencefrom1979
Not quite vengenceLIARfrom1979.
Actually IT'S MOLTEN ALUMINUM from the planes sherlock.
And I suppose items that are typically in an office like chairs, desks, and carpets would NEVER catch fire?
Why did you conveniently fail to mention the most common flammible in offices; PAPER.
And now you know why vengenceLIARfrom1979 is truely a 911 liar.
911 TRUTH = STRAWMAN
ctcole77 1 year ago
@ctcole77
Still spreading disinformation on every single 9/11 vid you can find, Cole? is this your full-time job or something? always the same shit too.
You're wrong, and you know it.
1) molten aluminium looks SILVER, not RED when molten
2) the molten material under WTC7 cannot have been from a plane.
I call you out for the lying piece of shit you are. ALL we want is a new, INDEPENDENT investigation.
Q: If there is nothing to hide, why are you so scared of one?
A: BECAUSE OF ALL THE EVIDENCE
ThePassiveFist 1 year ago
What utter BULLSHIT! Anyone that believes that story is beyond stupid and gullible.
Wake up people!!!
aerhearts 1 year ago
Richard Riggs a Debris Removal Specialist, is that a fancy term for "garbage man"?
This clown failed to learn that oxygen starved fires emitting black smoke and do not reach temps high enough to melt high carbon structural steel. Military grade thermite however does reach temps far exceeding the melting point. This is why three months later the steel was still flowing like a river.
9-11 was 100% Mossad-CIA operation with the goal of starting wars and destroying our constitutional rights.
lickdacat2 1 year ago
@lickdacat2 Thermite is a chemical reaction which dies out the same day it started. Think a little before you speak.
sacr3 1 year ago
@sacr3
Thermite is not a reaction, it's a substance. Think a little before YOU speak.
ThePassiveFist 1 year ago
@ThePassiveFist LEt me Quote "Thermite is a pyrotechnic composition of a metal powder and a metal oxide, which produces an exothermic oxidation-reduction reaction known as a thermite reaction." Think a little before you speak...again that is. The reaction dies out fairly quickly and wouldn't last what.. 6 weeks.
sacr3 1 year ago
@sacr3
yes - the substance is called Thermite, the reaction is called the Thermite reaction.
you stated that Thermite is the reaction while glossing over or ignoring the fact that it is also the substance.
now that we have that out of the way, the Thermitic reaction would have stopped as soon as the available thermite had been used. the heat generated, and insulated by tons of rubble, would have stayed there for weeks.
the incredible heat could not possibly have been generated by office fires
ThePassiveFist 1 year ago
@ThePassiveFist
...or even jet-fuel fires. everyone can see that the bulk of the jetfuel was consumed in the initial impacts. and you still have not explain how there was molten steel/iron under WTC7. because you can't. admit it.
While we're on WTC7, the 2.3seconds of freefall is still completely unexplained by NIST. NONE of the official story matches reality. Physics cannot be suspended or altered for one day.
and since all we want is an independent investigation, WHY ARE YOU SO AGAINST IT?!?
ThePassiveFist 1 year ago
@ThePassiveFist Oh give it a rest, You're really picking at the bottom of the barrel to be claiming i'm incorrect because of how I used the word. And no, even under the rubble the reaction would have simple stopped, the heat would have diminished, specially with all the water being poured on the rubble. Thermite was never the reason, and there was never thermite there. No traces, Nothing. Single people making videos saying there was, doesn't mean there is.
sacr3 1 year ago
@sacr3
Me give it a rest? i said we could leave the wrod-play semantics behind now that it was agreed we weren't disagreeing, just talking about different things. and you keep saying there's no evidence, but there is. denying it does not make it disappear.
Peer-reviewed scientific papers are not 'single videos'
Google the words "peer reviewed paper on thermite in 9/11" and you'll find the papers concerned.
quit swallowing the bullshit the media feeds you. to quote Carlin: "it's bad for you"
ThePassiveFist 1 year ago
@sacr3
And I'm still waiting (will probably be, until the day i die) for someone, ANYONE, to come up with a credible, scientific explanation for 2.3 seconds of freefall in WTC7.
Freefall = no resistance.
no resistance = no buckling, no crushing, NOTHING holding the building up.
NOTHING explains this away. go ahead, try. i am waiting, as is every other person who has at least a rudimentary understanding of physics.
ALL supporting columns failed, almost simultaneously.
deny it.
go on.
no?
ThePassiveFist 1 year ago
@ThePassiveFist Alright, 1 - There was no free fall, because A - scientifically impossible even with Thermite, even with planted explosives so you'll never receive an answer to that because that just isn't what happened. The inner part of the tower fell slower compared to the outer part of the tower as we see in other videos. Once the tower is finished collapsing after 14-15 seconds of falling, up to 40 stories of the Core is still left standing for a short period. There was never any free fall
sacr3 1 year ago
@sacr3
HOLY. FUCKING. SHIT.
even NIST admits freefall, after David Chandler called them out on it. Even THEY admit it, and yet you refuse to.
There was freefall. 2.3 seconds of it. EVEN IF the whole interior of the building collapsed before the outer shell fell WITHOUT DAMAGING THE OUTER STRUCTURE AT ALL (Seriously, you buy THAT shit?)
What was left STILL FELL AT FREEFALL SPEED.
I'm done with you. someone with their head so far up their own ass will never see anything other than their own shit.
ThePassiveFist 1 year ago 6
@ThePassiveFist No, NIST figured out that there was never any "Free fall". Everyone figured that out, that one theory was demolished shortly after the Conspiracy came out. Oh and wait, assuming NIST said this you'll believe them say this but you won't believe them say there was never any thermite? you only hear what you want to hear eh, people like you that make other people fucking stupid "Don't believe the government maan, its all fake man, thermite and bombs and planning" Get ahold of urself
sacr3 1 year ago
@sacr3
4 words.
Google
NIST
Admits
Freefall.
case closed.
I see and hear everything that I get this involved in. I've EXTENSIVELY looked over ALL the debunking vids and websites i can find. but you see, being an intelligent, skeptical person, i only believe that which makes sense. The official story didn't, and still doesn't. if i was at ANY stage shown some credible explanation for what happened on that tragic day, I'd be the first to admit i have been misled. You, obviously, can't.
I
ThePassiveFist 1 year ago
@ThePassiveFist So, A massive 200 Ton jet with tons of jet fuel crashing into a steel and cement building 80 stories high at 500mph, causes extensive damage leading to the collapse... This isn't believable? But a "Thermite melted the steel, or controlled demolition" etc that makes sense? Being intelligent? when you still to this day have no real idea how everything happened you're still piecing it together with thermite bullshit? Jesus, people need PHysics Lessons around here.
sacr3 1 year ago
@sacr3
The Jets did damage, but did NOT cause the collapse - even NIST says as much. and the jet fuel, burned up after a short while.
You seem to 'know all the answers' but you don't even know what the official report states, so how can you defend it, let alone try to debunk the reasons i doubt it?
I agree. people do need physics lessons. but not the people you're implying.
See you later, moron. have fun under that rock.
ThePassiveFist 1 year ago
@ThePassiveFist Oh yes, Call me a Moron and tell me i'm living under a Rock because I believe 200 tons + 500mph + tons of jet fuel = Demolished building. Yet you're the one believing in all these other issues that make no sense and never hold up in the end, and the worst part is when you're proven wrong you change your story and go "oh well no it was this then". Its simple, Extreme heat from jet fuel, plus core damage from the jet made the building very unstable, and that was it. The end.
sacr3 1 year ago
@sacr3
I could believe that jet planes impacting the building could cause the damage and cause the towers to collapse, if it happened like that.
however, the collapse itself happened FAR too long after the impact and fire. if the damage done was going to cause the collapse, logic dictates it would happen during or only slightly after impact.
i would expect to see the top collapse onto the lower floors, and a gradual, halting collapse. NOT the explosive ejection of material we actually do see.
ThePassiveFist 1 year ago
the idea that a (relatively, compared to the rest of the building) small section of floors falling onto the structure (which gets stronger and more solid as you get further down) could cause a _TOTAL_ disintegration of steel and concrete that we witnessed is unbelievable to me, and to thousands of others, some of whom are more educated and more qualified to comment than me.
i would have expected to see far more floors still standing, or at least core columns rising hundreds of feet into the air
ThePassiveFist 1 year ago
@ThePassiveFist Well I thank you for replying without resulting to insults. As the videos all dictate most of the debris is shot outward because yes, there is far too much material underneath for it to go straight down. seeing the various angles via video you can see a LOT of material blowing out the sides more than going straight down, Than after the 10-12 second mark as the smoke and debris hits the ground you can see the middle section of the tower still there
sacr3 1 year ago
@ThePassiveFist As seen in Computer Simulations the initial impact did cause a lot of structural damage to the core, destabilizing the tower. They said the tower would have held if it wasn't for the thousands of pounds of jet fuel burning, not all the jet fuel burnt right away, there was still residual fuel in parts of the tanks and the office furniture etc was burning away also. The initial explosion exposed the steel, and long hot burn weakened the steel, and so began the collapse
sacr3 1 year ago
YOU WILL NEVER GET A NEW INVESTIGATION INTO 911!
Debunkers will ALWAYS be there to expose your lies.
Move out of your parents' basement, quit the pizza delivery job, and kiss a girl - FOR THE FIRST TIME!
911 WAS AN OUTSIDE JOB!
ctcole77 1 year ago
@sacr3 The building should have tipped over in the direction of the destruction and not destroy itself on the way down. As building get close to the ground the beams are actuallty stronger and not weaker. So the top cannot destroy the bottom.
fake2 10 months ago
@ThePassiveFist
5 words
NIST DID NOT ADMIT FREEFALL!
NIST did admit that on WTC 7 2.25 seconds of freefall collapse did occur.
911 TRUTH = STRAWMAN
ctcole77 1 year ago
@ctcole77
I shouldn't be surprised by your BS by now, but still...
You say NIST did not admit freefall, and in the very next line, you admit they did.
You're some piece of work. you need to calm down before you have a heart attack. or not, i could care less either way.
Cole, you couldn't even debunk something as retarded as mormonism if your life depended on it, and you've debunked NOTHING to do with 9/11.
keep up the ad-homs though. it's the only thing you're any good at.
Later, Choad.
ThePassiveFist 1 year ago
@ThePassiveFist
Just because something falls PARTIALLY at freefall does not mean it completely collapsed in freefall.
2.25 seconds freefall of a 7 second collapse does equal freefall...............even in 911 twoofer math.
911 TWOOFER LIE # 19 - "Free fall speed" (absolutely no building collapsed at freefall speed)
ThePassiveFist DEBUNKED!
ctcole77 1 year ago
@ctcole77 Do you realize NIST said the building did fall at freefall for a few second and approximately 100 feet. Free fall for that distance means all resistance was removed beneath the structure. This cannot be done by fire. These people are asking what happened to the resistance for that distance.
fake2 10 months ago 2
@ThePassiveFist
Keep on refusing to answer questions that refute your magic theories.
911 TRUTH = 911 LIES
ctcole77 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ThePassiveFist Here are the videos that have all the proof
Heres the proof of explosives
watch?v=xvw0_i1rGns
More explosives
watch?v=V0tzmGgWggg&feature=related
Firefighters and demolition crew cleaning up fires and molten metal 6 weeks AFTER the incident
watch?v=t-XA0Rv1Ng8
The best and Damning compilation of evidence that will bring justice to all in the future
watch?v=tIx2CVRxRXg
^enough evidence to put ANYONE in prison.
DarkDragon187II 3 months ago
Oxyhydrogen flame: 2000 °C or above (3645 °F)[7]
Bunsen burner flame: 1,300 to 1,600 °C (2,372 to 2,912 °F)[8]
Blowtorch flame: 1,300 °C (2,370 °F)[9]
Candle flame: 1,000 °C (1,830 °F)
taledarkside 1 year ago
@captwasabi .... How can anyone respond to an individual that writes this "The average temperature of a house fire can range between 1100-1500 degrees, more than enough to both weaken and melt steel at
1130 and 1315 degrees respectively" . Have you ever used a frying pan, or lit a fire in a stove... Even if you dropped out of school at 4th grade , real life experience should have been an indicator that the statement might
be a little turboretarded.
roxxphatcox 1 year ago
Reading these posts introduces one to some of the most ignorant morons ever put on this planet. One can only hope they do not reproduce.
captwasabi 1 year ago
People will grasp at any aregument, despite how flawed the science is, in order to support their own beliefs of "new world orders" and other evil empires. Just as we had Free Mason witch hunts and the current movement to villify vaccinations as being the cause of austism despite all the science to the contrary, we will forever have moronic turds who insist that the World Trade Center attacks were an inside job. You are fools to believe this. End of fucking story.
captwasabi 1 year ago
Comment removed
ryconster 1 year ago
@ryconster really assmaggot? A house fire can reach temperatures between 1100 and 1500 degress. Steel with 2.1% carbon by weight melts at 1130 and is completely molten at 1315. These temperatures are well within the ranges one would expect from an office fire with all the combustible materials there. Don't presume to be arrogant enough to question my intelligence when you obviously have none to speak of yourself.
captwasabi 1 year ago
Comment removed
ryconster 1 year ago
Comment removed
ryconster 1 year ago
@ryconster I seriously doubt you have a bachelors in anything that relates to this. As it is, you're a moronic, sad and rather pathetic little fuckstick who wants to insist that the govt was behind some horrid conspiracy when we see time and again that govt's simply cannot keep secret. Afghan wars documents on Wikileaks anyone? As for your molten steel, it was proven to be aluminum. And what 3,000 people? You care to show your proof of that claim or are you just making up more facts? Pathetic.
captwasabi 1 year ago
@ryconster And by the way, steel weakens by 50% at 1100F, well within range of your temp claims. how easily you are proven wrong using your own words. With a major impact damaging the buildings structural integrity coupled with the additional weaking of its support due to the sustained fires and the build style which placed the majority of the building structural system on the exterior walls you have a perfect recipie for an implosion. Buhbye jackass.
captwasabi 1 year ago
Comment removed
ryconster 1 year ago
@ryconster that's right. Keep flailing away. You just shoved your own foot in your mouth. Care to try your knee now too? Keep grasping at straws as your faulty logic and half-cocked theories are easily proven wrong. What shool did you get your "degree" from? I want to make sure I don't send my son there.
captwasabi 1 year ago
@ryconster
candles burn hotter than 1500 degrees. Looks like your the retard.
taledarkside 1 year ago
Comment removed
ryconster 1 year ago
@ryconster
yes, i know i'm wrong, its really 1,830* F.
taledarkside 1 year ago
@ryconster
"hydrocarbons fires can reach 1500 degrees" why do jet engines reach 4000 degrees?
do your research you stupid fuck foreigner, get off our internet too. stupid 3rd world people
taledarkside 1 year ago
Comment removed
ryconster 1 year ago
@ryconster
candles are hydrocarbon and they burn at 1830. I wonder what different hydrocarbon compounds burn at.
looks like your an idiot claiming 1500 degrees.
taledarkside 1 year ago
Comment removed
ryconster 1 year ago
@ryconster
"oxygen starved" why is there lacking oxygen outside? LOL, no oxygen outside. funny shit.
So the big hole that the airplane made didn't let oxygen in. ROFL, funny shit from a dumbass foreigner.
we should tell fire fighters they don't have to put the fire out, because theres no oxygen. I wonder how fire starts in the first place, with "starved oxygen"
what a stupid fuck truther, probably believes everything the JEW richard gage says too
taledarkside 1 year ago
Comment removed
ryconster 1 year ago
Comment removed
ryconster 1 year ago
Comment removed
ryconster 1 year ago
@ryconster
LOL black smoke, that doesn't mean starved for oxygen. My car makes black smoke and it isn't starved.
my fire place makes black smoke, and the fire is nice and strong. Your an idiot
taledarkside 1 year ago
Comment removed
ryconster 1 year ago
Comment removed
ryconster 1 year ago
@ryconster
ok my bad.
so according to you, the official report isn't wrong.
taledarkside 1 year ago
Comment removed
ryconster 1 year ago
@ryconster
so the official report contradicts the official report. WHAT?
what does the war of iraq have to do with 9/11?
taledarkside 1 year ago
Comment removed
ryconster 1 year ago
@ryconster
We invaded Iraq before 9/11. did you forget your history. most truthers do. and i'm still wondering what does iraq have to do with 9/11
taledarkside 1 year ago
Comment removed
ryconster 1 year ago
@ryconster so why didnt we invade iraq in 2001?
taledarkside 1 year ago
Comment removed
ryconster 1 year ago
@ryconster
so after I corrected you, now your repeating what I said. ROFL, what a typical truther sheep.
so why were you crying 9/11 is related to Iraq for the last few years?
taledarkside 1 year ago
Comment removed
ryconster 1 year ago
@ryconster
why didn't ORAD track down an airliner that was off course for 2 hours last year, with no radio communication?
can you tell me the truth about that?
taledarkside 1 year ago
Comment removed
ryconster 1 year ago
@ryconster
You claim NORAD has all this ability, eventhough they can't track down an airplane when it was late landing at an airport by 2 hours.
taledarkside 1 year ago
Comment removed
ryconster 1 year ago
@ryconster
And why didn't they track down the important one that had no radio communication with the control tower few years back when it was radio silenced for 2 hours?
i want the truth about that
taledarkside 1 year ago
Comment removed
ryconster 1 year ago
@ryconster
your not american, that would explain why your so stupid to think candles burn less than 1500 degrees.
dumb like richard gage, fires can't be hot. I wonder how people cook food, with fire. stupid truthers. especially foreigner truthers. because they care about the united states, and use our internet. LOL
taledarkside 1 year ago
@taledarkside Kool man!! Suppose candles melt steel aswel??
ryconster 1 year ago
@ryconster
candles can heat up steel hot enough to cause it to loose strength.
taledarkside 1 year ago
@taledarkside hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahaaha
ryconster 1 year ago
@ryconster
Did you forget how to write sentences? Doesn't suprise me on the intelligence of truthers.
taledarkside 1 year ago
@taledarkside intelligence??? really???? hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahahaha lmfao boy
ryconster 1 year ago
@ryconster
you should tell richard gage what I typed because it's obvious you can't think for yourself.
taledarkside 1 year ago
@taledarkside dude, your'e not even worth my fucken time now gooo shooo fly
ryconster 1 year ago
@ryconster
You must be a british foreigner, since you obviously don't know how to swear.
taledarkside 1 year ago
@ryconster
"dont recall us topping the iraq govt back then tho"
ROFL, and your the dumbass. A majority of Iraq army surrendered. They basicaly had jeeps and pos tanks. No nightvision, no stealth fighters, no new tanks.
wow, your stupid like all truthers.
so why did we invade iraq two times? we didn't take enough oil the first time. is that the lie. ROFL retards
taledarkside 1 year ago
Comment removed
ryconster 1 year ago
@ryconster
we killed 1 million people? so we didn't invade the country and at the same time killed 1 million.
LOL, you getting information from the mass media. what a loser
taledarkside 1 year ago
Comment removed
ryconster 1 year ago
@ryconster
60 miles? really? And there is an airport right behind the Pentagon. I wonder how they land since theres a no flight zone.
wow stupid people on the internet
taledarkside 1 year ago
Comment removed
ryconster 1 year ago
@ryconster
a lot of private pilots are unauthorized planes, so why did they build an airport behind the Pentagon
cmon loser, give me the truth
taledarkside 1 year ago
Comment removed
ryconster 1 year ago
@ryconster
the official report contradicts itself, what?
steel beams turned into dust, thats weird, this video doesn't show any of that. And theres no oxygen outside?
taledarkside 1 year ago
@ryconster:
So common wax candles burn at 1830 F huh?
tpwatson 1 year ago
@taledarkside:
So common wax candles burn at 1830F huh?
tpwatson 1 year ago
False flag operation. See "Demolition Expert Debunks the Debunkers." Even other countries know it was a controlled implosion, and an inside job. Give it up shills.
73849309378 1 year ago
Your fantasy land theory concerning PRESSURE to create temperatures ABOVE
1500 degrees celcius would imply we had the gravitational pull of the sun and
all the weight distributed through the building was a big rigid solid mass on top
of the mass getting pressure cooked. I don`t believe anyone is that stupid.
I would love to see you calculate this in an atmospheric condition and
gravitational pull we have on this planet, known as the earth.
roxxphatcox 1 year ago
@roxxphatcox You're a moron. A house fire can reach 1500 degrees at sea level. Are you truly that fucking stupid? Gravitational pull of the sun? I guess you do believe someone is that stupid. You certainly are.
captwasabi 1 year ago
So my initial statement that the physics is simple: 1585C melting point of structural
steel. Jet fuel / hydro carbonf ires 980c/825c under best possible atmospheric
conditions. To what extent you did not understand these rather basic and
easily confirmable facts captwasabi is beyond me. This would implicate
other sources of energy/accelerant capable of producing temperatures over
1585C or else this would be physically _impossible_ , it is that simple.
roxxphatcox 1 year ago
@roxxphatcox No, it's not physically impossible you homunculus troglodyte. Steel weakens at 425C and loses half of it's strength at 650C. At this point the building collapses. Now, we know (at least some of us do) that an increase in pressure results in an increase in temperature. The WTC rubble was roughly 1MM Tonnes. Feel free to figure out how much of a temperature increase that correlates to.
captwasabi 1 year ago
@captwasabi I forgot the universal law "650c the steel looses half of its strength
and causes building collapse" . Forget all we know about steelframe structures
and fires, there is a new science in town. A half-finished steel frame structure :
The Windsor building in Madrid burned for 18-20 hours and peaked at 800 celcius. This is as close to a full-scale experiment we get and the best
scientific basis for behaviour of steel frame structures on fire.
roxxphatcox 1 year ago
@roxxphatcox Check out the Mandarin Hotel fire in China.
JBushMusic 1 year ago
@JBushMusic Holy ##¤%#¤! Now that is what I call inward bowing
roxxphatcox 1 year ago
@roxxphatcox You're a fucking moron. What do you expect a building to do when part of it's structural frame is removed and more of it is greatly weakened? Fucking float on dreams and farts? Let's compare windsor and WTC, the Windsor wasn't hit by a fucking plane and the Windsor used an entirely different building style than the WTC. Go ahead and feel safe in your apples to dogs comparison but the Windsor does not apply here. You're a fucking moron.
captwasabi 1 year ago
@roxxphatcox And here's a little someting from the Windsor which I feel is relevant "The Windsor Tower was completely gutted by the fire on 12 February 2005. A large portion of the floor slabs above the 17th Floor progressively collapsed during the fire when the unprotected steel perimeter columns on the upper levels buckled and collapsed." Sound familiar? Also, the Windsor fires didn't burn as hot as WTC because the Windsor had no furnishings. Moron. Die in a fire.
captwasabi 1 year ago
@captwasabi And YES it is physically IMPOSSIBLE to create the kind of
pressure you are refering to. A high-rised steel framed homogenous structure
consisting of 90%+ Air does not create consistent pressure over a timeperiod.
If you had any Idea how this even remotely works you would light yourself on
fire this instant in shame. Alot of the steel beams explodes outwards like a big fountain, and they don`t land neatly in a timed fashion to create pressure. Oxygen
is also a factor
roxxphatcox 1 year ago
@roxxphatcox You're so fucking stupid it's pathetic. You're talking about a traditionally built steel structure in which the support is on the inside of the building, essentially a covered steel frame. With the WTC the structure was on the OUTSIDE like a straw! So when the planes struck the building they reduced the structurial integrity. when the steel supported got weakened they remaing supports went.
captwasabi 1 year ago
@roxxphatcox The jet fuel was the ignitor you fucking moron. The average temperature of a house fire can range between 1100 and 1500 degrees, more than enough to both weaken and melt steel at 1130 and 1315 degrees respectivly. It wasn't just the jet fuel burning moron. Carpet, curtains, office furniture and the like. 1585 is easily within reach. In less than 4 minutes a house fire can hit 1100 degrees. Please stop talking cause you are as dumb as a fucking brick.
captwasabi 1 year ago
Well the physics is very simple: Melting point structural steel 1500+ degrees celcius.
Jet fuel A kerosene 980C. Hydrocarbon fires burning in the atmosphere 825C.
Even under the best circumstances the fires in WTC1/2 could not melt the steel.
roxxphatcox 1 year ago
@roxxphatcox You are so fucking stupid they should create an asshole award for you. Steel begins to soften around 425°C and loses about half of its strength at 650°C. Based on what you just said the flames were sufficiently hot to, over the period of several hours that the 90K liters of jet fuel burned, significantly reduce the structural integrity of the building. Now shut the fuck up already. You say the physics is very simple then you must be dumber than dirt.
captwasabi 1 year ago
@captwasabi Your saying 90k liters of jet fuel burned over a period of several hours:
I`m not sure what fires you are refering too since the WTC 2/1 fires 56/85 mins.
And the fact that most of the jet fuel burned off at impact further questions your
random statements. "steel begins to soften around 425 and lose half its strength at 650C" : So how can there be molten steel and fused steel/concrete that requires
1500+C ?
roxxphatcox 1 year ago
@roxxphatcox I'm going to ignore the majority of your stupidity and simply remind you that the fires burned for three months. I know this because I live in NYC and saw, each morning, in the west (I live on Long Island) a plume of smoke from ground zero.
captwasabi 1 year ago
@captwasabi is just another troll
blite13 1 year ago
That show "mythbusters" was about to do a story about this one. We shut that fown pretty quick and let the producers know that if they ever tried to even touch this subject, they would all meet with an untimely death.
tuaman21 2 years ago
i'm a retired cia operative. Be thankful not too many normal people take yr conspiracy theories seriously. The day they do, you will all be hunted down and either killed or drugged and tortured until you go insane. Count yr blessings nerds. We have the biggest smartest nerd (Bill Gates) and nerds in the world working for us and we can find all of you if we wanted to.
tuaman21 2 years ago
wow, fires burning underneath the buildings rubble? is there some kind of secret oxygen furnace down there or something??? sure you could have THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS of litres of oil or something down there, but that would never burn without oxygen... idiots..
swiftarrow01 2 years ago
@swiftarrow01 Oh mu god you are such a fucking idiot. First, did you realize that a piece of wood can simply ignite on it's own if placed in a sufficiently high enough pressure system. Did you ever learn that an increase in pressure leads to a related increase in temperature? As for no fire existing without oxygen try looking into thermolysis idiot.
captwasabi 1 year ago
--thats a good idea,the next time I need to cut through some steel,I won't have to rent a cutting torch,i'll just make a nice bon fire with some carpet and an old recliner
blunted15 2 years ago 9
@blunted15 Man its crazy, i used to run boilers for a government building, we used natural gas and propane to light the fires and keep the old people warm and create steam. sheesh good thing they didn't use paper and carpet, the boilers would've melted! LMAO
ideasarebulletpr00f 1 year ago 2
@blunted15 Your comment just displayed to everyone here how simplified your line of thinking is.
sacr3 1 year ago
@sacr3 --apparently my "line of thinking" is so simple,I don't understand what you mean.
blunted15 1 year ago
@sacr3 --PS..and you defending of the all propoganda you have absorbed on this topic shows how robotic your line of thinking is.
blunted15 1 year ago
@blunted15 Yes because I stated that Thermite couldn't possibly last more then 1 day due to it being a chemical reaction, it automatically means that I am some robotic person following the governments every will. I follow facts, Facts show there was NO traces of ANY thermite, and thermite again can not last more than a day, maybe 2. Its a chemical reaction that will burn itself out. God damn man.
sacr3 1 year ago
@sacr3
Not if it doesn't get ignited. you can put thermite into a mixture and spray it onto a surface, and if there's not enough heat to ignite it all, it will hang around almost indefinitely.
That's like saying paper will only hang around for a few days.
where are these facts you speak of? INDEPENDENT research was done by at least 3 labs around the world and they all came to the same conclusion. the OFFICIALS never even LOOKED. not seeing something doesn't mean it's not there.
ThePassiveFist 1 year ago
This is simply time waster.
Reasonable99pct 2 years ago
This guy apparently lacks the elite special genetics needed to support the official baloney story.
CACBCCCU 2 years ago 2
He is not very good at lying. Besides physics and logic is working against him.
Danebrogen 2 years ago
look up where they sent the rubbish to... people need to wake the fuck up!
USMilitaryKillsKids 2 years ago 12
@USMilitaryKillsKids where did they send it?
eduTouY 1 year ago
dolt
iSunTzu 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Hearsay. No one has produce the melted steel, the rivers, the tons, the piles. But we have tons of hearsay like this melted steel myth.
iSunTzu 3 years ago
Richard Riggs says there was molten metal. A simple follow up question would have told us if his story is hearsay. Q: Did you see molten metal at ground zero? If he answered "yes" it would not be hearsay. If he said, "no, the guys told me" then it would be hearsay. Of course, an investigator would follow up with "Who told you there was molten metal at ground zero?" Riggs does NOT appear to be a 911 "truther" because he accepts at face value the claim that WTC fires melted steel.
Skeptic121 2 years ago
@Skeptic121
He says "molten steel" "molten beams"
KombiPode 2 years ago
3 QUESTIONS 911 TRUTHERS DON'T WANT YOU TO ASK THEM:
Why did Scholars for 911 Truth split into two groups?
Why are there NO professional/academic peer reviewed journals or papers substantiating 911 truther theories?
In a world (and nation) of Bush haters, why has no one taken your absolute proof" to the courts to convict the guilty conspirators? It only took 5 years for Jim Garrison to bring charges on the Kennedy assassination (clearly a much smaller conspiracy than 911).
smartasa911twoofer 3 years ago
@smartasa911twoofer You are welcome to ask me your three questions.
1. Probably had a fight.
2. Peer review today is much abused, as we saw in the Climategate scandal. Problem is the government pays for most science today.
3. Private individuals cannot prosecute criminal cases.
Skeptic121 2 years ago
Relly09 you idiot, smoke depends on whats burning, gasoline gives off a black smoke, smoke isnt based on head dumbshit
Daubernoob 3 years ago
Black smoke means that the Oxygen is lacking in the fire so the combustion is not efficient...
Jet fuel burns in seconds... it is like burning alcohol..
You got to do more homework darling
pwpg0516 3 years ago
Google "black smoke" + "insufficient oxygen" and find hundreds of references including academic chemistry papers.
Black smoke from a hydrocarbon fuel fire means incomplete combustion. If there is enough oxygen, the hydrocarbon burns completely, producing carbon dioxide (and water) instead of black smoke and soot.
The words "idiot" and "dumbshit" add little to your credibility.
Skeptic121 2 years ago
Uh, actually jet fuel burn at 860 degrees Celsius, which i well over half the temperature needed to melt steel. But nobody in any of the reports said anything about steel melting, at 625 degrees celcius steel begins to lose it strength and if pressure is applied to it the steel will warp. That's a fact. If that's true, then it's very possible that the combination of one of the worlds biggest jet liners colliding into the tower at top speed along with the burning jet fuel can cause a collapse.
Darkit2099 3 years ago
Seriously Darkit? You actually think the building would just collapse just like it would under a controlled demolition. Ever seen a building collapse naturally? It falls to the SIDE
DjUmKuE 2 years ago
lol...have you ever seen a building fall naturally??
geigeroo 2 years ago
@DjUmKuE
There is the French Verinage demolition technique which doesn't require explosives.
watch?v=NwFHEoiUZ7o
But interesting Popular Mechancis never referred to it in all their 'debunks' hit-pieces.
KombiPode 2 years ago
Ok, well explain the piece of the building that start falling off and collapsing in the minute following the collapse of the building. And it didn't fall straight down, it did collapse on it's side, something that wouldn't happen in a control demolition. Where's my proof? Debris from site 7 was scattered over two city blocks. Some controlled demolition. THe truth movement i about making money, not exposing Bush. If you believe the deniers you really need to do your research.
Darkit2099 3 years ago