@SlimeBuster I am not a metalurgist or forensic scientist just a perp asking questions, I believe steel (low carbon type and mild streel) looses 50% strength @ 600 deg C and 90% @ 900 deg C ~ Jet A1 fuel has an open air ignition temp of 315 deg C and petroleum (your gasolene) has a open air ignition temp of 400 deg C.
secondly when the plane hit the WTC it would have almost entirely ripped open the wings (fuel containers) and most of the avgas would have been used in the initial fireball. In a small space of time the surrounds furnishings carpets and inflammables would have been the remaining source of the fire.
@SlimeBuster I just would like to say that I am a steel worker amongst other things, and i am pointing to the fact that the "gantry" would appear to be made of steel tubing which has a small wall thickness as opposed to the steel in the WTC,which was of little comparison. Fires do effect steel as does a hot day in the sun with expansion. this is a well known fact. However it takes alot of sustained heat to melt steel alot more than just a camp fire.
@leeking007 In the World trade center, near the impact Area, the steel of Perimeter Columns was only about 1/4" thick. The steel tubing in this video, the gantry is schedule 80, and is about 1/4" thick is well. Gasoline is a hydrocarbon, it naturally gives of black smoke.
You have failed in every sill point you tried to make.
@SlimeBuster OK this I don't know, and really hey what do I care? I'm not in US ~ you are, and I understand your patriotism and I hope you are right and i am just being silly. But hold your friends close and your enemies even closer.
@leeking007 Did the steel melt? No! Did it lose its integrity? Yes! The whole point of the steel discussion is that the fire retardent material was blown from the steel, the reason they use such material is to protect the steel from fire, hence the term "fire retardent". It was always a known fact that serious fire can affect steel, thus the steel was protected. Once exposed by the plane's exploding it was only a matter of time before the steel's integrity was comprimised and the floor collapsed
@NafffRespect yes my friend, I do see your point,you are correct that fire does effect steel, and fire retardant was blown off, but my problem and I'm sure most peoples problem is that it could only effect a certain amount of steel (ill be generous 6 floors ) but the other 60 or so floors below are still in tact ( not fire effected) there fore must have offered some resistance to the collapse slowing it down, but all to be reduced to baby powder and 3 of them ? there is a serious safety issue.
@leeking007 If we take the 6 floor scenario, imagine those crashing down on the floors below. You're quite right about the resistance factor, this is one of the reasons anyone watching ALL the videos pertaining to the collapses can quite clearly see that the towers took in excess of 14 seconds to collapse. In fact, you can see at one point that the debris and columns outpace the actual building itself, this proves strong resistance and explains the time the towers took to fall.
@NafffRespect Free fall would have been in the region of 9-10 seconds, an extra 4 seconds in terms of these collapses is a long period of time and can only be explained by resistance from the floors below, thus the free fall theory is nothing more than a fallacy. Of course, troofers will always use the 9 second arguement, it's the only thing they have to compound their free fall theory! They even ignore the videos that prove the towers took 14+ seconds to collapse.
@NafffRespect I would like to add, I would really like to see some scientific department ( unbiased) do a smaller scaled recreation of this collapse with the building built in exact detail to see what would actually happen to settle this once and for all. If true it would add to the credibility of the govt and would be worth while.
@leeking007 The problem there is the stance of truthers. Some argue for explosives, some argue for the use of thermite or super/nano-thermite. Prove either and you will still have the truth movement. I would say that my reference to steel melting was in reference to the towers, not the above news report.
There is no evidence for explosives in either of the towers, or indeed WTC 7 - no explosive squibs Prior to collapse.
@leeking007 I'd also add that for the use of thermite cuts would have needed to be made prior to ignition of the thermite, which in itself requires tremendous heat! These cuts were offered in video and photographic evidence from the clean-up, what truthers neglect to show are the workers making these cuts AFTER the collapse of both towers and not prior to!
To bring the towers down would have required tonnes of thermite at hundreds of points within the towers.
@leeking007 There is no way on this earth that this could have been carried out! It would have taken dozens of men months to set up such a plan. Not to mention the ignition to bring about a thermite reaction.
I would jut like to point out that this is 12,000 gallons of Gasolene ( petrol) no aviation kerosene, It is in a slow leaking tanker overturned,with rubber tyres burning giving off black smoke, in a sustained and confined area. The huge Gantry looks to be made from steel tubing not columns and beams( big difference in wall thickness. In WTC I have seen steel bent in such a manner I have never seen before in industry, As a matter of fact you would push shit uphill to do it in a factory.
Did you see it? The Message board fell down THREE TIMES & the fire MELTED IT (false reporting) this reporter can only assume that the fire bought the message board down not report it as fact. The video doesn’t show any damage to the message board from the accident (and there may not have been any) however there are the possibilities of other reasons that the reporter can not see. The report @1..30 mark “fire and rescue workers were still working underneath” would also appear to lack credibility.
I can't believe that there are still truthers out there banging their heads against the wall. JESUS! Stupid people.. with nothing to spend their time on
I'm currently studying to become a structural engineer (I start work in the summer) and as such I have a considerable interest in these matters.
It's not that fire can't weaken steel, it justrequires very high temperatures. It is complicated by the fact that steel actually strengthens when heated up to 500 degrees celcius. In order for steel to weaken considerably a temperature of 700 degrees c is required. Those temperature couldn't have existed based on the radio response by firefighters
@TruthMediaRadio One:: 12,000 gallons is Impossible, thats 100,000 lbs in fuel. (It is 4000 gallons more than the "Boeing" that hit the WTC.) The trucks Max. GVW is 80,000lbs. Or some 5,000 gallons plus the weight of the truck/trailers. Next, Gas burns, better than diesel. Just try and light diesel with a match. Lastly, Slimebuster is wrong, 911 was an inside job and a media job. Wake up people, the cats out of the bag. We deserve a better history. SB deserves something,too,...
How is "The government betrayed and killed it's own people" better than "The US was attacked by foreign islamic fundamentalists"? You still think 9/11 was an inside job?? Jeez...
@TruthMediaRadio@TruthMediaRadio WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT???? I am a journeyman welder who works with steel EVERY FREAKING DAY. Steel looses strength the hotter it gets and I believe it's close to 30 percent lost at 600 degrees.....I have no clue where you learned that but you need to haul your ass up to your instructer, which probably doesn't exist because you're full of shit anyway, and smack him in the face for being a moron.
If you love Liberty, If you care about freedom, If you want to know the truth, Then see the discovery movie -Path to 911- Why did Certian Dems try to block this movie? Why was it blocked from DVD? Why do Twoofers Fear this Movie? Its here on utube and in my favs.See it now if you care. Willing to spend some time to learn,even if it takes a few hours or days? Then go to -Path to 911
Sure you can try to use any examples you feel can make your point, However, because you have deleted my comments that I have posted on your "other" channel, you have been blocked. Now you come back using another account, after i blocked you, this is called harassment, and you have been reported.
Why would I be threatened by a video of a flipped over gasoline tanker truck posted as though it has anything to do with something other than what it is about?
It's a gasoline tanker truck, not a Boeing 767. It's leaking gasoline from a tank that HASN'T been completely destroyed. It's gasoline fumes that burn, not the actual liquid. That's the reason fuel was still leaking after the fire was extinguished, hence the environmental concerns. Duh!
Black smoke indicates a excessively rich air-fuel mixture. So yes the fire IS lacking oxygen. It's mostly gasoline fumes burning. The black smoke is from unburnt fuel. The burn is incomplete. Oxygen from the surrounding air is pushed away from the rising fumes and fire.
Bottomline, your video is about an overturned gasoline tanker truck. It has absolutely nothing to do with 9/11.
...not only does your video have nothing to do with 9/11, but in the description you say, "911 Conspiracy Theorist claim that Black Smoke means an oxygen starved fire." as though this is an incorrect statement when in fact it's true (but not just because 911 conspiracy theorists say it).
Then you say, "911 Conspiracy Theorist claim that Fire can not weaken Steel. This is an incorrect statement because not all 911 conspiracy theorists say this. Just because you say it, doesn't make it true.
It does not matter if the smoke is black, blue, green, or red... the video demonstrates that a FIRE CAN, and DID get hot enough to weaken the steel to the point it collapsed, and that is what happened on 9/11... and it's not because I said so, the evidence speaks for itself.
So what!?!!! You have a video that shows a highway sign gantry falling over. This doesn't prove that the fires in the 3 WTC buildings were hot enough to comprimise constuction-grade steel, it doesn't explain the uniform & symmetrical collapsing of these buildings as a result of asymmetrical damage and it doesn't explain the molten steel and evidence of thermate etc.
jelinto I let you freely post comments on my channel, but you have removed my comments, why? Obviously just like GINO said, you are threatened by my video... you afraid people will see that I exposed you.
What does she say at 0:16? A gas tanker? So it's gasoline burning and not jet fuel?
So when black smoke comes out of your car's exhaust pipe, the first thing you do is check to see if your air filter is clogged because black smoke suggests the combustion process isn't getting enough...*ahem...oxygen.
Sorry lost my train of thought. What was the point of the video again? That the WTC towers were made of highway sign gantries? Oh, I didn't know that. You learn something new everyday.
The metal grid is what she said metal not steel get your shit straight kids and truthers never said fire can't weaken steel.You guys are cherry picking arguments and who you argue with.Some truthers are uneducated and some are bizarre but you are simply stereotyping the rest of us.
This guy SlimeBuster keeps blocking my comments because he can't keep up with my arguments which make him look so very clueless about 9-11.He is a coward and it's a shutout so far in favor of us truthers.LMFAO
kingkonz1020 stop crying like a baby, you are just angry because you can not figure out how to use YouTube. You should explain how your comments just magically appear if they was being blocked?
What is to argue about man, STEEL is a type of METAL
Actually what she said was "gantry" as long as you;re getting "shit straight".
Also, if you look around on YT you will find videos of simular fires under freeway overpasses causing the steel supports to weaken enoungh to collapse the entire overpass.
What's cool about this video, is that it demonstrates that fire CAN infact affect steel!
also: notice @ the 2:07 mark, that she points out that the gasoline--amidst all this heat and fire, was still flowing. Many a truther will contend (to shore up their fairy-tales) that the jet fuel in the case of the WTC towers, burned off within the 1st ten minutes! This would indicate otherwise! Thanks to Slimebuster for posting!
Oh wow! That's another thing I didn't know. The planes involved in 9/11 were fueled with gasoline. Most jetliners are fueled with jet fuel...I think. I'm not sure but I think I heard that somewhere. Oh well, it doesn't matter. This is the internet, I can say whatever I want, it doesn't have to be true. Fuck it! ALL jet planes are fueled with GASOLINE! Teehee. I'm with you GINO868...thank-you Slimebuster for posting misleading bullshit. I mean...who cares what's true?
@InTheSticks1881 It is a high rise building that fell, how should it fell otherwise. It is how these buildings fell regardless of the cause. Hence the way it fell does not support any of your silly claims.
Comment removed
Tykkimiehet 1 month ago
@leeking007 You are a steel worker? So that makes you some sort of expert then correct? Then you should have no problem answering this question...
At what Temperature does Steel weaken?
Do not dance around, do not give excuses, no buts, just answer the question with a simple number.
SlimeBuster 4 months ago
@SlimeBuster I am not a metalurgist or forensic scientist just a perp asking questions, I believe steel (low carbon type and mild streel) looses 50% strength @ 600 deg C and 90% @ 900 deg C ~ Jet A1 fuel has an open air ignition temp of 315 deg C and petroleum (your gasolene) has a open air ignition temp of 400 deg C.
leeking007 4 months ago
secondly when the plane hit the WTC it would have almost entirely ripped open the wings (fuel containers) and most of the avgas would have been used in the initial fireball. In a small space of time the surrounds furnishings carpets and inflammables would have been the remaining source of the fire.
leeking007 4 months ago
@leeking007 LOL!!
you are trying to argue that fire does not affect steel at all? what a foolish little boy you are LOL!!
SlimeBuster 4 months ago
@SlimeBuster I just would like to say that I am a steel worker amongst other things, and i am pointing to the fact that the "gantry" would appear to be made of steel tubing which has a small wall thickness as opposed to the steel in the WTC,which was of little comparison. Fires do effect steel as does a hot day in the sun with expansion. this is a well known fact. However it takes alot of sustained heat to melt steel alot more than just a camp fire.
leeking007 4 months ago
@leeking007 In the World trade center, near the impact Area, the steel of Perimeter Columns was only about 1/4" thick. The steel tubing in this video, the gantry is schedule 80, and is about 1/4" thick is well. Gasoline is a hydrocarbon, it naturally gives of black smoke.
You have failed in every sill point you tried to make.
SlimeBuster 4 months ago
@SlimeBuster OK this I don't know, and really hey what do I care? I'm not in US ~ you are, and I understand your patriotism and I hope you are right and i am just being silly. But hold your friends close and your enemies even closer.
leeking007 4 months ago
@leeking007YOU Don't know??? Then what the hell are you doing here spitting out bullshit???
SlimeBuster 4 months ago
@SlimeBuster MMM sorry slime, actually you are starting to sway me over , maybe togeather we can convince the other half of america its bullshit .
leeking007 4 months ago
@leeking007 Did the steel melt? No! Did it lose its integrity? Yes! The whole point of the steel discussion is that the fire retardent material was blown from the steel, the reason they use such material is to protect the steel from fire, hence the term "fire retardent". It was always a known fact that serious fire can affect steel, thus the steel was protected. Once exposed by the plane's exploding it was only a matter of time before the steel's integrity was comprimised and the floor collapsed
NafffRespect 4 months ago
@NafffRespect yes my friend, I do see your point,you are correct that fire does effect steel, and fire retardant was blown off, but my problem and I'm sure most peoples problem is that it could only effect a certain amount of steel (ill be generous 6 floors ) but the other 60 or so floors below are still in tact ( not fire effected) there fore must have offered some resistance to the collapse slowing it down, but all to be reduced to baby powder and 3 of them ? there is a serious safety issue.
leeking007 4 months ago
@leeking007 If we take the 6 floor scenario, imagine those crashing down on the floors below. You're quite right about the resistance factor, this is one of the reasons anyone watching ALL the videos pertaining to the collapses can quite clearly see that the towers took in excess of 14 seconds to collapse. In fact, you can see at one point that the debris and columns outpace the actual building itself, this proves strong resistance and explains the time the towers took to fall.
NafffRespect 4 months ago
@NafffRespect Free fall would have been in the region of 9-10 seconds, an extra 4 seconds in terms of these collapses is a long period of time and can only be explained by resistance from the floors below, thus the free fall theory is nothing more than a fallacy. Of course, troofers will always use the 9 second arguement, it's the only thing they have to compound their free fall theory! They even ignore the videos that prove the towers took 14+ seconds to collapse.
NafffRespect 4 months ago
@NafffRespect I would like to add, I would really like to see some scientific department ( unbiased) do a smaller scaled recreation of this collapse with the building built in exact detail to see what would actually happen to settle this once and for all. If true it would add to the credibility of the govt and would be worth while.
leeking007 4 months ago
@leeking007 The problem there is the stance of truthers. Some argue for explosives, some argue for the use of thermite or super/nano-thermite. Prove either and you will still have the truth movement. I would say that my reference to steel melting was in reference to the towers, not the above news report.
There is no evidence for explosives in either of the towers, or indeed WTC 7 - no explosive squibs Prior to collapse.
NafffRespect 4 months ago
@leeking007 I'd also add that for the use of thermite cuts would have needed to be made prior to ignition of the thermite, which in itself requires tremendous heat! These cuts were offered in video and photographic evidence from the clean-up, what truthers neglect to show are the workers making these cuts AFTER the collapse of both towers and not prior to!
To bring the towers down would have required tonnes of thermite at hundreds of points within the towers.
NafffRespect 4 months ago
@leeking007 There is no way on this earth that this could have been carried out! It would have taken dozens of men months to set up such a plan. Not to mention the ignition to bring about a thermite reaction.
NafffRespect 4 months ago
@NafffRespect Yes you have spoken the truth and I accept your sway on this. Although refer to my message to you.
leeking007 4 months ago
I would jut like to point out that this is 12,000 gallons of Gasolene ( petrol) no aviation kerosene, It is in a slow leaking tanker overturned,with rubber tyres burning giving off black smoke, in a sustained and confined area. The huge Gantry looks to be made from steel tubing not columns and beams( big difference in wall thickness. In WTC I have seen steel bent in such a manner I have never seen before in industry, As a matter of fact you would push shit uphill to do it in a factory.
leeking007 4 months ago
What's happened to slimebuster's channel? Can't view it. If he's been kicked off YT why can we still watch the vids?
terrymanning1 9 months ago
@terrymanning1 I am still here, just not that often.
SlimeBuster 9 months ago
Wow that explains building 7!
Oceanno69 11 months ago
@Oceanno69 yes it is so easy! truthtards are brainless, they can not think for themselves, they are like cave men living in basements.
SlimeBuster 11 months ago
Did you see it? The Message board fell down THREE TIMES & the fire MELTED IT (false reporting) this reporter can only assume that the fire bought the message board down not report it as fact. The video doesn’t show any damage to the message board from the accident (and there may not have been any) however there are the possibilities of other reasons that the reporter can not see. The report @1..30 mark “fire and rescue workers were still working underneath” would also appear to lack credibility.
babanapeal 1 year ago
@babanapeal
i agree
sadfasdf74 8 months ago
I can't believe that there are still truthers out there banging their heads against the wall. JESUS! Stupid people.. with nothing to spend their time on
Horjan 1 year ago
The real question is WHY u lie about 9/11
Is it money or fame or both ?
KimmoKuopio 1 year ago
:o
Why not to take a break???
I love breaks
KimmoKuopio 1 year ago
But but but....Alex Jones said fire cant do that! He's smart!
EdgemanLL2 1 year ago
ATTENTION all contractors:
IExposeMormonism says you do not have to fireproof your steel anymore because FIRE can NOT hurt steel !
SlimeBuster 1 year ago
@IExposeMormonism
seems you are really fucking stupid, waiting for YES or NO
SlimeBuster 1 year ago
@SlimeBuster I could have sworn I said no..You need to provide parameters..... Are you trying to control this situation? tsk.
IExposeMormonism 1 year ago
@IExposeMormonism no? ...really...?
so what made the steel collapse in this video the smoke?
LOL!!!
SlimeBuster 1 year ago
@IExposeMormonism
the answer to my question is yes or no... anything else gets deleted, try again.
So, your arguement is Fire has no affect on steel?
SlimeBuster 1 year ago
I'm currently studying to become a structural engineer (I start work in the summer) and as such I have a considerable interest in these matters.
It's not that fire can't weaken steel, it justrequires very high temperatures. It is complicated by the fact that steel actually strengthens when heated up to 500 degrees celcius. In order for steel to weaken considerably a temperature of 700 degrees c is required. Those temperature couldn't have existed based on the radio response by firefighters
TruthMediaRadio 1 year ago
I thought you told the Truth? I am glad you won't be involved in building anything in my country.
Steel loses 50% of it's strength at 1100
and those firefighters were BELOW the impact area, stupid ass.
SlimeBuster 1 year ago
@TruthMediaRadio One:: 12,000 gallons is Impossible, thats 100,000 lbs in fuel. (It is 4000 gallons more than the "Boeing" that hit the WTC.) The trucks Max. GVW is 80,000lbs. Or some 5,000 gallons plus the weight of the truck/trailers. Next, Gas burns, better than diesel. Just try and light diesel with a match. Lastly, Slimebuster is wrong, 911 was an inside job and a media job. Wake up people, the cats out of the bag. We deserve a better history. SB deserves something,too,...
IExposeMormonism 1 year ago
@IExposeMormonism so you argument is that fire don't affect steel right?
SlimeBuster 1 year ago
@IExposeMormonism
"We deserve a better history"
How is "The government betrayed and killed it's own people" better than "The US was attacked by foreign islamic fundamentalists"? You still think 9/11 was an inside job?? Jeez...
Horjan 1 year ago
@TruthMediaRadio @TruthMediaRadio WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT???? I am a journeyman welder who works with steel EVERY FREAKING DAY. Steel looses strength the hotter it gets and I believe it's close to 30 percent lost at 600 degrees.....I have no clue where you learned that but you need to haul your ass up to your instructer, which probably doesn't exist because you're full of shit anyway, and smack him in the face for being a moron.
streakingcameraman 1 year ago
Fail
Mueller852 2 years ago
Mueller will be the next 911 trruthtard to follow the footsteps of John Patrick Bedell, the Pentagon shooter.
SlimeBuster 1 year ago
HeadLessMunkees 2 years ago
je[i]into
Sure you can try to use any examples you feel can make your point, However, because you have deleted my comments that I have posted on your "other" channel, you have been blocked. Now you come back using another account, after i blocked you, this is called harassment, and you have been reported.
SlimeBuster 2 years ago
Threatened? hahaha! By this video? lol!
Why would I be threatened by a video of a flipped over gasoline tanker truck posted as though it has anything to do with something other than what it is about?
It's a gasoline tanker truck, not a Boeing 767. It's leaking gasoline from a tank that HASN'T been completely destroyed. It's gasoline fumes that burn, not the actual liquid. That's the reason fuel was still leaking after the fire was extinguished, hence the environmental concerns. Duh!
jelinto 2 years ago
The Fire is Clearly without doubt, an OPEN burning Fire that IS NOT be Oxygen starved,
so tell us why the smoke is black then?
SlimeBuster 2 years ago
Black smoke indicates a excessively rich air-fuel mixture. So yes the fire IS lacking oxygen. It's mostly gasoline fumes burning. The black smoke is from unburnt fuel. The burn is incomplete. Oxygen from the surrounding air is pushed away from the rising fumes and fire.
Bottomline, your video is about an overturned gasoline tanker truck. It has absolutely nothing to do with 9/11.
jelinto 2 years ago
...not only does your video have nothing to do with 9/11, but in the description you say, "911 Conspiracy Theorist claim that Black Smoke means an oxygen starved fire." as though this is an incorrect statement when in fact it's true (but not just because 911 conspiracy theorists say it).
Then you say, "911 Conspiracy Theorist claim that Fire can not weaken Steel. This is an incorrect statement because not all 911 conspiracy theorists say this. Just because you say it, doesn't make it true.
jelinto 2 years ago
It does not matter if the smoke is black, blue, green, or red... the video demonstrates that a FIRE CAN, and DID get hot enough to weaken the steel to the point it collapsed, and that is what happened on 9/11... and it's not because I said so, the evidence speaks for itself.
SlimeBuster 2 years ago
So what!?!!! You have a video that shows a highway sign gantry falling over. This doesn't prove that the fires in the 3 WTC buildings were hot enough to comprimise constuction-grade steel, it doesn't explain the uniform & symmetrical collapsing of these buildings as a result of asymmetrical damage and it doesn't explain the molten steel and evidence of thermate etc.
Your video is irrevelant.
jelinto 2 years ago
jelinto I let you freely post comments on my channel, but you have removed my comments, why? Obviously just like GINO said, you are threatened by my video... you afraid people will see that I exposed you.
SlimeBuster 2 years ago
What does she say at 0:16? A gas tanker? So it's gasoline burning and not jet fuel?
So when black smoke comes out of your car's exhaust pipe, the first thing you do is check to see if your air filter is clogged because black smoke suggests the combustion process isn't getting enough...*ahem...oxygen.
Sorry lost my train of thought. What was the point of the video again? That the WTC towers were made of highway sign gantries? Oh, I didn't know that. You learn something new everyday.
jelinto 2 years ago
It's funny how truthers don't see how funny their beliefs are. Even when it is pointed out to them in an obvious way.
dsglop 2 years ago
Comment removed
jelinto 2 years ago
The metal grid is what she said metal not steel get your shit straight kids and truthers never said fire can't weaken steel.You guys are cherry picking arguments and who you argue with.Some truthers are uneducated and some are bizarre but you are simply stereotyping the rest of us.
kingkonz1020 2 years ago
kingkonz1020 said "The metal grid is what she said metal not steel"
LOL! and to think I would ever delete such a comment?
You are right, some Truthtards are uneducated and some are bizarre, and many like you are Both.
SlimeBuster 2 years ago
This guy SlimeBuster keeps blocking my comments because he can't keep up with my arguments which make him look so very clueless about 9-11.He is a coward and it's a shutout so far in favor of us truthers.LMFAO
kingkonz1020 2 years ago
kingkonz1020 stop crying like a baby, you are just angry because you can not figure out how to use YouTube. You should explain how your comments just magically appear if they was being blocked?
What is to argue about man, STEEL is a type of METAL
stupid ass.
SlimeBuster 2 years ago
@kingkonz1020
Actually what she said was "gantry" as long as you;re getting "shit straight".
Also, if you look around on YT you will find videos of simular fires under freeway overpasses causing the steel supports to weaken enoungh to collapse the entire overpass.
NWOisBS 2 years ago
What's cool about this video, is that it demonstrates that fire CAN infact affect steel!
also: notice @ the 2:07 mark, that she points out that the gasoline--amidst all this heat and fire, was still flowing. Many a truther will contend (to shore up their fairy-tales) that the jet fuel in the case of the WTC towers, burned off within the 1st ten minutes! This would indicate otherwise! Thanks to Slimebuster for posting!
GINO868 2 years ago
@GINO868
Oh wow! That's another thing I didn't know. The planes involved in 9/11 were fueled with gasoline. Most jetliners are fueled with jet fuel...I think. I'm not sure but I think I heard that somewhere. Oh well, it doesn't matter. This is the internet, I can say whatever I want, it doesn't have to be true. Fuck it! ALL jet planes are fueled with GASOLINE! Teehee. I'm with you GINO868...thank-you Slimebuster for posting misleading bullshit. I mean...who cares what's true?
jelinto 2 years ago
I luv how threatened u r by this video!
GINO868 2 years ago
There is one important lesson that builders should learn from this. Always use concrete around supporting columns in skyscrapers.
ThePigSwill 2 years ago
Whatta about Building #7? I weld and studies physics.
InTheSticks1881 2 years ago
Have you welded anything as big as building 7?
stbays 2 years ago
''Have you welded anything as big as building 7? ''
No.
Why did building #7 collapse? The dynamics where vastly different, yet the structure fell in the same manner as the towers.
Seriously, the more important topic at this point should be the economy. I don't expect a definitive answer and that's fine.
InTheSticks1881 2 years ago
@InTheSticks1881 It is a high rise building that fell, how should it fell otherwise. It is how these buildings fell regardless of the cause. Hence the way it fell does not support any of your silly claims.
Hochdorff 2 years ago
@InTheSticks1881
sure it did...that's why the towers collapsed top down and seven didn't
grandmastershek 2 years ago
"What about Building #7? I weld and study physics. "
It was on fire too, and had similar designs to the towers, so the same applies.
tokenmac 2 years ago
Must have been an inside Job.
blueshadow1996 2 years ago
rofl
Psy0pAgent 2 years ago
I love how truthers can re-define physics and chemistry to suit their preconceived biases.
jacobromu 2 years ago
@jacobromu
I agree, it's an amazing skill they have to re-define the laws of physics, chemistry and sometimes gravity. In just one sentence.
SlightyDisturbedNBK 2 years ago
Did anyone check the dust for thermite or thermate?
lolz
Twoofers think fireproofing the steel is a NWO myth
KimmoKuopio 2 years ago
@KimmoKuopio Or was this MIHOP or LIHOP?
SlightyDisturbedNBK 2 years ago
Comment removed
KimmoKuopio 2 years ago
Definately IHOP, as you can get there if you took the next exit.
stbays 2 years ago