Jump to content

spivver

Members
  • Posts

    28
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by spivver

  1. Insane_Alien, you mean this hotel fire in Madrid: http://www.iklimnet.com/hotelfires/windsor_madrid_pictures.html Now that's a fire!! But please do tell me, did the building collapse at near free-fall speeds?? From what I can tell it mainly stood afterward, but, hey, I'm not the scientist here!!
  2. Thank you theCPE, I'm very glad that you posed your question regarding proof of the collapse timings. I didn't time grainy videos, which is the popular accusation for just brushing off this type of question. You scientists have an instrument which measures earth tremors, it is called a seismometer. The nearby Columbia University seimometer recorded the tremors as the buildings collapsed, here are their findings: http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/LCSN/Eq/20010911_wtc.html Now as to the steel in the jet engines not melting, in the last passenger aircraft I flew in (last month) I detected no ceramics at the exhaust outlets, and these weren't melting. And what is the conductivity of ceramics?? I assume that this would have been somehow attached to the steel in the engines, steel which didn't melt or weaken very much (thankfully) in the plane I was in. Now please also advise me just how hot it would get before a person would be unable to enter a building? Not very hot, red hot, warmish, just how hot? You see, you scientists are overlooking the fact that your arguments assume that all the steel throughout the whole building was raised to such a temperature as to weaken it sufficently for it to collapse at near free-fall speeds. And, of course, this just cannot be so, as people were working high up in those buildings. There are testimonies from some of the fire-fighters who survived, and we also have radio transmissions from those within the building prior to its collapse. Notwithstanding all your arguments, it must also be mentioned here that never before or since 9/11 have steel framed buildings ever collapsed and completely disintegrated as a result of fire, yet that day three seem to have done so. So please do answer my questions, after all, you are the scientists. Which would you prefer, either the tops of the collapsing buildings having infinite mass, or the lower (and not very hot steel columns) having zero resistance, so resulting in pretty much free-fall building collapses. I cannot continue my understanding until I know which option to use. Finally, and I know the difficulties some of you may be facing, you have probably never given these questions a thought before, just taking in all the media brainwashing which has been going on for many years now, just as I have until the realisation a few months ago. Visit the website at http://www.cornwall911truth.info if you do need to refer to some of the media film taken at the time, as you probably won't have seen it since the day of the atrocities, as the mainstream media chooses not to show it - I cannot think why!!
  3. Gentlemen, I've read some of the above posts with a great deal of interest. There is much discussion regarding the jet fuel 'melting' the structural steel in the World Trade Centre towers, resulting in their total collapse. However, will uncontrolled jet fuel fuel burning actually 'melt' steel? Can anyone please advise me whether or not, when they were last flying in a passenger aircraft, the jet fuel melted the steel in the engines please? Not to mention, of course, that the steel in the lower half of the buildings couldn't have got that hot as fire-fighters and rescuers were working inside the towers, without incineration. In addition, has anyone given any thought as to just how could two 110 story buildings (and one 47 story building which wasn't even hit by an aircraft), collapse into their own footprints at close to free-fall speeds, around 10 1/2 seconds for the two twin towers, 6 1/2 seconds for the WTC7. In order for this to happen, either the stories above the areas of the crashes must have had infinite mass, or else the steel structure below offered zero resistance (because of weakened steel??). Which is it to be??
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.