Jeez, another insult? How did I miss this one? lol! I don't have a communications degree. I do posess a handful of undergrad degrees and a Master's in chemistry, but that's a different discussion entirely. You're right, I don't understand all this "technical" shit (although I've seen NONE of it from you). My 15+ years of firefighting experience and all that goes along with it: I am also a paramedic (that alone is a 2 year degree), a Hazmat technician, a rescue technician, building collapse technician, confined space rescue technician, swift water/ice rescue technician. I have a handful of other credentials but it's all boring stuff that wouldn't interest you so, now that you have a little background on my experience and education, would you mind NOT saying I know nothing? Thanks!
Dude get over it? No thanks. I am making comparisons with like sized buildings with similar construction. A 4 story building isn't the same. The building I put up is almost exactly the same size as WTC7 and surprisingly enough it was built in the same manner as 7 the only thing different was that the Beijing building had a fire which was massive compared to the SMORES fires in WTC 7. And yet it didn't soften or melt or collapse.Wait a second! You keep making all these "comparisons" yet when someone else throws up some evidence debunking some of your claims it suddenly isn't "comparable"? LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!
Dude, get over it! Buildings HAVE collapsed from fire alone. Ignoring more facts?What about the fact that the sprinkler system on the fire floors was disabled since huge jets flying at over 500mph severed the standpipe supplying the sprinkler systems. Also, much of the asbestos was believed to be sheared off, making fire retardant a non issue when dealing with the WTC. 9/11 was unlike anything in the history of the planet. There is NOTHING you can truly compare to it. NOTHING!
It didn't "free fall"!
None of those buildings free fell, because buildings DON'T FUCKING FREE FALL! Even in a controlled demo, they don't just free fall and neither did any of the WTC buildings! lol! I don't need to attempt to "deceive" anyone. The facts I put up speak for themselves. You are saying that none of my "comparisons" are "comparable", yet none of yours are really that "comparable" either now, are they? I've said it numerous times, I'll say it again; there has NEVER been an event that comes close to comparing to 9/11. You make claims like "No steel frame.....blah, blah, blah", yet when confronted with actual proof that contradicts what you say all of a sudden it's not "comparable"? Just address some of my links. Show me what exactly isn't possible, and so on and so forth. Come one man, do it! lmfao!!!!!! More leaving out of facts? How about that there was a 10 story gash with main supporting beams taken out? Fires alone, huh? Pfft!This table shows the temperature of the METAL, not the temperature of whatever it is that's burning. Just because steel loses 50% of its strength at 1000f does not mean you only need 1000f flame to get it that hot. To get steel that hot in under 45 minutes you are going to need something MUCH MUCH hotter. For example, take 1 cup of water in a pan on your stove and time how long it takes to boil at maximum heat, now try the same thing with 10 gallons. Huge time difference in how long it takes to boil isn't it? I mean it's a DRAMATIC difference of probably 1,000 times longer to boil the larger amount. I am somehow expected to believe that steel lost more than 50% of it's strength in under 45 minutes and all from an ordinary fire? Skyscrapers are seriously over engineered, each beam is actually only having to hold about 20% of its intended max load.
Buildings don't free fall? How come NIST says WTC7 free fell then?It didn't "free fall"!
from http://www.nist.gov/public_affairs/factsheet/wtc_qa_082108.cfmNIST said:
[youtube]nnnjIzamnJo[/youtube]I found yet another link that deals with fire induced collapse, which I expect NOBODY to actually read. lol!
http://fire.nist.gov/bfrlpubs/fire02/PDF/f02028.pdf
Thermodynamics my friend. Steel conducts heat fairly well. It doesn't take that long and water can't possibly illustrate the thermodynamic properties of steel. You're also assuming that heat conductivity is limitless in steel. It is not. The rest of the steel will sink SOME of the heat but not nearly enough. Stick a flame on one end of a 6 foot piece of steel and touch the opposite end. It will take a LONG time and a lot of heat to get the opposite end heated up. Exactly how long is going to depend on a lot of variables. Fuel burned and size/heat of the fire being the 2 big ones. Also, assuming the heat disspates instantly, as you are assuming would mean that the point where the flame touches the metal should be much cooler due to the heat sink properties you're talking about. I'll bet you put that flame to the steel for 1 minute and I bet the opposite end is barely warm while the end the flame touched probably will give you a 3rd degree burn instantly!
please keep arguments clean. doc111 is a very respectable person who puts his life on the line to save others. His opinions are just as good as mine or anyones. Who volunteered to go to Japan and save people from the Nuclear disaster? doc111 that's who.
No they aren't! Again, You are conveniently leaving out HUGE facts to bolster your argument. WTC7 didn't fall from fire alone. It had a HUGE gash which took out key structural elements.
If you are so "right" then why do you feel the need to insult me? Trying to make me look more stupid than I am capable of on my own or are you somehow threatened by my "lack of knowledge"? Usually people who are confident they are correct don't feel the need to insult others. That alone shows your level of "intelligence".
Thank you my friend. I appreciate that.
becuase you try and try at legnth to disprove the facts and im dont care to cradle your emotions as well as your ignoranceIf you are so "right" then why do you feel the need to insult me? Trying to make me look more stupid than I am capable of on my own or are you somehow threatened by my "lack of knowledge"? Usually people who are confident they are correct don't feel the need to insult others. That alone shows your level of "intelligence".
And what is so wrong with me having an opinion? Does that make me "stupid" or a "punk", just because we don't share the same views? You don't have to cradle my emotions, but calling me names and saying "I don't know anything" or implying that I'm stupid is completely unnecessary and serves no purpose in bolstering your argument, in fact quite the contrary. I am allowed to have an opinion ya know, and this is VERY personal to me. I lost a lot of brothers that day and if I thought for 1 millisecond that the govt. perpetrated/knew anything about it, I would be at the head of the line demanding blood. My ignorance and experience aside, what "proof" have you offered up? I really haven't seen much, except some terms like "compressive strength". That's awesome that you know a thing or 2 about metals but I'd like to see more substance and fewer insults from you if you want to be taken seriously.
Red hot is certainly hot enough to bend/weaken steel. I'm not sure we're having the same conversation anyways.