i really want to read the entire book, but dont have time, so i pulled this part, the actual part you just mentioned.
Originally posted by: Acanthus
Read the part about the fires, where an MIT Prof concludes that the temperature of the fires exceeded 1000C.
Wierzbicki follows with a detailed analysis of the collision of the aircraft, and the heavy damage that they caused to the structures. From his exacting mechanical analysis, he concludes that the North Tower must have lost between 4 and 12 core columns ¾out of 44¾ while the South Tower lost between 7 and 20 such columns, and that both were brought to the verge of collapse by the collisions. Ghoniem examines carefully the fire conditions inside the towers, and determines that the temperature within the buildings must have been close to 1000°C, hot enough to significantly lower the stiffness and strength of the steel columns and girders. He also demonstrates that the chemical power of the aircraft fuel together with the combustible materials in the building, when released as heat over the course of one hour, was a staggering one gigawatt, which is comparable to the power of a large electrical power plant. This provides substantiation to the notion that the fires played a critical role in the collapse of the towers. Buyukozturk and Ulm proceed with a materials and structures analysis of the towers, their interaction with the fires, the effects of these on the structural materials, and the mechanics of collapse. They also discuss how the vulnerability of future high rise buildings could be ameliorated by the widespread application of the concept of ?redundancies?.
Originally posted by: noto12ious
Now you're getting desperate. Funny how you won't address any of the facts or the article I just posted #1 is true.... #2-5? What does that have to do with the topic at hand? Nothing.
Originally posted by: MIKEMIKE
Originally posted by: Acanthus
Read the part about the fires, where an MIT Prof concludes that the temperature of the fires exceeded 1000C.
i really want to read the entire book, but dont have time, so i pulled this part, the actual part you just mentioned.
Wierzbicki follows with a detailed analysis of the collision of the aircraft, and the heavy damage that they caused to the structures. From his exacting mechanical analysis, he concludes that the North Tower must have lost between 4 and 12 core columns ¾out of 44¾ while the South Tower lost between 7 and 20 such columns, and that both were brought to the verge of collapse by the collisions. Ghoniem examines carefully the fire conditions inside the towers, and determines that the temperature within the buildings must have been close to 1000°C, hot enough to significantly lower the stiffness and strength of the steel columns and girders. He also demonstrates that the chemical power of the aircraft fuel together with the combustible materials in the building, when released as heat over the course of one hour, was a staggering one gigawatt, which is comparable to the power of a large electrical power plant. This provides substantiation to the notion that the fires played a critical role in the collapse of the towers. Buyukozturk and Ulm proceed with a materials and structures analysis of the towers, their interaction with the fires, the effects of these on the structural materials, and the mechanics of collapse. They also discuss how the vulnerability of future high rise buildings could be ameliorated by the widespread application of the concept of ?redundancies?.
The analysis presented here was based on simplifying assumptions that reduced the problem to
that of a compartment fire, albeit of a much larger scale than anything that has been analyzed
before. Further simplifications have been applied to estimate the values of the various
parameters that appear in compartment fire models, and allowed estimates for the burn rate and
the temperatures to be obtained. Preliminary results, based on approximate estimates of the
fire conditions following the crash of the planes into the WTC Towers and the initial damage
caused by the impact, shows that the fires generated very significant heat release rates and the
fire temperatures were likely to have exceeded 1000° C. Given the amount of fuel available at
the moment of the crash, such temperatures are likely to have lasted long enough to raise the
temperature of the building material to dangerously high levels, and hence for the fires to have
contributed significantly to the weakening of the towers structures and their collapse, contrary
to some early speculations.
The next step in assessing the contribution of the fire to the collapse of the Towers is
to define the fire conditions more precisely, e.g., the initial size of the exterior wall opening
created by the crash, the volume and surface area of the initial impact zone, the initial
distribution of the jet fuel and other combustible material, and the fraction that participated in
the initial fireball, etc. Conditions must have changed rapidly due to the further weakening of
the structure, the caving-in of the floors and the seepage of the jet fuel downward, which must
have also changed the fire conditions and have strengthened the fire as more air was fed
through the damaged exterior walls. Results of a study of the crash and the dynamics of the
structural failure that followed can provide the necessary input to update the fire conditions
and will lead to better estimates of the temperature history of the fire and the surrounding
structures. The strong coupling between the progress of the fire and the further damage to the
structure should be considered next, in a modeling analysis in which a two-way interaction is
maintained. Such complex analysis must rely on powerful computational models, running on
state of the art computational facilities of very high sustained speeds.
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Originally posted by: noto12ious
Now you're getting desperate. Funny how you won't address any of the facts or the article I just posted #1 is true.... #2-5? What does that have to do with the topic at hand? Nothing.
It directly applies to the topic at hand because it shows that you're a quack with mental problems, and therefore we don't need to address all of your ridiculous claims one by one.
This is just like those court cases where you have some wacko trying to present some ludicrous case, and he wants to bring all these people to the stand, including Dick Cheney, Bill Clinton, Maurice Gibb from the Bee Gees, his pet dog, a barrel of monkeys, a 9/16ths wrench, Bill Gates, etc.
If you had to address their looney claims one by one, you'd be there forever, since they keep making crap up. They'll never learn, just as you'll never learn that your conspiracy theories are bunk.
You're a loony, you're not a person with any sort insightful knowledge.
Originally posted by: BrokenVisage
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Originally posted by: noto12ious
Now you're getting desperate. Funny how you won't address any of the facts or the article I just posted #1 is true.... #2-5? What does that have to do with the topic at hand? Nothing.
It directly applies to the topic at hand because it shows that you're a quack with mental problems, and therefore we don't need to address all of your ridiculous claims one by one.
This is just like those court cases where you have some wacko trying to present some ludicrous case, and he wants to bring all these people to the stand, including Dick Cheney, Bill Clinton, Maurice Gibb from the Bee Gees, his pet dog, a barrel of monkeys, a 9/16ths wrench, Bill Gates, etc.
If you had to address their looney claims one by one, you'd be there forever, since they keep making crap up. They'll never learn, just as you'll never learn that your conspiracy theories are bunk.
You're a loony, you're not a person with any sort insightful knowledge.
You're a inward thinking numbskull, just keep calling him a quack whose questions are ridiculous so you can feel better about not addressing them. He's asking the same questions and making the same claims that hundreds of thousands of other people are on other forums, so much for him being a wacko with mental problems, is that what we call having an open mind now?
Originally posted by: BrokenVisage
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Originally posted by: noto12ious
Now you're getting desperate. Funny how you won't address any of the facts or the article I just posted #1 is true.... #2-5? What does that have to do with the topic at hand? Nothing.
It directly applies to the topic at hand because it shows that you're a quack with mental problems, and therefore we don't need to address all of your ridiculous claims one by one.
This is just like those court cases where you have some wacko trying to present some ludicrous case, and he wants to bring all these people to the stand, including Dick Cheney, Bill Clinton, Maurice Gibb from the Bee Gees, his pet dog, a barrel of monkeys, a 9/16ths wrench, Bill Gates, etc.
If you had to address their looney claims one by one, you'd be there forever, since they keep making crap up. They'll never learn, just as you'll never learn that your conspiracy theories are bunk.
You're a loony, you're not a person with any sort insightful knowledge.
You're a inward thinking numbskull, just keep calling him a quack whose questions are ridiculous so you can feel better about not addressing them. He's asking the same questions and making the same claims that hundreds of thousands of other people are on other forums, so much for him being a wacko with mental problems, is that what we call having an open mind now?
Originally posted by: noto12ious
Originally posted by: BrokenVisage
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Originally posted by: noto12ious
Now you're getting desperate. Funny how you won't address any of the facts or the article I just posted #1 is true.... #2-5? What does that have to do with the topic at hand? Nothing.
It directly applies to the topic at hand because it shows that you're a quack with mental problems, and therefore we don't need to address all of your ridiculous claims one by one.
This is just like those court cases where you have some wacko trying to present some ludicrous case, and he wants to bring all these people to the stand, including Dick Cheney, Bill Clinton, Maurice Gibb from the Bee Gees, his pet dog, a barrel of monkeys, a 9/16ths wrench, Bill Gates, etc.
If you had to address their looney claims one by one, you'd be there forever, since they keep making crap up. They'll never learn, just as you'll never learn that your conspiracy theories are bunk.
You're a loony, you're not a person with any sort insightful knowledge.
You're a inward thinking numbskull, just keep calling him a quack whose questions are ridiculous so you can feel better about not addressing them. He's asking the same questions and making the same claims that hundreds of thousands of other people are on other forums, so much for him being a wacko with mental problems, is that what we call having an open mind now?
I think 91TTZ missed the memo,
Former Head Of Star Wars Program Says Cheney Main 9/11 Suspect
The former head of the Star Wars missile defense program under Presidents Ford and Carter has gone public to say that the official version of 9/11 is a conspiracy theory and his main suspect for the architect of the attack is Vice President Dick Cheney.
Dr. Robert M. Bowman, Lt. Col., USAF, ret. flew 101 combat missions in Vietnam. He is the recipient of the Eisenhower Medal, the George F. Kennan Peace Prize, the President?s Medal of Veterans for Peace, the Society of Military Engineers Gold Medal (twice), six Air Medals, and dozens of other awards and honors. His Ph.D. is in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering from Caltech. He chaired 8 major international conferences, and is one of the country?s foremost experts on National Security.
Bowman worked secretly for the US government on the Star Wars project and was the first to coin the very term in a 1977 secret memo. After Bowman realized that the program was only ever intended to be used as an aggressive and not defensive tool, as part of a plan to initiate a nuclear war with the Soviets, he left the program and campaigned against it.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2006/040406mainsuspect.htm
Also many other high profile figures, including Ray McGovern, Morgan Reynolds, etc
Notice he wouldn't address Norman Mineta?
Originally posted by: Acanthus
Read the part about the fires, where an MIT Prof concludes that the temperature of the fires exceeded 1000C.
Originally posted by: noto12ious
Originally posted by: Acanthus
Read the part about the fires, where an MIT Prof concludes that the temperature of the fires exceeded 1000C.
1000C? Your point being? Nobody has said the steel wasn't weakened
Contradictions to the official collapse theory have already been made, as presented throughout this thread and many others, including the MIT video.
Originally posted by: Acanthus
Originally posted by: noto12ious
Originally posted by: BrokenVisage
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Originally posted by: noto12ious
Now you're getting desperate. Funny how you won't address any of the facts or the article I just posted #1 is true.... #2-5? What does that have to do with the topic at hand? Nothing.
It directly applies to the topic at hand because it shows that you're a quack with mental problems, and therefore we don't need to address all of your ridiculous claims one by one.
This is just like those court cases where you have some wacko trying to present some ludicrous case, and he wants to bring all these people to the stand, including Dick Cheney, Bill Clinton, Maurice Gibb from the Bee Gees, his pet dog, a barrel of monkeys, a 9/16ths wrench, Bill Gates, etc.
If you had to address their looney claims one by one, you'd be there forever, since they keep making crap up. They'll never learn, just as you'll never learn that your conspiracy theories are bunk.
You're a loony, you're not a person with any sort insightful knowledge.
You're a inward thinking numbskull, just keep calling him a quack whose questions are ridiculous so you can feel better about not addressing them. He's asking the same questions and making the same claims that hundreds of thousands of other people are on other forums, so much for him being a wacko with mental problems, is that what we call having an open mind now?
I think 91TTZ missed the memo,
Former Head Of Star Wars Program Says Cheney Main 9/11 Suspect
The former head of the Star Wars missile defense program under Presidents Ford and Carter has gone public to say that the official version of 9/11 is a conspiracy theory and his main suspect for the architect of the attack is Vice President Dick Cheney.
Dr. Robert M. Bowman, Lt. Col., USAF, ret. flew 101 combat missions in Vietnam. He is the recipient of the Eisenhower Medal, the George F. Kennan Peace Prize, the President?s Medal of Veterans for Peace, the Society of Military Engineers Gold Medal (twice), six Air Medals, and dozens of other awards and honors. His Ph.D. is in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering from Caltech. He chaired 8 major international conferences, and is one of the country?s foremost experts on National Security.
Bowman worked secretly for the US government on the Star Wars project and was the first to coin the very term in a 1977 secret memo. After Bowman realized that the program was only ever intended to be used as an aggressive and not defensive tool, as part of a plan to initiate a nuclear war with the Soviets, he left the program and campaigned against it.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2006/040406mainsuspect.htm
Also many other high profile figures, including Ray McGovern, Morgan Reynolds, etc
Notice he wouldn't address Norman Mineta?
Oh look, we changed the subject again...
How long until we come back to steel Noto12ious?
Originally posted by: noto12ious
Originally posted by: Acanthus
Originally posted by: noto12ious
Originally posted by: BrokenVisage
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Originally posted by: noto12ious
Now you're getting desperate. Funny how you won't address any of the facts or the article I just posted #1 is true.... #2-5? What does that have to do with the topic at hand? Nothing.
It directly applies to the topic at hand because it shows that you're a quack with mental problems, and therefore we don't need to address all of your ridiculous claims one by one.
This is just like those court cases where you have some wacko trying to present some ludicrous case, and he wants to bring all these people to the stand, including Dick Cheney, Bill Clinton, Maurice Gibb from the Bee Gees, his pet dog, a barrel of monkeys, a 9/16ths wrench, Bill Gates, etc.
If you had to address their looney claims one by one, you'd be there forever, since they keep making crap up. They'll never learn, just as you'll never learn that your conspiracy theories are bunk.
You're a loony, you're not a person with any sort insightful knowledge.
You're a inward thinking numbskull, just keep calling him a quack whose questions are ridiculous so you can feel better about not addressing them. He's asking the same questions and making the same claims that hundreds of thousands of other people are on other forums, so much for him being a wacko with mental problems, is that what we call having an open mind now?
I think 91TTZ missed the memo,
Former Head Of Star Wars Program Says Cheney Main 9/11 Suspect
The former head of the Star Wars missile defense program under Presidents Ford and Carter has gone public to say that the official version of 9/11 is a conspiracy theory and his main suspect for the architect of the attack is Vice President Dick Cheney.
Dr. Robert M. Bowman, Lt. Col., USAF, ret. flew 101 combat missions in Vietnam. He is the recipient of the Eisenhower Medal, the George F. Kennan Peace Prize, the President?s Medal of Veterans for Peace, the Society of Military Engineers Gold Medal (twice), six Air Medals, and dozens of other awards and honors. His Ph.D. is in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering from Caltech. He chaired 8 major international conferences, and is one of the country?s foremost experts on National Security.
Bowman worked secretly for the US government on the Star Wars project and was the first to coin the very term in a 1977 secret memo. After Bowman realized that the program was only ever intended to be used as an aggressive and not defensive tool, as part of a plan to initiate a nuclear war with the Soviets, he left the program and campaigned against it.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2006/040406mainsuspect.htm
Also many other high profile figures, including Ray McGovern, Morgan Reynolds, etc
Notice he wouldn't address Norman Mineta?
Oh look, we changed the subject again...
How long until we come back to steel Noto12ious?
What's wrong with changing subject? I'm addressing the topics, each and every single one (just responded to one another one of your steel posts) Looks like you're a bit trigger happy...calm down, son. Still angry you couldn't find a single link to support your ridiculous claim the fires melted WTC steel?
Originally posted by: Tom
I'm not going to read thee whole thread, but what is this talk about "melted" steel ?
If it is referring to the ceiling trusses, you don't have to "melt" steel for heat to weaken it.
I remeber a NOVA or FRONTLINE show, where they had a very detailed explanation of how the fire retardent foam applied to the girders was insufficently applied. If you think about that for a second and realize that the reason the foam was there to begin with is because it was known that an ordinary fire could weaken the trusses.
Pre collapse explosions...a few pages back , there are many links that have not been addessed by the government in an apparent coverup Also Norman Mineta implicating Cheney, also NORAD standing down due to war games, etc, etc. See my sig .Frankly, there is no mystery in the whole 9/11 episode.
Originally posted by: Acanthus
Originally posted by: noto12ious
Originally posted by: Acanthus
Originally posted by: noto12ious
Originally posted by: BrokenVisage
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Originally posted by: noto12ious
Now you're getting desperate. Funny how you won't address any of the facts or the article I just posted #1 is true.... #2-5? What does that have to do with the topic at hand? Nothing.
It directly applies to the topic at hand because it shows that you're a quack with mental problems, and therefore we don't need to address all of your ridiculous claims one by one.
This is just like those court cases where you have some wacko trying to present some ludicrous case, and he wants to bring all these people to the stand, including Dick Cheney, Bill Clinton, Maurice Gibb from the Bee Gees, his pet dog, a barrel of monkeys, a 9/16ths wrench, Bill Gates, etc.
If you had to address their looney claims one by one, you'd be there forever, since they keep making crap up. They'll never learn, just as you'll never learn that your conspiracy theories are bunk.
You're a loony, you're not a person with any sort insightful knowledge.
You're a inward thinking numbskull, just keep calling him a quack whose questions are ridiculous so you can feel better about not addressing them. He's asking the same questions and making the same claims that hundreds of thousands of other people are on other forums, so much for him being a wacko with mental problems, is that what we call having an open mind now?
I think 91TTZ missed the memo,
Former Head Of Star Wars Program Says Cheney Main 9/11 Suspect
The former head of the Star Wars missile defense program under Presidents Ford and Carter has gone public to say that the official version of 9/11 is a conspiracy theory and his main suspect for the architect of the attack is Vice President Dick Cheney.
Dr. Robert M. Bowman, Lt. Col., USAF, ret. flew 101 combat missions in Vietnam. He is the recipient of the Eisenhower Medal, the George F. Kennan Peace Prize, the President?s Medal of Veterans for Peace, the Society of Military Engineers Gold Medal (twice), six Air Medals, and dozens of other awards and honors. His Ph.D. is in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering from Caltech. He chaired 8 major international conferences, and is one of the country?s foremost experts on National Security.
Bowman worked secretly for the US government on the Star Wars project and was the first to coin the very term in a 1977 secret memo. After Bowman realized that the program was only ever intended to be used as an aggressive and not defensive tool, as part of a plan to initiate a nuclear war with the Soviets, he left the program and campaigned against it.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2006/040406mainsuspect.htm
Also many other high profile figures, including Ray McGovern, Morgan Reynolds, etc
Notice he wouldn't address Norman Mineta?
Oh look, we changed the subject again...
How long until we come back to steel Noto12ious?
What's wrong with changing subject? I'm addressing the topics, each and every single one (just responded to one another one of your steel posts) Looks like you're a bit trigger happy...calm down, son. Still angry you couldn't find a single link to support your ridiculous claim the fires melted WTC steel?
No, youre changing the subject because you have to, in order to keep the convorsation going in a neverending circle.
If you stay on one subject, youll get cornered, and you know it.
Originally posted by: BrokenVisage
You're a inward thinking numbskull, just keep calling him a quack whose questions are ridiculous so you can feel better about not addressing them. He's asking the same questions and making the same claims that hundreds of thousands of other people are on other forums, so much for him being a wacko with mental problems, is that what we call having an open mind now?
Originally posted by: noto12ious
Originally posted by: Acanthus
Originally posted by: noto12ious
Originally posted by: Acanthus
Originally posted by: noto12ious
Originally posted by: BrokenVisage
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Originally posted by: noto12ious
Now you're getting desperate. Funny how you won't address any of the facts or the article I just posted #1 is true.... #2-5? What does that have to do with the topic at hand? Nothing.
It directly applies to the topic at hand because it shows that you're a quack with mental problems, and therefore we don't need to address all of your ridiculous claims one by one.
This is just like those court cases where you have some wacko trying to present some ludicrous case, and he wants to bring all these people to the stand, including Dick Cheney, Bill Clinton, Maurice Gibb from the Bee Gees, his pet dog, a barrel of monkeys, a 9/16ths wrench, Bill Gates, etc.
If you had to address their looney claims one by one, you'd be there forever, since they keep making crap up. They'll never learn, just as you'll never learn that your conspiracy theories are bunk.
You're a loony, you're not a person with any sort insightful knowledge.
You're a inward thinking numbskull, just keep calling him a quack whose questions are ridiculous so you can feel better about not addressing them. He's asking the same questions and making the same claims that hundreds of thousands of other people are on other forums, so much for him being a wacko with mental problems, is that what we call having an open mind now?
I think 91TTZ missed the memo,
Former Head Of Star Wars Program Says Cheney Main 9/11 Suspect
The former head of the Star Wars missile defense program under Presidents Ford and Carter has gone public to say that the official version of 9/11 is a conspiracy theory and his main suspect for the architect of the attack is Vice President Dick Cheney.
Dr. Robert M. Bowman, Lt. Col., USAF, ret. flew 101 combat missions in Vietnam. He is the recipient of the Eisenhower Medal, the George F. Kennan Peace Prize, the President?s Medal of Veterans for Peace, the Society of Military Engineers Gold Medal (twice), six Air Medals, and dozens of other awards and honors. His Ph.D. is in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering from Caltech. He chaired 8 major international conferences, and is one of the country?s foremost experts on National Security.
Bowman worked secretly for the US government on the Star Wars project and was the first to coin the very term in a 1977 secret memo. After Bowman realized that the program was only ever intended to be used as an aggressive and not defensive tool, as part of a plan to initiate a nuclear war with the Soviets, he left the program and campaigned against it.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2006/040406mainsuspect.htm
Also many other high profile figures, including Ray McGovern, Morgan Reynolds, etc
Notice he wouldn't address Norman Mineta?
Oh look, we changed the subject again...
How long until we come back to steel Noto12ious?
What's wrong with changing subject? I'm addressing the topics, each and every single one (just responded to one another one of your steel posts) Looks like you're a bit trigger happy...calm down, son. Still angry you couldn't find a single link to support your ridiculous claim the fires melted WTC steel?
No, youre changing the subject because you have to, in order to keep the convorsation going in a neverending circle.
If you stay on one subject, youll get cornered, and you know it.
Considering 91TTZ wasn't specifically addressing the WTC issue, I never actually changed the subject away from the 9/11 Conspiracy issue. Nice job of missing that simple fact :laugh:
Originally posted by: Acanthus
Originally posted by: noto12ious
Originally posted by: Acanthus
Originally posted by: noto12ious
Originally posted by: Acanthus
Originally posted by: noto12ious
Originally posted by: BrokenVisage
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Originally posted by: noto12ious
Now you're getting desperate. Funny how you won't address any of the facts or the article I just posted #1 is true.... #2-5? What does that have to do with the topic at hand? Nothing.
It directly applies to the topic at hand because it shows that you're a quack with mental problems, and therefore we don't need to address all of your ridiculous claims one by one.
This is just like those court cases where you have some wacko trying to present some ludicrous case, and he wants to bring all these people to the stand, including Dick Cheney, Bill Clinton, Maurice Gibb from the Bee Gees, his pet dog, a barrel of monkeys, a 9/16ths wrench, Bill Gates, etc.
If you had to address their looney claims one by one, you'd be there forever, since they keep making crap up. They'll never learn, just as you'll never learn that your conspiracy theories are bunk.
You're a loony, you're not a person with any sort insightful knowledge.
You're a inward thinking numbskull, just keep calling him a quack whose questions are ridiculous so you can feel better about not addressing them. He's asking the same questions and making the same claims that hundreds of thousands of other people are on other forums, so much for him being a wacko with mental problems, is that what we call having an open mind now?
I think 91TTZ missed the memo,
Former Head Of Star Wars Program Says Cheney Main 9/11 Suspect
The former head of the Star Wars missile defense program under Presidents Ford and Carter has gone public to say that the official version of 9/11 is a conspiracy theory and his main suspect for the architect of the attack is Vice President Dick Cheney.
Dr. Robert M. Bowman, Lt. Col., USAF, ret. flew 101 combat missions in Vietnam. He is the recipient of the Eisenhower Medal, the George F. Kennan Peace Prize, the President?s Medal of Veterans for Peace, the Society of Military Engineers Gold Medal (twice), six Air Medals, and dozens of other awards and honors. His Ph.D. is in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering from Caltech. He chaired 8 major international conferences, and is one of the country?s foremost experts on National Security.
Bowman worked secretly for the US government on the Star Wars project and was the first to coin the very term in a 1977 secret memo. After Bowman realized that the program was only ever intended to be used as an aggressive and not defensive tool, as part of a plan to initiate a nuclear war with the Soviets, he left the program and campaigned against it.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2006/040406mainsuspect.htm
Also many other high profile figures, including Ray McGovern, Morgan Reynolds, etc
Notice he wouldn't address Norman Mineta?
Oh look, we changed the subject again...
How long until we come back to steel Noto12ious?
What's wrong with changing subject? I'm addressing the topics, each and every single one (just responded to one another one of your steel posts) Looks like you're a bit trigger happy...calm down, son. Still angry you couldn't find a single link to support your ridiculous claim the fires melted WTC steel?
No, youre changing the subject because you have to, in order to keep the convorsation going in a neverending circle.
If you stay on one subject, youll get cornered, and you know it.
Considering 91TTZ wasn't specifically addressing the WTC issue, I never actually changed the subject away from the 9/11 Conspiracy issue. Nice job of missing that simple fact :laugh:
You walked away from the steel after being shown real evidence of why the buildings collapsed, by top engineers in the world, coming from a neutral backround. Top engineers agree on how it collapsed. They show with detail how they came to the conlclusions.
With the proof that it was very likely over 1000C while standing, the fire burning for weeks afterward couldve easily built up enough heat to melt some steel.
Originally posted by: noto12ious
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2006/040406mainsuspect.htm
Also many other high profile figures, including Ray McGovern, Morgan Reynolds, etc
Notice he wouldn't address Norman Mineta?
debris (smoke) is coming out of the right side of that building the whole time. are you blind?Originally posted by: noto12ious
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtcshake.mpg
12 seconds before WTC1 collapse, the tripod shakes, debris falls off the right side of the building
"Melted" Steel
CLAIM: "We have been lied to," announces the Web site AttackOnAmerica.net. "The first lie was that the load of fuel from the aircraft was the cause of structural failure. No kerosene fire can burn hot enough to melt steel." The posting is entitled "Proof Of Controlled Demolition At The WTC."
FACT: Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn't need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength--and that required exposure to much less heat. "I have never seen melted steel in a building fire," says retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety. "But I've seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks."
"Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.
But jet fuel wasn't the only thing burning, notes Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California, San Diego, and one of seven structural engineers and fire experts that PM consulted. He says that while the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F.
"The jet fuel was the ignition source," Williams tells PM. "It burned for maybe 10 minutes, and [the towers] were still standing in 10 minutes. It was the rest of the stuff burning afterward that was responsible for the heat transfer that eventually brought them down."
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Originally posted by: noto12ious
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2006/040406mainsuspect.htm
Also many other high profile figures, including Ray McGovern, Morgan Reynolds, etc
Notice he wouldn't address Norman Mineta?
The site you posted as evidence is a quack site. Look at the sections on there:
"Occult Elite", "Loss of Freedom", "Scams and coverups", "Vote Fraud, "World Government", Political Murders", etc.
Is it really that hard for you to identify this?
Originally posted by: noto12ious
Originally posted by: Acanthus
Originally posted by: noto12ious
Originally posted by: Acanthus
Originally posted by: noto12ious
Originally posted by: Acanthus
Originally posted by: noto12ious
Originally posted by: BrokenVisage
Originally posted by: 91TTZ
Originally posted by: noto12ious
Now you're getting desperate. Funny how you won't address any of the facts or the article I just posted #1 is true.... #2-5? What does that have to do with the topic at hand? Nothing.
It directly applies to the topic at hand because it shows that you're a quack with mental problems, and therefore we don't need to address all of your ridiculous claims one by one.
This is just like those court cases where you have some wacko trying to present some ludicrous case, and he wants to bring all these people to the stand, including Dick Cheney, Bill Clinton, Maurice Gibb from the Bee Gees, his pet dog, a barrel of monkeys, a 9/16ths wrench, Bill Gates, etc.
If you had to address their looney claims one by one, you'd be there forever, since they keep making crap up. They'll never learn, just as you'll never learn that your conspiracy theories are bunk.
You're a loony, you're not a person with any sort insightful knowledge.
You're a inward thinking numbskull, just keep calling him a quack whose questions are ridiculous so you can feel better about not addressing them. He's asking the same questions and making the same claims that hundreds of thousands of other people are on other forums, so much for him being a wacko with mental problems, is that what we call having an open mind now?
I think 91TTZ missed the memo,
Former Head Of Star Wars Program Says Cheney Main 9/11 Suspect
The former head of the Star Wars missile defense program under Presidents Ford and Carter has gone public to say that the official version of 9/11 is a conspiracy theory and his main suspect for the architect of the attack is Vice President Dick Cheney.
Dr. Robert M. Bowman, Lt. Col., USAF, ret. flew 101 combat missions in Vietnam. He is the recipient of the Eisenhower Medal, the George F. Kennan Peace Prize, the President?s Medal of Veterans for Peace, the Society of Military Engineers Gold Medal (twice), six Air Medals, and dozens of other awards and honors. His Ph.D. is in Aeronautics and Nuclear Engineering from Caltech. He chaired 8 major international conferences, and is one of the country?s foremost experts on National Security.
Bowman worked secretly for the US government on the Star Wars project and was the first to coin the very term in a 1977 secret memo. After Bowman realized that the program was only ever intended to be used as an aggressive and not defensive tool, as part of a plan to initiate a nuclear war with the Soviets, he left the program and campaigned against it.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2006/040406mainsuspect.htm
Also many other high profile figures, including Ray McGovern, Morgan Reynolds, etc
Notice he wouldn't address Norman Mineta?
Oh look, we changed the subject again...
How long until we come back to steel Noto12ious?
What's wrong with changing subject? I'm addressing the topics, each and every single one (just responded to one another one of your steel posts) Looks like you're a bit trigger happy...calm down, son. Still angry you couldn't find a single link to support your ridiculous claim the fires melted WTC steel?
No, youre changing the subject because you have to, in order to keep the convorsation going in a neverending circle.
If you stay on one subject, youll get cornered, and you know it.
Considering 91TTZ wasn't specifically addressing the WTC issue, I never actually changed the subject away from the 9/11 Conspiracy issue. Nice job of missing that simple fact :laugh:
You walked away from the steel after being shown real evidence of why the buildings collapsed, by top engineers in the world, coming from a neutral backround. Top engineers agree on how it collapsed. They show with detail how they came to the conlclusions.
With the proof that it was very likely over 1000C while standing, the fire burning for weeks afterward couldve easily built up enough heat to melt some steel.
I didn't walk away from anything...I just chose to respond to 91ttz first. Look at the time stamps. You can try calling me out, but you're mistaken, and you're the one who refuses to come up with a credible link supporting your rediculous "fire melted WTC steel" theory.
Many engineers have also disagreed with the official collapse theory NIST has recently been called out by British engineers because they refused to show computer models of the collapse. The official investigators have also ignored every single piece of pre collapse explosion testimony, which could radically alter the investigative process
Originally posted by: ElFenix
debris (smoke) is coming out of the right side of that building the whole time. are you blind?Originally posted by: noto12ious
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtcshake.mpg
12 seconds before WTC1 collapse, the tripod shakes, debris falls off the right side of the building
and a camera with that high zoom on is going to exhibit shake when someone walks near it.
as for PM not addressing melted steel, wtf do you think this is? can you read?
"Melted" Steel
CLAIM: "We have been lied to," announces the Web site AttackOnAmerica.net. "The first lie was that the load of fuel from the aircraft was the cause of structural failure. No kerosene fire can burn hot enough to melt steel." The posting is entitled "Proof Of Controlled Demolition At The WTC."
FACT: Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn't need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength--and that required exposure to much less heat. "I have never seen melted steel in a building fire," says retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety. "But I've seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks."
"Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.
But jet fuel wasn't the only thing burning, notes Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California, San Diego, and one of seven structural engineers and fire experts that PM consulted. He says that while the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F.
"The jet fuel was the ignition source," Williams tells PM. "It burned for maybe 10 minutes, and [the towers] were still standing in 10 minutes. It was the rest of the stuff burning afterward that was responsible for the heat transfer that eventually brought them down."
Originally posted by: ElFenix
debris (smoke) is coming out of the right side of that building the whole time. are you blind?Originally posted by: noto12ious
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/wtcshake.mpg
12 seconds before WTC1 collapse, the tripod shakes, debris falls off the right side of the building
and a camera with that high zoom on is going to exhibit shake when someone walks near it.
as for PM not addressing melted steel, wtf do you think this is? can you read?
"Melted" Steel
CLAIM: "We have been lied to," announces the Web site AttackOnAmerica.net. "The first lie was that the load of fuel from the aircraft was the cause of structural failure. No kerosene fire can burn hot enough to melt steel." The posting is entitled "Proof Of Controlled Demolition At The WTC."
FACT: Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn't need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength--and that required exposure to much less heat. "I have never seen melted steel in a building fire," says retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety. "But I've seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks."
"Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.
But jet fuel wasn't the only thing burning, notes Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California, San Diego, and one of seven structural engineers and fire experts that PM consulted. He says that while the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F.
"The jet fuel was the ignition source," Williams tells PM. "It burned for maybe 10 minutes, and [the towers] were still standing in 10 minutes. It was the rest of the stuff burning afterward that was responsible for the heat transfer that eventually brought them down."
Originally posted by: noto12ious
Yeah, I pretty much shot down the sad attempts to deny pre collapse explosions "because they didn't register on seismographs". The 1993 Truck Bombing at WTC did not register on seismographs either. GG.
Originally posted by: Acanthus
You came back to it because i called you on it.
The BEST engineers in the world, and the people who taught them agree...