Melting steel?

a reply to: samkent

I... I'm aghast at this. How can you possibly think the official investigation of what is probably the most important event of the 21st century can get away with not releasing their model data. That you "don't need it." It's stupefying that you believe it's acceptable.

Even if I thought the fire induced collapse theory was 100% correct, and ignored all the shady government actions around the event, I would still be demanding that data, because it's supposed to be their proof. Their proof that they won't let anyone see, but trust us guys we're right.

a reply to: Chadwickus

top comment;

1.) How long was your "structural steel" in the furnace?
2.) Why did you use only half inch steel?
3.) Why was the metal heated to 300 degrees MORE than Jet fuel can burn?
4.) Why didn't towers 1 and 2 simply BEND and fall over away from the healthy structure below as you demonstrated?
5.) Why did the part of the towers that WASN'T affected by jet fuel (the perfectly in tact HEALTHY STRUCTURE) decide to give out in perfect succession?
6.) WTC 7 was not subjected to jet fuel or an airplane, yet fell the same way the other towers fell.

originally posted by: DeceptioVisus
a reply to: wildb

Nice work wildb. This is why I backed out a few pages ago. There is enough evidence in this thread alone to prove in a court of law that molten steel existed and some kind of incendiary device plus explosives were used to bring those buildings down. But instead of discussing the facts you have 1 or 2 people that just keep parroting, "that didn't happen", to every piece of factual evidence provided without analyzing it or providing links or even reasonable counter argument to the original eveidence. I have read hundreds of 9/11 threads and they all end the same way.

I don't understand people ignoring the mountain of evidence unless they choose to. Most of the people I know realize by now that we were lied to that day. Have a great day and keep up the good fight.

Bottom Line is this thread is about melted steel. That's been proven, over and over! If you deny that, you're a stone cold liar.

Thank You, and yes I agree...

a reply to: wildb

If you knew anything about steel and structures you would have understood.

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

Even if I thought the fire induced collapse theory was 100% correct, and ignored all the shady government actions around the event, I would still be demanding that data, because it's supposed to be their proof. Their proof that they won't let anyone see, but trust us guys we're right.

As I have mentioned, more than enough has been revealed already. If you want to know what fire can do to steel frame buildings, read this.

Kader Toy Factory Fire

At about 4pm on May 10th, 1993, a small fire was discovered on the first floor of part of the E-shaped building. Workers were instructed to keep working as the fire was thought to be minor. The fire alarm in this building did not sound.

The building was reinforced with un-insulated steel girders which quickly weakened and collapsed. This part of the building was dedicated to the storage of finished products and the fire spread quickly. Other parts of the factory were full of raw materials which also burnt very fast... Fire-fighters arrived at the factory at about 4:40pm, to find Building One about to collapse.

The Kader buildings,...collapsed relatively early in the fire because their structural steel supports lacked the fireproofing that would have allowed them to maintain their strength when exposed to high temperatures.

A post-fire review of the debris at the Kader site showed no indication that any of the steel members had been fireproofed.

en.wikipedia.org...

Here are photos of what fire has done to steel beams.

Photo 1: Fire Weakened Steel Beams

Photo 2: Fire Weakens Steel Beams

Photo 3: Fire Weaken Steel Struture Roof Collapse


Fire Weakens Steel Structure Causing Overpass Collapse

Influence of temperature on the strength of metals

Some common types of steel lose 10% of their strength at 450 C (840 F), and 40% at 550 C (1022 F). At temperatures above 800 C ( 1475 F), it has lost 90% of its strength.

Other types of steel are made to stand higher temperatures before losing 10% of their strength, but they are much more expensive (and are weaker at room temperature).

And there are types which actually get stronger, up to 450 F (but then get a lot weaker at higher temperatures

www.engineeringtoolbox.com...


Why the World Trade Center Buildings Collapsed: A Fire Chief ’s Assessment

The steel truss floor supports probably started to fail quickly from the flames and the center steel supporting columns severed by plane parts heated by the flames began to buckle, sag, warp and fail. Then the top part of the tower crashed down on the lower portion of the structure. This pancake collapse triggered the entire cascading collapse of the 110-story structure.

vincentdunn.com...


American Society of Civil Engineers

Towers Weakened by Planes; Brought Down by Fire

911-engineers.blogspot.com...


We can also take a look here at what heat can do to steel.

Buckled Railroad Tracks

a reply to: skyeagle409
The buckled railroad tracks show the effect of thermal expansion. A steel beam will grow when it is heated and can shear bolts and rivets.
I have never seen confirmation that there was any expansion joints engineered into the structure that would cover the amount of expansion that would occur in a massive fire like they had that day.

a reply to: DeceptioVisus

Nice work wildb. This is why I backed out a few pages ago. There is enough evidence in this thread alone to prove in a court of law that molten steel existed and some kind of incendiary device plus explosives were used to bring those buildings down.

That is false because it has been proven that those stories were fabricated and has been used to discredit 9/11 conspiracy theorist. Have you ever wondered why I have asked 9/11 conspiracy theorist for certain time lines in videos that depict the collapse of WTC 1, WTC 2, and WTC 7?

In addition, the experts have concluded that fire, in conjunction with impact damage, was responsible for the collapse of the WTC buildings.

You will have noticed that wildb is a supporter of William Rodriquez, but let's take a closer look at William Rodriquez.

William Rodriguez - Last Man Out: Discovered a Fraud!

We have more then a few things we have discovered about Mr. William Rodriguez, alleged last man out of the world trade center on 9/11 which are extremely suspicious, but none as suspicious as when one draws a simple gracious time-line of William Rodriguez's very own tale of the events and compares it to probability verses possibility verses impossibility. . Unfortunately, no matter how one does the equation of William Rodriguez's tale of events of September the 11th, 2001, last man out, there is no available possibility that his story is true. There is literally no other possibility then that his tale of events is a staggering national hoax and at the crux of an international conspiracy.

His file is growing every day we look into this national hero of 9/11. When one lies and is caught in their lie, there is humiliation. But when one tells a lie thousands and thousands of times, and makes a fat living off of it for 10 years straight, who can describe the humiliation? William Rodriguez has told his lie, on National TV, International TV and beyond. He is by far one of the more prolific liars of the 21st century.

So don't expect William Rodriguez to ever admit to the truth. Even when nobody is listening to him any longer and he is living in a box again. And no, I seriously doubt Willie Rodriguez was ever homeless. That was all part of his "legend." The national hero ignored. National hero homeless. Then finally recognition and redemption., then finally international hero status. Legends take an awful lot of effort to create. Yet fraudulent legends sometimes fall in a matter of minutes, sometimes seconds. It doesn't take much. Just a little bit of truth shining in a dark place.

letsrollforum...uez-t24680.html...

RICO lawsuit

In October 2004, Rodriguez sued the President of the United States and 155 other parties, accusing them of complicity in the 9/11 attacks.

His 237-page civil lawsuit included allegations pursuant to the RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) against The United States Of America, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the Department of Homeland Security, George Herbert Walker Bush, George W. Bush, Richard Cheney, Donald H. Rumsfeld,and numerous others, totaling 156 defendants in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

In his lawsuit, Rodriguez made hundreds of allegations including allegations that the Twin Towers were destroyed by means of "controlled demolitions;" that members of the FDNY were ordered, on instructions of the CIA, not to talk about it; that the FDNY conspired with Larry Silverstein to deliberately destroy 7WTC; that projectiles were fired at the Twin Towers from “pods” affixed to the underside of the planes that struck them; that FEMA is working with the US government to create “American Gulag” concentration camps which FEMA will run once the federal government’s plan to impose martial law is in place; that phone calls made by some of the victims, as reported by their family members, were not actually made but were "faked" by the government using "voice morphing" technology; that a missile, not American Airlines Flight 77, struck the Pentagon; that United Airlines Flight 93 was shot down by the US military; that the defendants had foreknowledge of the attacks and actively conspired to bring them about; that the defendants engaged in kidnapping, arson, murder, treason, conspiracy, trafficking in narcotics, embezzlement, securities fraud, insider trading, identity and credit card theft, blackmail, trafficking in humans, and the abduction and sale of women and children for sex. In his Complaint, Rodriquez also alleged that he "single-handedly rescued fifteen persons from the WTC".

The matter was transferred to the Southern District of New York on May 2, 2005. In January 2006, Rodriguez swore and filed a 51-page affidavit in opposition to a motion to dismiss, which reiterated and expanded upon his conspiracy allegations. On June 26, 2006, the court dismissed Rodriguez's claims against the USA, DHS, and FEMA, and gave Rodriguez until July 7, 2006 to show cause why his lawsuit should not be dismissed with respect to the other 153 defendants. Rodriguez failed to do so, and the court dismissed all of his claims against all of the remaining 153 defendants on July 17, 2006

letsrollforums.com...

a reply to: skyeagle409

You will have noticed that wildb is a supporter of William Rodriquez

Really, show me where I said that, don't put words in my mouth.. and stop with the lies...

a reply to: skyeagle409

That is false because it has been proven that those stories were fabricated and has been used to discredit 9/11 conspiracy theorist.

No it has not, and only in your malfunctioning mind...

a reply to: butcherguy

The buckled railroad tracks show the effect of thermal expansion. A steel beam will grow when it is heated and can shear bolts and rivets.

That's right. The SR-71 is an aircraft whose design has taken such expansion into consideration during its high speed flight and that is why fuel leaks from the aircraft whenever it sits on the ground. One of my chapter members was a mechanic on the SR-71.

I have never seen confirmation that there was any expansion joints engineered into the structure that would cover the amount of expansion that would occur in a massive fire like they had that day.

I haven't seen anything from engineers that would have covered what the WTC buildings had suffered during 9/11 other than an impact from a B-707, but I don't think they could have imagined such an aircraft slamming into the buildings at over 500 mph.

a reply to: wildb

No it has not, and only in your malfunctioning mind...

Of course the claims of thermite/thermate and explosives were fabrications, which explains why you cannot provide me with those video time lines that I have requested from you.

a reply to: wildb

Really, show me where I said that, don't put words in my mouth.. and stop with the lies...

Did you post this?

posted by wildb on Dec, 17 2015 @ 05:40 PM

A new eyewitness who was working in the WTC on 9/11 has gone on record to describe how he heard multiple grenade-like explosions around the basement levels of the north tower, backing up William Rodriguez' story, the WTC janitor who reported explosions before the first plane hit the tower.

www.bushstole04.com...

So, do you support the claims of William Rodriguez, or not? Yes, or no.

a reply to: skyeagle409

Of course the claims of thermite/thermate and explosives were fabrications, which explains why you cannot provide me with those video time lines that I have requested from you.

Deflecting again, no one is talking about thermite, at least not me.. you were giving your time lines, are you that dense you can't remember..

a reply to: Eilasvaleleyn

I... I'm aghast at this. How can you possibly think the official investigation of what is probably the most important event of the 21st century can get away with not releasing their model data. That you "don't need it." It's stupefying that you believe it's acceptable.

You still assume the data would calm the conspiracy people.
When a warehouse burns and collapses do they create a model?
When ships of war go down during a battle do they model it?
You refuse to ask a firefighter his professional opinion.
Instead you feel you can hunch your way to an answer.

The claim that the building could withstand an airplane strike came from a designer who did no computer modeling.
He did a best guesstimate assuming it was a low speed, low fuel, smaller plane hit.
I would bet he was semi forced into an answer during the design and permit phase given the Empire State incident.
The claim of plane survivability gives conspiracy people the idea it means any plane any size any speed any fuel.

NYFD should never have sent crews up the stairs.
I guess they thought they had more time to save the building.
Bad guess.

a reply to: skyeagle409

Did you post this?

I sure did, its about a man backing up WR..

So, do you support the claims of William Rodriguez,

Well there were others that were there and reported the same as he did, so I'll take there word, ya know since they were there..

a reply to: wildb

Sure did, its about a man backing up WR..

So once again, do you support the claims of William Rodriguez? The sound of explosions heard that day were attributed to things that had nothing to do with explosives. In fact, such explosions are common in New York City, which experiences over 2000 explosions each year.

a reply to: skyeagle409

So once again, do you support the claims of William Rodriguez? The sound of explosions heard that day were attributed to things that had nothing to do with explosives. In fact, such explosions are common in New York City, which experiences over 2000 explosions each year.

Your not very bright are you, explosions in the sub levels of the WTC are not common at all. People were injured and even killed in the sub levels BEFORE THE FIRST PLANE HIT.. do you understand that now?

There was no jet fuel, no falling elevators, no plane when these explosions went off.. period..

If you don't understand that you have some very serious problems..

As far as WR I have no opinion about him..

a reply to: wildb

Your not very bright are you, explosions in the sub levels of the WTC are not common at all.

Falling elevators at the WTC is not common either, but apparently, that is what caused the explosion-like sounds in the basement.

Explosions have occurred in the WTC area before and I might add, the explosion they heard in the basement had nothing to do with explosives and you are not paying attention because they have indicated that falling elevators crashing into the lower level were responsible for the explosive sounds they heard.

People were injured and even killed in the sub levels BEFORE THE FIRST PLANE HIT.. do you understand that now?

Post the reference that support your claim for everyone here and then, I will let you know something.

a reply to: wildb

Just to remind you that WTC explosives and thermite/thermate are all fabrications.

a reply to: Lysergic

1.) How long was your "structural steel" in the furnace?
2.) Why did you use only half inch steel?
3.) Why was the metal heated to 300 degrees MORE than Jet fuel can burn?

I would like to provide a bit of information about fire and steel. In regard to questions #1, #2, and #3, let's take a look here and see what you can do to railroad tracks that were left sitting over a wood fire.

4.) Why didn't towers 1 and 2 simply BEND and fall over away from the healthy structure below as you demonstrated?

Because a single hinge point beneath a rotating upper block of the WTC Towers would have been far too weak to support an upper block in order to allow the upper block to tilt over to the side. In other words, based on the construction of the WTC Towers and the location of the center-of-gravity of the upper blocks, there was no way the upper blocks could have tilted over the side.

5.) Why did the part of the towers that WASN'T affected by jet fuel (the perfectly in tact HEALTHY STRUCTURE) decide to give out in perfect succession?

Remember, the WTC Towers are not solid objects and once the collapse began, there was nothing to stop the collapse.

6.) WTC 7 was not subjected to jet fuel or an airplane, yet fell the same way the other towers fell.

WTC 7 suffered massive impact damage from debris as WTC 1 collapsed and the raging fires that followed were out of control because there was no water to confront those fires.