It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by unknown_one
I thought this single piece of evidence would have been enough to shred the official story into pieces
www.youtube.com...
www.youtube.com...
If not? Please provide a reason..
"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 syrinx high priest
evidence is detonator caps at WTC and missile fragments at the pentagon. Without that, all you have is a theory
Originally posted by pavil
Originally posted by spacevisitor
[Because there is no doubt in my mind that they have already take their precautions, they have already created enormous state of the art underground facilities for surviving that kind of disasters for a very long time.
Sure there are underground facilities to keep the government working, they have been around since the start of the cold war.
How is that proof or even evidence of a 9/11 coverup?
Originally posted by PepeLapew
I find the OP a bit depressive and negative.
Originally posted by PepeLapew
We don't need this kind of attitude, we need to keep pushing forward and keep trying as best as we can.
Originally posted by PepeLapew
The only fight worth fighting for is the one that's already lost.