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 ULTIMA1
You did not see about the JET FUEL CUTTERS?
Originally posted by HLR53K
Plus there are many, many more explosives that are much more reliable, as Griff might be able to tell you.
Originally posted by Damocles
well im not griff but i hope you dont mind my 2 cents.
Originally posted by Griff
You're the explosives expert around here. Not me.
Originally posted by Damocles
Originally posted by Griff
You're the explosives expert around here. Not me.
or government shill/disinfo agent depending on who you ask and on what day i suppose.
i have often wondered what would have happened if i had thought that the towers were a CD with my backround....lol id be a prophet in the religion.
(no offense to those who are seeking the truth but are not part of the "religion". there is a difference and i do acknowledge and respect that difference)
Originally posted by jackinthebox
reply to post by LEAP STICK
The fuel from airliners was spent within ten minutes or so. The rest of the burn was residual. There is no logical explanation why open-air fires of relatively low intensity should have melted steel. I will grant that the fires were somewhat widepread, but this still does not account for the unprecedented global failureS. Furthermore, this certainly does nothing to explain WTC7 either.
Also keep in mind that one of the Twin Towers burned for hours, on several floors, back in 1975. This was back before fire codes even required a sprinkler system, which the buildings did not even have at the time.
Okay, it is true that the jet fuel was burned off within 10 minutes after the plane impacted. However, according to the NIST report, 70% of the jet fuel (approx. 7,000 gallons) was spread throughtout the impacted floors. As for your assertion that the fires could not have melted steel, this is correct. However, this is not, nor has it ever been the official explianation for the failure of the steel trusses in the WTC Towers. I won't go into that here, but I will in another post if you wish. I'm assuming that you are basing the claim that "open air fires of relatively low-intesity" could not have caused the collapse off of the same claim made by Dr. Steven Jones. Dr. Jones claim that the black smoke coming from the WTC towers indicate that the fires were oxygen starved, thus they were too weak to do any damage. In fact, black smoke, in this case, indicates the opposite. The fires were fueled by jet fuel and mostly plastic-based office equipment, both of which are hydrocarbons with extremely high rates of heat-release and therefore produce arid, black smoke.
Now onto your reference to the 1975 WTC fire. Apples and Oranges my friend. They are two totally different events with two totally different circumstances. This reminds me of the argument about the B-25 hitting the Empire State Building in 1945 and trying to compare it to the 767's used on 9/11 First of all, the fire in 1975 was mainly on one floor, the 11th floor of the north tower. Although five other floors were affected, the fires on those floors were brought under control very quickly. The main fire was put out after 3 hours. The main difference between the two being that the WTC's on 9/11 were hit with 200 ton planes. The planes, when they impacted, blew off most of the fire-proofing material used on the critical floor trusses on the impacted floors. The fire-proofing on the floors in 1975 was not affected by external forces and preserved the structural integrity of the building during the time it took to put out the fire.
Archived NY Times article dated Feb. 14, 1975:
www.nytimes.com...
How can you ignore the plane impacts? Do you not realize how much damage they caused? "Truthers" tend to forget that when they try to argue about "how the towers should not have falled from fire alone." You're right, they should not have fallen from fire alone and they didn't. They fell from the combination of uncontrolled fires and the devastating impacts from the 767's.
Originally posted by cashlink
reply to post by fo694013
Welcome new memeber!