Wtc 7

[KeepOurFreedoms]

It makes little difference what you believe. Facts are facts. Go argue with the engineering department at purdue. Of course, they aren't the only ones who have reached the same result.

Aluminum burns more than 2000 degress hotter than the heat necessary to cause the failure of steel under pressure. Add liquid oxygen to the mixture and only a dolt would suggest that there wasn't enough heat to cause the steel to fail.

"Because of the widespread use of aluminium alloys in building,
transport, home appliances and offshore structures, it is necessary to
address the issue of aluminium and fire and to answer the question,
'does aluminium burn?'.


The answer is, of course, "No". Each year hundreds of thousands of
tonnes of aluminium scrap are fed into remelt furnaces and heated up
to and beyond the melting point. The aluminium melts when the
temperature exceeds the melting point, it does not burn. If it did,
the recycling of aluminium would not be possible. "

 

[jb_1430]

Even if the plane did slice through the core of the building, why did it fall down like a stack of pancakes and in so many small pieces? Surely the uneven initial pressure from the collapse would have made it fall to one side? Are we really to believe that steel beams running all the way up the centre of the building somehow fell in a sort of concertina-like manner? Exactly on top of themselves like a car aerial?

Gravity pulls in one direction, straight down. What would be hard to believe is that they fall in any direction other than straight down.
And the top did fall to one side. And then the overwhelming force of gravity almost immediately overcame any forces of deflection to one side.

 

[DeDampkring]

Like I said. Jack is a cartoon. Anyone who seriously references mad magazine in what he presents as a scholarly book simply couldn't be trusted to pay up on a challenge.

Funny that His Book has sold so, so many copies! And that NO One, has been able to prove any of his book wrong yet. apparently including yourself?
The Emperor Wears No Clothes "is the defenitive book on Marijuana and Hemp prohibition in the United States. Ive read your drivel on this subject. ive never met someone less educated in this area besides you?

 

[dahermit]

Thank you. You are a gentleman and a scholar.

No one who knows me would ever describe me as such.

 

[mustardayonnaise]

Gravity pulls in one direction, straight down. What would be hard to believe is that they fall in any direction other than straight down.
And the top did fall to one side. And then the overwhelming force of gravity almost immediately overcame any forces of deflection to one side.

err...gravity pulls things to the ground. It doesn't correct the angle of falling objects. Your post makes no sense.


Added: So if the top did fall to one side, the only way it could have fallen back in would be to remove the support from the other side before it was impacted.

 

[palerider]

"
it does not burn. If it did, the recycling of aluminium would not be possible. "

Was this article too difficult for you to understand? There is a lot of technical language there and you really couldn't be faulted if you didn't understand it all, but my grandson could work out the title.

"Reaction of molten/burning aluminum with liquid oxygen"

http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=16246270

The work was from American Society for Testing and Materials.

The second link was titled:

"Dynamics of aluminum combustion"

Do you know what combustion means? It is the act or process of burning.

The third link was to an article titled:

"TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENTS OF ALUMINUM PARTICLES BURNING IN CARBON DIOXIDE "

The fourth was to an article titled:

"Correlating Aluminum Burning Times "

It was written in the Journal of Combustion, Explosion, and Shock waves. These are not Wiki articles, they are bonified scholarly articles. What exactly is wrong with you that you would continue to argue that aluminum doesn't burn in the face of such evidence?

 

[palerider]

No one who knows me would ever describe me as such.

Sorry. I was temporarily overwhelmed with awe at encountering someone who could not only read a scholarly article, but apply it to the issue at hand. I will try to check my jubiliation next time before I respond.

 

[palerider]

Sorry, can't buy into that one. Still waiting for real proof.

It is unfortunate when one gets proof and doesn't even realize it due to personal bias or simple lack of intellectual wattage. Either way, one remains in ignorance.

 

[KeepOurFreedoms]

It is unfortunate when one gets proof and doesn't even realize it due to personal bias or simple lack of intellectual wattage. Either way, one remains in ignorance.

Good that you can admit your ignorance. You have yet to show proof of anything.

 

[Rokerijdude11]

Note how he ignores the obvious, and instead chooses to argue miniscule points instead. This is all youll get from the great pale rider . some of you actually see it now the great circle talker palerider.


he has no real argument here . aluminum combustion the second link patsy boy was to a BOOK that could be purchased are you going to buy it for those who wish to read it? no thought not

aluminum oxide and aluminum Dust is used in thermite .....it helps create the reaction along with iron oxide
aluminum aircraft parts, would be hard pressed to set flames to .......this argument he has chosen, directly conflicts with the OT ,that NO thermite was used......thermite is the only way you'd get fire with aluminum as far as i see it......

have fun with the great circle talker......


He is STILL taking "Pot" shots at Jack Herer!!!!

MY what a high level of intellect, and maturity you display eh?

 

[Coyote]

Good that you can admit your ignorance. You have yet to show proof of anything.

What constitutes real proof?

 

[Coyote]

I was curious because I thought aluminum burned but I'm a long way from my college intro chemistry courses....but I did find references such as:


http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/oxyreg.html
Most oxygen regulators are made of brass or aluminum. Aluminum and its alloys are more likely to ignite than brass. In standard tests, aluminum can burn vigorously at pressures as low as 25 pounds per square inch (psi), while brass does not burn at pressures below 10,000 psi.

 

[palerider]

I was curious because I thought aluminum burned but I'm a long way from my college intro chemistry courses....but I did find references such as:


http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/oxyreg.html
Most oxygen regulators are made of brass or aluminum. Aluminum and its alloys are more likely to ignite than brass. In standard tests, aluminum can burn vigorously at pressures as low as 25 pounds per square inch (psi), while brass does not burn at pressures below 10,000 psi.

You aren't so far away that you have forgotten everything you knew. At this point, only a flat earther who reads the likes of jack herer (and believes him) would still deny that aluminum burns.

I am satisfied that there was no conspiracy with regard to the 9/11 attacks and am really not very interested hashing over debunked conspiracy theories. I really just popped in to this thread to push the pretty buttons.

I pushed one and got insult in lieu of actual argument.

I pushed another and got red type AND 8x10 glossy photos with circles and arrows (really just arrows) and a paragraph on the back.....

I pushed another and got a flat earther flatly denying obviously credible scientific evidence in lieu of his personal bias

In short, this is a button rich environment.

 

[Rokerijdude11]

You aren't so far away that you have forgotten everything you knew. At this point, only a flat earther who reads the likes of jack herer (and believes him) would still deny that aluminum burns.

I am satisfied that there was no conspiracy with regard to the 9/11 attacks and am really not very (Capable of)interested hashing over debunked conspiracy theories. I really just popped in to this thread to push the pretty buttons.

I pushed one and got insult in lieu of actual argument.

(SOP for The rider Insultous comment)kettle meet pot

I pushed another and got red type AND 8x10 glossy photos with circles and arrows (really just arrows) and a paragraph on the back.....

(and yet you are incapable of adressing the points)

I pushed another and got a flat earther flatly denying obviously credible scientific evidence in lieu of his personal bias

(where was that?)

In short, this is a button rich environment.

Arrogance in its Primest of examples eh? the rider is so smug kiddies

He is STILL taking "Pot" shots at Jack Herer!!!!

MY what a high level of intellect, and maturity you display eh?
__________________

 

[Rokerijdude11]

funny how he has still chosen to ignore the important parts


pretty much S.O.P. for the rider