- Jan 21, 2009
- Reaction score
Who said fire DOES NOT damage a
a building"? This was no ordinary "building".
One reason fire proofing is used is to keep other parts of a structure that DON'T have a the resistance to fire, like heavy thick beams and girders, from igniting, and to give time for evacuations and save lives, dip shit.
It certainly isn't because fire will melt or distort massive steel components at temps that are verified NOT to.
Office fires, or even infernos DO NOT CAUSE an exploding total collapse of skyscrapers like the WTC towers experienced, or produce the results witnessed at the WTC 7. If that were the case WTC 7 and others with emergency back up power generation capabilities, would not be allowed to store fuel for its generators.
You like to make it sound and appear that the massive WTC buildings were made with fireproof sticks of wood.
It's astonishing that none of you can explain why it is that seeking the truth about the worst attacks on American soil is wrong.
And the only facts you assholes resort to in justifying you willful ignorance are the very same ones that have been debunked by science, physics, and NIST's own failed testing.
Fire damages steel at very high temps but does not cause a total collapse at the acceleration levels witnessed in NYC on 9-11. So we know that its destruction by fire alone is not proven, and the question remains what did, and then after that who had motive and opportunity and resources. The start to answering these questions are found by asking who benefited the most from the attacks.