Jesse Ventura Confronts the 09/11 Commission

[TakeAStepBack]

As an engineer by trade, I understand perfectly.
Jet fuel burns at around 500-600F.

You're shooting yourself in the foot if you believe the plane impacts and subsequent fuel can account for 5,000 degree fires days later. I watched the impacts and the fireball that ensued. What do you think that the fire we saw on impact was made of?

And no matter how much "air" there was on the floors, the EPA and engineers gave the figures in the report on the "vaporized" materials. It is they that claim steel particle, marble, etc...turned to dust or "vaporized". Am I now to believe they were completely incorrect on that you are spot on?

Especially after you tell me "jet fuel burns really hot. Hot enough to melt rock, steel, etc..."

As a welder and former Navy Fire-fighter I know that aviation metals burn quite a bit hotter then that. Hot enough to burn through metal and concrete floors.

Nothing vaporized. Pulverized yes. Vaporized? Not hardly. Maybe some of the jet-fuel vaporized or water. But the structure didn't vaporize. It was pulverized.

This is false. You'll need to go back and educate yourself.

 

[mudwhistle]

Well, explain to me in scientific detail how steel turns to dust during a supposed fire induced collapse. The only energy in this situation is the buildings gravitational potential energy. If we take that potential energy and convert it to kinetic energy, we can very well explaina certian degree of "pancaking". What it can not explain (nor the engineers that built the fucking WTCC), is how so much material turned to dust, including steel. It is an anomaly.

Jet fuel - 500 -600 F
Steel (depending of course on the alloy) molten - ~2,500F
(Steel will soften most often around 1,000F)

There is a disconnect between your belief of "molten steel" on the N. tower, and the temperature with which we could observe molten steel.

How does steel turn to dust???

It doesn't. I thought I was clear about that.

I suppose you recorded the total weight of all debris recovered from Ground Zero.

I think you need to look at the specs on the WTC. It wasn't built the same way other sky-scrapers in NYC were built.

 

[mudwhistle]

As an engineer by trade, I understand perfectly.
Jet fuel burns at around 500-600F.

You're shooting yourself in the foot if you believe the plane impacts and subsequent fuel can account for 5,000 degree fires days later. I watched the impacts and the fireball that ensued. What do you think that the fire we saw on impact was made of?

And no matter how much "air" there was on the floors, the EPA and engineers gave the figures in the report on the "vaporized" materials. It is they that claim steel particle, marble, etc...turned to dust or "vaporized". Am I now to believe they were completely incorrect on that you are spot on?

Especially after you tell me "jet fuel burns really hot. Hot enough to melt rock, steel, etc..."

As a welder and former Navy Fire-fighter I know that aviation metals burn quite a bit hotter then that. Hot enough to burn through metal and concrete floors.

Nothing vaporized. Pulverized yes. Vaporized? Not hardly. Maybe some of the jet-fuel vaporized or water. But the structure didn't vaporize. It was pulverized.

This is false. You'll need to go back and educate yourself.

Horseshit.

You'd better look it up.

I've trained on aviation fires enough to know this is the case. Ever hear of Willy Pee....WP......White Phospherous???

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Well, explain to me in scientific detail how steel turns to dust during a supposed fire induced collapse. The only energy in this situation is the buildings gravitational potential energy. If we take that potential energy and convert it to kinetic energy, we can very well explaina certian degree of "pancaking". What it can not explain (nor the engineers that built the fucking WTCC), is how so much material turned to dust, including steel. It is an anomaly.

Jet fuel - 500 -600 F
Steel (depending of course on the alloy) molten - ~2,500F
(Steel will soften most often around 1,000F)

There is a disconnect between your belief of "molten steel" on the N. tower, and the temperature with which we could observe molten steel.

How does steel turn to dust???

It doesn't. I thought I was clear about that.
I suppose you recorded the total weight of all debris recovered from Ground Zero.

I think you need to look at the specs on the WTC. It wasn't built the same way other sky-scrapers in NYC were built.

So you're saying that the EPA and the engineers are wrong. There was no steel dust particles in their samples and they just said that to.....confuse everyone?
Thanks for clearing that whole thing up for me.

I've studied this event for over ten years now. I know exactly how those buildings were constructed, who designed them, who built them and what kind of elements they were built to withstand.

But I digress from here. You're jumping around from this topic to that. I will say, regardless of our disagreement, that you conduct yourself politely in the face of disagreement and I appreciate that.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

As a welder and former Navy Fire-fighter I know that aviation metals burn quite a bit hotter then that. Hot enough to burn through metal and concrete floors.

Nothing vaporized. Pulverized yes. Vaporized? Not hardly. Maybe some of the jet-fuel vaporized or water. But the structure didn't vaporize. It was pulverized.

This is false. You'll need to go back and educate yourself.

Horseshit.

You'd better look it up.

I've trained on aviation fires enough to know this is the case. Ever hear of Willy Pee....WP......White Phospherous???

I must apologize here. I misread what you wrote as "aviation fuel", rather than aviation metals. The metals, however, must have a way to remain heated to a point of molten. I'll have to check into it, but I'm willing to bet that kerosene doesn't provide the required temps for this.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Aluminum. The craft was mainly aluminum. AL does melt under certain conditions. A hydrocarbon based diffuse flame does not present the proper conditions however.

 

[Obamerican]

Well, explain to me in scientific detail how steel turns to dust during a supposed fire induced collapse. The only energy in this situation is the buildings gravitational potential energy. If we take that potential energy and convert it to kinetic energy, we can very well explaina certian degree of "pancaking". What it can not explain (nor the engineers that built the fucking WTCC), is how so much material turned to dust, including steel. It is an anomaly.

Jet fuel - 500 -600 F
Steel (depending of course on the alloy) molten - ~2,500F
(Steel will soften most often around 1,000F)

There is a disconnect between your belief of "molten steel" on the N. tower, and the temperature with which we could observe molten steel.

How does steel turn to dust???

It doesn't. I thought I was clear about that.

I suppose you recorded the total weight of all debris recovered from Ground Zero.

I think you need to look at the specs on the WTC. It wasn't built the same way other sky-scrapers in NYC were built.

There are no other buildings in the world built like the WTC. Yet we are told time and time again that other skyscrapers haven't collapsed. That's true except the WTC wasn't built like other buildings and the truthers always avoid this issue.

 

[mudwhistle]

Well, explain to me in scientific detail how steel turns to dust during a supposed fire induced collapse. The only energy in this situation is the buildings gravitational potential energy. If we take that potential energy and convert it to kinetic energy, we can very well explaina certian degree of "pancaking". What it can not explain (nor the engineers that built the fucking WTCC), is how so much material turned to dust, including steel. It is an anomaly.

Jet fuel - 500 -600 F
Steel (depending of course on the alloy) molten - ~2,500F
(Steel will soften most often around 1,000F)

There is a disconnect between your belief of "molten steel" on the N. tower, and the temperature with which we could observe molten steel.

How does steel turn to dust???

It doesn't. I thought I was clear about that.
I suppose you recorded the total weight of all debris recovered from Ground Zero.

I think you need to look at the specs on the WTC. It wasn't built the same way other sky-scrapers in NYC were built.

So you're saying that the EPA and the engineers are wrong. There was no steel dust particles in their samples and they just said that to.....confuse everyone?
Thanks for clearing that whole thing up for me.

I've studied this event for over ten years now. I know exactly how those buildings were constructed, who designed them, who built them and what kind of elements they were built to withstand.

But I digress from here. You're jumping around from this topic to that. I will say, regardless of our disagreement, that you conduct yourself politely in the face of disagreement and I appreciate that.

Now that's two attempts to put words in my mouth.

Seriousy, you are waste of time. After ten years you still don't know Magnesium burns at higher than 500 degrees. In all honesty I think you need something more constructive to occupy your mind.

 

[mudwhistle]

Btw, only a retard thinks a 1200 ft tall building is gonna collapse into a 1200 ft pile of rubble. Their too much air inside the structure to come up with that.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Magnesiuim. Melting point 923 K, 650 °C, 1202 ° F

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Btw, only a retard thinks a 1200 ft tall building is gonna collapse into a 1200 ft pile of rubble. Their too much air inside the structure to come up with that.

The buildings weren't 1,200 ft tall. So you're saying the EPA and the engineers are retards? OK.....

 

[mudwhistle]

Magnesiuim. Melting point 923 K, 650 °C, 1202 ° F

So you learned something today.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

I learned that magnesium plays no role here at all, yes.

 

[mudwhistle]

I learned that magnesium plays no role here at all, yes.

I suppose it vaporized. Ha, ha.

Idiot.

 

[mudwhistle]

Btw, only a retard thinks a 1200 ft tall building is gonna collapse into a 1200 ft pile of rubble. Their too much air inside the structure to come up with that.

The buildings weren't 1,200 ft tall. So you're saying the EPA and the engineers are retards? OK.....

Close enough.

One was 1368, the other 1362.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Close enough?

And I'm the idiot? You still want to walk away from the FACT the EPA found steel dust in their samples. You aren't calling me an idiot, you're calling the engineers that built the WTC and the EPA retards and idiots.

I take it back, you're a fucking toolbag too.

 

[daws101]

Jesse Ventura is a liar and a moron. NAVY SEAL my left gonad.

Im sorry to have to step on your toes but Jesse Ventura IS TRYING TO BE A TRUTH ADVOCATE like we all are! (Well some of us)

bullshit! Jesse Ventura is washed up performer trying to jump start a dead career like most performers he'll do and say anything to stay in the biz.

 

[daws101]

Close enough?

And I'm the idiot? You still want to walk away from the FACT the EPA found steel dust in their samples. You aren't calling me an idiot, you're calling the engineers that built the WTC and the EPA retards and idiots.

I take it back, you're a fucking toolbag too.

ahhh... could the steel dust be left over from repairs to the towers or even the original building process.. with all that welding grinding and cutting theres no way you could get it all in site clean up....
TASB never asks the more mundane and much more probable questions,always relying on the over the top shit as a explanation.

btw.. it could be rust...over 30 years in the rain cold snow and marine conditions?

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Close enough?

And I'm the idiot? You still want to walk away from the FACT the EPA found steel dust in their samples. You aren't calling me an idiot, you're calling the engineers that built the WTC and the EPA retards and idiots.

I take it back, you're a fucking toolbag too.

ahhh... could the steel dust be left over from repairs to the towers or even the original building process.. with all that welding grinding and cutting theres no way you could get it all in site clean up....
TASB never asks the more mundane and much more probable questions,always relying on the over the top shit as a explanation.

btw.. it could be rust...over 30 years in the rain cold snow and marine conditions?

Yes, the EPA and the engineers are far too "retarded" to think of the ridiculously small amount of old steel dust from construction as the culprit for the missing 1,250 ft of debris and the steel dust they found.

Typical. When you can't answer, attack the messenger ad hominem. Such a new technique.

I('m bored with you Daws. You suck at this and handing you your ass over adn over again is really not intellectually stimulating.

I'll stick my head in again later and watch you shitty debaters flail around like fucking fish out of water.

 

[daws101]

Close enough?

And I'm the idiot? You still want to walk away from the FACT the EPA found steel dust in their samples. You aren't calling me an idiot, you're calling the engineers that built the WTC and the EPA retards and idiots.

I take it back, you're a fucking toolbag too.

ahhh... could the steel dust be left over from repairs to the towers or even the original building process.. with all that welding grinding and cutting theres no way you could get it all in site clean up....
TASB never asks the more mundane and much more probable questions,always relying on the over the top shit as a explanation.

btw.. it could be rust...over 30 years in the rain cold snow and marine conditions?

Yes, the EPA and the engineers are far too "retarded" to think of the ridiculously small amount of old steel dust from construction as the culprit for the missing 1,250 ft of debris and the steel dust they found.

Typical. When you can't answer, attack the messenger ad hominem. Such a new technique.

I('m bored with you Daws. You suck at this and handing you your ass over adn over again is really not intellectually stimulating.

I'll stick my head in again later and watch you shitty debaters flail around like fucking fish out of water.

another intentional misinterpretation. how does finding steel dust in their samples. lead to the "missing"1,250 of debris.?
even if there had been no loss, there would have been steel dust in the samples why?
because the fucking towers were built with it!

As to this:"TASB never asks the more mundane and much more probable questions,always relying on the over the top shit as a explanation." it's a statement of fact,
not an ad hominem.
my proof ? your own posts.
you've never even hinted at a more ubiquitous cause.