The Zapruder Film Of 9/11...

Just a couple of points to make about your video.

1. Jet fuel from the ruptured wings wasn't contained in a pool, it was flowing down stairs and elevator shafts. This means that whatever was burning in the building after the first minute or so was burning @ 800 degrees, not 2,000.

2. The steel I-beam used in the video was much smaller than the steel in the towers, giving it much less resistance to heat fatigue. Just guessing here, but probably by a factor of 5, at least.

3. Having worked in steel building construction I can assure you that the spray-on insulation covering those beams was NOT knocked off. In retrofit and remodeling of these buildings it takes tools and time to clear it from even a small (12"X12") area.
sorry shit for brains but once any fuel is ignited it burns at a constant rate no matter if it's moving or not.
like all twoofers you missed the point, 800 degrees is more then enough heat to WEAKEN STEEL TO THE POINT OF FAILURE WHEN IT'S CARRYING A LOAD.NO MATTER WHAT GRADE THE STEEL IS.
2. YOUR COMMENT ABOUT INSULATION IS ALSO BULLSHIT SPRAY ON INSULATION LIKE EVERY THING ELSE GETS WEATHERED AND WEAK WITH TIME.
I'VE BEEN IN STRUCTURES WHEN THE SPRAY ON IS SO WEATHERED THAT IT FALLS OFF THE STEEL IN CHUCKS. (THANKS FOR PLAYING ) cue buzzer....

You're a fucking idiot, sorry to say. The only 'fuel' that was burning 2 minutes after impact was whatever flammable materials were in the buildings PRIOR to impact. Most of the jet fuel was consumed in the initial impact, as witnessed by those great big fireballs you saw on the video. Whatever remained certainly didn't violate the laws of physics and 'pool up'. Also, spray on insulation is INSIDE the building and doesn't get weathered. I've worked in dozens of hi-rise buildings and have been tasked to remove said insulation in order to attach interior walls and ceilings. I KNOW what it takes to remove it.

And stop yelling or I'll add 'rude' to 'idiot'.
 
Just a couple of points to make about your video.

1. Jet fuel from the ruptured wings wasn't contained in a pool, it was flowing down stairs and elevator shafts. This means that whatever was burning in the building after the first minute or so was burning @ 800 degrees, not 2,000.

2. The steel I-beam used in the video was much smaller than the steel in the towers, giving it much less resistance to heat fatigue. Just guessing here, but probably by a factor of 5, at least.

3. Having worked in steel building construction I can assure you that the spray-on insulation covering those beams was NOT knocked off. In retrofit and remodeling of these buildings it takes tools and time to clear it from even a small (12"X12") area.
sorry shit for brains but once any fuel is ignited it burns at a constant rate no matter if it's moving or not.
like all twoofers you missed the point, 800 degrees is more then enough heat to WEAKEN STEEL TO THE POINT OF FAILURE WHEN IT'S CARRYING A LOAD.NO MATTER WHAT GRADE THE STEEL IS.
2. YOUR COMMENT ABOUT INSULATION IS ALSO BULLSHIT SPRAY ON INSULATION LIKE EVERY THING ELSE GETS WEATHERED AND WEAK WITH TIME.
I'VE BEEN IN STRUCTURES WHEN THE SPRAY ON IS SO WEATHERED THAT IT FALLS OFF THE STEEL IN CHUCKS. (THANKS FOR PLAYING ) cue buzzer....

You're a fucking idiot, sorry to say. The only 'fuel' that was burning 2 minutes after impact was whatever flammable materials were in the buildings PRIOR to impact. Most of the jet fuel was consumed in the initial impact, as witnessed by those great big fireballs you saw on the video. Whatever remained certainly didn't violate the laws of physics and 'pool up'. Also, spray on insulation is INSIDE the building and doesn't get weathered. I've worked in dozens of hi-rise buildings and have been tasked to remove said insulation in order to attach interior walls and ceilings. I KNOW what it takes to remove it.

And stop yelling or I'll add 'rude' to 'idiot'.

Ever try to remove it with a 500+MPH jetliner? How much force do you think that would be? I'm not an engineer but I would feel safe betting that it is a lot more than you and a sledgehammer could apply...........
 
sorry shit for brains but once any fuel is ignited it burns at a constant rate no matter if it's moving or not.
Like all twoofers you missed the point, 800 degrees is more then enough heat to weaken steel to the point of failure when it's carrying a load.no matter what grade the steel is.
2. Your comment about insulation is also bullshit spray on insulation like every thing else gets weathered and weak with time.
I've been in structures when the spray on is so weathered that it falls off the steel in chucks. (thanks for playing ) cue buzzer....

you're a fucking idiot, sorry to say. The only 'fuel' that was burning 2 minutes after impact was whatever flammable materials were in the buildings prior to impact. Most of the jet fuel was consumed in the initial impact, as witnessed by those great big fireballs you saw on the video. Whatever remained certainly didn't violate the laws of physics and 'pool up'. Also, spray on insulation is inside the building and doesn't get weathered. I've worked in dozens of hi-rise buildings and have been tasked to remove said insulation in order to attach interior walls and ceilings. I know what it takes to remove it.

And stop yelling or i'll add 'rude' to 'idiot'.

ever try to remove it with a 500+mph jetliner? How much force do you think that would be? I'm not an engineer but i would feel safe betting that it is a lot more than you and a sledgehammer could apply...........

fire proofing was intact in wtc 7...no jet fuel
 
you're a fucking idiot, sorry to say. The only 'fuel' that was burning 2 minutes after impact was whatever flammable materials were in the buildings prior to impact. Most of the jet fuel was consumed in the initial impact, as witnessed by those great big fireballs you saw on the video. Whatever remained certainly didn't violate the laws of physics and 'pool up'. Also, spray on insulation is inside the building and doesn't get weathered. I've worked in dozens of hi-rise buildings and have been tasked to remove said insulation in order to attach interior walls and ceilings. I know what it takes to remove it.

And stop yelling or i'll add 'rude' to 'idiot'.

ever try to remove it with a 500+mph jetliner? How much force do you think that would be? I'm not an engineer but i would feel safe betting that it is a lot more than you and a sledgehammer could apply...........

fire proofing was intact in wtc 7...no jet fuel

True, and how long did it burn and how long was the fireproofing rated for?
 

Seems to me I don't remember that these other buildings had the same construction as WTC7. And I also seem to remember that one of them had a collapse of the only part of it that was steel framed......

But hey, I could be wrong......... So tell me were these other buildings built the same way? And did one of them partially collapse where it was steel framed while the concrete frame part stood?
 

seems to me i don't remember that these other buildings had the same construction as wtc7. And i also seem to remember that one of them had a collapse of the only part of it that was steel framed......

But hey, i could be wrong......... So tell me were these other buildings built the same way? And did one of them partially collapse where it was steel framed while the concrete frame part stood?

you no clue how these buildings where constructed relative to the wtc 7
 
And lets not forget it was the failure of a single column that is claimed to have caused the collapse of wtc 7 and that the failure of the column under any circumstance would have intaited the collapse sequence ..according to the NIST progressive collapse theory
 
Last edited:

seems to me i don't remember that these other buildings had the same construction as wtc7. And i also seem to remember that one of them had a collapse of the only part of it that was steel framed......

But hey, i could be wrong......... So tell me were these other buildings built the same way? And did one of them partially collapse where it was steel framed while the concrete frame part stood?

you no clue how these buildings where constructed relative to the wtc 7

So you don't really want to compare them apples to apples......... I understand.......
 
Just a couple of points to make about your video.

1. Jet fuel from the ruptured wings wasn't contained in a pool, it was flowing down stairs and elevator shafts. This means that whatever was burning in the building after the first minute or so was burning @ 800 degrees, not 2,000.

2. The steel I-beam used in the video was much smaller than the steel in the towers, giving it much less resistance to heat fatigue. Just guessing here, but probably by a factor of 5, at least.

3. Having worked in steel building construction I can assure you that the spray-on insulation covering those beams was NOT knocked off. In retrofit and remodeling of these buildings it takes tools and time to clear it from even a small (12"X12") area.
sorry shit for brains but once any fuel is ignited it burns at a constant rate no matter if it's moving or not.
like all twoofers you missed the point, 800 degrees is more then enough heat to WEAKEN STEEL TO THE POINT OF FAILURE WHEN IT'S CARRYING A LOAD.NO MATTER WHAT GRADE THE STEEL IS.
2. YOUR COMMENT ABOUT INSULATION IS ALSO BULLSHIT SPRAY ON INSULATION LIKE EVERY THING ELSE GETS WEATHERED AND WEAK WITH TIME.
I'VE BEEN IN STRUCTURES WHEN THE SPRAY ON IS SO WEATHERED THAT IT FALLS OFF THE STEEL IN CHUCKS. (THANKS FOR PLAYING ) cue buzzer....

You're a fucking idiot, sorry to say. The only 'fuel' that was burning 2 minutes after impact was whatever flammable materials were in the buildings PRIOR to impact. Most of the jet fuel was consumed in the initial impact, as witnessed by those great big fireballs you saw on the video. Whatever remained certainly didn't violate the laws of physics and 'pool up'. Also, spray on insulation is INSIDE the building and doesn't get weathered. I've worked in dozens of hi-rise buildings and have been tasked to remove said insulation in order to attach interior walls and ceilings. I KNOW what it takes to remove it.

And stop yelling or I'll add 'rude' to 'idiot'.
In April 1970, the New York City Department of Air Resources ordered contractors building the World Trade Center to stop the spraying of asbestos as an insulating material.[13]

Fireproofing was incorporated in the original construction and more was added after a fire in 1975 that spread to six floors before being extinguished. After the 1993 bombing, inspections found fireproofing to be deficient. The Port Authority was in the process of replacing it, but replacement had been completed on only 18 floors in 1 WTC, including all the floors affected by the aircraft impact and fires,[14] and on 13 floors in 2 WTC, although only three of these floors (77, 78, and 85) were directly affected by the aircraft impact.[15][note 2] and that the fireproofing was being replaced due to its asbestos content; in fact the builders had been informed of a proposed ban on using asbestos/vermiculite fireproofing during construction and had ceased using it. By this time, only the fireproofing of the lower 40 floors of the north tower had been completed, and more than half of this was later replaced before the building was completed


FiresThe light construction and hollow nature of the structures allowed the jet fuel to penetrate far inside the towers, igniting many large fires simultaneously over a wide area of the impacted floors. The fuel from the planes burned at most for a few minutes, but the contents of the buildings burned over the next hour or hour and a half.[18] It has been suggested[who?] that the fires might not have been as centrally positioned, nor as intense, had traditionally heavy high-rise construction been standing in the way of the aircraft. Debris and fuel would likely have remained mostly outside the buildings or concentrated in more peripheral areas away from the building cores, which would then not have become unique failure points. In this scenario, the towers might have stood far longer, perhaps indefinitely.[19][20] The fires were hot enough to weaken the columns and cause floors to sag, pulling perimeter columns inward and reducing their ability to support the mass of the building above.[21]

Collapse of the World Trade Center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


800 degrees is more then enough heat to WEAKEN STEEL TO THE POINT OF FAILURE WHEN IT'S CARRYING A LOAD.NO MATTER WHAT GRADE THE STEEL IS.
 
sorry shit for brains but once any fuel is ignited it burns at a constant rate no matter if it's moving or not.
like all twoofers you missed the point, 800 degrees is more then enough heat to WEAKEN STEEL TO THE POINT OF FAILURE WHEN IT'S CARRYING A LOAD.NO MATTER WHAT GRADE THE STEEL IS.
2. YOUR COMMENT ABOUT INSULATION IS ALSO BULLSHIT SPRAY ON INSULATION LIKE EVERY THING ELSE GETS WEATHERED AND WEAK WITH TIME.
I'VE BEEN IN STRUCTURES WHEN THE SPRAY ON IS SO WEATHERED THAT IT FALLS OFF THE STEEL IN CHUCKS. (THANKS FOR PLAYING ) cue buzzer....

You're a fucking idiot, sorry to say. The only 'fuel' that was burning 2 minutes after impact was whatever flammable materials were in the buildings PRIOR to impact. Most of the jet fuel was consumed in the initial impact, as witnessed by those great big fireballs you saw on the video. Whatever remained certainly didn't violate the laws of physics and 'pool up'. Also, spray on insulation is INSIDE the building and doesn't get weathered. I've worked in dozens of hi-rise buildings and have been tasked to remove said insulation in order to attach interior walls and ceilings. I KNOW what it takes to remove it.

And stop yelling or I'll add 'rude' to 'idiot'.
In April 1970, the New York City Department of Air Resources ordered contractors building the World Trade Center to stop the spraying of asbestos as an insulating material.[13]

Fireproofing was incorporated in the original construction and more was added after a fire in 1975 that spread to six floors before being extinguished. After the 1993 bombing, inspections found fireproofing to be deficient. The Port Authority was in the process of replacing it, but replacement had been completed on only 18 floors in 1 WTC, including all the floors affected by the aircraft impact and fires,[14] and on 13 floors in 2 WTC, although only three of these floors (77, 78, and 85) were directly affected by the aircraft impact.[15][note 2] and that the fireproofing was being replaced due to its asbestos content; in fact the builders had been informed of a proposed ban on using asbestos/vermiculite fireproofing during construction and had ceased using it. By this time, only the fireproofing of the lower 40 floors of the north tower had been completed, and more than half of this was later replaced before the building was completed


FiresThe light construction and hollow nature of the structures allowed the jet fuel to penetrate far inside the towers, igniting many large fires simultaneously over a wide area of the impacted floors. The fuel from the planes burned at most for a few minutes, but the contents of the buildings burned over the next hour or hour and a half.[18] It has been suggested[who?] that the fires might not have been as centrally positioned, nor as intense, had traditionally heavy high-rise construction been standing in the way of the aircraft. Debris and fuel would likely have remained mostly outside the buildings or concentrated in more peripheral areas away from the building cores, which would then not have become unique failure points. In this scenario, the towers might have stood far longer, perhaps indefinitely.[19][20] The fires were hot enough to weaken the columns and cause floors to sag, pulling perimeter columns inward and reducing their ability to support the mass of the building above.[21]

Collapse of the World Trade Center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


800 degrees is more then enough heat to WEAKEN STEEL TO THE POINT OF FAILURE WHEN IT'S CARRYING A LOAD.NO MATTER WHAT GRADE THE STEEL IS.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65Qg_-89Zr8]Bad Ass Skyscraper Fires and Destruction!! Awesome!! - YouTube[/ame]
 
WTC 5 was 9 stories tall and suffered heavy damage and partial collapse.

WTC 6 may as well have completely collapsed:
250px-Six_WTC_SW_Corner.jpg

What was left was later Pulled down with cables. BTW WTC 6 was a whole 8 stories tall...
 
You're a fucking idiot, sorry to say. The only 'fuel' that was burning 2 minutes after impact was whatever flammable materials were in the buildings PRIOR to impact. Most of the jet fuel was consumed in the initial impact, as witnessed by those great big fireballs you saw on the video. Whatever remained certainly didn't violate the laws of physics and 'pool up'. Also, spray on insulation is INSIDE the building and doesn't get weathered. I've worked in dozens of hi-rise buildings and have been tasked to remove said insulation in order to attach interior walls and ceilings. I KNOW what it takes to remove it.

And stop yelling or I'll add 'rude' to 'idiot'.
In April 1970, the New York City Department of Air Resources ordered contractors building the World Trade Center to stop the spraying of asbestos as an insulating material.[13]

Fireproofing was incorporated in the original construction and more was added after a fire in 1975 that spread to six floors before being extinguished. After the 1993 bombing, inspections found fireproofing to be deficient. The Port Authority was in the process of replacing it, but replacement had been completed on only 18 floors in 1 WTC, including all the floors affected by the aircraft impact and fires,[14] and on 13 floors in 2 WTC, although only three of these floors (77, 78, and 85) were directly affected by the aircraft impact.[15][note 2] and that the fireproofing was being replaced due to its asbestos content; in fact the builders had been informed of a proposed ban on using asbestos/vermiculite fireproofing during construction and had ceased using it. By this time, only the fireproofing of the lower 40 floors of the north tower had been completed, and more than half of this was later replaced before the building was completed


FiresThe light construction and hollow nature of the structures allowed the jet fuel to penetrate far inside the towers, igniting many large fires simultaneously over a wide area of the impacted floors. The fuel from the planes burned at most for a few minutes, but the contents of the buildings burned over the next hour or hour and a half.[18] It has been suggested[who?] that the fires might not have been as centrally positioned, nor as intense, had traditionally heavy high-rise construction been standing in the way of the aircraft. Debris and fuel would likely have remained mostly outside the buildings or concentrated in more peripheral areas away from the building cores, which would then not have become unique failure points. In this scenario, the towers might have stood far longer, perhaps indefinitely.[19][20] The fires were hot enough to weaken the columns and cause floors to sag, pulling perimeter columns inward and reducing their ability to support the mass of the building above.[21]

Collapse of the World Trade Center - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


800 degrees is more then enough heat to WEAKEN STEEL TO THE POINT OF FAILURE WHEN IT'S CARRYING A LOAD.NO MATTER WHAT GRADE THE STEEL IS.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65Qg_-89Zr8]Bad Ass Skyscraper Fires and Destruction!! Awesome!! - YouTube[/ame]
once again eot's makes a false comparison: 1. that hotel was not struck by an airliner or debris before it caught fire.
2. there were several firefighting units there to battle the flames.
3. it was also unfinished.
these factors alone make it unlike wtc 1, 2, & 7.
it does however prove that eot's is talking out his ass .. not surprising
 
There is a disease of anti-science in our socitety. Like with global warming theory, 99% of climate scientists support it and the truthers will still believe that they have science on their side. We see it with the rejection of the science of evolution. We see hysteria over smart meters, and vaccines and fluoridation. We see people like Steve Jobs who delayed using "conventinal medicine" until the cancer had spread and it killed him. Stubborn ignorance is not true skepticism.
 

Forum List

Back
Top