Can someone on /sci/ help explain this discrepancy?
Jet fuel can't melt steel beams.
>>7768187
only one of those buildings had a plane crash into it
>>7768195
Explain tower 7. No planes.
>>7768195
>allegedly
>>7768198
what the fuck is tower 7
>>7768195
So it wasn't the fire that melted the steel ? Coz none of them collapsed when the planes hit.
>>7768206
it crashed because the molten aluminium from the plane was trapped between floors with sprinkler water flooding in
take a look at what happens when you combine hot aluminium with water
>>7768198
Tower 7 was hit abd damaged by the debris of the north tower and was on fire pretty much all day until it collapsed. Also the sprinkler system in the building pretty much failed.
>>7768200
Tower 7 was the third building to collapse that day, without being hit by a plane.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mamvq7LWqRU
>>7768216
i thought it was called building 7
>>7768187
It's because the Jews are secretly aligned against Christians with the Muslims.
Think about it, they've been working together all along and are just trying to trick us. The had some phony war that literally only lasted 6 days. They spout over the top rhetoric to each other and yet never have real conflict.
Jews did 9/11 which allowed to them exert control over American freedom. Muslims provided convenient scapegoats and a target that is literally a desert filled with shiites.
>>7768211
Yeah, but what about the pools of melted steel burning below the rubble for weeks?
>>7768220
the hydrogen released from the water exploded so some steel would have melted there
the rest was saggy but not liquid
>>7768187
Maybe fire burns hotter during the daylight so thats why the Dubai tower still stood because it didn't have the added heat from then sun's rays?
>>7768187
The WTC had a plane sever the outer columns and inner core. WTC wasn't a traditional skyscraper, with the outer columns holding the buildings weight to increase office floor space. The heat weakened the steel, and the incredible weight of the upper portion created a procedural structural failure. There is a reason the upper portion of the tower leaned in the direction of where it was hit, proceeding afterwards to fall straight down after the framework gave out.
I'm sure you all know that the second tower hit was actually the first fall as the plane hit lower and the framework collapsed first under more weight.
7 WTC collapsed, because, you know, a giant fucking tower fell on top of it. There was concerns that the World Financial Center across the west street would collapse and/or have to be rebuilt, and it had significantly less damage.
So far the most "conclusive" evidence of a conspiracy is the thermite claims, which is usually just people pointing at steel columns that had been cut by clean up crew after the tower had fallen; or claiming that thermite just simply existed, and then making fun of people who say it just doesn't exist.
>>7768254
This smithy demonstrates that jet fuel can in fact melt steel beams.
http://cheezburger.com/76773121/video-jet-fuel-can-melt-steel-beams
>>7768381
So? Are you suggesting there was a hidden arc furnace in the towers? You need to present a better hypothesis, not just dismiss the generally accepted one.
>>7768381
http://www.debunking911.com/moltensteel.htm
steel anneals at 1270 deg F
it doesn't need to melt in order to significantly reduce it's stiffness.
>clad your building in flammable materials
>be surprised when your building turns into a giant candle
>>7768393
Im suggesting that there was a source of thermite in the towers.
>>7768395
That's an absurd claim that molten steel was being created by oxidizing steel. There is not enough exothermic energy to be turning steel to liquid. And to add, they're talking about freshly ground Iron. Im pretty sure that there wasn't too much freshly ground iron below ground zero after just a few days. But just to clarify, you are suggesting that rusting steel or iron has the potential energy to completely liquefy itself. I just want to put that in plain English so everybody knows what you are suggesting
>>7768224
>the hydrogen that released from the water molecules
>>7768416
what about all the heat from the building collapsing. I thought underground fires from structure collapse was normal.
>>7768198
The fucking building was on fire and the fire department couldnt put it out so they collapsed it
>>7768416
>Im suggesting that there was a source of thermite in the towers.
Thermite is less energy dense than aviation fuel. If jet fuel can't melt steel beams, what hope does thermite have?
>>7768421
I understand that part. But the amount of hydrogen being released by the oxidation would be an inconsequential amount. Especially when all of the steel eventually becomes oxidized, there would no longer be a fuel source.
>>7768187
You can't really compare some modern hotel to a monster-sized decades old concrete skyscraper.
>>7768189
This is correct. But it can obviously weaken the steel enough to give away under the overwhelming pressure of half a skyscraper above it.
>>7768195
Yes. The plane crash played a big part in making the towers collapse.
>>7768198
Debris from the north tower ripped off some big chunks on the side of the building facing the wave of debris. But ultimately it was the fires that brought it down.
>>7768199
nice meme
>>7768200
newfag
>>7768206
The planes cut several core columns and the raging fires weakened the rest. Without the fires, they would've survived.
>>7768211
explain
>>7768212
this
>>7768216
it was hit by an object, in this case it was debris and not a plane. the fires brought it down though, not the debris
>>7768217
yes
>>7768219
nice meme
>>7768220
that's aluminium and it didn't stay molten for weeks
>>7768224
are you retarded, the steel should either be saggy or normal, you may be talking about the molten aluminium
>>7768236
retard
>>7768245
this, but let me correct one thing
WTC1 did not fall on top of WTC7, only a few moderately sized chunks
>>7768254
liquid aluminium*
>>7768368
>cheezburger
>>7768381
liquid aluminium*
>>7768393
he doesn't even understand the generally accepted one
>>7768405
yes
>>7768411
the main reason why the fires fucked shit up so hard was the sloppy fireproofing
>>7768416
it was liquid aluminium
>>7768421
dumb frogposter
>>7768427
it was a collapse of massive proportions but i don't think it would heat up that much
>>7768428
they didn't collapse it, it collapsed by itself
WTC2 (South Tower)
>plane hits building on the side
>cuts away several exterior columns and a few of the core columns
>sloppy fireproofing blown off by the impact
>people are instantly killed
>fires engulf the impacted floors
>the lack of fireproofing exposes the steel columns supporting the floors
>part of the floors start to sag
>because the plane hit one side of the building, the building wants to lean to that side and the stress builds up
>saggy floor planes give away and land on the floor below
>floor planes keep giving away
>fires keep raging
>more floor planes falling down
>the exterior columns are now almost on their own as the floor planes that connected them to the core are now gone
>the columns cant take it anymore
>the building starts to lean, the tiny leaning puts enormous pressure on the columns
>they cant take it
>a fuckton of concrete is weighing them down
>they finally give away
>as seen in some close-up videos, they bend until they crack and then the entire top of the building slams into the floor below
>all that energy is now released
>tears through the rest of the building and kills everyone besides a lucky one or two i think
>since it was leaning, the collapse put more stress on one side of the building so parts of the other side are still standing after the collapse, but being on their own, they give away and fall down after mere seconds
same shit in WTC1 but the plane hit dead center so the core gave away first, not the exterior
a simulation of the collapse would be cool as fuck, seeing that monster of a building give away
only ones i can find are shitty blender animations though with fucking jenga planks ffs
>>7768381
>ground zero
Precisely. At least 2, probably 3 micronukes were used that day buried in the granite directly below WTC 1,2 and probably 6. Truth be told is was the only way to dismantle the asbestos tower complex safely, but no one would have ever agreed to that. In fact Controlled Demolition who cleaned up most of it, loaded debris on slow boats to China, were asked about demolishing the structures prior to 11 of 9 and refused to even quote the job, unpossible to do safely.
9/11 was revolutionary from an engineering-standpoint. up to 2001 large buildings would be deconstructed for millions and millions of dollars by professional companies that used millisecond-timed, carefully calculated explosions - and even then, the buildings sometimes wouldn't collapse symmetrically.
now we know that all of this was naive and nonsensical: you don't need expertise, explosives or careful planning to bring down a ~50-story building. just start a small office fire and it'll eventually come down by itself and fall into its own footprint.
i now make a living bringing down large scyscrapers for the government with nothing but a box of matches and some office furniture. ask me how, i make 19.000$ a month and you can, too.
>>7768245
>7 WTC collapsed, because, you know, a giant fucking tower fell on top of it
[citation needed]
why don't you start with the official NIST-report.
you now, the guys who themselves are saying it was "due to office fires".
>>7768220
>>7768381
Ever make pottery in a campfire or smelted some raw ore or did some forging before? Same thing. It gets super hot near the bottom where all the hottest coals and fuel is.
Jet fuel would have almost instantly vaporized and blown up. It doesn't work like oil where oil runs over everything and spreads fire for a long time.
>>7768217
>i thought
that's where you went wrong
>>7768187
>two different towers
>two different designs
>two different disasters
>suprised the damages are different
wut r u stupid?
>>7768187
ever heard of linear shaped charges?
>>7768458
>But it can obviously weaken the steel enough to give away under the overwhelming pressure of half a skyscraper above it.
>half a skyscraper above it.
>half
911 was caused by a ufo
theres a video where you can see it
i dont have the link
>>7768753
i think ive seen that one on yutube
area 51 took the video down
copyright claim
>>7768381
>weekend
kek get off of /sci/ tinfoil fag
>>7768200
>what the fuck is tower 7
>being this new
>so new, in fact, that anon must have been born yesterday
>>7768540
Yep, a perfect demo, hardly any mess to clean up even
>>7768381
How do you know it's steel?
>plane flies into building
>building then collapses
>but the collapse can't have been caused by the plane
What are you, 5?
In fact no, even a fucking five year old would understand what happened
The only reason anyone questions this blatant causal relationship is that they have grown up thinking no one could ever attack their mighty country and the only way this could possibly happen is if it was self inflicted
It's just denial, plain and simple
>>7769717
the plane was a hologram
>>7769719
I laughed out loud
>>7769720
you laugh, but people have used that argument unironically
>>7769717
It was more
>no way our mighty country was unprepared for such a low-tech attack
It's a kind of snobbery I guess. We would much prefer to be killed in a convoluted conspiracy involving holograms and space lasers.
>>7768219
Back to /pol/
>>7769719
Has anyone considered the possibility that the airplane was no airplane at all but an alien aircraft? And that maybe there are Muslim space aliens that have a fuel that burn a million times warmer than jet fuel?
Easy. Union Labor.
>>7768713
ur right m8 that w8 is nice and light
>>7768713
>What is hyperbole
>>7770128
>>7770142
>Hyperbole is the use of exaggeration as a rhetorical device or figure of speech. In rhetoric, it is also sometimes known as auxesis (lit. "growth"). In poetry and oratory, it emphasizes, evokes strong feelings, and creates strong impressions. As a figure of speech, it is usually not meant to be taken literally.[1][2]
>Hyperbole may also be used for instances of such exaggerations for emphasis or effect. Hyperboles are often used in casual speech as intensifiers
>exagerrations
>evokes strong feelings
>creates strong impressions
>intensifiers
Wheww samefag err laddies.
>>7772058
>>>/reddit/
It was obviously a false flag operation used to start the War on terror which destabilized the mid-east so they could sell weapons and install puppet governments.
>>7768458
>This is correct. But it can obviously weaken the steel enough to give away under the overwhelming pressure of half a skyscraper above it.
Hence the tons of red hot metled steel found even a few days after on ground zero :^)
>>7772901
There was no melted steel.
