• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22][W:565]

Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

Buck,

The points about the OP I brought up.

You do not wish to discuss?


Were you raised in an english speaking country?
 
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

Were you raised in an english speaking country?

Insult ignored.

You have no desire to discuss the points I brought up in regards to the OP?

Why create an OP when you have no desire discussing the content?

Shades of the FBI documents thread.
 
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

First lie at 32 seconds.
 
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

First lie at 32 seconds.


Are you implying it is a lie that the entire outer structure fell at or very near the rate of free fall?
 
Last edited:
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

Are you implying it is a lie that the entire outer structure fell at or very near the rate of free fall?


When he said: catches fire and also collapses. This one literally at the rate of freefall.
He was lying. Only part of the build fell for part of the time at that rate.
video is a joke with no merit, If you have to lie to try and get your message across it seems pretty obvious your message is bogus.

BTW it wasn't the entire outer structure it was just part of it for part of the collapse.
By why let fact6s get in the way of a bad conspiracy?
 
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

BTW it wasn't the entire outer structure it was just part of it for part of the collapse.

Your wrong again.

NIST Report said:
Global collapse occurred as the entire building above the buckled region moved downward as a single unit.
http://www.nist.gov/customcf/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=861610

By why let fact6s get in the way of a bad conspiracy?

I don't know why you continue to ignore facts that contradict your conspiracy theory.
 
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

Technically about 23 seconds followed by 33 seconds...

I stand corrected
 
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

Your wrong again.


http://www.nist.gov/customcf/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=861610



I don't know why you continue to ignore facts that contradict your conspiracy theory.

Wrong.
Global collapse occurred as the entire building above the buckled region moved downward as a single unit.
That quote does NOT say the entire building collapsed at freefall. I suggest you read the paragraphs just before your quote to realize how wrong you are

He lied when he claimed the entire building collapsed at freefall
 
Last edited:
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

The reason no steel framed building had ever collapsed due to fire is not so much fire temperature but heat energy transfer.

The heat energy transferred to the large steel structural members in the fire in local areas is not enough to heat them to a high enough temperature to compromise their strength sufficiently for failure. This is generally due to the high factors of safety used in large buildings.

The fires burn out locally before anything can happen.

The blacksmith's argument is not accurate because his heat energy to steel mass ratio is far more than what exists in an office fire.

It is the specific heat and mass of the steel vs. energy available from the fire that is important and the blacksmith's argument does not consider this. Maybe he just doesn't know.
 
Last edited:
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

The reason no steel framed building had ever collapsed due to fire is not so much fire temperature but heat energy transfer.

The heat energy transferred to the large steel structural members in the fire in local areas is not enough to heat them to a high enough temperature to compromise their strength sufficiently for failure. This is generally due to the high factors of safety used in large buildings.

The fires burn out locally before anything can happen.

The blacksmith's argument is not accurate because his heat energy to steel mass ratio is far more than what exists in an office fire.

It is the specific heat and mass of the steel vs. energy available from the fire that is important and the blacksmith's argument does not consider this. Maybe he just doesn't know.

Or perhaps his argument about steel losing strength as it is heated is dead on accurate and there is no need for the steel to melt.

You will note that molten metal plays in to AE911TRUTH claims, right?

Tell me. How does molten metal work in the CD claim of yours?

How did the molten metal contribute to the collapse?

What melted all this metal?
 
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

Buck,

What temps are required for molten METAL?

I think it depends upon the metal in question....
 
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

Or perhaps his argument about steel losing strength as it is heated is dead on accurate and there is no need for the steel to melt.

You will note that molten metal plays in to AE911TRUTH claims, right?

Tell me. How does molten metal work in the CD claim of yours?

How did the molten metal contribute to the collapse?

What melted all this metal?

It seems you missed my point about the heat energy in a given location not being enough to cause the steel to fail. I didn't even talk about melting.

The blacksmith did not mention specific heat, how much energy would be available in an office fire in a given location, and how much energy it would take to raise the temperature of large structural members enough to cause them to fail. Without these points what he says is inaccurate and meaningless.
 
Last edited:
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

It seems you missed my point about the heat energy in a given location not being enough to cause the steel to fail. I didn't even talk about melting.

The blacksmith did not mention specific heat, how much energy would be available in an office fire in a given location, and how much energy it would take to raise the temperature of large structural members enough to cause them to fail. Without these points what he says is inaccurate and meaningless.

It seems you ignored the questions asked of you.

Nor do you appear to understand temps high enough to degrade steel strength can be found in normal structural fires.

It is a KNOWN phenomena.
 
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

That quote does NOT say the entire building collapsed at freefall.

No it doesn’t, and nor did Gage or I. Please read for comprehension.

I suggest you read the paragraphs just before your quote to realize how wrong you are

What can I possible be wrong about? I made no claim or statement.

He lied when he claimed the entire building collapsed at freefall

Gage did not use the word, “entire”. That’s just your miscomprehension resulting into false accusations.
 
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

No it doesn’t, and nor did Gage or I. Please read for comprehension.



What can I possible be wrong about? I made no claim or statement.



Gage did not use the word, “entire”. That’s just your miscomprehension resulting into false accusations.

Molten metal.

What temp?
 
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

It seems you ignored the questions asked of you.

Nor do you appear to understand temps high enough to degrade steel strength can be found in normal structural fires.

It is a KNOWN phenomena.

It isn't the temperatures. It is the energy.

You could have a 3 ft. diameter campfire with temperatures of 700 to 800 degrees C and it won't have enough energy to raise the temperature of a 6,000 lb. W33 x 130 x 45 foot long steel girder like A2001 by more than 100 degrees.
 
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

No it doesn’t, and nor did Gage or I. Please read for comprehension.



What can I possible be wrong about? I made no claim or statement.



Gage did not use the word, “entire”. That’s just your miscomprehension resulting into false accusations.


From the video.
catches fire and also collapses. This one literally at the rate of freefall.
Either he meant the entire building collapsed at the rate of freefall or he INTENTIONALLY worded it to sound that way.
Either way it is dishonest and the video is crap.
Please reread the NIST report you linked because it doesn't say the entire building fell at once either. So either you didn't read it or you failed to comprehend it or you are intentionally being dishonest.
Fact is only part of the building for part of the collapse fell near the rate of freefall.
 
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

It isn't the temperatures. It is the energy.

You could have a 3 ft. diameter campfire with temperatures of 700 to 800 degrees C and it won't have enough energy to raise the temperature of a 6,000 lb. W33 x 130 x 45 foot long steel girder like A2001 by more than 100 degrees.

We didn't have a campfire.

We had a burning building.

I suspect WTC7 had far more potential for heating the steel, eh?
 
Back
Top Bottom