• 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]

Fledermaus said:
Tony, what caused.the collapse?
Click to expand...

The building failed. Pretty simple.:lamo

I would bet you will not get a straight answer. He has ruled out fire. He thinks it is silly to ask any specific questions regarding CD. He wants NIST to do another report.
 
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

mike2810 said:
The building failed. Pretty simple.:lamo

I would bet you will not get a straight answer. He has ruled out fire. He thinks it is silly to ask any specific questions regarding CD. He wants NIST to do another report.
Click to expand...

I am wondering why Tony believes his OPINION trumps the opinion of the firefighters on the scene, the NIST, various other organizations.
 
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

Thoreau72 said:
Except that all the other fires we know of in high rise modern buildings has never taken a building down. We just had yet another demonstration of that simple law of physics on New Years day in Dubai.
Click to expand...

The Dubai building was CONCRETE ... and the fire was mostly confined to the OUTSIDE PLASTIC/ALUMINIUM CLADDING ... so fail in you assumption it was steel and so a comparison to the WTC building.
 
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

Tony Szamboti said:
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.
Click to expand...

Yet a mere campfire is enough to soften rail lines to be bent into horseshoes.

Shermans Neckties ... so WHY do you think softened steel can hold LOAD then ???
 
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

I_Gaze_At_The_Blue said:
Yet a mere campfire is enough to soften rail lines to be bent into horseshoes.

Shermans Neckties ... so WHY do you think softened steel can hold LOAD then ???
Click to expand...

Another viewpoint....

Open air burning of jet fuel degrades steel....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2TMVDYpp2Q

And this is without all the consumables in the towers that caught fire.
 
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

mike2810 said:
Do you always compare events that are not identical? What other "modern building" was first damaged by a collision? Ae the other buildings that burned of the same construction type?

Seems you have taken your points from AE911T who tends to leave out the most obvious things when trying to come up with a comparison.
Click to expand...

Damaged by a collision that the architects and engineers designed the building to withstand, you mean?

Damaged by a collision that the buildings DID withstand, as designed, do you mean?
 
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

I_Gaze_At_The_Blue said:
The Dubai building was CONCRETE ... and the fire was mostly confined to the OUTSIDE PLASTIC/ALUMINIUM CLADDING ... so fail in you assumption it was steel and so a comparison to the WTC building.
Click to expand...

And it's still standing today.

The towers, OTOH, were steel and concrete, and the real insight is that even though the fires were confined to about 10 of the upper floors, the entire structure, obviously including the lower two thirds not involved in fire, collapsed into a pyroclastic cloud at free fall speeds. Something wrong with that picture. It was controlled demolition, assuming one conducts an independent analysis.
 
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

Thoreau72 said:
And it's still standing today.

The towers, OTOH, were steel and concrete, and the real insight is that even though the fires were confined to about 10 of the upper floors, the entire structure, obviously including the lower two thirds not involved in fire, collapsed into a pyroclastic cloud at free fall speeds. Something wrong with that picture. It was controlled demolition, assuming one conducts an independent analysis.
Click to expand...

The concrete played what part in the construction?
 
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

Thoreau72 said:
Damaged by a collision that the architects and engineers designed the building to withstand, you mean?

Damaged by a collision that the buildings DID withstand, as designed, do you mean?
Click to expand...

Tell me how the other high rise fires are the same as the WTC1,2, 7?

Tell me what is different from the fires at wtc1,2,7 and others that have occurred.

No one is claiming the crash was the cause. Guess in your world the crash had no effect on wtc1 and 2. That the falling debris that hit wtc7 had not effect on the building.

. Do you have any examples outside of 9/11 that mini neutron bombs are used in CD? That is your free thinking conclusion for the towers. Enlighten us on how this was carried out.
 
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

I_Gaze_At_The_Blue said:
Yet a mere campfire is enough to soften rail lines to be bent into horseshoes.

Shermans Neckties ... so WHY do you think softened steel can hold LOAD then ???
Click to expand...

Let's see, railroad rails are about 5.2 inches high with a 9/16" web. See J & J Rail Sales | 85# A.S.C.E. Railroad Track

The rail's moment of inertia is about 6.6 in^4. A 45 foot long piece of that rail would weigh about 1,000 lbs.

A 33 inch deep girder with a 9/16" web, like the girder between columns 44 and 79, had a moment of inertia of 6,710 in^4. This 45 foot long girder would weigh about 6,000 lbs.

The girder is 1,000 times stronger in bending and weighs 6 times more.

I don't think anyone would be using a campfire to heat a girder like that and bending it around a tree. It was also more likely that Sherman's crews used bonfires not campfires, but bonfires wouldn't even provide enough heat energy to soften a huge W33 x 130 girder to the point of failure. Nobody said steel can't soften. It is the degree that matters. It is all relative.

You can throw a 3" diameter rock to break a window. You can't throw a 3" diameter rock to knock a building down.

You were just kidding about this though weren't you?
 
Last edited:
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

Tony Szamboti said:
Let's see, railroad rails are about 5.2 inches high with a 9/16" web. See J & J Rail Sales | 85# A.S.C.E. Railroad Track

The rail's moment of inertia is about 6.6 in^4. A 45 foot long piece of that rail would weigh about 1,000 lbs.

A 33 inch deep girder with a 9/16" web, like the girder between columns 44 and 79, had a moment of inertia of 6,710 in^4. This 45 foot long girder would weigh about 6,000 lbs.

The girder is 1,000 times stronger in bending and weighs 6 times more.

I don't think anyone would be using a campfire to heat a girder like that and bending it around a tree. It was also more likely that Sherman's crews used bonfires not campfires, but bonfires wouldn't even provide enough heat energy to soften a huge W33 x 130 girder to the point of failure. Nobody said steel can't soften. It is the degree that matters. It is all relative.

You can throw a 3" diameter rock to break a window. You can't throw a 3" diameter rock to knock a building down.

You were just kidding about this though weren't you?
Click to expand...

Tony, what brought WTC7 down?

Since you reject fire (for not real reason) what are you claiming the collapse was caused by?

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

Fledermaus said:
Tony, what brought WTC7 down?

Since you reject fire (for not real reason) what are you claiming the collapse was caused by?

Gophers?
Click to expand...
Dick Cheney's fire ants.

I think they were left in the building by his emissary Rudy Giuliani. Rudy used to slip away to his bunker bedroom on the 23rd floor with his girlfriend he was having an extra marital affair with and might have gotten too excited and forgot he left them there. The ants might have gotten agitated by the fires on Sept. 11, 2001 and ate much of the steel on their way out, causing the bottom of the building to collapse.
 
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

Fledermaus said:
The concrete played what part in the construction?
Click to expand...

The same part it plays in other constructions. As I understand it, all the floors were poured concrete.
 
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

mike2810 said:
Tell me how the other high rise fires are the same as the WTC1,2, 7?

Tell me what is different from the fires at wtc1,2,7 and others that have occurred.

No one is claiming the crash was the cause. Guess in your world the crash had no effect on wtc1 and 2. That the falling debris that hit wtc7 had not effect on the building.

. Do you have any examples outside of 9/11 that mini neutron bombs are used in CD? That is your free thinking conclusion for the towers. Enlighten us on how this was carried out.
Click to expand...

The other high rise fires were similar to those at WTC in that combustible materials were set on fire by one mechanism or another.
 
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

Tony Szamboti said:
Dick Cheney's fire ants.

I think they were left in the building by his emissary Rudy Giuliani. Rudy used to slip away to his bunker bedroom on the 23rd floor with his girlfriend he was having an extra marital affair with and might have gotten too excited and forgot he left them there. The ants might have gotten agitated by the fires on Sept. 11, 2001 and ate much of the steel on their way out, causing the bottom of the building to collapse.
Click to expand...

Ignorant answer is ignorant.

What caused WTC7 to collapse?
 
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

Thoreau72 said:
The other high rise fires were similar to those at WTC in that combustible materials were set on fire by one mechanism or another.
Click to expand...

You seem to ignore the other damage. why is that?
 
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

mike2810 said:
You seem to ignore the other damage. why is that?
Click to expand...

You are the one who ignores other damage, not I. For example, as I recall you are one who denies the molten iron for 90 days.
 
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

Thoreau72 said:
You are the one who ignores other damage, not I. For example, as I recall you are one who denies the molten iron for 90 days.
Click to expand...

Good grief.

Pretty juvenile to bring up the molten iron when it has been discussed at length in the past. Free thinkers know that is a rabbit hole that never has been proven.:mrgreen:

Interesting with all the cell phones and small cameras that existed on 9/11, there is no photo evidence other than hot metal, not molten.

There are however altered images that were posted on various sites trying to say this is the molten metal.

As far as witness statements, they should be backed up by other evidence. That is where the molten metal theory falls apart.

Why don't you start a new thread and explain to us all how the towers and wtc7 where taken down by mini neutron bombs. Be very specific and provide collaborating information.

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

mike2810 said:
Good grief.

Pretty juvenile to bring up the molten iron when it has been discussed at length in the past. Free thinkers know that is a rabbit hole that never has been proven.:mrgreen:

Interesting with all the cell phones and small cameras that existed on 9/11, there is no photo evidence other than hot metal, not molten.

There are however altered images that were posted on various sites trying to say this is the molten metal.
As far as witness statements, they should be backed up by other evidence. That is where the molten metal theory falls apart.

Why don't you start a new thread and explain to us all how the towers and wtc7 where taken down by mini neutron bombs. Be very specific and provide collaborating information.

I
Click to expand...

Bolded is more proof that the truther mouvment is all about lies.
 
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

Quag said:
Bolded is more proof that the truther mouvment is all about lies.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Even when presented with information that shows how some images where photo shopped.

Hopefully the madness will end some day.:mrgreen:
 
Re: Viral 9/11 truth-debunking blacksmith gets it all wrong[W:22]

mike2810 said:
Agreed. Even when presented with information that shows how some images where photo shopped.

Hopefully the madness will end some day.:mrgreen:
Click to expand...

Too many people making money by lying about 911 for trutherdom to ever disappear
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom