"No fuel melts steel..." Always uttered by people who never check the details. The adiabatic flame temperature of kerosene (jet fuel) is 2093 deg C. The only metals that can tolerate that temperature (in jet engines) are special nickel alloys or columbium. Steel (iron) has a melting temperature of 1538 deg C, approximately 550 deg C below the flame temperature of burning kerosene. And steel gives up its strength rapidly with temperature, losing most of it well before it reaches the melting point. So your statement is pure puffery.
The collapse appears to have been the result of the fires and the consequent weakening of the columns, leading to pancake collapse as each floor suffered increasing weight and impact loads. Without the airplane crashes, this would never have happened. You have a strange conception of causality.
A whole lot of people were killed "for show," so your characterization is a grotesque trivialization of their deaths.
Speaking of puffery. How does armor piercing rounds work? The round hits a tank and the energy super heats the steel for A moment to let a harder rod slip through. Does the entire tank immediately turn to a puddle of molten goo?
I love your last line. It fits all of the cabal false flag defenses. Give me a Greta "How dare you" question ....911, gulf of tonkin, JFK, sandy hook, January 6, kids in cages, Nazi flag in uhaul truck, Charlottesville, Russia Russia Russia, coldvid, masks, fauci, clot shots, 2020 election, etc. The fact is that I have my alibi for that morning. I didn't plan or perform the grotesque human sacrifice. Redirect your disgust to the satanic cabal that did the crime. Attacking the messenger just shows you don't like the message. Oh oh oh, here's another one you can use. Talking about the gender of the transvestite who targeted and brutally murdered innocent Christians, trivializes their death so we will declare a new tranny day to celebrate the murderer instead. How dare you question Christine blaisey fords extremely credible and brave testimony, it trivializes the horrific act of rape that so many men and women have experienced since the beginning of time. how dare you. That last one was free. Feel free to use it while defending other official narratives.
Armor-piercing rounds: The projectile has high mass per frontal area, so as to attain high momentum per frontal area, which allows it to go through steel like it was plastic. Actual fact---it causes plastic deformation of the metal. If the penetrator is tungsten, then it gets through and creates the usual havoc of a ballistic object. If the pentrator is uranium, it is already molten and flashes into a mist that instantly catches on fire (pyrophoric). The heat of the bulk uranium-air combustion ramps up the pressure inside the tank, probably blows the turret off, and sets off the tank ammo as a secondary detonation.
Second paragraph: "Are you talking to me?" Or was that just an elaborate recourse to name-calling in lieu of argument?
Great now we are making progress. The high heat melts the pinpoint area of impact resulting in a hole in the steel tank. The hole is evident because of the steel that didn't melt. You are absolutely correct that steel can be liquified and reshaped while in that molten state. We know a 50 bmg could pierce through a tank but will not melt the entire tank to the ground like popping a balloon. So my point is that there is not enough fuel in a 767 to melt that tower to the ground in a pancake freefall. Don't forget that in the midst of that tower melting heat, Mohammed Attas passport fluttered safely to the sidewalk uncharred. Build your origami tower out of that paper next time.
I suspect the q post board is filled with users who question the official narrative.
Calling out someone who questions the official narrative as someone who is trivializing the deaths of the victims is a form of shouting down any dissent. Your "How dare you" only works on people that care about misgendering someone. I expect that response at the Huffington post. I assure you that Bush/cheney and cabal lied about 911. The victims they sacrificed are not trivialized just because I don't believe some cave dweller masterminded an attack that was described by Al Gore years before, and implemented on the very day of a training exercise of the same nature. How many coincidences until it is mathematically impossible?
I'm moving on. If I had definitive proof to show you, then I would be arkancided. One day after W is gone,.they will let us know for sure. We had to wait until after HW was gone to know that the Clowns popped JFK. I still work with folks that believe Iraq had WMDs, masks work, clot shot was safe and effective, Biden won, the flu disappeared, water sticks to a spinning ball, people evolved from slime and the big bang created everything from nothing. We don't need to agree.
I don't follow your thinking. In an anti-tank round, the penetration comes from brute force plastic deformation of the steel by a denser, harder penetrator projectile. It is not melting the steel armor.
No one has ever said that the fuel in the 767 melted the Twin Towers. That is an absurdity. But the burning fuel can certainly heat the structural columns to temperatures where its strength would be gone. Structural steel is reduced to 30% of its room temperature strength by the time it reaches 600 deg C. Meanwhile, what is to stop a passport from drifting down to the ground within moments of the collision?
The problem is that there is no "lie" involved in "the official narrative." It is coherent and consistent with known physics and engineering. It seems to me that a Lot of People have jumped off the cliff of "It's all lies," and have psychotically denied the truth. Not because there is compelling evidence that something else is the truth and we have the detailed receipts---but because there is a psychological need to feed the paranoid narrative of "it's all lies." If the "official narrative" were understood to be the truth...then what becomes of "it's all lies"? That, itself, would become a lie. And then we would have to scrutinize fellow-travelers who have fallen off the deep end with fabulous paranoid conspiracies. That wouldn't be polite, perhaps. And it would be fraught with self-recognition. But maybe a step back from the brink, toward sanity, is a good idea, if the alternative is to embrace insanity and become untouchable from the normie point of view.
And, by the way, water (and everything else) does stick to a spinning ball, to the tune of 1 pound force for 1 pound of mass. Nothing else to pull it away. (The effect of the spin is teeny-tiny by comparison.)
Look, I'm staying outside this conversation besides coming in and throwing this: If you cannot properly discount his argument, don't tell him to shut up.
That's leftist behavior. Enough people have offered their own counters to his statements and either they'll sway him or they won't, and still more people will likely throw their own opinions into the discussion.
But your only contribution has been to trash him, which is reductive and unacceptable.
Regardless of how you believe the WTC fell, or what hit what, is not strictly relevant to belief in Q or the goals outlined. It doesn't even mean that he doesn't believe that it was an inside job.
All he's saying is that planes hit.
There are a lot of accounts that say they saw it. This was all over the place the day of.
There is also a lack of proof to support either argument, at least not enough that has yet to come to light.
It's fine to argue your opinions, but there's no need to attack him on something completely unrelated and try to shut him down if you can't even attempt to offer an argument.
His argument has been discounting a million different ways. We've all heard the Popular Mechanics bullshit he spouts like gospel doctrine. He's not a Q supporter. He's a shill. He can suck my dick. And don't defend him. One of these days it will be clear enough to the mods what this faggot's MO is and they'll boot him. Perhaps today is not that day but the guy's a cuck faggot RINO fucker if I ever saw one.
"No fuel melts steel..." Always uttered by people who never check the details. The adiabatic flame temperature of kerosene (jet fuel) is 2093 deg C. The only metals that can tolerate that temperature (in jet engines) are special nickel alloys or columbium. Steel (iron) has a melting temperature of 1538 deg C, approximately 550 deg C below the flame temperature of burning kerosene. And steel gives up its strength rapidly with temperature, losing most of it well before it reaches the melting point. So your statement is pure puffery.
The collapse appears to have been the result of the fires and the consequent weakening of the columns, leading to pancake collapse as each floor suffered increasing weight and impact loads. Without the airplane crashes, this would never have happened. You have a strange conception of causality.
A whole lot of people were killed "for show," so your characterization is a grotesque trivialization of their deaths.
Speaking of puffery. How does armor piercing rounds work? The round hits a tank and the energy super heats the steel for A moment to let a harder rod slip through. Does the entire tank immediately turn to a puddle of molten goo?
I love your last line. It fits all of the cabal false flag defenses. Give me a Greta "How dare you" question ....911, gulf of tonkin, JFK, sandy hook, January 6, kids in cages, Nazi flag in uhaul truck, Charlottesville, Russia Russia Russia, coldvid, masks, fauci, clot shots, 2020 election, etc. The fact is that I have my alibi for that morning. I didn't plan or perform the grotesque human sacrifice. Redirect your disgust to the satanic cabal that did the crime. Attacking the messenger just shows you don't like the message. Oh oh oh, here's another one you can use. Talking about the gender of the transvestite who targeted and brutally murdered innocent Christians, trivializes their death so we will declare a new tranny day to celebrate the murderer instead. How dare you question Christine blaisey fords extremely credible and brave testimony, it trivializes the horrific act of rape that so many men and women have experienced since the beginning of time. how dare you. That last one was free. Feel free to use it while defending other official narratives.
Armor-piercing rounds: The projectile has high mass per frontal area, so as to attain high momentum per frontal area, which allows it to go through steel like it was plastic. Actual fact---it causes plastic deformation of the metal. If the penetrator is tungsten, then it gets through and creates the usual havoc of a ballistic object. If the pentrator is uranium, it is already molten and flashes into a mist that instantly catches on fire (pyrophoric). The heat of the bulk uranium-air combustion ramps up the pressure inside the tank, probably blows the turret off, and sets off the tank ammo as a secondary detonation.
Second paragraph: "Are you talking to me?" Or was that just an elaborate recourse to name-calling in lieu of argument?
Great now we are making progress. The high heat melts the pinpoint area of impact resulting in a hole in the steel tank. The hole is evident because of the steel that didn't melt. You are absolutely correct that steel can be liquified and reshaped while in that molten state. We know a 50 bmg could pierce through a tank but will not melt the entire tank to the ground like popping a balloon. So my point is that there is not enough fuel in a 767 to melt that tower to the ground in a pancake freefall. Don't forget that in the midst of that tower melting heat, Mohammed Attas passport fluttered safely to the sidewalk uncharred. Build your origami tower out of that paper next time.
I suspect the q post board is filled with users who question the official narrative. Calling out someone who questions the official narrative as someone who is trivializing the deaths of the victims is a form of shouting down any dissent. Your "How dare you" only works on people that care about misgendering someone. I expect that response at the Huffington post. I assure you that Bush/cheney and cabal lied about 911. The victims they sacrificed are not trivialized just because I don't believe some cave dweller masterminded an attack that was described by Al Gore years before, and implemented on the very day of a training exercise of the same nature. How many coincidences until it is mathematically impossible?
I'm moving on. If I had definitive proof to show you, then I would be arkancided. One day after W is gone,.they will let us know for sure. We had to wait until after HW was gone to know that the Clowns popped JFK. I still work with folks that believe Iraq had WMDs, masks work, clot shot was safe and effective, Biden won, the flu disappeared, water sticks to a spinning ball, people evolved from slime and the big bang created everything from nothing. We don't need to agree.
I don't follow your thinking. In an anti-tank round, the penetration comes from brute force plastic deformation of the steel by a denser, harder penetrator projectile. It is not melting the steel armor.
No one has ever said that the fuel in the 767 melted the Twin Towers. That is an absurdity. But the burning fuel can certainly heat the structural columns to temperatures where its strength would be gone. Structural steel is reduced to 30% of its room temperature strength by the time it reaches 600 deg C. Meanwhile, what is to stop a passport from drifting down to the ground within moments of the collision?
The problem is that there is no "lie" involved in "the official narrative." It is coherent and consistent with known physics and engineering. It seems to me that a Lot of People have jumped off the cliff of "It's all lies," and have psychotically denied the truth. Not because there is compelling evidence that something else is the truth and we have the detailed receipts---but because there is a psychological need to feed the paranoid narrative of "it's all lies." If the "official narrative" were understood to be the truth...then what becomes of "it's all lies"? That, itself, would become a lie. And then we would have to scrutinize fellow-travelers who have fallen off the deep end with fabulous paranoid conspiracies. That wouldn't be polite, perhaps. And it would be fraught with self-recognition. But maybe a step back from the brink, toward sanity, is a good idea, if the alternative is to embrace insanity and become untouchable from the normie point of view.
And, by the way, water (and everything else) does stick to a spinning ball, to the tune of 1 pound force for 1 pound of mass. Nothing else to pull it away. (The effect of the spin is teeny-tiny by comparison.)
Please don't talk anymore.
Take your own advice, thanks.
Did you think I was talking to you?
Look, I'm staying outside this conversation besides coming in and throwing this: If you cannot properly discount his argument, don't tell him to shut up.
That's leftist behavior. Enough people have offered their own counters to his statements and either they'll sway him or they won't, and still more people will likely throw their own opinions into the discussion.
But your only contribution has been to trash him, which is reductive and unacceptable.
Regardless of how you believe the WTC fell, or what hit what, is not strictly relevant to belief in Q or the goals outlined. It doesn't even mean that he doesn't believe that it was an inside job.
All he's saying is that planes hit.
There are a lot of accounts that say they saw it. This was all over the place the day of.
There is also a lack of proof to support either argument, at least not enough that has yet to come to light.
It's fine to argue your opinions, but there's no need to attack him on something completely unrelated and try to shut him down if you can't even attempt to offer an argument.
Uncool my dude.
His argument has been discounting a million different ways. We've all heard the Popular Mechanics bullshit he spouts like gospel doctrine. He's not a Q supporter. He's a shill. He can suck my dick. And don't defend him. One of these days it will be clear enough to the mods what this faggot's MO is and they'll boot him. Perhaps today is not that day but the guy's a cuck faggot RINO fucker if I ever saw one.