I made this comment to a post earlier today, but I thought it was worth its own post. I can't believe I had never looked this up before. Am I missing something? A jet engine is OPTIMIZED to burn jet fuel the most efficiently possible. Jet fuel burning in a building fire is NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO REACH THAT TEMPERATURE! (and even that would not melt steel!) This discrepancy, if as simple as it appears to be, should have been broadcast loud and far long ago. Perhaps this simple fact, if indeed as simple as it seems to be, so clearly indicates the official 9/11 narrative absolutely can't be true, is the reason it seems to have been buried all these years. Please correct me if this is not as simple as it seems.
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (103)
sorted by:
Your first error in your advocating is to assume that the steel in those buildings (beams; and especially bolts) were properly manufactured according to specifications. Fraud exists everywhere, and those shiny "steel" products we all see, and buy, are not immune from being cheap fakes. Fake steel building materials have been around for decades.
That little topic is one that Big Brother doesn't like the proles knowing about.
I think that's why there is a range in steel melting temperatures, with the lower number probably associated with lower quality steel. My main point in this post is that any consideration of melting steel is not relevant. Softening may be relevant, but softening should have caused some kind of unequal failure of the buildings, not pancake collapse, especially bldg 7. Bldg 7 is the mistake they made; they should have held off on that one, because it reveals the pre-planned explosives installation, and therefore, fore-knowledge of the 9/11 attacks, which means likelyhood of pre-installed explosives in the twin towers as well.
These are all primarily iron based --- their melting temperatures are all in the same ballpark. Stainless Steel actually melts at a lower temperature than low carbon steel.
I absolutely agree.
Your theory, although plausible is near impossible in being probable. Sure fraud exists. But in the construction of a high rise like the WTC there are many layers of checks and balances that ensure the design of the structure is met. Many codes of construction are in place that drive the requirements of the material like IBC, AISC and AWS just a few for example. Also including multiple independent inspector and engineering verifications. I've performed 1000s of structural steel building Inspections and the inspector of record and structural inspector would not accept or be able to approve continuance of work due to the process involved that meets the code requirements for the materials.. they are physically tested and witnessed.. yeah the whole crew from contractor to sub contractors to design and structural engineers could be corrupt but on that scale and level and amount of people involved for permitting and acceptance on a structure that massive. No. Not possible.