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:
What small experimental burn? What is your point? What makes you so expert on whether an "experimental burn" means anything?
"Small experimental burns" are the kind of experiments some people do(or simulate) before wrongly supposing the same heat concentration can be achieved on a gigantic steel structure.
I don't know anything about them. And I don't know of any theory that depends on them, or for which building. Back in the mid-1940s, German turbojet engineers were melting their steel turbine blades. Did these "experimental burns" include burning aluminum? I will suppose not.
Tiny masses like turbine blades are very easy to "overheat".
By contrast, 100,000 tons of steel (or even 10,000 tons) are VERY HARD to heat up.
You'd need hundreds, if not thousands of times the given amount of kerosene to generate enough calories to heat up a large steel structure enough to reach anything close to "softening".
This makes the "weakened steel" theory of collapse, ludicrous.
Size has nothing to do with it, only temperature. Only the steel in proximity to the fire would have been heated. I've never claimed anything "softened," just that the structural margin went to zero. How something fails after that doesn't matter, but there were signs of failure in compression shear. All it took was for one (or maybe two) stories to fail initially. The downfalling momentum would have been enough to defeat all the lower stories.