if the flame temperature is not higher than the melting point,
Completely untrue. A thing will melt if it has absorbed enough heat energy to break the bonds (and the crystalline structure) in a localized area. That is how you can melt steel, which melts at 2500 F with wood, which has a flame temperature of about half that. It requires a insulated kiln to trap the heat to ensure that the steel will absorb enough heat energy.
A flame temperature higher than the melting point is only one way to accomplish melting, and even then, it still will not happen if the dissipation rate is faster than the incoming heat energy flow. That is why a thing doesn't melt instantaneously when exposed to such a flame.
The way I have explained it is how it works. Your understanding is insufficient. Just look it up, it's not hard.
Aluminum wheels are now popular.
Aluminum wheels have been popular for 30 years. They started melting in 2018. You have not addressed the topic directly, but are pretending you have through a straw man.
whether cars get burnt up is NOT IMPORTANT.
It may not be important to them, but it is an important piece of evidence that you still have not correctly addressed. Aluminum wheels will NOT MELT in a tire fire, period. I have given a substantial argument that you did not address (correctly) and perhaps more importantly, there is no actual evidence of it occurring prior to about 2018, and a metric fuckton after that.
is just more bloviating by someone who thinks he knows more than he does.
False, moon landings are real.
Programs exist that are outside of public domain.
Q
Couple this with videos from the Navy of objects that, if the video evidence is as it suggests, can warp space (change directions and accelerate at impossible speeds). If they have technology that can warp space, then there are programs that exist that are FAR outside of the public domain. Your knowledge is irrelevant to what is possible. IRRELEVANT. You don't know shit. I don't know shit either about our technology, but I admit I don't know. I am willing to ask questions, you aren't.
It wouldn't be used to do juvenile stuff like start forest fires.
It would be if the intention was to create distrust in the government. In fact, that would be a perfect use of the technology in that case.
It just reveals you to be a fantasist.
I am not, nor have I ever made claims without evidence to back it up. Just because you think the evidence is insufficient, doesn't make it not corroborating evidence. You are completely unwilling to even ask questions, and your responses are very often totally incorrect full of false assumptions, like your concept of "melting". Your level of your own "rightness" would be almost laughable if it weren't interfering in what could otherwise be a productive conversation. Seriously, maybe you should brush up on thermo so we can have a proper conversation. Your physics is obviously a little rusty.
if the flame temperature is not higher than the melting point,
Completely untrue. A thing will melt if it has absorbed enough heat energy to break the bonds (and the crystalline structure) in a localized area. That is how you can melt steel, which melts at 2500 F with wood, which has a flame temperature of about half that. It requires a insulated kiln to trap the heat to ensure that the steel will absorb enough heat energy.
A flame temperature higher than the melting point is only one way to accomplish melting, and even then, it still will not happen if the dissipation rate is faster than the incoming heat energy flow. That is why a thing doesn't melt instantaneously when exposed to such a flame.
The way I have explained it is how it works. Your understanding is insufficient. It's OK to be wrong, and you are wrong. Just look it up, it's not hard.
Aluminum wheels are now popular.
Aluminum wheels have been popular for 30 years. They started melting in 2018. You have not addressed the topic directly, but are pretending you have through a straw man.
whether cars get burnt up is NOT IMPORTANT.
It may not be important to them, but it is an important piece of evidence that you still have not correctly addressed. Aluminum wheels will NOT MELT in a tire fire, period. I have given a substantial argument that you did not address (correctly) and perhaps more importantly, there is no actual evidence of it occurring prior to about 2018, and a metric fuckton after that.
is just more bloviating by someone who thinks he knows more than he does.
False, moon landings are real.
Programs exist that are outside of public domain.
Q
Couple this with videos from the Navy of objects that, if the video evidence is as it suggests, can warp space (change directions and accelerate at impossible speeds). If they have technology that can warp space, then there are programs that exist that are FAR outside of the public domain. Your knowledge is irrelevant to what is possible. IRRELEVANT. You don't know shit. I don't know shit either about our technology, but I admit I don't know. I am willing to ask questions, you aren't.
It wouldn't be used to do juvenile stuff like start forest fires.
It would be if the intention was to create distrust in the government. In fact, that would be a perfect use of the technology in that case.
It just reveals you to be a fantasist.
I am not, nor have I ever made claims without evidence to back it up. Just because you think the evidence is insufficient, doesn't make it not corroborating evidence. You are completely unwilling to even ask questions, and your responses are very often totally incorrect full of false assumptions, like your concept of "melting". Your level of your own "rightness" would be almost laughable if it weren't interfering in what could otherwise be a productive conversation. Seriously, maybe you should brush up on thermo so we can have a proper conversation. Your physics is obviously a little rusty.
if the flame temperature is not higher than the melting point,
Completely untrue. A thing will melt if it has absorbed enough heat energy to break the bonds (and the crystalline structure) in a localized area. That is how you can melt steel, which melts at 2500 F with wood, which has a flame temperature of about half that. It requires a insulated kiln to trap the heat to ensure that the steel will absorb enough heat energy.
A flame temperature higher than the melting point is only one way to accomplish melting, and even then, it still will not happen if the dissipation rate is faster than the incoming heat energy flow. The way I have explained it is how it works. Your understanding is insufficient. It's OK to be wrong, and you are wrong. Just look it up, it's not hard.
Aluminum wheels are now popular.
Aluminum wheels have been popular for 30 years. They started melting in 2018. You have not addressed the topic directly, but are pretending you have through a straw man.
whether cars get burnt up is NOT IMPORTANT.
It may not be important to them, but it is an important piece of evidence that you still have not correctly addressed. Aluminum wheels will NOT MELT in a tire fire, period. I have given a substantial argument that you did not address (correctly) and perhaps more importantly, there is no actual evidence of it occurring prior to about 2018, and a metric fuckton after that.
is just more bloviating by someone who thinks he knows more than he does.
False, moon landings are real.
Programs exist that are outside of public domain.
Q
Couple this with videos from the Navy of objects that, if the video evidence is as it suggests, can warp space (change directions and accelerate at impossible speeds). If they have technology that can warp space, then there are programs that exist that are FAR outside of the public domain. Your knowledge is irrelevant to what is possible. IRRELEVANT. You don't know shit. I don't know shit either about our technology, but I admit I don't know. I am willing to ask questions, you aren't.
It wouldn't be used to do juvenile stuff like start forest fires.
It would be if the intention was to create distrust in the government. In fact, that would be a perfect use of the technology in that case.
It just reveals you to be a fantasist.
I am not, nor have I ever made claims without evidence to back it up. Just because you think the evidence is insufficient, doesn't make it not corroborating evidence. You are completely unwilling to even ask questions, and your responses are very often totally incorrect full of false assumptions, like your concept of "melting". Your level of your own "rightness" would be almost laughable if it weren't interfering in what could otherwise be a productive conversation. Seriously, maybe you should brush up on thermo so we can have a proper conversation. Your physics is obviously a little rusty.
if the flame temperature is not higher than the melting point,
Completely untrue. A thing will melt if it has absorbed enough heat energy to break the bonds (and the crystalline structure) in a localized area. That is how you can melt steel, which melts at 2500 F with wood, which has a flame temperature of about half that. It requires a insulated kiln to trap the heat to ensure that the steel will absorb enough heat energy.
A flame temperature higher than the melting point is only one way to accomplish melting, and even then, it still will not happen if the dissipation rate is faster than the incoming heat energy flow. The way I have explained it is how it works. Your understanding is insufficient. It's OK to be wrong, and you are wrong. Just look it up, it's not hard.
Aluminum wheels are now popular.
Aluminum wheels have been popular for 30 years. They started melting in 2018. You have not addressed the topic directly, but are pretending you have through a straw man.
whether cars get burnt up is NOT IMPORTANT.
It may not be important to them, but it is an important piece of evidence that you still have not correctly addressed. Aluminum wheels will NOT MELT in a tire fire, period. I have given a substantial argument that you did not address (correctly) and perhaps more importantly, there is no actual evidence of it occurring prior to about 2018, and a metric fuckton after that.
is just more bloviating by someone who thinks he knows more than he does.
False, moon landings are real.
Programs exist that are outside of public domain.
Q
Couple this with videos from the Navy of objects that, if the video evidence is as it suggests, can warp space (change directions and accelerate at impossible speeds). If they have technology that can warp space, then there are programs that exist that are FAR outside of the public domain. Your knowledge is irrelevant to what is possible. IRRELEVANT. You don't know shit. I don't know shit either about our technology, but I admit I don't know. I am willing to ask questions, you aren't.
It wouldn't be used to do juvenile stuff like start forest fires.
It would be if the intention was to create distrust in the government. In fact, that would be a perfect use of the technology in that case.
It just reveals you to be a fantasist.
I am not, nor have I ever made claims without evidence to back it up. Just because you think the evidence is insufficient, doesn't make it not corroborating evidence. You are completely unwilling to even ask questions, and your responses are very often totally incorrect full of false assumptions, like your concept of "melting". It's almost laughable, your level of your own "rightness." Seriously, maybe you should brush up. Your physics is obviously a little rusty.
if the flame temperature is not higher than the melting point,
Completely untrue. A thing will melt if it has absorbed enough heat energy to break the bonds (and the crystalline structure) in a localized area. That is how you can melt steel, which melts at 2500 F with wood, which has a flame temperature of about half that. It requires a insulated kiln to trap the heat to ensure that the steel will absorb enough heat energy.
If you are going to attempt to "debunk" me, at least do some homework first. I suggest reading a book on thermo, or perhaps metallurgy, or even just chemistry. You obviously are out of your depth here.
Aluminum wheels are now popular.
Aluminum wheels have been popular for 30 years. They started melting in 2018. You have not addressed the topic directly, but are pretending you have through a straw man.
whether cars get burnt up is NOT IMPORTANT.
It may not be important to them, but it is an important piece of evidence that you still have not correctly addressed. Aluminum wheels will NOT MELT in a tire fire, period. I have given a substantial argument that you did not address (correctly) and perhaps more importantly, there is no actual evidence of it occurring prior to about 2018, and a metric fuckton after that.
is just more bloviating by someone who thinks he knows more than he does.
False, moon landings are real.
Programs exist that are outside of public domain.
Q
Couple this with videos from the Navy of objects that, if the video evidence is as it suggests, can warp space (change directions and accelerate at impossible speeds). If they have technology that can warp space, then there are programs that exist that are FAR outside of the public domain. Your knowledge is irrelevant to what is possible. IRRELEVANT. You don't know shit. I don't know shit either about our technology, but I admit I don't know. I am willing to ask questions, you aren't.
It wouldn't be used to do juvenile stuff like start forest fires.
It would be if the intention was to create distrust in the government. In fact, that would be a perfect use of the technology in that case.
It just reveals you to be a fantasist.
I am not, nor have I ever made claims without evidence to back it up. Just because you think the evidence is insufficient, doesn't make it not corroborating evidence. You are completely unwilling to even ask questions, and your responses are very often totally incorrect full of false assumptions, like your concept of "melting". It's almost laughable, your level of your own "rightness." Seriously, maybe you should brush up. Your physics is obviously a little rusty.
if the flame temperature is not higher than the melting point,
Completely untrue. A thing will melt if it has absorbed enough heat energy to break the bonds (and the crystalline structure) in a localized area. That is how you can melt steel, which melts at 2500 F with wood, which has a flame temperature of about half that. It requires a insulated kiln to trap the heat to ensure that the steel will absorb enough heat energy.
If you are going to attempt to "debunk" me, at least do some homework first. I suggest reading a book on thermo, or perhaps metallurgy, or even just chemistry. You obviously are out of your depth here.
Aluminum wheels are now popular.
Aluminum wheels have been popular for 30 years. They started melting in 2018. You have not addressed the topic directly, but are pretending you have through a straw man.
whether cars get burnt up is NOT IMPORTANT.
It may not be important to them, but it is an important piece of evidence that you still have not correctly addressed. Aluminum wheels will NOT MELT in a tire fire, period. I have given a substantial argument that you did not address (correctly) and perhaps more importantly, there is no actual evidence of it occurring prior to about 2018, and a metric fuckton after that.
is just more bloviating by someone who thinks he knows more than he does.
False, moon landings are real.
Programs exist that are outside of public domain.
Q
Couple this with videos of objects that, if the video evidence is as it suggests, can warp space (change directions and accelerate at impossible speeds). If they have technology that can warp space, then there are programs that exist that are FAR outside of the public domain. Your knowledge is irrelevant to what is possible. IRRELEVANT. You don't know shit. I don't know shit either about our technology, but I admit I don't know. I am willing to ask questions, you aren't.
It wouldn't be used to do juvenile stuff like start forest fires.
It would be if the intention was to create distrust in the government. In fact, that would be a perfect use of the technology in that case.
It just reveals you to be a fantasist.
I am not, nor have I ever made claims without evidence to back it up. Just because you think the evidence is insufficient, doesn't make it not corroborating evidence. You are completely unwilling to even ask questions, and your responses are very often totally incorrect full of false assumptions, like your concept of "melting". It's almost laughable, your level of your own "rightness." Seriously, maybe you should brush up. Your physics is obviously a little rusty.
if the flame temperature is not higher than the melting point,
Completely untrue. A thing will melt if it has absorbed enough heat energy to break the bonds (and the crystalline structure) in a localized area. That is how you can melt steel, which melts at 2500 F with wood, which has a flame temperature of about half that. It requires a insulated kiln to trap the heat to ensure that the steel will absorb enough heat energy.
If you are going to attempt to "debunk" me, at least do some homework first. I suggest reading a book on thermo, or perhaps metallurgy, or even just chemistry. You obviously are out of your depth here.
Aluminum wheels are now popular.
Aluminum wheels have been popular for 30 years. They started melting in 2018. You have not addressed the topic directly, but are pretending you have through a straw man.
whether cars get burnt up is NOT IMPORTANT.
It may not be important to them, but it is an important piece of evidence that you still have not correctly addressed. Aluminum wheels will NOT MELT in a tire fire, period. I have given a substantial argument that you did not address (correctly) and perhaps more importantly, there is no actual evidence of it occurring prior to about 2018, and a metric fuckton after that.
is just more bloviating by someone who thinks he knows more than he does.
False, moon landings are real.
Programs exist that are outside of public domain.
Q
Couple this with videos of objects that, if the video evidence is as it suggests, can warp space (change directions and accelerate at impossible speeds), there are programs that exist that are FAR outside of the public domain. Your knowledge is irrelevant to what is possible. IRRELEVANT. You don't know shit. I don't know shit either about our technology, but I admit I don't know. I am willing to ask questions, you aren't.
It wouldn't be used to do juvenile stuff like start forest fires.
It would be if the intention was to create distrust in the government. In fact, that would be a perfect use of the technology in that case.
It just reveals you to be a fantasist.
I am not, nor have I ever made claims without evidence to back it up. Just because you think the evidence is insufficient, doesn't make it not corroborating evidence. You are completely unwilling to even ask questions, and your responses are very often totally incorrect full of false assumptions, like your concept of "melting". It's almost laughable, your level of your own "rightness." Seriously, maybe you should brush up. Your physics is obviously a little rusty.