nice post. agreed and edjumucated. the booyman is still under the bed.Green Lemon wrote:ThrowAway wrote:Im a structural welder.
And I'm an architect. The way the towers fell is perfectly consistent with what one would expect, I second.
Yes, they were designed to be possibly hit by planes. And if you recall, they both stood up for a good 20 minutes after being hit- they performed as designed.
Steel, like many substances when heated, loses strength. It does not have to melt to lose this strength- it simply has to become hot enough, which is why it is always required to be protected from fire in a building. Steel is vulnerable to fire.
The structure of the WTC consisted of a series of steel tubes to either side of each window- maybe they were only about a foot in diameter, but there were many of them, a structural cage. The burning fuel took time to heat them to the point of structural failure, but once they failed- straight down. All that weight, it's thrust, just like a rocket engine in reverse. Once one floor goes, then you have the inertia which makes the rest of them pancake.
This doesn't make me throw the conspiracy theory out the window, BTW- but there is simply no logic to the statement "Jet fuel doesn't burn hot enough to melt steel". It doesn't have to. And ignore the concrete. Those buildings were held up by steel.
there are two trains of thought going on in this thread ATM. GRB vs MW. TD joins GL & TA in teh bomb shelter. on stage 3 is Emissary vs. the Underworld. Imaulle, Condra and the crab people are site unseen.