Let me see, they used less quality steel as part of cost savings, building inspectors passed poor or improper quailty.
The material was stressed, the planes hitting the towers also damaged structure. The weight of each room falling down onto the other, had a sheer effect.

And of course there is always a chance there was explosive material in the planes,

Not sure what NASA was doing, since they have nothing to do with investigation of any accident.

And no your experiment does not take into effect all of the conditions.

Now this has nothing to do with building 7 which was a different issue, and many of the nut cases start talking about issues of building 7 and the planes hitting,

ScottGem 12:17 AM:

Ditto my post to BABRAM at 01:36 AM.

I already mentioned that computer simulations were done that supported what actually happened. And what did NASA have to do with anything. Did you read somewhere they found this melted steel? I'll bet it was another of your conspiracy theorists trying to make the off the wall junk seem plausible.

You seem to pin everything on your belief that the planes alone could not have caused the collapse. This while ignoring all the other facts and the implausible nature of your conspiracy theories.

Fr_Chuck:

Either I believe or I don't believe. Either I love or I hate. Plenty of emotion to make me not want to check facts. Do you know that everything you wrote in your post is propaganda?
Propaganda is binary emotional rhetoric. It would be nice to get past the binary emotional rhetoric.

Let me see, tapes of people calling their family, deaths of people on the plane, all facts, lots of film showing planes hitting the towers, all facts.

Investigations I personally did or assited FBI on, all real. Sorry but there is a differnece between facts and made up stories.

It is when these silly made up stories offend the family of the passengers on the planes, that it is no longer funny to hear people say there were no planes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarthaA

Fr_Chuck:

Either I believe or I don't believe. Either I love or I hate. Plenty of emotion to make me not want to check facts. Do you know that everything you wrote in your post is propaganda?
Propaganda is binary emotional rhetoric. It would be nice to get past the binary emotional rhetoric.

---

You ARE a piece of work. And the garbage you are spouting ISN'T propaganda? Give me a break. That was so hypocritical!

I've debunked so much of what you've said with FACTS, but you don't want to hear facts. You just want to believe the worst about Bush and his administration.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarthaA

BABRAM:

1st of all, knowledge of welding and the temperatures it takes to melt steel. Forget the stuff about conspiracy theories, I want publicly controlled experiments with jet fuel in a torch so that I can see that jet fuel will melt steel. An experiment for actual fact doesn't seem to me to be outrageous. So, lets just do an experiment with jet fuel in a torch and see if we can melt steel and the controversy will be over. Why is that so hard? NASA found that steel was melted, which it appears to me is why the WORLD TRADE CENTER BUILDINGS came down.

---

OK. So now you want an experiment? But that's not the sources I asked for. What we do know is that two large towering infernos after being hit by jet airliners did melt steel. Nothing outrageous at all. It happened. Steel melts within two 110 story bonfires and NASA knows the massive pile of debris smoked and smoldered for 99 days. Martha that's NINETY-NINE days. I welcome you to reality.



Bobby

BABRAM:

Why not an experiment with jet fuel in a torch and a piece of steel equivalent of the steel in the towers. The people who built the towers could find equivalent steel. I'm certain the steel can be found. It would set all theories to rest. I have heard no good reason why not.

Debunking the 9/11 Myths: Special Report - Popular Mechanics



"Melted" Steel

CLAIM: "We have been lied to," announces the Web site AttackOnAmerica.net. "The first lie was that the load of fuel from the aircraft was the cause of structural failure. No kerosene fire can burn hot enough to melt steel." The posting is entitled "Proof Of Controlled Demolition At The WTC."


FACT: Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F, not hot enough to melt steel (2750°F). However, experts agree that for the towers to collapse, their steel frames didn't need to melt, they just had to lose some of their structural strength — and that required exposure too much less heat. "I have never seen melted steel in a building fire," says retired New York deputy fire chief Vincent Dunn, author of The Collapse Of Burning Buildings: A Guide To Fireground Safety. "But I've seen a lot of twisted, warped, bent and sagging steel. What happens is that the steel tries to expand at both ends, but when it can no longer expand, it sags and the surrounding concrete cracks."

"Steel loses about 50 percent of its strength at 1100°F," notes senior engineer Farid Alfawak-hiri of the American Institute of Steel Construction. "And at 1800° it is probably at less than 10 percent." NIST also believes that a great deal of the spray-on fireproofing insulation was likely knocked off the steel beams that were in the path of the crashing jets, leaving the metal more vulnerable to the heat.

But jet fuel wasn't the only thing burning, notes Forman Williams, a professor of engineering at the University of California, San Diego, and one of seven structural engineers and fire experts that PM consulted. He says that while the jet fuel was the catalyst for the WTC fires, the resulting inferno was intensified by the combustible material inside the buildings, including rugs, curtains, furniture and paper. NIST reports that pockets of fire hit 1832°F.

"The jet fuel was the ignition source," Williams tells PM. "It burned for maybe 10 minutes, and [the towers] were still standing in 10 minutes. It was the rest of the stuff burning afterward that was responsible for the heat transfer that eventually brought them down."



_____________________________________________



Bobby

ScottGem:

When I am talking about the PENTAGON, I am not talking about the WORLD TRADE CENTER TOWERS. Answers for the WORLD TRADE CENTER TOWERS that were well publicized, are not answers for the PENTAGON at all, so don't do that.

BABRAM:

FACT: Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F.??

It takes 5,000 degrees to melt steel.

You're wrong again Martha.

What's the melting point of steel?

That depends on the alloy of steel you are talking about. The term alloy is almost always used incorrectly these days, especially amongst bicyclists. They use the term to mean aluminum. What the term alloy really means is a mixture of metals, any kind of metals. Almost all metal used today is a mixture and therefore an alloy.

Most steel has other metals added to tune its properties, like strength, corrosion resistance, or ease of fabrication. Steel is just the element iron that has been processed to control the amount of carbon. Iron, out of the ground, melts at around 1510 degrees C (2750°F). Steel often melts at around 1370 degrees C (2500°F).

________________________________________________


Bobby

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarthaA

BABRAM:

FACT: Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F. ?????

It takes 5,000 degrees to melt steel.

---

Actually its only about 2700 degrees.

But, as I said earlier the steel didn't need to melt, just lose some if its structural strength. There was NO ONE single factor that caused the collapse, but a combunation of factors. However, explosives placed in the building was NOT one of them.

BABRAM:

Steel is an alloy, that is why it takes such high heat to melt it. How can an open air public experiment be arranged with a jet fuel torch to steel, so this can be put to rest? It wouldn't be too costly, the people who made that building would probably give us a piece of steel comparable to what was put in the WORLD TRADE CENTERS. They have records of what that building was made with. Why does an experiment have to be an argument?

Hey MarthaA,
There was a new program on TV that proved most of that stuff wrong. But if you want to keep arguing with these guys, why don't you sign on to your other profile ThomasG and back up your argument like you did in my North American Union post. Too bad you forgot to switch back from ThomasG to MarthaA for a response and gave yourself away.

Scott,

That was my focus in posting the Popular Mechanic article. BTW many steels have a melting point of even less than 2700 degrees. Respectfully, Martha and others will believe as they choose. I just hope we presented enough facts to give her something to reconsider from a scientific community view. I'm going to give this particular issue a rest now. Some of the accusations are beyond silly for my taste and willing participation.


Bobby

First a torch will not have the same result as tanks of it exploding, the fire thing called "flash point" which can be a lot more extreme than the pure burn temp, same issue that happens in house fires. Add to this the other fluids in the planes,

And of course we don't know all of the itmes stored in all of the governmetn storage in some of the buildings. Like building 7 that had a secure gov bunker.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarthaA

BABRAM:

Steel is an alloy, that is why it takes such high heat to melt it. How can an open air public experiment be arranged with a jet fuel torch to steel, so this can be put to rest? It wouldn't be too costly, the people who made that building would probably give us a piece of steel comparable to what was put in the WORLD TRADE CENTERS. They have records of what that building was made with. Why does an experiment have to be an argument?

---

Martha, it doesn't take the 5,000 degrees as you blatantly stated. You're not reading the factual information provided by several contributors besides myself. Believe as you like, and by all means please experiment until your content. I think that's healthy and I do encourage your curiosity. I've participated enough time to the subject.


Bobby

Martha will not be joining us at least for now, there appeared to be multiple user names on her IP address. This is banned pending review.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarthaA

BABRAM:

1st of all, knowledge of welding and the temperatures it takes to melt steel. Forget the stuff about conspiracy theories, I want publicly controlled experiments with jet fuel in a torch so that I can see that jet fuel will melt steel. An experiment for actual fact doesn't seem to me to be outrageous. So, lets just do an experiment with jet fuel in a torch and see if we can melt steel and the controversy will be over. Why is that so hard? NASA found that steel was melted, which it appears to me is why the WORLD TRADE CENTER BUILDINGS came down.

---

I want the Kennedy files released to the public, so that I can know for SURE that it wasn't George Bush, Sr. who planned the shooting on behalf of the CIA and was rewarded for his silence by eventually becoming president.

Please, lady... urinate in one hand and want in the other, and see which fills up faster.

Edit: Bah, I didn't see she'd been banned before I posted my sarcasm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarthaA

ScottGem:

I do not care anything about conspiracy theories. The only thing I am concerned about is an experiment to see if regular air and jet fuel will melt a large steel tested I-Beam, not just turn the beam red in one spot, but melt it down to a puddle. I think the experiment should be conducted with the participation of Professor David Ray Griffin and Professor Stephen E. Jones, who I am sure would gladly participate.

---

Y'know, no one has ever, in an official capacity, made the claim that any of the steel I-Beams melted or puddled -- Those are claims made by so called 'experts' who never once set foot on the sites.

The official report maintains that the steel I-Beams twisted from exposure to flames in excess of 700 degrees, which is consistent with temperatures used to bend, form and fold steel in a foundry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MarthaA

Dark_crow:

Facts of physics are not theories, but facts. Scientific principle along with cause and effect has to reign, rather than nebulous belief; regardless of your propaganda to the contrary.

You should read the information on these sites. It is plain to see that you do not read. Once you pull your head out, you will find there are many shades of color other than brown, believe it or not there is a whole spectrum that in combination can form infinite color combinations. You are crowing in the dark.

---

The problem with "the information on these sites" is that the information is being put forward by people who never once set foot on any of the sites in question.

How can any of these people put forth conclusive theory's when they have failed to examine any of the hard evidence first hand?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fr_Chuck

Martha will not be joining us at least for now, there appeared to be multiple user names on her IP address. This is banned pending review.

---

Oh gee, I was just about to share some of my knowledge from working in the paint industry. Paint factories and other structures well filled with hydrocarbons are always constructed out of poured concrete to reduce the damage in a fire. You need to go no further than the nearest concrete parking garage. Skyscrapers are built with steel because it is cheaper and stronger unless it gets too hot.