atheists and "conspiracy" theories

[libalchris]

Missed it. You do realize that in a collision that big, sprinkler systems would have been severely damaged, and temperatures would have been far greater than necessary to evaporate any water that was introduced to the environment.

We're talking about 11-17 burning floors libalchris (planes hit on the 93rd and 99th floor of 110 story buildings). It's not like those sprinklers are powered by electricity (they react to heat).

You're forgetting you only need one floor to fail for the whole thing to come down.

[Abishalom]

Missed it. You do realize that in a collision that big, sprinkler systems would have been severely damaged, and temperatures would have been far greater than necessary to evaporate any water that was introduced to the environment.

We're talking about 11-17 burning floors libalchris (planes hit on the 93rd and 99th floor of 110 story buildings). It's not like those sprinklers are powered by electricity (they react to heat).

You're forgetting you only need one floor to fail for the whole thing to come down.

Who told you that nonsense (the government?)? The planes hit on the 93rd and 99th floors. That's 93 and 99 floors of stability below. And we haven't even discussed WTC7.

[Shell B]

We're talking about 11-17 burning floors libalchris (planes hit on the 93rd and 99th floor of 110 story buildings). It's not like those sprinklers are powered by electricity (they react to heat).

Like any sprinkler system, they require pipes. I don't know about you, but I have yet to see a sprinkler pipe that could get hit by a fucking plane and still push water. Did every floor have an independent water supply? I doubt it.

---

And we haven't even discussed WTC7.

Hmmmm. Apparently we don't understand the amount of force two of the tallest buildings in the world collapsing would create. Let's not even get into the fact that the government would hardly have needed to take out yet another building to make their point. It would have been overkill. This is not a fucking movie.

[Bgood]

libelchris wrote:

So somehow, numerous demolitions were planted in the buildings without anyone noticing,

Yes, and there is evidence of covert operations weeks prior that would have been the timeframe for planting the explosives.

they were set off without anyone hearing the sound,

Explosions WERE heard by hundreds of New Yorkers that day. Look up all the media coverage that explains people hearing bombs going off in the basement.

You also have to believe that, somehow, the government managed to silence hundreds if not thousands of individuals who would have had to be in on this.

Who the fuck is going to stand up against the U.S government? If they were "in" on it, I'm sure they got paid very much for it and they would have no reason to "blow the whistle". People who speak out the truth got snuffed. Kind of like the mafia, but you pussies wouldn't know anything about that.

We're not relying on the official story, we're using common sense.

Oh O.K, and that common sense just happens to correlate completely with the story the corporate-owned media fed you.

All it would take would be enough damage to collapse ONE floor, to bring the whole building down.

By what reasoning do you suppose this nonsense?

Several floors on skyscrapers have caught on fire simultaneously for HOURS before and after 911 and not a single building has ever collapsed because of it. So WTF are you talking about? It would take enough damage on ONE floor to bring the whole building down???

Which one of those two scenarios seems more plausible?

Ummm, Conspiracy theory. Accept it. Money, laws and propaganda are the most powerful weapons.
[/quote]

[libalchris]

Missed it. You do realize that in a collision that big, sprinkler systems would have been severely damaged, and temperatures would have been far greater than necessary to evaporate any water that was introduced to the environment.

We're talking about 11-17 burning floors libalchris (planes hit on the 93rd and 99th floor of 110 story buildings). It's not like those sprinklers are powered by electricity (they react to heat).

You're forgetting you only need one floor to fail for the whole thing to come down.

Who told you that nonsense (the government?)? The planes hit on the 93rd and 99th floors. That's 93 and 99 floors of stability below. And we haven't even discussed WTC7.

It doesn't matter. When one floor collapses the upper floors begin falling, when they hit the next floor they have gained extra momentum which applies a huge force on the next floor in addition to the weight that they are already putting on them, this force continually compounds on the way down as more and more floors are picked up.

WTC 7 is simple. It burned continuously uncontrolled for SEVEN HOURS.

[jackman]

Jackman, at that heat, the water would evaporate very rapidly. Even as a cook, I saw plenty of evidence of that. My cooking surfaces often got red or white hot. It takes a substantial amount of water to stop it from heating up quickly. Just think of the cooling systems in engines. If water were really that much of a coolant, we could just pour water on our engines on long road trips. As it is, water cooled engines rely on the intake of water, not just a splash or a filler up. Hence the reason why certain boat motors that have been in fresh water need to be drained at a different temperature than those that have been in salt water when the weather gets cold, to prevent it from cracking.

As for the insulation, my understanding is that it was destroyed on impact. We have to remember that there was not just a fire or just a collision. There was a combination of both. We also have to take into account the amount of heat that would be generated by the collapse. Even bending metal rapidly makes it warm. Friction also causes it to heat up. Therefore, we have steel beams compromised to at least some degree by the impact, then the fire then the collapse itself to account for the structural compromise. As the top floors came down, they also generated plenty of heat and pushed the heat of the fire and its own friction/twisting down.

They were exceptional buildings. However, as is the case with so many things, everything about it was public knowledge. The individuals who took it down knew where to hit it. Being a terrorist does not mean you are stupid.

shell, you make very good points. but to say water evaporates at that heat, it depends on how much water is on those floors within the pipes that are supplying the sprinklers. if you have 1" pipe going up a 10' floor height, there may be 20 different sprinkler runs (no clue, as i haven't looked at the drawings for the buildings). there will be a lot of water sitting on that floor to be evaporated, considering the pressure would be upwards of 70psi to get up that high in a building and still be enough to disperse properly to squelch a fire. so much water there and much more pressure spraying water out - it won't evaporate very quickly. especially the stuff that soaks into the office furniture, carpet, insulation, etc...

the insulation being destroyed on impact. i heard that too, i just don't buy it. it's not like knocking a picture off a wall when you bump the wall from the adjacent room. that stuff has a bonding agent that ties it to the metal. it doesn't scrape off easily with a concerted effort and a chisel. but, who knows, maybe it well could have. i can't say for sure because i don't know what happened to shards of the plane as it entered the buildings.

i don't believe terrorists are stupid at all. i just wonder who the real terrorists are sometimes.

[Shell B]

Well, as for the sprinkler systems, I have already figured that they would have been damaged. Assuming all of the water was pushed up from the ground level, the destruction of the sprinklers on one floor would have destroyed them on the rest of the way up. Even if there were a few pipes still pushing water, it could not have been enough. Putting out a fire like that takes much more than sprinklers. It would not stand a chance in cooling the metal. Water is not a sufficient coolant, even for a metal lathe. It evaporates too easily and the viscosity is laughable. Even if it was hitting the metal, it would run off within seconds or even a fraction of a second.

As for the insulation, I'm sure the force of a plane in the air would be sufficient to scrape it off in places. Scrape it off in one place and the heat has a way in.

[Christi]

I really have no interest debating the collapse of the buildings as I have no idea WTF happened and no knowledge of metal to jet fuel reaction whatsoever. My main problem I have with the whole 9/11 is that so many times previously, they were caught. I mean even when they have bombs in their shoes. They don't appear to be the brightest and had never been able to carry out large acts like this before. Then one day, everything goes right for them, and they are able to pull something off like 9/11. It just doesn't make sense.

Not only were they able to take control of 4 planes, they were able to get 3 of them to their targets. Where was the Air Force? The Air Force never responded until after all of the damage had been done. To say it was all an accident would be a major slam to the Air Force. That is why I think there's a lot we don't know. Not only that, but if everything was on the up and up, it means that the Pentagon was not normally protected at all. I just have a tough time believing that the US would leave the Pentagon and buildings like the World Trade Center so vulnerable to attacks. No one can say they had no idea an attack might come. This wasn't even the first attack on the World Trade Center. The government knew it was a huge target, yet there was nothing in place to keep it protected. That just doesn't make sense.

[jackman]

water's viscosity isn't important in cooling the metal enough to delay the heating @ fail temps. water that cools heated metal when forging swords isn't viscous, but it cools that red hot iron immediately to black. ok, well, i can't work on the guesses. i know there should be a sprinkler head every 400sf. there should be a damper at every vertical pipe, duct, penetration between floors and firestop at every horizontal penetration, duct, pipe. basically, buildings are built to contain a fire in one space, then wet it out. risers aren't placed at the exterior of a building, they're usually in the core (better insulated against weather is more efficient for heating/cooling). i doubt very few of the water supply was compromised. this would be horrible judgment on the designers' behalf.

hey, perhaps none of the systems implemented to prevent spread of fire, worked this day. i'd just be inclined to bet otherwise.

[Bgood]

Shell B wrote:

As for the insulation, I'm sure the force of a plane in the air would be sufficient to scrape it off in places. Scrape it off in one place and the heat has a way in.

Wow, you guys really focus on and dispute the smallest and most trifling details! You seem to overlook the big picture all the time. The plain mystery is:

WHY the hell is this the only time in history that buildings have collapsed due to FIRES??? And not just once but 3 times on the same day??????

You guys also try to sound scientific and intelligent by analyzing trivial details in such a large operation. I think you are myopic to the extent of a 911 conspiracy. You think in a box. You are afraid to see the real truth what certain elements in world governments do to control the complacent masses.

Wake up! The government doesn't give a fuck about you! You are just a number.