Nukes can't destroy Concrete Buildings.... but Jet Fuel CAN!

And this is where is goes deeper down that rabbit hole.

They have good drugs down that rabbit hole, don't they?

Quote from: sceptimatic on July 29, 2016, 12:25:11 PM

And this is where is goes deeper down that rabbit hole.

They have good drugs down that rabbit hole, don't they?

Suppositories - everything is a trade off.

Please explain: How does a concrete building survive 50+ million degree heat?

Hydrogen bombs create that kind of heat, the bombs that were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, not so much.

It's just proof that we're living in a false reality.

To suggest that a single bomb devastated an entire city and vaporized Human Bones, and there still be trees standing. Likewise and equally absurd, is suggesting Jet Fuel could bring down two of the most sophisticated skyscrapers the world has ever seen.

Conclusion: Nukes and 9/11 are a fraud.

You ask "How does a concrete building survive 50+ million degree heat?" Well the simple answer is that they didn't have to!
"The Hiroshima fireball was 370 metres (1,200 ft) in diameter, with a surface temperature of 6,000 °C (10,830 °F)."
Not quite the ridiculous figure came up with!

It might depend on how far from "ground zero" the buildings were.



While the atomic bombs were very powerful, they were not "infinite" (luckily). The Hiroshima bomb, "Little Boy" was estimated to be 15 ±20% kiloton and the Nagasaki bomb, "Fat Man", 21 ±10% kiloton.

Compare these photographs:

I think Tokyo did not fare any better. True it took maybe 1,000 bombers to do similar damage and there wasn't the searing heat and terrible radiation burns, but the building damage was nearly as severe and over a larger area.

The human tragedy from both the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs totalled over 100,000 killed with a similar number killed in Tokyo from the fire-bombings.

This might be a disturbing read, though maybe worthwhile Tokyo vs. Hiroshima.


Then you claim that the buildings in 9/11 were "obliterated". Well hardly!
They lasted quite a period and I believe burning fuel poured down the lift wells and while it did not melt any steel it severely weakened it.
The buildings were designed so that a large part of their strength was in the central steel core, making them quite vulnerable to this type of failure.
Also, I would guess that the floors severely damaged by the aircraft collisions collapsed first adding shoch loading to floors below.

Still, so people need all these conspiracies to keep them happy. so who am I to deny them?

Trees, I repeat! TREES CANNOT SURVIVE 10,830 °F

It's called petrification.

It's called petrification.

No it's not.

Trees, I repeat! TREES CANNOT SURVIVE 10,830 °F

Here you can find more stuff you can just claim is proof of what ever you believe.

http://www.atomicarchive.com/Docs/MED/med_chp9.shtml

It gives some data on damage to buildings at different distances. Even covers effects of flash heat at different distances

Seems how thick the walls were, material and distance played a roll in amount of damage caused to a building. Distance was also a factor in the affects of flash heat.

So what is your estimate and calculations of how much heat certain trees can with stand for lets say about 1 second? 

How far away from the blast do they need to be not to be uprooted or completely destroyed by combustion? 

Why would a building not being completely destroyed by a nuclear bomb be evidence that planes hitting buildings can not cause catastrophic structural failure?

ftp://

Trees, I repeat! TREES CANNOT SURVIVE 10,830 °F

That would depend greatly on the size of the trees and how long the heat is applied.

Trees, I repeat! TREES CANNOT SURVIVE 10,830 °F

And I repeat, you iWitness is a fraud!

The Nagasaki Prefectural report describes vividly the effects of the bomb on the city and its inhabitants:

"Within a radius of 1 kilometer from X, men and animals died almost instantaneously and outside a radius of 1 kilometer and within a radius of 2 kilometers from X, some men and animals died instantly from the great blast and heat but the great majority were seriously or superficially injured. Houses and other structures were completely destroyed while fires broke out everywhere. Trees were uprooted and withered by the heat.

"Outside a radius of 2 kilometers and within a radius of 4 kilometers from X, men and animals suffered various degrees of injury from window glass and other fragments scattered about by the blast and many were burned by the intense heat. Dwellings and other structures were half damaged by blast.

So, who made you the expert that knows so much more than those that witnessed the destruction?

So, who made you the expert that knows so much more than those that witnessed the destruction?

How about the fact there are trees in the picture:



Also, they claim a single bomb "uprooted trees" yet there is no visible blast radius evident. You would expect to see trees and debris blown in all directions from the epicenter, but no...

Note how there roads are clear of any trash or debris also, suggesting that Hiroshima was Carpet-bombed like Tokyo. Compare Hiroshima with pictures of Tokyo firebombing:



You really can't tell a difference. There is no evidence that a 50+ million degree bomb went off and vaporized human bones.

If there is no oxygen present the trees can't burn. They will decompose or turn to charcoal. Do you have any evidence that the trees aren't just charcoal or charcoal on the outside so the inside couldn't burn?

Quote

So, who made you the expert that knows so much more than those that witnessed the destruction?

How about the fact there are trees in the picture:



Also, they claim a single bomb "uprooted trees" yet there is no visible blast radius evident. You would expect to see trees and debris blown in all directions from the epicenter, but no...

Note how there roads are clear of any trash or debris also, suggesting that Hiroshima was Carpet-bombed like Tokyo. Compare Hiroshima with pictures of Tokyo firebombing:



You really can't tell a difference. There is no evidence that a 50+ million degree bomb went off and vaporized human bones.

Do you think there might be roads going between those buildings under that debri?


It very well could be close to ground zero the roads are clear of a lot of debri because it was blown away.  Also some roads were cleared after the blast to get in and out of the both cities.  Military and emergency personnel needed to get in and out to help survivors and evacuate them.

Also why with a country the US was at war with go along with the whole fake nuclear bomb thing?  Plus fire bombing required a lot of aircraft.  The Tokyo fire bombing used around 180 bombers and destroyed about 640 acres.

Is there no way to compromise theories?

Like government nuked one building, and terrorists crashed two planes into one building.

This.

Also e=mc2 so nukes exist.

Edit, love how everyone jumps on nukes existence because you can prove it with science.

No one wants to discuss the "total progressive collapse" of building 7,

If anyone has any doubt that nuclear weapons may be a psy-op hoax, then watch this Chinese Nuclear Bomb test:


Skip to 0:25 for the Amazing special effects!



I must be a MORAN to question the authenticity of this test footage.

If anyone has any doubt that nuclear weapons may be a psy-op hoax, then watch this Chinese Nuclear Bomb test:


Skip to 0:25 for the Amazing special effects!



I must be a MORAN to question the authenticity of this test footage.

What should it look like?

Not like 1980s arcade graphics

Quote from: iWitness on August 02, 2016, 10:32:33 PM

If anyone has any doubt that nuclear weapons may be a psy-op hoax, then watch this Chinese Nuclear Bomb test:


Skip to 0:25 for the Amazing special effects!



I must be a MORAN to question the authenticity of this test footage.

What should it look like?

Seriously, Woody?
I believe you're intelligent enough to see this garbage for what it is. Click your mind out of the propaganda/indoctrination mode and you'll plainly see we've been massively duped with this stuff.

Hi All,

So apparently it is because the temperature got so high (with the fuel in the wings) that the buckling strength of the tower's steel work reached its limit. In Europe most buildings are made of reinforced concrete (not steel) and this collapse would not have happened).

Open to comments,

BR,
Catherine

lol

lol

You think hydrogen bombs were dropped on Japan, so maybe you should show some humility?

Please explain: How does a concrete building survive 50+ million degree heat?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/58/Hiroshima_Dome_1945.gif
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiroshima_Peace_Memorial

Yet Both WTC towers were completely destroyed from Jet Fuel which burns 600 degrees in the open air?

http://911research.wtc7.net/talks/wtc/ndocs/nt_col1531c.jpg

200,000 tons of Steel and 425,000 cubic yards of concrete OBLITERATED.

BTW, it was the steel support beams that failed in the WTC collapse, not the concrete.

At what temperature does steel melt?

Which alloy?

Which alloy?

A992, O1, A2, 1095, and W2.

Or, how about the structural steel that the beams in question were made from?   

Structural steel loses much of its strength long before it melts.

All materials weaken with increasing temperature and steel is no exception. Strength loss for steel is generally accepted to begin at about 300°C and increases rapidly after 400°C. By 550°C steel retains approximately 60% of its room temperature yield strength, and 45% of its stiffness. At high temperatures, steel is also subjected to significant thermal elongation, which may lead to adverse impacts, especially if it is restrained. It follows therefore that one would expect that structural steelwork which has been subjected to high temperatures would exhibit signs of this in the form of distortion and buckling.

We are told the steel trusses lost their strength and buckled causing a pancake collapse.
The steel trusses are connected to the outer structure and also the inner core columns of which there were 47 of them.
Assuming all of the struts all around the towers buckled, it would have still left the inner core structure.

Now the only thing that puzzles me out of all of this; is the fact that supposed intelligent human beings actually believe the official story being this is what happened.

We are told the steel trusses lost their strength and buckled causing a pancake collapse.
The steel trusses are connected to the outer structure and also the inner core columns of which there were 47 of them.
Assuming all of the struts all around the towers buckled, it would have still left the inner core structure.

Now the only thing that puzzles me out of all of this; is the fact that supposed intelligent human beings actually believe the official story being this is what happened.

It goes to show the power of brainwashing. The duped masses just can't bring themselves to believe the government would lie to them.

e=mc2 so nukes exist.

It doesn't so they don't.

Easy eh, Harry Potter?

Perhaps if you necked some Polyjuice Potion & used a million sock-puppets to tell me it did it'd make your bullshit true, Harry?

lol no it wouldn't but watch you do it anyway you prick...

Hold on, did Papa Legba just say Nukes don't exist?