If you read through the thread master you will see where I debunk the jet fuel melting metal theory...If there were another fuel that would fair well in a non compressed and open environment I would have a different song to sing.
For some reason I have a suspicion that you did not read my post properly. I never talked about the steel reinforcements melting- I only claimed that the aluminium alloy used in planes, that have a lower melting point than pure aluminium, could have melted. And liquid metal, probably aluminium, was apparently witnessed to be dripping down the south tower.
There are many different numbers and things to debunk, but you would want to have to talk numbers and many other things. If you don't want to talk numbers then I guess we have nothing to talk about.
I didn't want to use numbers in my argument, because it would have been a lot of work and none of us knows exactly how the weight was distributed, or how hot it was, and how the damage would escalate. Basically, I don't have the numbers to discuss. I'd have to make lots of guesses, but I figured I'd probably be way off making those guesses. You're free to use numbers though. And I did end up usign the number for melting aluminium, as I didn't have to guess that and it demonstrates how easily it would have melted.
This bugs me though...I don't like people blindly accepting things....If it isn't in your specialty no problem. But tell me this...
If you had two people of equal credentials telling you something...One had something to gain for themselves the other actually had something to lose by telling you something...Who would you listen to?
This is also the only " conspiracy theory" that I know of that has 1000s upon 1000s of PhDs and professionals in the exact industry calling bullshit...not to mention 1000s of pilots saying bullshit on just the flight dynamics alone...People in power etc etc etc...Then you have millions upon millions of the American population (over 50 percent according to the polls) that question it. Then throw in all the people of other counties, also don't forget the actual leaders of other counties that flat I say "we know it's bullshit"
The biggest reason for me to believe one over the other - reasons. I assume you think that the government might be behind it, or some part of the government (back then, that is). Why would they do this? What was the motive? I don't buy that it was to have a reason to start a war or deploy troops somewhere. And the facts point towards the reason of the collapse being the planes - the collapse happened where the planes crashed, after the planes crashed. I don't see anything that defies physics. Something that defies human expectations? Sure, but nothing physics-breaking.
I agree that it could possibly lead to a collapse, I'll play ball with the official story it's especically the near plumb fall and acceleration of all three buildings that concerns me. If building 7 hadn't of fell maybe I wouldn't have looked into it as deeply as I have and come to the conclusions I have.
Do you agree building 7's fall at gravitational acceleration is suspicious?
I'll agree that it is evidence in favor of controlled demolition, but I don't think it's suspicious enough to be major evidence against structural failure due to damage.
If you read my bowling ball experiment, do you disagree with me?
As I stated before the second law of thermodynamics pretty much precludes the possibility of a plumb collapse at close to or at free-fall.
(Without foul play)
I haven't read that experiment, could you repost or tell me where it is? And I don't know what a "plumb collapse" is, I guess it has something to do with the experiment?
This is completely leaving out the logical jumps you have to make for the hijackings, maneuvers of the plane, NORAD not shooting them down, the Pentagon "plane" crash, the invulnerable passports, the fact that the official story claims they used stolen credit cards and yet used the purchaseses to identify some of them.
Getting on the plane in the first place with box-cutters gas masks tape etc.
To me there is just too much that doesn't make sense, ironically occams razor dictates that controlled demolition and foul play are at fault.
I'm sure Bhs can get into the specifics of your post far better than I can.
Logical jumps according to one story, misunderstandings according to the other. I haven't read into the hijackings very much, but I doubt I'll find something completely physics or logic defying if I look into it. Some spooky coincidences or hints? Possibly. I might look into it later.